Forbes on the future of Kodak

[Silverhead]

Jack Trout from Forbes Online has some interesting comments on Kodak:

http://www.forbes.com/2007/03/15/trout-marketing-kodak-oped-cx_jt_0316trout.html?partner=alerts

Particularly telling: 'A fundamental mistake that big successful companies often make is to see themselves and their reputation far beyond the way the world is willing to see them. The corporate feeling is, "All I have to do is put my well-known name on the product and the world will buy it."'

Sound familiar?

 

[HerrBremerhaven]

One only needs to look at Polaroid to see the potential (or lack) of a brand. The Petters Group purchased what was left of Polaroid after their bankruptcy, and privatized it. Then the Polaroid brand was launched onto cheap consumer electronics, though the instant film still is being sold. Unfortunately, with it now under the realm of a private holding company, it is speculation to imagine those consumer electronics are enjoying sales due to the Polaroid name, and not solely due to low prices.

With Kodak, there is still that public perception of being a film company. Depending upon advertising, they could become known as an imaging company. However, the recent companies purchased by Kodak launch them into commercial printing and graphic arts supply, realms that are outside the public eye. While sales to businesses in the GCG division are working out nicely, this business is out of the public eye. Kodak, in my opinion, could move further to business to business, removing themselves more from the public eye, or could try a two tiered approach: define itself in public as an imaging company and market themselves in the professional realm to businesses involved in imaging. I see a little indication of that two tiered approach now, though not as convincing as I would have expected; perhaps the tentative nature of doing this is lost on the current management, or they might actually think things are going better than perceptions would indicate.

Wallstreet is often about buy on the rumour, sell on the news. Ultimately they need to look where they want to be in the future, and that is farther away than one or two quarters. Perhaps they should look into getting another advertising or PR agency with fresh ideas.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
Dead Link Removed

 

[Chan Tran]

Kodak makes good film, good digital imaging sensor, good dye sub photo printer. They just couldn't sell it.

 

[donbga]

Jack Trout from Forbes Online has some interesting comments on Kodak:

http://www.forbes.com/2007/03/15/trout-marketing-kodak-oped-cx_jt_0316trout.html?partner=alerts

Particularly telling: 'A fundamental mistake that big successful companies often make is to see themselves and their reputation far beyond the way the world is willing to see them. The corporate feeling is, "All I have to do is put my well-known name on the product and the world will buy it."'

Sound familiar?

All large companies have to re-invent their selves every few years because as Trout points out competion and markets change.

As I see it Kodak missed their chance of becoming THE leader in digital photography. I've not given up on their success and commend their president for being aggressive to turn the company around. He or his successor has no choice but to do so.

IMO, ironically Kodak's potential success with digital imaging will be the only thing that can save their film line.

Long live the king,

 

[aldevo]

This is an excellent article.

Just because a consumer will trust you with a $3 film/roll doesn't mean they will line up to buy a $250 printer or $400 digicam when the field is already crowded with established players in consumer electronics.

Kodak's brand is associated with a technology that is viewed by the general public as obsolescent. And they appear more inclined to place their faith in the conquerors and not the vanquished when it comes to making these not-so-inconsequential purchases.

That said, the jury is still out on their printers.

My gut feeling is that EK is going to be bought by private equity, eventually. Perhaps it's nothing more than the continued questions about liability for environmental cleanup that's delayed that outcome this long...

I don't know what the purchase would mean for its film operations.

 

[Brac]

A very interesting article. Fujifilm seems to have done much better in embracing both digital & film worlds. Over here in the UK, they are one of the leading brands of consumer digital cameras along with Sony and Canon. Kodak seem to lag behind all of these though when digital cameras first surfaced they were one of the leading brands here. I suspect eventually Kodak will have to merge or be taken over by one of the electronic giants.