As it was a good number of posts ago here's what Mirko said about the current situation:
"Tetenal manufactured all chemicals for Ilford, Kodak and other brands at least for Europe. Their manufacturing was ceased in November. This means here in Europe everyone who has bought from Tetenal before is currently selling from stock until new manufacturing sources have been found. I am not telling anything less or anything more. This means I am also not specualating about future availability of certain brands in certain markets. "
I have just seen Steven Lee''s post but had not before I posted. He sums up what needs to be all of our serious concern
&I don't think it's this easy: photochemistry manufacturers don't simply buy large quantity of chemicals from Sigma-Aldrich, Fischer and the likes. If they would do it, a 1 liter developer bottle would cost you 80£, 80$ or 80€ or whatever...
it was stated fairly clearly that much of the raw chemistry comes from Asia, and that Tetenal mostly served as a catalyst (no pun intended) for maintaining the import channels of that chemistry. In the present situation, Adox et al need to directly source some stuff from Asia or develop alternative channels for this.
Essentially we're being told that both Ilford and Kodak chemistry is no longer manufactured.
US customers do not pay VAT if we ship to the US. If a US citizen buys from us in our store we have to charge him VAT due to the lack of proof of export for the german authorities. He can -however- claim back the taxes by handing us in the stamped invoice (customs stamp on exit). Our webhop is quite straightforeward about this. The international shop shows both prices with and without VAT and depending on your location VAT is applied at checkout or not (different rates within Europe btw.)
so I learn that:
so I learn that:
1) reagents for photo chemistry isn't sourced from Europe (!)
and maybe even synthesise some of the chemicals for redundancy?
I can take no responsibility for your misunderstanding, whether deliberate or not. Sorry I can't help you. I'll keep it at that I don't subscribe to your analysis because it has fundamental flaws.
Regarding chemistry, wouldn't that be an opportunity for ADOX (or whoever) to scale up production to fill the possible gap in market and maybe even synthesise some of the chemicals for redundancy?
At the moment sourcing raw chemicals from China is cheaper, but from my experience, the quality has been so-so with some manufacturers (mislabelled chemicals, wrong batch numbers, etc.) and the pandemic showed how unreliable supply can be, with Shanghai port being closed for several months. That's why production of fine chemicals (eg. starting materials or intermediates for active pharmaceutical ingredients) is slowly moving back to Europe.
what I learnt from your former comment and @Tsubasa one is that buying large quantities of reagents like ADOX needs to do in order to manufacture their chemistry costs more proportionally than for a hobbyist to buy a small amount like 100g.
But in a further comment he gets into availability issue for other manufacturers than ADOX or the reselling business of Tetenal. This is were I am puzzled.
@ADOX Fotoimpex Always love reading your insights on how the industry operates. Putting your manufacturing capacity aside for a second, let me ask you a hypothetical question: would you consider making C-41 chemistry at some point? I am asking because B&W has a solid "Plan B" for most users, which is making our own from raw ingredients. But C-41 is way more involved and looks like our choices are rapidly shrinking, soon to be limited only to 1L blix kits.
Agreed! It's silly to put all eggs in one basket.The EU, and Europe and the West in general, should be more careful with regulations and become more independent.
This reply is somewhat vague. There are stores where Ilford chemistry is now unavailable, so the disruption HAS an effect.
This reply is somewhat vague. There are stores where Ilford chemistry is now unavailable, so the disruption HAS an effect.
Number 3 seems to me the only possible way to read their statement. That's how I took it.
And I find number four (none of the above) to be most likely.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?