Obviously, it tells *you* what you want to hear. As for some of us, we keep shooing Kodak, Ilford, Fuji, etc. daily and go about our daily lives as image making photographers. Kodak is making and selling film, until I hear different, I don't really care about any of this crap.
Kodak Concedes Difficulty in Drawing Lead Bidder for Patents
-
A
- Thread starter Prof_Pixel
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale FS: Horseman 6x12 Roll Film Back for any 4x5 Camera with a Graflok back
- Started by dirkfletcher
-
Want to Buy Fuji GSW690III
- Started by djdister
-
For Sale MAKINA PLAUBEL 67
- Started by Guillaume Zuili
-
For Sale FS: Minolta SpotMeter F
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
Sold Schneider Kreuznach 90mm helical / focusing mount
- Started by Guivd
Forum statistics
Obviously, it tells *you* what you want to hear. As for some of us, we keep shooing Kodak, Ilford, Fuji, etc. daily and go about our daily lives as image making photographers. Kodak is making and selling film, until I hear different, I don't really care about any of this crap.
Whoa boy. Calm down. FYI I just bought my first film camera last week. First film camera since about 10 years ago. I dont have any anti-film bias here AT ALL. PERIOD.
We are participating in a discussion about the longevity of Kodak. You dont like it? Then get out of this thread. If you dont care, as you claim to, then why are you here?
I bought two rolls of Kodak TMax 400 and a few of Porta400. But I am not going to buy anymore Kodak because I'd rather try to help a healthy film company survive. Ilford deserves more business because they clearly have competent managers. Fujifilm too.
Kodak's future is out of their hands. The courts have the final say in Kodak's exit from bankruptcy. Can they exit without showing a profit? Is that even possible?
5 years without a profit is a loooong time.
My understanding was that the film products were one of the few areas, maybe the only area, in which they ARE making a profit. Not a big one, certainly not big enough to help the overall company that much, but turning a profit on film and paper none the less.
MattKing
Moderator
It has been clear for a long time that the market for analogue photography products would never again be near what it once was.
Kodak used to make huge profits from that market. As Kodak is a public company, its Board of Directors has and had the legal duty to attempt to replace those profits with similar profits.
When the world started turning away from film, it was clear that Kodak had to look elsewhere to replace most of those huge profits.
They have done a very poor job of finding and taking advantage of replacement profit sources. In addition, arguably they have done a very poor job of maximizing the benefit of that portion of their old analogue photography products that still produced significant, albeit smaller profits.
If the patent auctions don't produce enough cash, there will be a large number of creditors left being owed a large amount of money. Some of them may be forced into bankruptcy.
By itself, Kodak's film operations currently produce a profit. If you assign those operations responsibility for some or all of Kodak's legacy costs (particularly unfunded retiree's benefits and to a small extent unfunded pensions) than the accountants will tell you that the film operations don't make a profit.
I would surmise that Ilford really doesn't want Kodak to fail, because Ilford is relatively very small, and the failure of Kodak will hurt the market Ilford trades into much more than any benefit Ilford may gain from no longer needing to compete with Kodak.
If you like Kodak products, buy them. You won't hurt Ilford by doing so.
Kodak used to make huge profits from that market. As Kodak is a public company, its Board of Directors has and had the legal duty to attempt to replace those profits with similar profits.
When the world started turning away from film, it was clear that Kodak had to look elsewhere to replace most of those huge profits.
They have done a very poor job of finding and taking advantage of replacement profit sources. In addition, arguably they have done a very poor job of maximizing the benefit of that portion of their old analogue photography products that still produced significant, albeit smaller profits.
If the patent auctions don't produce enough cash, there will be a large number of creditors left being owed a large amount of money. Some of them may be forced into bankruptcy.
By itself, Kodak's film operations currently produce a profit. If you assign those operations responsibility for some or all of Kodak's legacy costs (particularly unfunded retiree's benefits and to a small extent unfunded pensions) than the accountants will tell you that the film operations don't make a profit.
I would surmise that Ilford really doesn't want Kodak to fail, because Ilford is relatively very small, and the failure of Kodak will hurt the market Ilford trades into much more than any benefit Ilford may gain from no longer needing to compete with Kodak.
If you like Kodak products, buy them. You won't hurt Ilford by doing so.
Yes, you are most probably right in that Kodak's film division only turns a profit when discounting the massive legacy costs. That is what makes the future look so grim. You can't just disconnect the legacy costs can you? Certainly I am no expert at all this but shafting the retirees is not an option. At least I hope it is not.
There's no way Kodak's tiny film division today can support the enormous legacy cost of Kodak.
There's no way Kodak's tiny film division today can support the enormous legacy cost of Kodak.
I think we can all agree on that!
It seems unlikely, doesn't it. Very sad thought.
Look, I am not trying to harp on you, but in the past several months, Industry News has turned into the Ratty Mouse soap box page. I know as well as anyone that Kodak's future in making film or anything for that matter is all but uncertain. But you interject these stabs at Kodak as if you know something we don't.....and I'm sorry, but you are in no position to say if Kodak's film making future is healthy or not, no one really is and I can tell you for a *Fact* that the people I deal with at Kodak are moving forward as if film from Kodak will survive.
So maybe give it a rest for once, yeah?
Film needs advocates, not people to constantly dissect it's future...
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2010
- Messages
- 2,896
- Format
- Medium Format
With esprit de corps so rock solid at Kodak, what explains Scott Disabato bailing for Canson? Just coincidence, right?
The people making the film are probably quite happy. They know they are doing well.
It is the sales dept that is letting EK down so much. They are falling flat on their face. That is probably why Scott left.
PE
It is the sales dept that is letting EK down so much. They are falling flat on their face. That is probably why Scott left.
PE
All of what you said should be in past tense. I am close friends with a Kodak retiree who was a licensing and sales manager... and he has too many stories where Kodak made bad decisions and others ended up prospering as they filled in the gap. He retired quite a while ago.
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2010
- Messages
- 2,896
- Format
- Medium Format
Dunno, he was very chirpy about the film resurgence mirage in late '11 interviews on the eve of the bankruptcy filing. What's a guy with a mortgage and a family to do?
Brian;
I know about bad decisions. Hear my interview on "Inside Analog Photography". After all, I AM a Kodak retiree and also I have spoken with Scott DiSabado.
There were many bad management decisions, but the worst were in the sales division changing the entire sales regions and making it more difficult to buy products.
PE
I know about bad decisions. Hear my interview on "Inside Analog Photography". After all, I AM a Kodak retiree and also I have spoken with Scott DiSabado.
There were many bad management decisions, but the worst were in the sales division changing the entire sales regions and making it more difficult to buy products.
PE
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2010
- Messages
- 2,896
- Format
- Medium Format
They threw away the market here after the Kodak Canada sinking in '05. But even prior to that, marketing and supply chain issues were just handing business to Fuji.
I'm sure they are stressed, but hopeful. I think we all know what the chances are of a film division survival or even a purchase / spin off. Maybe Scott moving on says a lot, I don't know. For example, one of my main clients is a ski area. Last year, a new young marketing manager moved in and shook things up a bit. Several photogs did not get contracts renewed and key people under him that I had been dealing with for over ten years all left. So I thought the whole shebang was hosed.
But now they have new blood, younger more forward thinking, energetic folks...and I have to say much to my surprise, it is far better than it has ever been, my work has doubled and we have a blast. So I am not saying that Scott and company were a tired affair, but maybe that with what Kodak's film group has planned in a best case scenario, the fit was no longer right, especially considering what his salary looked like after 20 years.
I have a hunch what the future might hold, but I would rather not go into it, so I keep buying and using the products along with Ilford and hope for the best, make enough investments on my end to add some security to the whole thing.
I understand the speculation, especially as we get closer and closer to what will be Kodak's do or die dates. But when it gets to be a dissection party or witch hunt, sometimes I just want to scream.
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2010
- Messages
- 2,896
- Format
- Medium Format
People are just reacting to published Kodak-related news items. Personally, I can't see the point of trading in hearsay, undisclosed sources, or info from unverifiable insider leaks/contacts. Don't like the news? Sorry!
Well Brian, they made a lot of bad decisions, but they are still making them right up to today! Past, present and probably into the future unless someone makes a big turnaround.
Fuji is making a good profit from selling cut sheet CA color paper, but Kodak discontinued cut sheet Endura. Kodak requires a dealer to order a minimum case quantity of certain items which have come in larger and larger sizes and case size thus making it hard for the smaller dealer to stock or order.
EK has reduced the local sales "zones" and shuffled them such that if I buy some film here in Rochester, it comes from the Atlanta sales zone. There used to be a Rochester sales zone which was quite logical. They have muddled the zones in Hollywood in the same way.
PE
Fuji is making a good profit from selling cut sheet CA color paper, but Kodak discontinued cut sheet Endura. Kodak requires a dealer to order a minimum case quantity of certain items which have come in larger and larger sizes and case size thus making it hard for the smaller dealer to stock or order.
EK has reduced the local sales "zones" and shuffled them such that if I buy some film here in Rochester, it comes from the Atlanta sales zone. There used to be a Rochester sales zone which was quite logical. They have muddled the zones in Hollywood in the same way.
PE
Rare agreement here...
PKM-25 (Dan), could it be that your frustration with other's frustrations results from the fact that you DO have current contacts at Kodakpresumably cultivated via your Kodachrome Projectthat are saying things to you off the record, and we DON'T? And that if the rest of us were in a position to hear what you've heard, we might see the situation more like you do? You drop tasty hints. But you're obviously not in an unconstrained position to follow them up with hard information. Or even hard speculation.
CGW is right. All the rest of us know is only what's published in the media, driven primarily from a Wall Street risk/reward perspective. And that's as skewed a perspective post-bankrupcy as it was pre-bankruptcy. At least as far as Kodak film's continued manufacturing is concerned. Wall Street is severely unconcerned with our desires for continued availability of Kodak film.
Everyone will always fill in the unknown with worst-case scenarios. Probably originates with the human survival instinct, I suspect.
Ken
... or the human "know-it-all" instict. ha ha ha.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |