If you haven't already read it...

[arpinum]

PE,

Not understanding your comments that the pensions are fine. My reading of the 10-k is the pension is officially underfunded by 2.6 billion, but the unrealistic return on assets of 8.7% means it could be much worse.

Can you post some specifics on this?

 

[Aristophanes]

The bankruptcy is just speculation now, but the hiring of C11 experts at the same time as a credit draw says there is some concern about the latest creditor's standing in the queue.

The problem with the film biz is there appears to be no bottom to film's decline in common use. Kodak is not built to serve a hobby industry. It's cinema services are most in peril, so photography's salvation Kodakwise may lie in a motion picture industry purchaser. Problem is that entity may need to burn $$$ to get there, and that may only be accomplished by selling patents not for creditors, but for going concern solvency. That's where the bankruptcy comes in; to protect asset transfer. Shareholders are already written off.

It's going to be interesting. Anyone want to pass the hat?

 

[lxdude]

Thinking about it, I think they could get in a lot of trouble if they went bankrupt right after tapping a line of credit.

 

[alanrockwood]

To bad it's hard to short penny stocks... likely some money could be made.

The rule of thumb for making money in a bankruptcy is to buy up some of the discounted secured debt. Then, when a company comes out of chapter 11 as a debt free company with a good business the old debt gets converted to new shares and you might make some money if the new shares go up.

This strategy likely won't work in this case because it depends on a strong company coming out of bankruptcy, something that probably won't happen in the case of Kodak. Some kind of company might emerge, but it is questionable if it would be one with good prospects for long term growth.

 

[Photo Engineer]

PE,

Not understanding your comments that the pensions are fine. My reading of the 10-k is the pension is officially underfunded by 2.6 billion, but the unrealistic return on assets of 8.7% means it could be much worse.

Can you post some specifics on this?

For current retirees, they were allowed either to receive money from the pension plan or to take a lump sum cash distribution. So, those that did the latter have their money in their hands when they leave the gate at Kodak. The more recent retirees get an option to draw only a portion of this as cash. The rest is in the pension plan.

The current pension plan is comprised of the old EK pension plan and newer standard 401 K plans with investments chosen by the employee and thus vary in amount based on their choice of investment.

Now I realize that there are problems with the old Kodak managed investment plan, but I base my comments on what they said locally on TV, and that is that current retired people are safe, but the results for current employees will vary based on their choices of 401K plans as I noted above. An example would be a 401K plan based on Kodak stock, vs a plan based on Apple stock. The straight Kodak plan (not available to new employees since the mid 90s IIRC) is the one in trouble.

PE

 

[Photo Engineer]

How about what HARMAN did? Buy the business but not the real estate? HARMAN leases its site.

It is actually a good idea, but there is no person or group of persons at EK who can purchase such a large operation. And, due to the decline in business, I doubt if anyone would take the risk to loan them money.

PE

 

[fstop]

Originally Posted by wblynch

Thank the American MBA. The root of our problems since 1975.

For such an intelligent country how can we continually produce such disastrous business managers?

+1

+2

At least Kodunk doesn't have Meg Whitman as their new CEO, unload your HP stock boys its going to play submarine.


We won't know what is going on until after it happens.
Kodak has the option to sell the film division. there is still money to be made IF managed correctly.

 

[removed account4]

Originally Posted by wblynch




+2

At least Kodunk doesn't have Meg Whitman as their new CEO ...

yeah, she'd nickle+diime all the customers
to death until they went somewhere else .. :munch:
"canisters for the 35mm film or rolls of more than 12 exposures, that's 30¢ extra
boxes or foil wrapping for 120 film, that's 20¢ extra nested boxes for sheet film, 40¢ extra ... "
then run for political office ! :munch:

 

[Two23]

Well, filling the board of directors with butt kissers can certainly do it. Look at Immelt & GE.


Kent in SD

 

[lacavol]

I hope Kodak can come out of it, think I'll go buy some Tri-X.

I voted for Moonbeam, seemed like a good idea at the time.

At least he isn't talking business newspeak. "The latest remit is that we need more branding."

 

[Steve Smith]

They would have to assume the legal burden of the expected cleanup as part of the sale price.

Or take it on for a significant reduction in the sale price.


Steve.