Quote Originally Posted by Kayaker72 View Post
Of course, what other people shoot does not affect my photography other than I want to be investing in a company that I can count on to still be around in the foreseeable future. Still be servicing my gear as needed. Providing me updates that I may want to buy. The numbers can fluctuate, but no doubt in my mind Canon is one of those companies, if not the company that best exemplifies that standard. I'll be able to pick up Canon lenses and updated bodies for the foreseeable future.
I agree that Canon is one of those companies – as long as ILCs are still a thing, Canon will make and support them. Eventually, something paradigm shifting will come along to effectively replace the market, ultra resolution holography or something like that, in the same way that 8-track became cassettes became CDs became iPods became streaming.

A couple of years ago, Fuji admitted that their ILC business was not profitable (although their Instax line is very profitable); they stated they would keep making ILCs anyway for 'historical and societal reasons', which represents a certain level of commitment.

I'm not as confident in Sony. In Sony's financial reports, they really bury their camera sales and over the past few years they have moved that line item from one division to another. That's a strategy sometimes used to hide losing segments (from a ROI standpoint, obviously Sony is selling cameras). Sony has a history of abandoning lines which aren't providing good ROI. They abandoned the Vaio computer line. More recently, they partially abandoned mobile phones (they still sell them, but only in Europe and a handful of Asian countries, in the US there is 'no operator business' and most of the world is either that or 'defocused'). So no one outside of Sony really knows if their ILC business is profitable, and they are a company with a history of abandoning product lines when they aren't.