Ripolini wrote:
However, what annoys consumers is Nikon's completely senseless decision to include the Z5's lower-quality display in a camera called the Z5IIc just to make a few dozen $ more on each body sold.
Companies don't decide features like that to save a few dozen $ per unit. They do it to sell more. For most consumer products, and I would think cameras fall into that category, the rule-of-thumb is that the final consumer's cost is five times the materials cost. The seemingly high markup covers the costs of design, manufacturing, inventory, distribution, support, bookkeeping and all the other costs of simply running the company. Nikon must have figured that for the expected buyer and usage, in a competitive market the lower cost was more important than the specs of the screen, especially if the lesser screen they chose was still perfectly functional. So they could sell many more, not just make more profit per unit. Business history is full of companies which made the right choices and companies which didn't.