Ilford Purchased by Pemberstone Ventures Ltd

[Wallendo]

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.

I responded to Mr. Elton's reply with a follow up question about the other three former owners, namely whether Misters Brierly, Harris and Taylor had also left HARMAN or if they (like Mr. Elton) stayed on. Just moments ago, Mr. Elton answered that Mr. Taylor has remained and the others retired.

Retirement may be the driving force here.

One problem with privately controlled companies with few shareholders is that it can be difficult to cash out at retirement. These shares are not sold on the open market. It can be difficult to find a buyer willing to buy 1/5 of a company. In some cases it is expected that remaining shareholders buy out retiring owners which in many cases would result in much new debt. If that it is the case here, then the only real option is to sell the company and hope the new owners take care of things. I have had personal experience where a corporation was dissolved because remaining owners couldn't afford to buy out departing shareholders.

On the other hand, the word "retirement" may just be sugar-coating for forced departure.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

Four senior managers off the payroll instantaneously...

Three, not four. See post #164. Misters Elton and Taylor, two of the five former owners, are still affiliated with HARMAN.

 

[xo-whiplock]

There are a lot of people on here who have a persecution narrative that they feel they need to maintain - the idea that the market is changing and growing away from their narrow horizons terrifies them. Pretty much everything on this thread is irrelevant to those who use film & paper on a professional basis - it's better that companies are getting investment to grow.

Ilford's business has been growing steadily since the later 2000s & they obviously want major investment to take themselves forwards.

More to the point, the directors of Harman may well go off in their own directions creating their own new startups. I'd rather see a market whose strength is in diversity & quality rather than quantity

I agree. There does seem to be some personalities here that like politicians of a certain party, must tow the party line while putting their own personal spin on it to be entertaining. The line they tow is one of "I support film BUT..." where the "but" negates what they said in front of it. I call this "double speak" and so I just consider everything after the "but" to get the true sense of what they are saying. This duality of speak is the source of most confusion generated by the reader, as the lead-in is affirmative and the closing is negative. In essences, this type of speech is to induce controversy and ambiguous negativity. It's a lot like being passive aggressive, when action is required as the appropriate act, not words that spin people around in circles.

Indeed, the investment of Pemberstone is a diversification of their portfolio and put Harmon into a bigger pond and placed incentives on everyone to perform better, larger, and more forward looking than in the past. As with any business, get it right or go home. I believe Harmon will get it right, just like they did back when by "The 5" that leveraged a management buy out from the previous owners. It's a natural step for a management buyout to progress to soliciting a private equity interest to invest, provide incentive, streamline practices, increase profits, and make the company appealing to prospective buyers that are looking to do film longterm, like the Lomography brand. The change is to appeal to a new generation and target marketing to a broader spectrum of potential customers, while supporting and backing Harmon's longterm and longstanding customers.

 

[MartinP]

"Film" is being mentioned repeatedly here. I am more concerned with the position of Harman's photographic papers . . .

 

[pbromaghin]

I think we should stay reasonable. The guys are supposedly investors, and they are purchasing the company looking for a profit.

The BIG question here is if the profits are to be made by:

a) manufacturing and selling film
or
b) sale of the real estate involved

If Pemberstone Ventures is interested in (a), then we can rejoice, this is excellent news for us.
If Pemberstone Ventures is interested in (b), well, start stocking the freezer and give all power to Adox, Foma, and Ferrania.

It all depends on how profitable is the business. If Pemberstone is investing in (a), then they will make it more profitable and this means it could be sustained longer in time, which is good news for us as well.

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.

There is no land involved. Harman is a tenant. One does not come to own land by buying the company that is renting it!

 

[MattKing]

There is no land involved. Harman is a tenant. One does not come to own land by buying the company that is renting it!

In the past, I acted for clients who were tenants under a favourable commercial lease, and who sold the benefit of that lease for a very substantial sum.

Property encumbered by a lease can be either very valuable to a landlord, or of much less value to the landlord, depending on the terms of the lease.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Of course the statements emanating will be positive and rosy. When the stylus is lifted the object of the game is to already have your ass seated. In this way your children may continue to eat.

Ken

 

[mr rusty]

Retirement may be the driving force here.

One problem with privately controlled companies with few shareholders is that it can be difficult to cash out at retirement. These shares are not sold on the open market. It can be difficult to find a buyer willing to buy 1/5 of a company. In some cases it is expected that remaining shareholders buy out retiring owners which in many cases would result in much new debt. If that it is the case here, then the only real option is to sell the company and hope the new owners take care of things. I have had personal experience where a corporation was dissolved because remaining owners couldn't afford to buy out departing shareholders.

