Costs

pentaxuser · Aug 3, 2015

JW PHOTO said:
I just refuse to be a lemming or a sheep to slaughter type person. John W

While RobC makes some good points I think that he overlooks the powerful sentiment expressed above which most consumers have.

If there is any hint that we are being blatantly exploited by any or all parties in the chain, be that Kodak at the beginning or the retailers at the end we seek to retaliate and as any company knows once a consumer feels "slighted" then it takes a lot to change bring him back onboard. Indeed this may be impossible as several APUGers here have demonstrated. This feeling of being "duped/exploited" or any such similar description transcends income and this is precisely why it is such a dangerous sentiment for any company to excite in the consumer.

Interestingly the price premium bulk Kodak v cassette Kodak seems to be universal affecting both the U.K. and the U.S. I'd have thought the competition to be strong enough amongst the retailers in both countries to rule out a kind of price sharing cartel which turns the investigation back to towards the maker

I think I am safe in saying that the same issue doesn't apply to Ilford.

pentaxuser

Simon R Galley · Aug 3, 2015

Dear All,

BULK film is actually a very, very important product, it is used in education, by hobbyists who which to control exposure numbers for specific purposes, and of course it is a way of saving money over cassetted film and also some specialist applications. I only speak for ILFORD Photo and I cannot ( nor will I ) speak for anyone else. It costs LESS to make ILFORD or KENTMERE BULK film than cassetted film even though the process does have a little more manual intervention than producing cassetted film.

Therefore, as for all our film products, ILFORD and KENTMERE BULK Film will remain in production, it will always be cheaper than the equivalent length of film as a cassetted item and at the current ratio, regardless of what happens in the market.

We at HARMAN are lucky to have very, very good 'bean counters' although I prefer to call them financial officers of the company, they ensure we stay profitable and what's more ensure we are able to match and deliver our marketing objectives, because that ensures our future, but they do that because they believe in our marketing strategy and our company objectives.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited

Xmas · Aug 3, 2015

No totally wrong headed.

Kentmere 400 41.0 GBP 30.5m bought a box last week
Tx 153.0 GBP 30.5m never bought Kodak bulk except cine or positive colour dupe film

I don't care why there is a difference and I prefer the Harman film.

I'd need to be in a straight jacket.

Noel

Peltigera · Aug 3, 2015

JW PHOTO said:
I'm really not complaining about the over-all price of film, but am a little more than puzzled as to why Kodak prices their bulk higher per foot over 35mm canister film.

Because enough customers are willing to pay it.

JW PHOTO said:
If you want to be competitive you have to show it in your pricing. If you want to charge a much higher price for bulk film than say Ilford or Foma you had better have a far superior product. John W

You need customers who think it is worth more. Frequently, you achieve that by charging more - Leica have been doing it for years.

RobC · Aug 3, 2015

Nobody here is citing the prices that kodak or any other manufacturer is selling film to retailers at. Without knowing that, how can anyone say its kodaks or any other manufacturers fault for the prices retailers charge.

Let me tell you I worked on a "competitive pricing" project for one the UKs major high street chemist/pharmacy companies years ago. The way this worked is that every day they would compare the prices of their products in specific stores in each town with their main competitors store prices in the same town, often on the same high street. Where the competitor was not selling the exact same product the price would be set high, i.e. not discounted. Where the competitor price was lower the price would often be reduced to below that. This was done on a daily or weekly timescale so that in store prices are continually fluctuating according to what the competitor has on their shelves and at what price. This retailer sold film. Most of its main competitors (not camera shops) didn't. Film was always very expensive relative to the camera shop next door because they weren't included in the market price research.
In the next town 10 miles away where a competitor did sell film, the price would be significantly less for film than in the town where there was no main competitor. So in every shop in every town the price could and often was different from the same retailer. The super markets do this, all the main high street retailers do this.

Now tell me how you attribute any of this pricing to the manufacturer which everyone keeps trying to do. You just can't do it. All retailer prices are set by the retailer and not by the manufacturer. The manufacturer may contractually oblige them not to sell below cost or set a recommended retail price but they don't have the price control people seem to be attributing to them. This is apparently a difficult concept for some people to grasp. And this why retail is so fickle and chains/stores come and go. If they ain't right on the ball with their pricing they go out of business because the average punter doesn't look a gift horse in the mouth.

rrusso · Aug 3, 2015

Simon - thank you for taking the time to post that info. As I mentioned before, I prefer Ilford for b+w, so it's good to know there are no plans for it to be discontinued.

Matt - thanks to you also for a more "insiders" view of Kodak pricing.

I really didn't think this thread would turn out this way.

If it annoys you, go on to something else. Seriously. Don't create a straw man to beat up.

Ronald Moravec · Aug 3, 2015

Kodak wants to get out of bulk business and force people into higher profit singles.

It is all business strategy

MattKing · Aug 3, 2015

I know at least a little about this, having worked in the past at the retail end, and having maintained contacts. I also grew up eating, sleeping and breathing the old Kodak, although that perspective is obviously dated.

My favorite local retailer has a simple pricing system. With the exception of the very rare specials they run, they have a set markup for film, and their shelf price reflects their cost plus that markup.

They have stopped bringing in Kodak bulk rolls, except on special order, because the cost to them has increased much more than the relative costs of individual rolls.

Another local retailer has told me that they stopped ordering the bulk rolls of Kodak film because of the increased costs.

There are intervening level(s) of distributorship that complicate matters.

As I've said before, I am confident that Ilford's production costs for bulk rolls are lower than Kodak's. Of course, none of my local retailers are allowed to buy from Ilford directly, just as no US retailer is - all Ilford product in North America goes through distributors. If I understand matters correctly, that applies to most if not all still Kodak film as well.

The gas station analogy doesn't work at all - the gasoline distributors modify their prices daily to respond to market forces, and the stations do the same. And in all cases, the margins are razor thin, depending on high volumes and rapid turnaround for profit.

JW PHOTO · Aug 3, 2015

MattKing said:
The gas station analogy doesn't work at all - the gasoline distributors modify their prices daily to respond to market forces, and the stations do the same. And in all cases, the margins are razor thin, depending on high volumes and rapid turnaround for profit.

Matt,
Simon answered my question near perfectly and it's to bad Kodak couldn't have done the same, but that's OK since I got an answer that pretty much matched what I was thinking anyway. As for the gas station analogy? I'm talking of three gas stations getting their supply all at the same cost.Two selling any amount for the same $2.50 a gallon and the third charging more ($2.85 per gallon) if you buy more gallons than 5 gallons. I think it pretty well matches Kodaks pricing of 35mm cassettes and their pricing of bulk film. I'm beginning to think like others here that Kodak just doesn't want to deal with bulk volumes anymore and is inflating the price to make it worth their while without taking it off the market altogether. Also, a thanks to Simon from Ilford for letting me know they aren't stupid and losing money on every spool of bulk the sell. JohnW

Peltigera · Aug 3, 2015

If Kodak didn't want to do bulk rolls, they would just stop. They don't need to price themselves out of the market.

RobC · Aug 3, 2015

I think I've lost the will to live.

pentaxuser · Aug 3, 2015

Well we'll see what effect this kind of price premium for Kodak bulk will have over its sales in the next few months and then what Kodak does, assuming that it can do anything at all if the real problem is that it is the retailers all charging what they think or know the market will bear. If it is the retailers who have got it wrong in terms of what the market will bear then as their respective sales drop they should reduce the price, shouldn't they? We then know the kind of people we are dealing with

I'd presume that Kodak itself keeps its eye on bulk film sales and if it isn't it who is responsible for the premium it can do something to persuade the retailers to take remedial action should the drop in sales not persuade them.

The nightmare scenario is that all the retailers see their Kodak bulk films sales drop considerably but decide that they just need to keep their nerve and increase their prices to compensate, further lowering bulk film sales and thereby slowly but surely kill a part of Kodak's product range and Kodak is powerless to do anything about it.

The other part of the nightmare scenario affects Ilford. The scenario is that the price premium does not seriously affect Kodak bulk film sales but Ilford has been honest enough to tell us that it has no reason to use the same price premium so an increase in its bulk film price is not really possible for Ilford. It might be possible for all Ilford retailers to jump on the Kodak bandwagon and as long as they all did where would the Ilford consumers go for their bulk film? This assumes the customers cannot resist the lure of bulk film despite knowing they are being "screwed"

Our saving grace is that Harman Express( its direct customer order system) keeps its bulk film price and cuts the greedy retailers out of the equation. Maybe, if the Kodak bulk film premium is not its fault could do the same?

We then have a kind of Hollywood end to the film. The Wolf of Wall Street is slain.

Hurrah

pentaxuser

pentaxuser

cmacd123 · Aug 3, 2015

It was over 40 years since I had anything to do with retailing film, but back in those days the store where I worked generally used a fixed mark up form the wholesale price. for a while they got their Kodak film from a grey market distributor who brought Kodak Limited London film in from overseas, and because of exchange rates could sell it to the dealer for less than buying from Kodak Canada. that came to an abrupt end one day shortly after a visit from the Kodak Rep. I am guessing that it had something to do with getting a good price and having ample stock on Instamatic cameras.

I regretted not stocking up on the British tri-x at the time as the British cassettes were reloadable while the Canadian ones were not. You don't know what you’ve got till its gone.

JW PHOTO · Aug 3, 2015

RobC said:
I think I've lost the will to live.

Rob, hang in there you'll get it back. Besides, it's just film and not a lost love or something.

MattKing · Aug 3, 2015

I doubt that Kodak makes decisions about pricing and production quantities of bulk film more than once or twice a year. And maybe even less frequently.

And they probably don't do the finishing and labelling any more frequently.

The market is just too small.

What does change frequently for us outside the USA is the change in currencies. As all film is imported into Canada, currency valuation greatly affects both individual users here and our local retailers.

And as to gas prices here, the suppliers are constantly monitoring market prices and do vary the price they charge to the stations frequently - often more than once per day. Almost all gasoline is essentially sold on consignment, with the suppliers effectively controlling prices in a highly competitive, low margin market.

The film market is a relatively tiny, niche market that isn't the least like the gasoline market.

JW PHOTO · Aug 3, 2015

pentaxuser;1953772304 Our saving grace is that Harman Express( its direct customer order system) keeps its bulk film price and cuts the greedy retailers out of the equation. Maybe said:
Retailers can only go so far in the pricing scheme of this. Yes, they probably can charge whatever they wish and the manufacture can also pull their distributorship. I have seen it happen with a local motorcycle dealership. If that were the problem with Kodak and bulk pricing then I suggest to Kodak that they open a factory direct store. Simple solution to all their problems for bulk film would end if it really were a problem with retail pricing, which I think not. It's going to be interesting how all this plays out in the end. John W

Ricardo Miranda · Aug 4, 2015

To pentaxuser

While I agree that Harman Express has good prices, good delivery costs and it is very quick, they aren't cheaper than most retailers.

As the talk above is about bulk rolls, see Silverprint and Harman Express for Kentmere:

http://shop.silverprint.co.uk/Bulk-Film-Rolls/products/758/

http://www.harmanexpress.com/prod/68/KENTMERE-B-W-FILM.htm

The same prices. And single rolls Silverprint is cheaper by £0.20.

pentaxuser · Aug 4, 2015

Ricardo Miranda said:
To pentaxuser

While I agree that Harman Express has good prices, good delivery costs and it is very quick, they aren't cheaper than most retailers.

True but I was simply thinking aloud as to what the consequences of various business economics/ behaviour situations that have been postulated in this thread might be.

In the case of Ilford I was citing Harman Express as a means, should it be required, to stop "rogue "retailers all deciding that they could increase the price of Ilford bulk film and thereby ruin Ilford sales

If the Kodak bulk film premium truly reflects the economic reality and is justified then if I were a KA exec I'd ring Mr S Galley of Ilford and ask him what the Ilford secret is

pentaxuser

Sirius Glass · Aug 4, 2015

Peltigera said:
If Kodak didn't want to do bulk rolls, they would just stop. They don't need to price themselves out of the market.

