Seldom have so many argued so extensively and so speculatively about that of which so little is known.
That's called accounting for you. Let me explain: If I build a factory to do stuff, I depreciate it over 25 years or more. This neither means that the factory gets worth any less nor that it automatically makes losses. Sure, I have to maintain machinery and whatnot, but what I depreciate every year has little to do with what the factory is worth and more with when do I want tax deductions. It's the same with goodwill. Some rules can be bent, others can be broken.From Kodak's SEC filed AR: [...]
Kodak realize restructuring and rationalization charges across the company, but then weight them towards each of the 3 groups. FPEG's share always exceeds its profits. Always.
Chapter 11 has relieved them of all these liabilities. What's your point?For example, the depreciation expenses for FPEG compared to the other segments is 60-100% higher. If you amortize the pension costs across film equitably to the other segments, you find that film's revenues cannot sustain those obligations and operations.
Kodak has filed for chapter 11 protection already. Quit copy&pasting your standard text or at least adapt it with current news events. If you did't read the news, the thread title should have told you.Kodak is going bankrupt because film revenues keep falling with no end in sight.
And finally we're back to Analog Rapture again. Yawn.With Kodak and Fuji drawing less product, the entire emulsion economy of scale becomes a concern as raw material and related costs will rise due to lessened buying power. This will negatively affect Ilford and others, and the spotlight on a declining customer base will no doubt impact their credit, especially since some have already been through bankruptcy precisely due to falling film demand. All this overhead gets passed on to the net consumer, and basic Econ theory says that if prices rise, more customers leave.
That's called accounting for you. Let me explain: If I build a factory to do stuff, I depreciate it over 25 years or more. This neither means that the factory gets worth any less nor that it automatically makes losses. Sure, I have to maintain machinery and whatnot, but what I depreciate every year has little to do with what the factory is worth and more with when do I want tax deductions. It's the same with goodwill. Some rules can be bent, others can be broken.
Kodak's film business has made 70 cents to the dollar 15 years ago, and while their sales declined they had near zero expenses for research and product development lately, much less marketing and they also had a huge decline in work force. In the rich years they built up huge liabilities for pensions and health insurance, and these expenses neither scale with low film sales nor with the minimal profitability of digital business overall. These costs hurt their bottom line exactly until Jan 18, 2012.
Chapter 11 has relieved them of all these liabilities. What's your point?
Kodak has filed for chapter 11 protection already. Quit copy&pasting your standard text or at least adapt it with current news events. If you did't read the news, the thread title should have told you.
And finally we're back to Analog Rapture again. Yawn.
So are you saying that the US Government should have let General Motors, Boeing several other major corporations and half the banks in the US and probably the whole economy to collapse?.
The same rules apply. A few people try to put a value on something and the only nogoes are what could send someone to club fed later. If the exact value of every asset and opportunity was known at any given time there would be no hedge funds or stock markets.except depreciation is not restructuring and rationalization. Those are separate GAAP structures.
Kodak was highly profitable mostly because they were a near monopoly in the North American market and could charge whatever they wanted. Fuji arrived about the same time when the film market was already in decline. Some of Kodak's losses might well come from large scale customers not going digital but going Fuji film. I read Bollywood shoots mostly Fuji for example, mostly for cost reasons. Velvia is hugely popular with the lomo crowd, Fuji makes three (!) kinds of it. It's things like these which make me believe that Fuji's analogue product line will be here for a while, especially color.Kodak was highly profitable in part because its sunk cost assets depreciated but were returning record productivity. There's nothing better than an old piece of equipment paid for a decade ago churning out pure profit.
There is still a market for film based cameras, but people looking for them no longer go to B&H, Calumet and Best Buy but instead to KEH, Adorama and Ffordes. Don't downplay the used market, if car makers did the same they'd be out of business very quickly. If consumer digital cameras had changeable sensors we wouldn't argue about this brain damage that a camera is worthless after 3 years. The market has changed, mini labs go out of business but I still get E6 home dev kits in brick&mortar stores.Even if the older emulsion factories can be run on a shoestring, materials in/product out budget, it seems pretty clear that there will come a tipping point in FPEG very soon that even that product cycle cannot continue to suffer the constant loss of customers and real losses will occur. There is only so much Kodak can cut. The film camera market has collapsed by 99.9% and all that film has to go into cameras. Any investor is going to look at that dynamic and see zero new customer growth and all film equipment either eBay salvage or custom built cinema cameras. It's very hard to justify an investment in a film industry when there are no new devices being manufacturers to use your product. Add in the loss of affordable local processing, and this cannot help but rebound straight to Kodak's creditors as a very big problem that Kodak can longer deal with.
