General Motors and Ford downsized rather extensively, closing dozens of plants worth billions and billions of dollars. Why can't Kodak shut down their plant and build one to fit the current business?
General Motors and Ford downsized rather extensively, closing dozens of plants worth billions and billions of dollars. Why can't Kodak shut down their plant and build one to fit the current business?
Automotive sales are on the increase.
Film sales have at best plateaued, and may be still on the decline.
New film manufacturing is expensive to design and build.
And shareholders and creditors demand that that money be spent on growing markets, not markets that are either steady or declining.
If Kodak had been privately held, it probably wouldn't be trying to get out of bankruptcy now.
The only down side to the present time is the much lower selection of available films.
It's not really very low in the b&w world, is it? Color film has narrowed drastically, especially E-6 which I think is now down to five options (Provia and Velvia in two speeds each, plus CR200), but it seems to me like we're a bit spoiled for choice in black and white---a little less so since the demise of Efke, to be sure. There are, what, six or seven 400-speed films to choose from? (Two from Kodak, two plus XP2 from Ilford, Fomapan, two from Rollei if you don't count their infrared film.) I can't find a convenient historical catalog to compare to, but have previous generations of photographers really had more options than that at their fingertips?
-NT
GM's market share dropped during their downsizing time. If memory serves GM used to have close to 50% market share in the US around 1980. Today that is less than 20%. Somehow they managed to downsize their operations and continue production.
No one is making any new films. Kodak is just selling their old formulations.
If Kodak downsized properly, they can adjust their facility to be the proper size. According to PE Kodak can produce a years demand of film in one day today. Kodak could easily produce enough to keep sales going while they re-tool their production to the smaller size.
Everyone always comes back with numerous excuses that say can't can't can't. Can't be done. I've never seen a more negative (heh heh) industry than film producing. Why is it ALWAYS can't be done?
No doubt there are HUGE costs in downsizing an industrial giant. It's likely the cost of the legacy overheads are the real cost issues. Production of film at the correct scale probably wouldn't be a cost problem. The issue is getting from where you are today to the correct scale when you have the legacy costs consuming all the money.
If it is done right, bringing a company back to profitability might be a very rewarding challenge. The upside is that once a company is profitable you may get to try again, if you can develop new products and services that someone wants whether they are in your current market or something else.
Unfortunately, Kodak is saddled with an idiot at the top, who probably hired, promoted other idiots that agreed with him. It is amazing that he is still there.
Bad management seems to be their problem since the mid 80s, they basically invented the digital camera, developed stunning megapixel sensors before its competition and they completely missed the boat.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY: ![]() |
