Brian, why the recurring need to perform a Steve Jobs deathbed impression?
The market environment we live in sets a thing's value at what someone is willing to pay for it. That you can't afford it is not the crux. Rather, that you "wish you could flip through it" without buying it is. You've valued it at $0. I made no assumption -- it's an observation. An uncomfortable one, perhaps, but valid.
The results of the auction have been delayed for an indefinite period by agreement with Kodak and its creditors. Local reports say that this looks bad for Kodak and are saying "the company has been led to the precipice and it may go over the edge.
If the auction fails to bring in sufficient cash, Kodak will be unable to pay its creditors by the time limit, and at that time, the court will step in.
PE
Easy there big fella, that is not exactly how it reads:
http://www.whec.com/news/stories/S2725691.shtml?cat=565
For what it is worth, the Rochester Democrat article cites that if the "Bonanza" fails to yeild the moolah to pay off those who loaned EK the stay afloat during C-11 money, all may not be lost as it still has 1.3 billion in cash and equivalents. I guess the only speculation I am interested in now is what does this all look like if they get 250 mil, 500 mil, 750 mil, 1 billion, etc in terms of the big picuture in restructuring.
I just hit the buy button on my Kodak TMY 4x5 for the foreseeable future. With 2,000 sheets of 100 and 400 I am set for a few years so at least I don't have to worry about it going up in price or dissapearing anymore...hope it sticks around though, there really is nothing else like Tmax 400 in 4x5.
...You have taken my observations and, instead of considering the possibility that they are valid, decided to attack the observer...
More of the same.The only thing that makes me uncomfortable is your staggering lack of intellectual rigor...
The market environment we live in sets a thing's value at what someone is willing to pay for it. That you can't afford it is not the crux. Rather, that you "wish you could flip through it" without buying it is. You've valued it at $0. I made no assumption -- it's an observation. An uncomfortable one, perhaps, but valid.
One of the few articles that has positive comments, "Perhaps this new, smaller Kodak will be able to thrive, as the demand for sensitized coated materials will continue."
Refreshing!
Wish them the best! Fingers crossed....
No matter how much I'd love to have a Lamborghini, no matter how much I admire them and value them, I doubt I'll ever be able to afford one.
I'd sure jump at the chance to drive one, though.
Kodak's core competency from the start was Chemistry. ... Coating was ancillary to make things possible.
Kodak's core competency from the start was Chemistry. Remember that all analog photography is based on chemistry and there were Tennessee Eastman and Texas Eastman along with Distillation Products Industry which made a bedrock of Kodak's competency. Each was closed or spun off.
Coating was ancillary to make things possible.
PE
But what about now? Kodak no longer owns those. Now, it seems to me that coating is a basic competency, when it comes to producing products. Other basic competencies exist, it appears, such as producing and working with nanometer-scale particles.
I wonder what's left of their R&D. Even if they continued to innovate, without the intent to produce but with the intent to sell the technology, maybe that would be something.
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?