The short answer is no. The longer answer is below.

There’s a controversy that’s been brewing for awhile, but has really gained steam over the last couple of weeks, that suggests Fujifilm is purposefully crafting market shortages of products so as to create hype (or, really, FOMO), in an attempt to ensure that their products are constantly in high demand. The roots of this controversy are in the constant shortages of Fujifilm’s products. At one time, you could walk into most camera stores on any given day and buy the camera or lens that you wanted; however, over the last few years, that hasn’t always been the case. Then, just recently, Fujifilm seemed to confirm it.

“The most important point is how much brand strength to create and how to maintain it,” said Teiichi Goto, Fujifilm President and CEO, in response to a question about their inventory situation and plan. “Therefore, it would be quite unfortunate to manufacture too much and lower the price. What Fujifilm has been trying to do for a long time is finally coming true now. We intend to drive the entire imaging business, including Instax, while concentrating on building brand strength and not reducing the value of the properties purchased by our customers.” When asked if the current inventory situation is normal, Mr. Goto replied, “Yes.”

A lot of people responded to this with something to the effect of: “This proves it! Fujifilm is purposefully creating camera shortages to manipulate the market.” But I think they misunderstand it. I wasn’t planning to write this article, but, since I’ve had several people ask me to comment on the controversy, I thought I’d type out my opinion.

I’m completely convinced that if Fujifilm could produce the precise number of gear (cameras, lenses, etc.) for the current demand, so that everyone who wanted to purchase something could do so without waiting, they would. But that’s nearly impossible to correctly estimate. When PetaPixel asked for clarification if they consider insufficient supply to be part of a marketing strategy, Fujifilm responded, “No. Our marketing strategy is to showcase the innovation behind our lineup of digital cameras and lenses to provide creators with a variety of options so they can choose the right tools for their craft.”

It takes many months for a camera to be manufactured and end up at a camera store. Fujifilm has to secure the parts, get them assembled, and shipped across the world. They are guessing in December what the demand might be in July. And there are limited resources for manufacturing. How many parts can a supplier produce at any given time? How many cameras can an assembly line put together each day? The whole process is much more complex than I think many people assume. Fujifilm not only has to anticipate future demand, but they have to figure out how to meet that within the constrains of many and various limitations.

Demand isn’t steady, but constantly fluctuating. It can spike unexpectedly, and fall off a cliff unexpectedly. If the demand for a certain camera suddenly ceases, Fujifilm needs to anticipate that months and months in advance, or they’ll continue to manufacture tens of thousands of copies of a product that few are buying.

Let’s look at the Fujifilm X100V. It was released in early 2020, and, for about two-and-a-half years, Fujifilm was more-or-less manufacturing the number of copies it needed in order to meet the demand for that camera. Then, suddenly, demand spiked, due to several viral TikTok videos. Fujifilm did not ramp up production (or, if they did, it wasn’t nearly enough) of the X100V, likely because they assumed the hype would quickly dissipate, especially since the camera was approaching three-years-old at the time; however, they guessed wrong.

For the X100VI, Fujifilm assumed that doubling the production of the X100V would be enough to meet the anticipated demand for it. Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your perspective, the demand for the X100VI was historic and unprecedented. There were more preorders for the X100VI in China alone than there were X100V’s manufactured in total. Fujifilm has said that they will be increasing production of the X100VI, but I’m not certain to what extent exactly (I’ve heard that it could be 30,000 units per month by sometime in the summer, but I have no idea what the precise numbers are right now).

This is uncharted territory for not just Fujifilm, but for any camera maker. Fujifilm has to try to meet steep current demand while being hyper alert for any changes in future demand. If, for example, they are actually making 30K cameras per month, and suddenly the floor drops and nobody wants one, and they’ve already set in motion the manufacturing of 150K cameras, that could be enough to bankrupt the company (at least the camera division).

Another example is the Fujifilm X-E3 and X-E4 cameras. Fujifilm anticipated that demand for the X-E3 would be greater than it actually was, and made too many copies. Fujifilm had to discount the X-E3, and sometimes significantly, to clear the warehouse. You could still find brand-new (and discounted) X-E3 bodies 18 months after it had been officially discontinued. Fujifilm used the sales figures of the X-E3 to estimate the demand for the X-E4; however, the X-E4 was much more in-demand than the X-E3 was (largely because it was viewed as a top alternative to the impossible-to-find X100V in the aftermath of the viral videos). Fujifilm did not secure enough parts to manufacture nearly enough copies to meet the demand of the X-E4, and likely assumed (incorrectly) that the spike in demand would be short-lived. If you look at eBay, X-E4’s are listed for double the price of X-E3’s, and much higher than the MSRP when they were brand-new.

I bring that up for a specific reason. While consumers prefer over-manufacturing (especially since it usually means one can find bargains, and you can readily buy what you want), producers prefer under-manufacturing. Most ideal is precise-manufacturing, but that is really difficult to achieve; between over and under, every company—including Fujifilm—would much prefer to err on the side of making too few of something than too much. And, if you want the gear that you spent a lot of money on to retain its value, you, too, will prefer them to err on the side of caution.

Toyota created the Toyota Production System in the aftermath of WWII. This system invented what is now referred to as Lean Manufacturing (or Lean Business Philosophy or Lean Strategy Process). Many books have been written on this topic—I have a few on my library shelf, although I’ve only actually read one. To understand Fujifilm’s approach to manufacturing and inventory means understanding the Lean approach, which is used worldwide, especially in Japan. This Harvard Business Review article gives a very brief synopsis of what the Lean strategy is, just to give you an idea; even better, I’m sure your local bookstore has a few books on this topic.

The conclusion is that Fujifilm (along with all manufacturers) is in the tough position of trying to accurately gauge demand for each product they offer, and attempt to produce just the right amount; if they are going to err on one side or the other, they much prefer to err by producing too few copies than too many. Making too many of something reduces its value, while making just the right amount or too few does not. They have to guess what the demand will be many months from now, not just what the current demand is. The current demand might be an indication of future demand, but it also might not. Fujifilm would love to make and sell 50,000 copies of something, but just because they make 50,000 copies of something doesn’t mean that they will actually sell them all. A much better position for Fujifilm is to make 30,00 copies of something, and sell them all. That’s not manipulating the market, but simply good business strategy that provides some stability in a turbulent market.