My guess is that this is nearest to the actuality. Probably some of the original team have been wondering how to realise their investment so they can have a nice retirement. External money is really the only answer.

 

[Doc W]

I am not optimistic. Over the last few years, I have been experimenting a bit with alternate processes and I am beginning to think that this will the future, at least for me. I will use LF negatives as long as they are available, but sooner or later, I see all of us shooting LF glass negatives and coating our own paper.

or...

Let's assume the worst, just for the sake of discussion, and say that both Kodak and Ilford are getting out of the business, period. No film, no paper, no chemistry. Do some of the smaller firms, such as Bergger, reap the benefits? Which of them will continue to make film and paper, and for how long?

 

[Ai Print]

And I do hope the new owners consider it a wise investment to continue the support of APUG.

If I were Ilford in current form, I would strongly consider if it actually is a wise investment to support this site and possibly look at an entirely different one to be more effective.

The reason I say this is that for a variety of reasons, I believe there might be better investments when it comes to how well APUG promotes the future of film. I think it ranks pretty poorly in that regard and some of the reasons are the consistently negative attitudes of certain members who happen to post a ton keeping threads like this high on the popularity mast.

I like a lot of what this site has to offer in many areas, I just wish it had a much stronger showing of the younger people I often associate with, their attitude is pretty darn good when it comes to being truly grateful for what films and papers we do have left.

 

[destroya]

my friend who is the senior partner one of the most successful private equity firms around told me that they key to reading the crystal ball is how many of the key owners/ execs are staying on. if more than 50% of them are leaving that is not good news for the future of the "new"company. If the buying firm is really interested in keeping the business alive they use very lucrative handcuffs to keep the key employees around as they clearly know the business and the company better than a bunch of number crunchers. If they leave en mass or a ew stay but the majority leave, well, they are around to babysit the upcoming company "diversification" (another term for sell off?).

Look I'm not trying to be doom and gloom, just passing along things I know. I would bet, and it was mentioned before in a post, that they land lease is the major asset in this purchase decision. Clearly I know nothing of real estate in England, but a private equity firm has a much bigger stick and deeper pockets which could influence redevelopment plans and approvals. I would bet a roll of film that when they got the no go for the site improvements, that was the nail in the coffin for the current owners. They took a lot of risk in what they did years ago to save the ilford name an business. Cheers for them for doing that and cashing out what I hope is a very large payday!

I'm still hoping years from now we have many new and exciting products added to the ilford/harman family.

 

[xo-whiplock]

The demographic of the members on APUG is not a complete representation of the market demographic. I'm guessing that the larger demographic of younger generation with the greatest potential to grow the market are not present here on APUG. Lomography has done market studies that show this new demographic has tremendous potential for growth. Harman's directors know this about the market and have said as much in their recent statements of why they sold to Pemberstone, whom I'm sure sold themselves to Harman as the best path ahead by convincing Harmsn's management that they can deliver this market. I'm sure Pemberstone also assured Harman that the hindrances that have held them back will be eliminated.

 

[MattKing]

The demographic of the members on APUG is not a complete representation of the market demographic. I'm guessing that the larger demographic of younger generation with the greatest potential to grow the market are not present here on APUG. Lomography has done market studies that show this new demographic has tremendous potential for growth. Harmon's directors know this about the market and have said as much in their recent statements of why they sold to Pemberstone, whom I'm sure sold themselves to Harmon as the best path ahead by convincing Harmon's management that they can deliver this market. I'm sure Pemberstone also assured Harmon that the hindrances that have held them back will be eliminated.

It is Harman, not Harmon.

And no one here knows if the payment for their shares may have at least partially been in the form of a financial interest in Pemberstone.

 

[destroya]

This was announced today by Adox. is this a sign or is it just a fluke chance of timing?
it must have been in the works for a long time, but again, the timing of the release bothers me for some reason, as it relates to ilford. Great news for Adox though
14 September | NEWS | Mirko Böddecker
[h=2]ADOX acquires Ilford´s medium scale coating line[/h] In order to develop and produce a larger variety of analog products in the future ADOX has acquired Ilford´s 52cm medium scale coating machine in Marly, Switzerland in February 2015.
Having in house coating capabilities not only closes a gap and make ADOX a full analog factory- they also enable us to make all the products we ever dreamed of but never could due to high minimum coating volume restrictions.
We are here to secure your analog needs for many years to come.

http://www.adox.de/Photo/adox-acquires-ilfords-medium-scale-coating-line/

 

[xo-whiplock]

It is Harman, not Harmon.

And no one here knows if the payment for their shares may have at least partially been in the form of a financial interest in Pemberstone.

Not what I meant, I use the term "sold themselves" as in giving confidence to do what they promised.

 

[RobC]

I'd say it's good marketing by Adox whilst everyone is paranoid about Ilfords chances of survival.

 

[MattKing]

Not what I meant, I use the term "sold themselves" as in giving confidence to do what they promised.

What I was trying to indicate was that it is certainly possible that the former owners of Harman may actually remain indirectly invested in Harman, if part of the sale price was an investment interest in Pemberstone.

 

[pbromaghin]

The demographic of the members on APUG is not a complete representation of the market demographic. I'm guessing that the larger demographic of younger generation with the greatest potential to grow the market are not present here on APUG. Lomography has done market studies that show this new demographic has tremendous potential for growth. Harman's directors know this about the market and have said as much in their recent statements of why they sold to Pemberstone, whom I'm sure sold themselves to Harman as the best path ahead by convincing Harmsn's management that they can deliver this market. I'm sure Pemberstone also assured Harman that the hindrances that have held them back will be eliminated.

Checking out the companies that Pemberton owns indicates that they are VERY in tune with the younger demographic. None of them are very large. A Ski vacation travel agency, Bicycle Tours, Ethical Goods, injection moldings, Water quality monitoring, cloud-based software for renters and landlords. That's a pretty diverse portfolio.

 

[pbromaghin]

Harman most likely found the best use of the property by selling it to Adox. Thereby, giving Adox much needed coater, and Harman reduced liability and improved status both for Harman and Adox for the future both these companies see ahead of them -- a growing market in need of diversification and flexible production.

This is not the Ilford that was owned by Harman. It is an entirely independent Switzerland-based company that used to be part of UK Ilford decades ago and has only the name in common. This has nothing at all to do with the sale of Harman/Ilford.

 

[MattKing]

Harman most likely found the best use of the property by selling it to Adox. Thereby, giving Adox much needed coater, and Harman reduced liability and improved status both for Harman and Adox for the future both these companies see ahead of them -- a growing market in need of diversification and flexible production.

Harman have no connection with the now bankrupt Swiss Ilford, other than a license since 2004 to use the Ilford name.

The two transactions are entirely unrelated.

 

[RobC]

Harman most likely found the best use of the property by selling it to Adox. Thereby, giving Adox much needed coater, and Harman reduced liability and improved status both for Harman and Adox for the future both these companies see ahead of them -- a growing market in need of diversification and flexible production.

Ilford switzerland is nothing to do with Harman Mobberley. I thought Ilford Switzerland was in receivership but don't quote me on that.

 

[pdeeh]

Harman most likely found the best use of the property by selling it to Adox. Thereby, giving Adox much needed coater, and Harman reduced liability and improved status both for Harman and Adox for the future both these companies see ahead of them -- a growing market in need of diversification and flexible production.

Sigh.

Harman didn't own it.

The Swiss company and Harman are entirely unrelated, and had been for several years( even before the bankruptcy of the Swiss company in 2014)

You are making statements which are entirely without foundation - fantasy in fact - which a few moments fact-checking would have established for you (or even had you bothered to read the post in this thread which had already clearly outlined the Harman/Ilford and "Swiss Ilford" situation)

 

[Ian Grant]

Harman most likely found the best use of the property by selling it to Adox. Thereby, giving Adox much needed coater, and Harman reduced liability and improved status both for Harman and Adox for the future both these companies see ahead of them -- a growing market in need of diversification and flexible production.

Ilford Imaging in Switzerland were a separate company and always have been, they were originally Tellko and bought by Ciba who later bought Ilford in the UK. Under Ciba-Geigy the two companies had close ties but made different products.

There's no link between Adox's taking over some of the old Ilford Imaging machinery in Marly, Switzerland, and Harma/Ilford in the UK.

Ian

 

[MartinP]

Just to reiterate... Adox have acquired the medium coater from Ilford Imaging, not from Harman Technologies. Ilford is the 'other' part of the pre 2005 company which shares nothing with Harman.

The coating line is in a (huge) building in Switzerland, while Harman are located in Cheshire in the UK. Ilford Imaging ceased trading last year, while Harman Technologies has just been sold. Harmon appears to be a brewery in Tacoma, WA and to have no connection with photographic materials.

Edit: A whole bunch of us just posted the same thing, oh well.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Adox to restart ciba production, I heard.

(not really)

Damn it, Michael. I wanted to see how far that one went...



Ken