My point is not whether or not it looks likely that Kodachrome will ever come back. My point is the potential for a market for a revived Kodachrome should not be denied based on whatever the reasons of its discontinuation were in the past as long as proper promotion and affordable price would be provided. You keep missing it again and again.
Unfortunately, you cannot buy back preferred shares with tax write-offs.If the Ektachrome film and camera do not come to market, I'll bet it will mean a hefty tax writeoff.
PE:
Sorry about your pension uncertainty.
No doubt due to legislative and cultural differences, the pension fund for "old" Kodak Canada retirees is/was a separate fund that was not dependent on Kodak resources, and not susceptible to Kodak decisions.
It is based in Ontario, and is monitored by that Province's private pension fund monitoring officials.
Every two years (IIRC) the Ontario pension monitors issue a public report on the projected claims vs underlying assets of the fund (the "subscription rate").
The last report I saw before my Dad passed away two years ago (and accordingly stopped receiving payments) indicated that the fund had gone from a 94% subscription rate to just slightly over 100% subscription rate in the previous two years.
My Dad had collected his pension for 33 years, so I don't expect his passing had much effect on the statistical analysis.
The government reports and disclosure obligations also include information on the nature of the underlying assets. That gives pension beneficiaries the ability to comment on the administration decisions of the pension administrators. The Kodak Canada retirees association were active in organizing those comments and had plans to make representations to the pension administrators on its members' behalf.
At the time of his passing, Kodak was still funding Dad's extended medical benefits. As I understand it, that funding actually originated from Eastman Kodak, and was/is vulnerable to Eastman Kodak's circumstances.
Then there are Pentax optics as well, such as scopes.
We'll allow it only if you shot it on obsolete film there is no demand for and never will be so a revival can be argued about senselessly.
I have some Royal-X, in 4x5 and 120. Nobody ever mentions it.We'll allow it only if you shot it on obsolete film there is no demand for and never will be so a revival can be argued about senselessly.
Perhaps that person does not follow photography closely, as even in the digital realm Pentax has made some very well designed cameras (such as the K-1).
Then there are Pentax optics as well, such as scopes.
Am I the only one?...I like Starbucks, so I would not go out of my way to annoy the person working there. It's their job, part of their life so I don't see the need to make people miserable.
Apparently.Am I the only one?...
Is ratty mouse your alternate screen name?Apparently.
No. I’m me and he is he. Whatever that question was intended to imply...Is ratty mouse your alternate screen name?
Read the post I quoted. Read the quotee's subsequent posts. Think.No. I’m me and he is he. Whatever that question was intended to imply...
But when I posed your question to my Magic-8 Ball that was the answer. Just thought you should know. Magic-8 Ball is rarely wrong.
Ha ha ha ha ha. Not sure what your stirring up. Be less cryptic please. ByeRead the post I quoted. Read the quotee's subsequent posts. Think.
Unfortunately, PE didn't work for Kodak Canada, so he has no claim against a Kodak Canada pension.Maybe PE should move to Canada. He did not do that during the Viet Nam War, so he could do that now.
I like Starbucks, so I would not go out of my way to annoy the person working there. It's their job, part of their life so I don't see the need to make people miserable.
Am I the only one?...
Ha ha ha ha ha. Not sure what your stirring up. Be less cryptic please. Bye
Maybe PE should move to Canada. He did not do that during the Viet Nam War, so he could do that now.
Unfortunately, PE didn't work for Kodak Canada, so he has no claim against a Kodak Canada pension.
Eastman Kodak started up subsidiaries in many, many countries around the world. AFAIK, they were all wholly owned subsidiaries, but they were independent corporations with their own employees, legal obligations and legal entitlements. An employee of Kodak Canada has/had separate legal rights and entitlements, and no claim against Eastman Kodak directly, except where there were specific contractual provisions put separately in place - as an example, during a portion of my Dad's employment, he was able to buy stock in Eastman Kodak at a favourable rate, and I think Kodak Canada employees could get certain employee like price breaks for things that they bought from Eastman Kodak while in the US.
The best recent example of the separate nature of the subsidiaries is Kodak Alaris. There would be no such entity if the UK Kodak pension plan wasn't subject to certain super priorities that affected the claims under Eastman Kodak's bankruptcy.
I assumed you are receiving payments from a defined-benefit pension plan, and your quoted post appears to confirm that. Those plans are guaranteed (with certain benefit limits that affect those who had very high incomes and, therefore, receive very high monthly payments) by the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation (PBGC). When a company like Eastman Kodak offers such a plan, it's required to make plan contributions with a target level that would ensure all vested benefits could be paid over the actuarially probable life of beneficiaries. That's referred to as "100% funded." If the plan's investment vehicles are performing well, smaller contributions are required by the company each year. Poorer investment performance demands larger annual company contributions....The current Kodak pensions for those in the "old" Kodak now reside in a special plan "funded" somehow by EK funds. There is apparently no real back up for this fund, and it is apparently oversubscribed. That is what I meant above...
If the Ektachrome film and camera do not come to market, I'll bet it will mean a hefty tax writeoff.
It will come PE(Ektachrome) - what about the Super8 camera system???? From my point such system seams to be a stillbirth from the very beginning of conception.But who cares about?A high quality super8 tranfer (it is still avaible via some companies with horrable pricing) makes absolute sense because of Kodaks calculation(relative cheap).And from my point let them bring out a cheap version Super8 camera - but a concept related to film students is nonsence because they have to learn on digital systems.
with regards
PE
Unfortunately, you cannot buy back preferred shares with tax write-offs.
I waiting... an opportunity for real data on the real market for transparency film.
So far, it all seems like marketing hype and hope to me.
And I think Kodak is in a bit of a cold seat over it.
Surely the likely demise of the remainder of Fuji's E-6 line has to be playing a role here in the delay. It became very difficult - gosh,,more than years ago - to find any sort of quality E-6 processing service that was affordable/reliable/fast. And surely the last vestiges will be decimated once the Fuji films are gone - because most of the holdouts who shot this stuff were simply in it for those wonderfully-unique Fuji films. I can't imagine Kodak is in any sort of shape to underwrite a revival of E-6 processing infrastructure - even if, somehow, photographers who are presently loyal Fuji shooters somehow switch to Ektachrome. And every conversation I've had (which would require more fingers and toes than I have on both hands and feet to count) with an E-6 "holdout" over the past 15 years suggests there's scant chance of that.
My prediction remains that the Ektachrome re-issue isn't going to happen because Kodak is slowly coming around to its senses. Obviously, I'm sad for photogs who want it back - but I can't rationalize how Ektachrome is viable.
It'll be 100% in the near future ....I wonder what is the % of people who process their E6 rolls versus those who use the services of a lab.
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?