RattyMouse
Allowing Ads
There's too much negative speculation here. The key phrase in the press release is "Our new owners will assist us to connect more effectively to this younger generation in the future, and we will prioritise this as our main goal over the next five years."
Companies have to change and move on, this is most probably a positive development for Harman, the five directors who bought and rescued Harman will eventually retire and that would raise ownership issues for the company. This way allows for a far better chance of continuity and a viable future for Harman.
Ian
They have a vested interest in Harman being worth more than they paid for it. They are unlikely to be interested in 2 or 3 % profit - they will be looking to make the company worth a lot more. That means skilled staff and full order books.What does Pemberstone know about film? What is their expertise in this area?
How long does Pemberstone intend to own Harman? Two or three years? Why would such a short term ownership of Harman benefit anyone except those who can turn a quick profit from the sale?
Pemberstone is a private equity company. They have no long term interest in owning any film manufacturing company. None.
What does Pemberstone know about film? What is their expertise in this area?
How long does Pemberstone intend to own Harman? Two or three years? Why would such a short term ownership of Harman benefit anyone except those who can turn a quick profit from the sale?
Pemberstone is a private equity company. They have no long term interest in owning any film manufacturing company. None.
They have a vested interest in Harman being worth more than they paid for it. They are unlikely to be interested in 2 or 3 % profit - they will be looking to make the company worth a lot more. That means skilled staff and full order books.
Harman/Ilford has always been run by their senior management regardless of the actual ownership, that won't change except that Pemberstones will most likely also have their director(s) on the board. They will be relying on the expertise of existing Harman employees but they may well have additional expertise that will be beneficial to the company.
It's highly speculative and wrong to make assumptions that they are investing in a short term way.
Ian
How much land does the Ilford facility sit upon and does anyone know how much it is worth? I know that this is lease by Ilford and now owned but it still may be the key why this transaction took place.
Harman/Ilford has always been run by their senior management regardless of the actual ownership, that won't change except...
.From Pemberstones website:
CORPORATE INVESTMENTS
... As a private business partner, we are not tied to an exit timetable but can take a more flexible view depending on the specific needs and aims of the business and also managements aspirations...
This morning Mr. Elton replied to my inquiry with the information (already posted in this thread) that Simon Galley exited the business at the point of sale. He said he'd pass on my "best wishes for a great future in whatever you do" greeting to Simon....We already know one senior Harman owner has left the company with this transaction. Have more left? Have they all left?
Drip... drip... drip...
KenRockwell said:Thanks, but that's not photo news, its business news. Ilford sold out to Harman years ago, so no one cares who owns it now.
Thank you!
Ken
Sent from iPad 2
It's strange how for a pessimist like myself (and by coincidence my 18 year "career" has been in finance) this news inevitably has me thinking about my photographic future. It's one of those sobering developments that reminds me of how precarious the future of non-digital photography is. I mean, we know how iffy things are at Kodak, and now this? Honestly without Kodak and/or Ilford, realistically I'm out.
I think we should stay reasonable. [snip]
We all liked Simon but if there was a sale, it's natural that his exit is because he is not anymore an owner. Simple as that, no need to think there is something mysterious or wrong here.
We all liked Simon but if there was a sale, it's natural that his exit is because he is not anymore an owner. Simple as that, no need to think there is something mysterious or wrong here.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?