Let me skew those numbers to be far larger than Nigel's assumptions, and then still be depressed about my numbers.
As much as I hate to admit it, I don't think we can even use the replies and votes as an indicator, nor do I think the 28K users can be the baseline. The real baseline is probably the views, which right now stands at about 2.5K (this give us about ten-fold increase from Nigel's reasoning by shrinking the denominator). I think it is a safe assumption that the overlap between the votes and posts is tremendous, but one can say that the vote ratio is probably not terribly wrong. So using those numbers we have 48 people who care out of 2.5k, or (48/2500) = 1.92%. When I wrote the poll questions I tried very hard to make sure there was no BS option or misunderstanding for people not truly interested.
I dare say that no one, or at least very few, who has voted 'NO' can claim they never shot Kodachrome. My guess is that the no votes are people who have used it, and may or may not have loved it, but have moved on if they did love it.
Finally, even though I care, and I started the thread and the poll, I certainly can't say I'm going to throw out all my other film and shoot KR64 exclusively. Even if I were to say that 100% of my color film will be Kodachrome, that's still only 5% of what I shoot.
Ergo, if we take me as the absolute best case, then the 1.92% becomes 0.1% of film. Unfortunately that's a pretty small share of the market for a big company to support. One tenth of one percent of a shrinking market like film might be a big deal for a tiny startup, but Kodak *CANNOT* be run like a Mom and Pop startup.
So, let's hope for the boutique model with other's coming in to fill in the gaps in fact works if Kodachrome is to survive for the long term.
After all, nobody wrote songs about Ansco-color.
MB