Offline
As it happens, Konica Minolta (the two merged some years ago) has a facility in Windsor, CT -- but Royal doesn't enter into it, as Uwe mentions.
Offline
Hey Uwe,
The info came from UPI on Jan. 30, 1986, the articlke is as follows:WINDSOR, Conn. -- A Japanese company whose products include Konica cameras and lenses has purchased complete control of Royal Business Machines from a division of Volkswagen of America.Konishiroku Photo Industry Co., which already owned 34 percent of Royal, purchased the remaining 66 percent of the company from Triumph-Adler North America for an undisclosed price.
Offline
Uwe, Here is the rest of the article:The transaction was effective Monday but announced Wednesday in Connecticut and Japan. Triumph-Adler is a wholly owned subsidiary of Volkswagen of America with sales in excess of $500 million.Royal Business Machines is a leading supplier of copier products with sales of more than $250 million, while Konishiroku had sales totaling nearly $1.5 billion in 1985.Royal has been renamed Konica Business Machines USA, but will keep its headquarters in Windsor. Other Triumph-Adler operations, including Adler-Royal Business Machines and Royal Consumer Business Products, are not affected by the sale.'The decision to sell our remaining two-thirds interest in Royal Business Machines was, quite naturally, a difficult one,' said Robert R. Hagy, president of Triumph-Adler.The company has decided to strengthen its emphasis on Triumph-Adler designed and manufactured products directed toward office automation, he said.Royal has marketed copiers made by Konishiroku since 1972 and entered into a joint venture in 1984 when the Japanese firm acquired a 34-percent interest in Royal Business Machines.
Can't find any mention of Olivetti, maybe the dates are wrong????
Offline
Interesting. You'll note the Wikipedia entry (I know; not dispositive!) has no mention of Konica/Konishiroku:
Offline
gaia4us wrote:
Can't find any mention of Olivetti, maybe the dates are wrong????
Fascinating. I got the information and dates directly from the Royal website, which should be a fairly reliable source you would think. I'll have to add this to my list of things that require more in depth research.
As for the Wikipedia page on Royal, it's been a couple of years since I last looked at it, but back then it was notorious for the incorrect information it presented. Regardless, I tend to completely ignore Wikipedia when it comes to typewriter history.