Harrow Kodak Factory Closing

MattKing · Apr 15, 2016

1L6E6VHF said:
Does it seem odd to anyone other than I that they would be making photographic papers in Manaus, hot, humid, and so far from markets?

I would have expected Curitiba, Joinville, or the São Paulo area.

They do actually make and/or market other things.

Ai Print · Apr 15, 2016

Lachlan Young said:
I suspect that the digital camera will have become the CD of the imaging world long before RA4 goes away.

But if it does not go that way that is OK too....right?
Or is Kodak needing to "Hurry up and Die" or digital cameras going the way of the CD what folks are all about on this site?

I honestly don't understand it, why so much hate for tools that gives others so much pleasure?

Lachlan Young · Apr 15, 2016

Ai Print said:
But if it does not go that way that is OK too....right?
Or is Kodak needing to "Hurry up and Die" or digital cameras going the way of the CD what folks are all about on this site?

I honestly don't understand it, why so much hate for tools that gives others so much pleasure?

All I wanted to say was that the digital camera is losing a significant chunk of market share to smartphones etc. That's all. Of course equipment geared towards the professional market will continue to be around. Diversity is good.

Ken Nadvornick · Apr 15, 2016

Ai Print said:
I honestly don't understand it, why so much hate for tools that gives others so much pleasure?

If by tools you mean Kodak products, people aren't upset about the Kodak products. Kodak products, at least that tiny sliver of those that still remain after the carnage, are still the best in the world.

More than anything else it's the mutually exclusive thing, Dan. If Kodak could have continued maintaining and marketing the core of their analog products, trimmed as necessary (yes, even Kodachrome), while at the same time blending in the newer digital technology products, if they could have remained the world's leader in overall imaging, both amateur and professional, you would have heard only cheers, not jeers.

But that was never management's goal. To them it was a mutually exclusive either/or proposition. And analog came out holding the short straw.

People are (still) angry that in their failed efforts to go digital, Kodak upper management worked very hard to also kill off analog. Not just by discontinuing their own product lines instead of scaling them down. But by signaling to the rest of the industry that they needed to do similarly because if we don't see a future, you shouldn't either.

Just go reread the CEO's pronouncements to Wall Street at the time. He did—or tried to do—everything he told them he wanted to do to the Kodak analog product lines. And by his own words, he held those product lines in contempt.

Problem is, Kodak failed on both sides of the coin. They never became the dominant digital imaging company they thought should have been their birthright. And they never succeeded in killing off film completely to force the imaging world to make that happen for them.

Instead, Murphy's Law took over. The most unexpected things that could have happened, did happen. And with their failed ability to cope with the imaging technology transition, they went bankrupt.

But the larger overall damage to the analog film industry remains as a legacy ripple effect. The jury is still out as to whether it can survive in the long term. Dedicated film users were nothing more than pawns in Kodak's grand digital plans. And they ended up being orphaned pawns.

That's where some of the continuing hate at this late date still comes from.

Ken

DREW WILEY · Apr 15, 2016

The death of Kodak has been painfully long and slow, and apparently is quite a bit more complicated than just a digital versus analog conversation;
things like sacrificing their financial momentum trying to buy back a bulk of their own shares rather than reinvesting profits in infrastructure or
efficiency; being too big for their own britches, and like other big corporations, losing sight of individual divisions. Basically bad oversight at the top.
We can pontificate from hindsight. What matters now is encouraging what's left and usefuln to us. The film they still make is superb. I can't specifically address their RA4 papers because I use Fuji for that category. But don't cut off your nose to spite your face. At this point in time, there
aren't a lot of options left.

Ken Nadvornick · Apr 15, 2016

DREW WILEY said:
The death of Kodak has been painfully long and slow, and apparently is quite a bit more complicated than just a digital versus analog conversation; things like sacrificing their financial momentum trying to buy back a bulk of their own shares rather than reinvesting profits in infrastructure or efficiency; being too big for their own britches, and like other big corporations, losing sight of individual divisions. Basically bad oversight at the top.

Undoubtedly all true, to varying degrees of extent. But the question was, why the hate from here.

I'm not sure the average film user here was as upset about failed stock buy-backs as much as they were upset by the loss of their lifelong favorite analog products in favor of promised replacement digital products. Especially when due to gross mismanagement they eventually ended up with neither, and a still possibly mortally wounded analog industry as a result.

I'm an aspiring optimist on this that wants to believe that the post-Kodak carnage analog industry can still pull itself back up to something that's long-term viable. But that pesky analytical part of me also keeps trying to quietly whisper stuff in my ear...

Ken

Ai Print · Apr 15, 2016

Ken Nadvornick said:
I'm not sure the average film user here was as upset about failed stock buy-backs as much as they were upset by the loss of their lifelong favorite analog products in favor of promised replacement digital products.

I would agree with that but I also know that nearly all the photographers I know personally who use film, use it without prejudice towards who makes it, what they discontinued years or months ago and all help move film and it's niche awareness forward. Most of us are amazed at what film choices we have and are even more amazed at how relatively cheap it still is.

And finally, not one student I mentor at this program through my affiliation with it on the advisory panel I am a member of has a single bad thing to say about those who still take on the risk of making a highly niche product like film. They all have great attitudes and some put out fantastically fresh work on the stuff.

But to say things like "I wish Kodak would do us all a favour and hurry up and die" on a site that is supposed to be celebrating film in the modern digital era....?...what purpose does that kind of statement serve other than to allow a blowhard to blow even harder?

SchwinnParamount · Apr 15, 2016

it sucks that 250 people will be unemployed, but: "According to the company, the estimated impact is that around 250 people at the facility, which produces printing paper for businesses and consumers all over the world, will be affected by the decision."
It produces paper, not photo paper either. Aside from the collective groan we utter when yet another bunch of middle class stiffs (like us) are given the axe because of corporate overlord greed, what are we concerned about?

MattKing · Apr 16, 2016

SchwinnParamount said:
it sucks that 250 people will be unemployed, but: "According to the company, the estimated impact is that around 250 people at the facility, which produces printing paper for businesses and consumers all over the world, will be affected by the decision."
It produces paper, not photo paper either. Aside from the collective groan we utter when yet another bunch of middle class stiffs (like us) are given the axe because of corporate overlord greed, what are we concerned about?

Harrow produces essentially all of Kodak's colour photographic paper - the Endura papers et al.

From a PetaPixel article:

UPDATE: After publishing this piece, Audrey Jonckheer, Director of Worldwide Public Relations for Kodak Alaris’ Imaging Division, reached out to us to clarify a few things and answer some of the questions the news had brought up.

Here is her statement, pasted in full with her permission:

First and foremost, the company is doing well. Kodak Alaris comprises three business—Information Management, Imaging-Consumer (IC) and Imaging Professional Paper, Photo Chemicals and Film. The Harrow facility produces our Color Negative Paper (IPPF), as well as some of the Thermal media used in dry printing operations (IC).

Across the board, the color negative paper has undergone industry declines. This market decline has led to a partially-filled manufacturing factory and intense productivity pressures.

Here is a link to the entire PetaPixel article, including the over-the-top headline: http://petapixel.com/2016/04/13/kodak-alaris-trouble-shuts-manufacturing-plant-uk/

The "partially filled manufacturing factory" seems to be the almost universal problem.

Andre Noble · Apr 16, 2016

Kodak a few years stopped making cut sheets of their RA4 color paper. So why should I care?

Photo Engineer · Apr 16, 2016

As I have said before, a large portion of the color paper line and the duratrans line is made at the Colorado plant.

PE

SchwinnParamount · Apr 16, 2016

APUGuser19 said:
I don't hold with the Keynesian Crowd on that "corporate greed" bit. Lazy reasoning from that side of the spectrum. Business is business, not "greed". What makes it dirty is the position they are pushed into. Hijack 19% of the economy to pander for votes, and at the same time create and annoy people with new politically correct protected classes, and you push business to do what it needs to survive. Creates "greed" when none might have previously existed. People who run business are people like you; mostly good people (as most people are). If you had a protection shark tapping you up for money fast as you can make it, and more; you would get hard-of-heart too. Is that "greed"? To me, the source of the problem glares. Easy as finding a rotten tooth.

But do you know what else business people do, even worse? I happen to know--they say "fk it", and they close down. "I want to make film, but it's just not worth the horse sh..., so to hll with it". That's what they do. I wish Kodak could hang on one more year for the problem to be corrected. Maybe 2.

The prime directive of corporate officers is to increase shareholder value. In other words, make shareholders richer. So enriching shareholders has a higher priority than improving the lives of the people who work for the corporation. I work for one of the richest corporations in the world and I've seen over and over again the effects of this. Tens of thousands of people laid off to satisfy the fund managers of activist funds. You'll see that any time a company lays off a significant number of its workers, the stock price rises quickly.

Photo Engineer · Apr 16, 2016

You have to remember that for a long time, Kodak employees were major stock holders.

PE

Prof_Pixel · Apr 16, 2016

There used to be an acronym for - Shareholders, Customers and Employees (and maybe some others). Do you remember?

Kevin Harding · Apr 16, 2016

Photo Engineer said:
You have to remember that for a long time, Kodak employees were major stock holders.

PE

This is true, but it does depend on who is managing their investments - if there's enough of a gulf between the employees themselves and the management of their pension fund, ridiculous things happen. I've worked on projects to try to clean up those kinds of messes and they're not easy. I have no basis of assessing whether or not this is the case here, but it's worth exploring.

cmacd123 · Apr 16, 2016

Photo Engineer said:
As I have said before, a large portion of the color paper line and the duratrans line is made at the Colorado plant.

And that plant was spun out as part of selling X-ray Products to Carestream? (so a Kodak Spin out - Alaris, would be buying paper from another Kodak Spin out Carestream?

Prof_Pixel · Apr 16, 2016

cmacd123 said:
so a Kodak Spin out - Alaris, would be buying paper from another Kodak Spin out Carestream?

Yes

Photo Engineer · Apr 16, 2016

Isn't that hilarious? But then in many cases Kodak spin offs are doing better than Kodak ever imagined!

As for owning Kodak shares, they were held outright by the employees as part of a stock sharing plan or stock option plan.

PE

cmacd123 · Apr 16, 2016

Photo Engineer said:
Isn't that hilarious? But then in many cases Kodak spin offs are doing better than Kodak ever imagined!

that is because fo rthe most part they have an idea of what they want to be when they grow up. Although Carestream coating photographic products is a bit of a hoot, since they seem to have the goal of swapping out all film x-ray setups with digital ones.

MattKing · Apr 16, 2016

SchwinnParamount said:
The prime directive of corporate officers is to increase shareholder value. In other words, make shareholders richer. So enriching shareholders has a higher priority than improving the lives of the people who work for the corporation. I work for one of the richest corporations in the world and I've seen over and over again the effects of this. Tens of thousands of people laid off to satisfy the fund managers of activist funds. You'll see that any time a company lays off a significant number of its workers, the stock price rises quickly.

The "shareholders" of Kodak Alaris are to the best of my knowledge a single entity - the Kodak Limited Employees Pension Plan.

I wonder whether the sale of the Harrow property (which I expect will be happening soon) will radically change the financial position of Kodak Alaris?

DREW WILEY · Apr 18, 2016

"Taking care of shareholders" doesn't make much sense in the long run if it endangers the long-term survival of the corporation. Once a parasite gets
bigger than its host, they both die. But in publicly-traded scenarios, a lot of the mentality revolves around smoke and mirrors quarterly growth, along
with a very short-term mentality that rarely benefits general stockholders, but only a few robber-barons at the top. Gosh knows how many classic
US corporations I've seen pancake in a matter of months based on a stock and compensation strategy that could be reduced to one simple word: greed. However, that factor does generally accompany incompetence.

Wallendo · Apr 19, 2016

Apparently the photographic division of Kodak Alaris is basically a "cash cow" that provides capital to enhance their other businesses. The Harrow plant could not produce photo paper as efficiently as it could be outsourced. KA apparently sees little growth opportunity in film and photo paper, and therefore has no incentive to develop "right-sized" manufacturing capability. KA is now basically a photographic marketing company, selling photographic products manufactured by others.

MattKing · Apr 19, 2016

I'm wondering if Kodak Alaris is actually Carestream's landlord for the factory in Colorado.

cmacd123 · May 18, 2016

The Plot she thickens.. Carestream's Venture Capital owners , Onex, want to break up Carestream and sell off the pieces. (after taking 2.5 times their investment) http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...m-health-in-sale-sources-say/article30084703/

Photo Engineer · May 18, 2016

Nothing new under the SON.

PE

Harrow Kodak Factory Closing

MattKing

Moderator

Ai Print

Lachlan Young

Ken Nadvornick

DREW WILEY

Ken Nadvornick

Ai Print

SchwinnParamount

MattKing

Moderator

Andre Noble

Photo Engineer

SchwinnParamount

Photo Engineer

Prof_Pixel

Kevin Harding

cmacd123

Prof_Pixel

Photo Engineer

cmacd123

MattKing

Moderator

DREW WILEY

Wallendo

MattKing

Moderator

cmacd123

Photo Engineer

Harrow Kodak Factory Closing

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency