Wrong on so many levels.
We will have to disagree, then.
1. The competition overtook Canon at least three years ago.
Since you don't say what you mean by "overtake" I'll have to assume you mean they overtook Canon product capabilities. I'll take your word for it, but it's irrelevant. As I said above, Canon is a for-profit business, and appears to be at/near the top of profitability in DSLRs. This has not changed despite your assertion that their capabilities were overtaken years ago. Canon's line continues to sell well at high prices. Canon will take profitability over capability any day.
What they did was say they were going to react, but then did nothing.
Why are you surprised by marketing hype? No sane business will adhere to its previous marketing hype if it determines that the market has changed. Canon will take profit over rigid promises and roadmaps any day.
Pretty much everything they have released in the last 3 years has been rewrapped old products with a few newer odds and ends added in.
Which the market continues to devour at profitable prices. What sane business would cook the old hens before they've stopped laying eggs? This is good business.
2. You missed the point completely. They claimed that they were going to put greater emphasis on video, since that was were the market was heading.
I didn't miss it, I consider it irrelevant. They judged profit to lie in another direction. Sound business. Again, don't rely on old marketing hype.
The 7D2 may be well reviewed as a still camera, but as a video camera it is at the back of the pack in the prosumer market space.
To Canon, all that matters is that it's a profitable product. Canon corporate doesn't care whether the video is good or not, they just care if it makes them a profit. On that criterion, it appears to be doing exceptionally well.
Pretty much every other leading manufacturer has much better video functions in their consumer cameras. Even Nikon does.
How are the profits of those companies? Not as good as Canon's, I think.
Remember, Canon executives claimed that they were putting increased emphasis on video. Let me repeat that, video.
Let me repeat that, profit
. The profit motive supersedes all prior marketing claims.
Where the hell is it?
It was replaced by "profit" in their strategic plan.
This is a function that is important in their consumer camera market but is still stuck in way the past.
If so, then why do Canon DSLRs continue to sell so well? Obviously, it's not that important, or no one would buy Canon DSLRs.
What the engineers are producing is not what the executives are claiming is their future focus.
You can be certain the engineers produce what the execs tell them to produce, and what they've produced is profit.
or we are being sold a marketing line
Now you get it! More specifically, most camera companies feed customers a marketing line. You don't know what you're really going to get until the specs are announced. Why should this be a surprise.
but I do expect them to do what they say they are going to do.
Perhaps you should stop expecting that.
The mirrorless cameras which sell broadly are not Canons
In the US and Europe you are correct. I believe in Asia Canon does well in mirrorless. I believe Neuro posted figures a while back, but I don't recall the specifics.
The Canon M series was a failure in the market space. The only way they could sell any sort of quantity was by bargain basement pricing it.
Except in Asia, where it sold near the top of the lists, and was never subject to price cutting.
Given Sony's recent history in cameras, it will take things to a new level.
And possibly to a new level of unprofitability. Sony puts out great tech, but apparently their cameras (as a total product) aren't that great, since they don't seem to be stealing a lot of profit from Canon...or even Nikon.
The NX500 will have most of the capability of NX1.
Profitability is more important than capability.
5. Canon might be a profitable company,
Can pretty much stop right here.
If they don't keep up with the fore front of technology in time it will be someone else's brand that gets recognized
3 years, apparently, is not enough time for that to happen.
Ever heard of Xerox, or Kodak, or Nokia, or Research in Motion?...That is what is going to happen to Canon if they don't start delivering.
Could happen, no signs of it yet.
The tl;dr answer is:
- Profitability is more important than capability
- Canon's doing a good job of market anticipation so far, with the notable exception of the M in the US and Europe.