FPEG may or may not get broken away from Kodak but it won't go away soon. I watched "The Ides of March" yesterday and guess what, it was shot on Kodak Motion Picture Film. "Inception", same thing. Hollywood still needs and uses that stuff and seems to be unwilling to drop Kodak any time soon (Ides of March was shot when Kodak already publicly circled the drain, and more than a decade after the first "expert" declared the end of analogue film). Hollywood will prop up those coating lines at least long enough until they are finally happy with digital or Fuji stock and since the coating lines are not exactly over utilised why shouldn't they also make still film if it costs little extra and adds to the bottom line?That's why I see FPEG getting chopped from Kodak. And this is good for film users because it will allow someone with private equity to consolidate analog, preserve the crown jewels, and bring a new vision to the imaging market. Obviously the #1 producer of film products going bankrupt is going to create speculation; that's the point of threads like this.
Do you know that most UMTS modems are made by two Chinese manufacturers, sometimes claimed to be affiliated with the PLA? Do you know what potential security nightmare this means for the US? Realise that GM doesn't only make Geo Metros and Kodak makes more than snap shot film.Kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out
The same rules apply. A few people try to put a value on something and the only nogoes are what could send someone to club fed later. If the exact value of every asset and opportunity was known at any given time there would be no hedge funds or stock markets.
Kodak was highly profitable mostly because they were a near monopoly in the North American market and could charge whatever they wanted. Fuji arrived about the same time when the film market was already in decline. Some of Kodak's losses might well come from large scale customers not going digital but going Fuji film. I read Bollywood shoots mostly Fuji for example, mostly for cost reasons. Velvia is hugely popular with the lomo crowd, Fuji makes three (!) kinds of it. It's things like these which make me believe that Fuji's analogue product line will be here for a while, especially color.
There is still a market for film based cameras, but people looking for them no longer go to B&H, Calumet and Best Buy but instead to KEH, Adorama and Ffordes. Don't downplay the used market, if car makers did the same they'd be out of business very quickly. If consumer digital cameras had changeable sensors we wouldn't argue about this brain damage that a camera is worthless after 3 years. The market has changed, mini labs go out of business but I still get E6 home dev kits in brick&mortar stores.
FPEG may or may not get broken away from Kodak but it won't go away soon. I watched "The Ides of March" yesterday and guess what, it was shot on Kodak Motion Picture Film. "Inception", same thing. Hollywood still needs and uses that stuff and seems to be unwilling to drop Kodak any time soon (Ides of March was shot when Kodak already publicly circled the drain, and more than a decade after the first "expert" declared the end of analogue film). Hollywood will prop up those coating lines at least long enough until they are finally happy with digital or Fuji stock and since the coating lines are not exactly over utilised why shouldn't they also make still film if it costs little extra and adds to the bottom line?
Do you know that most UMTS modems are made by two Chinese manufacturers, sometimes claimed to be affiliated with the PLA? Do you know what potential security nightmare this means for the US? Realise that GM doesn't only make Geo Metros and Kodak makes more than snap shot film.
I believe that it is human nature to try and fill in the blanks to their satisfaction whenever there is a story in which not all the details are known.
I believe that it is human nature to try and fill in the blanks to their satisfaction whenever there is a story in which not all the details are known.
Regarding some of those who think they know it all. If your so darn smart, why ain't you rich?
If your rich, what are you doing here?
JMHO
Regarding some of those who think they know it all. If your so darn smart, why ain't you rich?
If your rich, what are you doing here?
JMHO
Regarding some of those who think they know it all. If your so darn smart, why ain't you rich?
If your rich, what are you doing here?
JMHO
SlummingRegarding some of those who think they know it all. If your so darn smart, why ain't you rich?
If your rich, what are you doing here?
JMHO
Here is what the final outcome will be with Kodak: I don't know, and neither does anyone else.
"Audrey Jonckheer, Kodak's worldwide director of marketing and public relations, tells BJP.
"We have taken steps to sustain the business as it has declined, and we know that there are hundreds of passionate fans of film for the artistic and quality reasons they cite."
Film, either is, or isn't, here to stay. If it does go away and you still want to play with silver you can, it's called emulsion making, wet plates, and coating.
If you believe that there is no mystery to film chemistry, then why isn't everyone doing it?
So I just looked on the Kodak website and noticed there is no slide film listed at all. There is a gaping hole where it used to be written on the left side of the screen
Also no TMZ.
http://store.kodak.com/store/ekconsus/en_US/list/Film/PROFESSIONAL_Film/categoryID.40677300
Because the gulf between those that can only say, and those that can actually do, is often breathtakingly wide...
Ken
If you believe that there is no mystery to film chemistry, then why isn't everyone doing it?
PE
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?