+1

jvo · Aug 3, 2017

2 years on...

i use tri-x and love it... having said that, i find is disheartening that if the company is interested in increasing profits that it wouldn't have someone monitoring this forum and provide a brief comment as Simon G and Harman have done.

their executives or marketing people apparently haven't even discovered google alerts. how customer-focused is that!?!!???

mklw1954 · Aug 3, 2017

The bulk Ultrafine Xtreme 135 films provide good savings over the canister prices. For ISO 100, $33.95 per 100 ft., or $1.89 per roll vs. $3.09 per canister roll of 36 exposures. For ISO 400, $34.95 per 100 ft., or $1.94 per canister roll of 135-36 vs. $3.29 per canister roll of 36 exposures. While I use other films as well, this is good quality film. Same for their 120 ISO 100 and 400 films, which are $3.49 per roll.

marcmarc · Aug 4, 2017

MattKing said:
Much of that info is quite dated.

Perez is essentially gone, and Kodak is almost entirely out of the consumer inkjet business.

Kodak Alaris owns the manufacturing facilities for Kodak colour photographic paper, and that is their main business.

They are ghe marketing entity for Kodak still films and photographic chemistry. The film is manufactured by Eastman Kodak, who effectively determines pricing. Most still film and chemicals is distributed through 3rd parties.

Eastman Kodak is trying to develop additional uses for their large capacity coating facilities (just as Harman has for their much smaller machine). And the continued existence of film manufactured by Kodak probably depends on that re-purposing effort.

Less than 300 people remain involved in the manufacture and packaging of Kodak film. As the sale of commercial motion picture films (which make up the vast majority of the film produced) continues to decrease, the continued employment of those 300 people becomes more tenuous.

The remaining Kodak machinery has far too much capacity for the film market. For that reason, Kodak film is much more expensive to make than the market would otherwise dictate.

And Kodak Alaris' marketing efforts reflect those hard facts. They are concentrating on the majority of their business - colour photographic paper - which also happens to be the business that they control supply and pricing for.

If Eastman Kodak is successful in developing large, profitable additional uses for their coating machinery, then there may be improvement.

If that should happen, I wouldn't be surprised to see Kodak contracting with third parties like Harman for finishing services like cutting and packaging.

Maybe Kodak should should supply films for Freestlye again. Remember years back the dark red boxes labeled Arista Premium? Those were re-branded Tri-X and Plus-X. Along with the older re-branded films that were made by Ilford, it was the only time I would trust re-branded films. Foma makes Freestlye films and I've ran into problems using them.

marcmarc · Aug 4, 2017

mklw1954 said:
The bulk Ultrafine Xtreme 135 films provide good savings over the canister prices. For ISO 100, $33.95 per 100 ft., or $1.89 per roll vs. $3.09 per canister roll of 36 exposures. For ISO 400, $34.95 per 100 ft., or $1.94 per canister roll of 135-36 vs. $3.29 per canister roll of 36 exposures. While I use other films as well, this is good quality film. Same for their 120 ISO 100 and 400 films, which are $3.49 per roll.

I've heard the Ultrafine line was plagued with QC issues some time ago. Perhaps they fixed these issues?

marcmarc · Aug 4, 2017

ToddB said:
Hey guys,

Chiming in.. Kentmere..? I've heard good thing about that film. Does it produce a nice image?

Todd

I've shot a lot of Kentmere 100 developed in Rodinal. It's a great film and at one time it could be bought for $2.95 a 36 exposure roll...about the same price as bulk loading Fp4 per roll. It seems prices jumped up for Ilford products and Kentmere was not spared but it's still cheaper then its counterparts.

Neal · Aug 4, 2017

Hi All,

Personally, I think a roll of film today is a bargain. Kentmere in bulk rolls is a steal. IMO, there has never been a better time to shoot b&w film and I'm enjoying it!

Neal Wydra

Costs

pentaxuser

Simon R Galley

Xmas

Peltigera

RobC

rrusso

Ronald Moravec

MattKing

Moderator

JW PHOTO

Peltigera

RobC

pentaxuser

cmacd123

JW PHOTO

MattKing

Moderator

JW PHOTO

Ricardo Miranda

pentaxuser

Sirius Glass

jvo

mklw1954

marcmarc

marcmarc

marcmarc

Neal

Costs

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency