I love Tmax 400, but...

[John Wiegerink]

You're wrong. Kodak Alaris, a U.K. corporation, is a film marketing/distribution company only. It assembles nothing film-related.Kodak Alaris obtains its finished, packaged film products from Eastman Kodak Company, which operates the Building 38 facility in Rochester. Eastman Kodak Company is the entity that 'owns' 120 backing paper issues, having outsourced that product.Unless someone has insider knowledge, it's not possible to say whether Kodak Alaris is able to purchase film from any source other than Eastman Kodak (and an insider saying so would likely violate a non-disclosure agreement). While I understand you were referring to the backing paper source when you wrote "only one supplier," the real tough spot Alaris finds itself in is that it probably has only one source of final product, i.e. Eastman Kodak. Thus, the entire approach to dealing with backing paper issues seems to have been established by Eastman Kodak, and is consistent with the way Eastman Kodak dealt with film defects for many, many decades.

Kodak Alaris' CEOs have each come from the electronics/technology sector. Perhaps recruiters should have drawn from executives in food distribution industries instead. Expertise with storing and transporting perishables could have been valuable.

Sal,
I was sure somebody would tell me if I was wrong. Now that I know, it makes more sense. Kodak Inc. hasn't been very smart in the last decade or two when it comes to making proper decisions. My heart goes out to Kodak Alaris in it's dealings with the "Yellow God", but it's still not going to change the opinion of many folks. It's to bad Kodak Alaris doesn't have anymore leverage against Kodak Inc., but when Kodak Inc. controls pretty much everything Kodak Alaris markets, leverage is mostly nonexistent. As for the storing and transporting being a problem? Well, I don't and won't buy film that has to be handled with that kind of tender-loving care. I'll be damned and switch to the dark side...........digital instead. JohnW

 

[RattyMouse]

Sal,
I was sure somebody would tell me if I was wrong. Now that I know, it makes more sense. Kodak Inc. hasn't been very smart in the last decade or two when it comes to making proper decisions. My heart goes out to Kodak Alaris in it's dealings with the "Yellow God", but it's still not going to change the opinion of many folks. It's to bad Kodak Alaris doesn't have anymore leverage against Kodak Inc., but when Kodak Inc. controls pretty much everything Kodak Alaris markets, leverage is mostly nonexistent. As for the storing and transporting being a problem? Well, I don't and won't buy film that has to be handled with that kind of tender-loving care. I'll be damned and switch to the dark side...........digital instead. JohnW

Yes, relying on a sole supplier is a horrible situation. My company moves heaven and earth to find second and third sources for any important raw material. Alaris is stuck having only Eastman Kodak as their film supplier. It's a horrible situation these days for sure.

That said, film is not Alaris' only business. It's not even the largest part. Look at their web site and you'll see many other businesses that have nothing to do with film.

 

[MattKing]

Kodak Inc.

Actually, Eastman Kodak Company, not Kodak Inc.
That is only important because there are still a number of subsidiaries of Eastman Kodak, and it just adds confusion if you don't use the right name.
By the way, of the 1500 or so (the number may be out of date) employees that work for Kodak Alaris, many of them were formerly employees of either Eastman Kodak, Kodak Ltd. (the UK subsidiary of Eastman Kodak), or many of the other international Eastman Kodak subsidiaries.
Historically, Eastman Kodak structured its business so as to do most of its international business through its (wholly owned) international subsidiaries. As a consequence of the bankruptcy settlement, the still film and chemical marketing businesses and the colour photographic paper businesses were transferred to the Kodak Ltd. pension fund through its newly incorporated corporation, Kodak Alaris. Kodak Alaris hired most of its employees from Eastman Kodak and its subsidiaries and had many of them continue to do the jobs they had done for their previous employers. And Kodak Alaris also set up its own international subsidiaries - there is one for Canada (as an example).
Here is a list of Eastman Kodak subsidiaries: https://www.google.ca/search?rlz=1C...-AZYQ44YBCOUBKAQwIQ&biw=1536&bih=732&dpr=1.25

 

[MattKing]

One interesting thing I learned when putting together the last post: Kodak Alaris is moving their US headquarters out of its current location in Kodak Park to another site in Rochester, New York.

 

[RattyMouse]

One interesting thing I learned when putting together the last post: Kodak Alaris is moving their US headquarters out of its current location in Kodak Park to another site in Rochester, New York.

Probably a very smart move.

 

[John Wiegerink]

One interesting thing I learned when putting together the last post: Kodak Alaris is moving their US headquarters out of its current location in Kodak Park to another site in Rochester, New York.

Matt,
I really do wish them the best, but it always seems some darn bean counter comes in and screws things up for the working folks and the product. To bad we don't have more "profit sharing" companies in the U.S.. One thing profit sharing does do is make the worker very conscious of the product he is putting out. But greed is what makes Capitalism work I guess and profit sharing goes against that. Of course it seems to work better for some folks than others. Wonder if Kodak Alaris is having it's rent upped or their lease expired? JohnW

 

[MattKing]

Wonder if Kodak Alaris is having it's rent upped or their lease expired?

Or if they see the need to differentiate themselves a bit from Eastman Kodak.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Or if they see the need to differentiate themselves a bit from Eastman Kodak.

That could be to Matt, but there are still dumb bunnies like me that see the name Kodak and think one in the same. JohnW

 

[RattyMouse]

Or if they see the need to differentiate themselves a bit from Eastman Kodak.

A physical move would do nothing to differentiate these two companies. They share the same name for goodness sake!

 

[RattyMouse]

Matt,
I really do wish them the best, but it always seems some darn bean counter comes in and screws things up for the working folks and the product. To bad we don't have more "profit sharing" companies in the U.S.. One thing profit sharing does do is make the worker very conscious of the product he is putting out. But greed is what makes Capitalism work I guess and profit sharing goes against that. Of course it seems to work better for some folks than others. Wonder if Kodak Alaris is having it's rent upped or their lease expired? JohnW

Profit sharing has nothing to do with Kodak's misfortunes. It's simply bad management. Business schools world wide use Eastman Kodak as an example of one of THE most mismanaged companies in the world. At virtually every strategic point in the past 40 years, Kodak has made the wrong decisions. It continues up to this very day with their cryptocurrency scams just recently unveiled.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Profit sharing has nothing to do with Kodak's misfortunes. It's simply bad management. Business schools world wide use Eastman Kodak as an example of one of THE most mismanaged companies in the world. At virtually every strategic point in the past 40 years, Kodak has made the wrong decisions. It continues up to this very day with their cryptocurrency scams just recently unveiled.

That's true Ratty, but profit sharing in a company makes "ALL" employees aware of company moves and there are many voices that can change a wrong policy. Now employees have little interest, because they have "NO" say and are at the whim of the shareholders and CEO's. They are just Lemmings collecting a paycheck for who knows how long. It is the way it is and that's to bad. JohnW

 

[MattKing]

A physical move would do nothing to differentiate these two companies. They share the same name for goodness sake!

I'm speaking more in terms of mundane practicalities, like erroneous deliveries and people showing up to the wrong location for meetings. I've been a part of an organization which had two locations but the same name. We were frequently dealing with these sorts of confusions.
I bet at least some mail for Kodak Alaris gets mis-delivered to Eastman Kodak.
Kodak Park may also be better suited for entities with a manufacturing and research component. Anything of that nature performed by Kodak Alaris is likely happening at locations different from Rochester, NY.
So if their lease is up, they may have thought it useful to move.

 

[MattKing]

That could be to Matt, but there are still dumb bunnies like me that see the name Kodak and think one in the same. JohnW

I was thinking about this John.
Those of you who are USA based probably don't think about there having been many non-US "Kodaks". Given my Dad's career with Canadian Kodak/Kodak Canada, I've always been aware of there being more than one. In fact, and most likely as a result of my Dad's perspective and my contact over the years with other Kodak people, I've always thought of Kodak as being many different Kodaks - Kodak Canada, Kodak Australia, Kodak South Africa, Kodak Pathe, Kodak Rhodesia (yes, there was one), Kodak Limited, etc.

 

[faberryman]

Mr. Mooney and others at Kodak Alaris have replaced film for a number of participants here on Photrio/APUG.
Be sure to indicate and describe the batch numbers for film that you have that has not yet been exposed.
In my case, I advised him of 30 rolls from known affected batches that I had not yet exposed. He promptly sent me replacement film, from the USA to Canada via courier and at no cost, and did not require return of my 30 rolls.

The thing is replacing rolls is just a financial transaction. You cannot replace the time and effort you spent making the images, or the images themselves. And replacing defective rolls with rolls that themselves may be defective? Why run the risk in the first place?

 

[John Wiegerink]

The thing is replacing rolls is just a financial transaction. You cannot replace the time and effort you spent making the images, or the images themselves. And replacing defective rolls with rolls that themselves may be defective? Why run the risk in the first place?

I think Kodak Alaris was probably caught between a rock and a hard place on this one. I'm not saying their actions were right, but their choices were hard ones also. I would feel bad if I had takend a "once in a lifetime" trip somewhere halfway around the world and shot some "once in a lifetime" photographs and then got home, processed the film and saw the name Kodak and a bunch of numbers all over the place. Now that would really piss me off. I guess it makes a lot of sense to have a high quality, dependable Digi camera along and shoot every shot on each film and that. JohnW

 

[RattyMouse]

I'm speaking more in terms of mundane practicalities, like erroneous deliveries and people showing up to the wrong location for meetings. I've been a part of an organization which had two locations but the same name. We were frequently dealing with these sorts of confusions.
I bet at least some mail for Kodak Alaris gets mis-delivered to Eastman Kodak.
Kodak Park may also be better suited for entities with a manufacturing and research component. Anything of that nature performed by Kodak Alaris is likely happening at locations different from Rochester, NY.
So if their lease is up, they may have thought it useful to move.

Yes, things like that happen. One time in my own company a very funny thing happened once. I worked in the research lab while our chemical plant was in Detroit. One day a guy was let into the building telling me he had a shipment to deliver to me. I asked him to put the sample on my lab bench. He said he could not do that because the "sample" he had was a 5,000 gallon tank truck! He was supposed to have gone to our Detroit plant to drop that off, not our Chicago lab!!!

Whoops.

 

[lensmagic]

Have you made any effort to look at the similar threads below or even thought to do a search?

Indeed I have, and you will see posts of mine in those threads. I have yet to hear directly from Kodak in these treads. Why don't the come out and say specifically what they are doing? All I hear is, "Send your damaged film to Kodak and Kodak will replace it." I don't call that progress. Why aren't they making rapid progress instead of slow progress? I have damaged Kodak film, both TMX and TMY. Why would I send it in to get more possibly damaged film?

 

[Pioneer]

...I have damaged Kodak film, both TMX and TMY. Why would I send it in to get more possibly damaged film?

And your other options are??

 

[Sirius Glass]

Indeed I have, and you will see posts of mine in those threads. I have yet to hear directly from Kodak in these treads. Why don't the come out and say specifically what they are doing? All I hear is, "Send your damaged film to Kodak and Kodak will replace it." I don't call that progress. Why aren't they making rapid progress instead of slow progress? I have damaged Kodak film, both TMX and TMY. Why would I send it in to get more possibly damaged film?

I cannot justify Kodak or any other corporation's actions.

 

[RattyMouse]

And your other options are??

Eat the loss and shoot Ilford film. Once one does that the anxiety of being hit with yet another batch of poor quality film from Kodak goes away.

 

[pentaxuser]

It continues up to this very day with their cryptocurrency scams just recently unveiled.

What is its involvement with cryptocurrency scams? This may have simply passed me by and not most others or it is not well known in the U.K.

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[RattyMouse]

What is its involvement with cryptocurrency scams? This may have simply passed me by and not most others or it is not well known in the U.K.

Thanks

pentaxuser

Wow.....you missed quite a lot. Google Kodak and Cryptocurrency and you'll get all the answers.

 

[Pioneer]

Wow.....you missed quite a lot. Google Kodak and Cryptocurrency and you'll get all the answers.

I read a lot about Kodak and the new KodakCoin but I read nothing about a scam.

Your post is the only reference to scam that I find.

I think there may be some personal animosity toward Kodak being voiced.

 

[pentaxuser]

I read a lot about Kodak and the new KodakCoin but I read nothing about a scam.

Your post is the only reference to scam that I find.

To be fair to RattyMouse, I did as he suggested and Googled "Kodak and Cryptocurrency scam" and found two articles straightaway which seemed to have legitimate sources.

It depends on how you define "scam" I suppose. It certainly isn't in the legal sense an illegal confidence trick but it may not be a sensible investment in terms of a rate of return. It would appear that Kodak is diversifying into strange areas. It has had an immediate beneficial effect on its stock but it does smack of desperation and the need to latch on to what may be a "Bitcoin" bubble.

It certainly doesn't give me faith in Kodak.

pentaxuser

 

[RattyMouse]

I read a lot about Kodak and the new KodakCoin but I read nothing about a scam.

Your post is the only reference to scam that I find.

I think there may be some personal animosity toward Kodak being voiced.

You didnt look too hard. Kodak has come out with a bitcoin mining piece of hardware that is a total scam. There are articles all over the web. Just search and find them.

https://lifehacker.com/why-kodaks-bitcoin-scheme-is-a-scam-you-should-avoid-1821957658