That is not quite true in the current context. Kodak is now in chp 11 which means that the liabilities counting against profit are set aside for adjudication.
Simply saying "there is no profit" is akin to saying that someone in bankruptcy doesn't have spending money. It's just not true. Yes, there are enormous legacy costs etc. that Kodak must deal with, but chp 11 gives them an umbrella under which to reorganize and to spin off profitable businesses. Chp 11 allows you to figure out what is and what is not sustainable business. What isn't sustainable gets liquidated, usually making the sustainable parts much stronger.
~~~
I feel like we're running around and around the same mulberry bush and certain people are just not going to be shaken off their misconceptions, and would prefer to bait others. Perhaps it is time to close the discussion.
The point is the new investors in the FPEG product lens want to grow their investments. The revenues are in retreat, for over a decade now, and show no sign of slowing, are hampered by the fact there are pretty much no new film or motion picture cameras being made now, the major scanner manufacturers have stopped dedicated 135/120 scanners, and the whole supply chain of affordable local labs is disappearing worldwide.
It's kind of hard to grow revenues under those circumstances. Without revenue growth new investment is going to be very hard to come by. Ch. 11 will likely highlight that problem, not solve it. By the time Ch. 11 is resolved, according to Kodak's goodwill estimates, film will have declined another 15%+ in gross revenues. That will put it closer to the goodwill mark and possibly fall below the cost of sales. So for FPEG it all depends now on how fast Kodak can shrink what it costs to reduce and distribute their film products and services.
If they cannot shrink fast enough, then they have to start selling off non-FPEG assets to make up the cost difference (since Kodak can no long borrow), which would be a violation of creditor rights, like selling the IP brought about creditor concern.
Saying there are profits is like buying an old couch to find nickels in the cushions. It's still a depreciating couch no one wants to sit on anymore. Now the consumer digital stuff may be brand new and looks all shiny in the showroom, but it's long-term prospects are difficult to see. Although in Q3 2011 they made money. Only Yoda knows about consumer printer demand.
I am just stating the facts the financials present. The capacity to salvage Portra, Ektar, Tri-X, and T-Max and the motion picture stuff that holds it all together depends on getting the FPEG line away from the dynamic described above. These are the analog crown jewels of the company, but they risk utter termination if their support structure starts to cost the other side of the balance sheet which the creditors value because film is clearly losing over 10% of its market per annum and the digital products are not. It is highly likely that whoever buys Kodak's FPEG will be looking at a market a further 90% depreciated from its current gross revenues.
