It seems unlikely Alaris would instruct Eastman Kodak (and pay it) to dispose of old packaging materials on hand simply because they didn't say "Kodak Alaris."
Undoubtedly, this relates to stock turnover of the packaging materials, including labels for sheet film boxes. Simon Galley has mentioned a number of times that the cost of packaging is a significant factor when HARMAN decides whether or not to offer new special-order-program sizes. It seems unlikely Alaris would instruct Eastman Kodak (and pay it) to dispose of old packaging materials on hand simply because they didn't say "Kodak Alaris."
I disagree, on two factors: Companies factor in costs to change trademarks/logos as normal overhead expenses, and just put the old stuff in a dumpster. Knowing Kodak's history, I count on Kodak to make the worst possible financial decisions. It's genetic, they can't help it. They can always go bankrupt again.
I was in the local grocery store today and, out of curiosity, looked at the labeling for the small selection of Kodak film there.
For the first time in my experience, there was reference to Kodak Alaris, rather than Eastman Kodak or one of the international subsidiaries of Eastman Kodak.
It was Kodak Ultra Max 400, with a "develop before" date of March 2017.
The older film and single use cameras on the display still had Eastman Kodak references.
In addition to Kodak Alaris references, there were also references to various other international Kodak related entities - Brazil, China, etc., etc.
As has always been the case in that store, the film is not cheap.
Pics or it didnt happen.
oliceman::devil:
Kodak Alaris is the distributor. With respect to film, that and marketing are Alaris' only functions....Who distributes the film for Kodak Alaris?
Kodak Alaris is the distributor. With respect to film, that and marketing are Alaris' only functions.
Kodak Alaris is the distributor. With respect to film, that and marketing are Alaris' only functions.
A bit of quick on-line research turns up nothing on that score. Would you let us know how, in North America for example, a retail store goes about placing an order for standard, i.e. not the special sheet film sizes that Canham consolidates, Kodak Alaris-branded still film? What "sub-distributor(s)" does the retailer contact?...Kodak Alaris sells only to distributors - not directly to retailers.
Just like Eastman Kodak did, before the bankruptcy.
It depends on what inscription we are talking about.
The designation of a manufacturer (whether that may be the manufactuer in the physical sense or not) has legal implications.
Any claims thus would have to be directed to Eastman Kodak, who then would have to state/prove that the very batch already was marketed by Kodak Alaris.
A bit of quick on-line research turns up nothing on that score. Would you let us know how, in North America for example, a retail store goes about placing an order for standard, i.e. not the special sheet film sizes that Canham consolidates, Kodak Alaris-branded still film? What "sub-distributor(s)" does the retailer contact?
If Alaris operates the way you describe, it's no wonder its still film prices have soared lately. As a "distributor" that doesn't distribute, it would represent an extra layer of absolutely no added value between Bldg. 38 and the consumer.
That begs the questions: what is "wholesale marketing?" And, other than talking up its digital products on social media, what "marketing" of any kind does Alaris do with respect to film? Whatever the answer to that second question, how does it differ from what Eastman Kodak used to (not?) do that could possibly justify another layer of retail-price-increasing profit in the chain from Bldg. 38 to ultimate film users?...Alaris just took over the wholesale marketing process that Eastman Kodak used to perform as part of their marketing department.
In many cases, from the same premises, and using the same people - only a small percentage of which were Eastman Kodak personnel...
That 12-year-old press release refers to "small dealers," which implies large dealers such as B&H could still order directly from Eastman Kodak. Unless that too has changed, Alaris does act as a distributor to large accounts. If Eastman Kodak subsequently discontinued servicing even large dealers directly, and Alaris follows suit, again the question arises: what does Alaris do to add value? Why would Eastman Kodak supply still film to Alaris when it could just as easily sell to another distributor? Unless, as a way of discharging its obligation to the UK pension fund, it entered into an exclusive supply agreement so Alaris could "skim" from all still film sales for the duration of that cow's milk production....Here is a link to a press release from 2003 that talks about one such distributor - "International Supplies": http://wwwca.kodak.com/US/en/corp/pressReleases/pr20030727-01.shtml
In essence, Kodak adopted the same approach that most of its competitors used. Ilford doesn't do its own distribution in most of the world, nor does Fuji (I doubt Foma and Impossible do either).
In the United States, Ilford is distributed through Wynit Inc., who are based in New York..
Yes, the chain is HARMAN (Mobberley) to Wynit to whichever dealer I purchase Ilford products from to me. There's no "Alaris-like" layer in there anywhere....In the United States, Ilford is distributed through Wynit Inc., who are based in New York...
Kodak Alaris is a colour photographic paper manufacturer that also markets film made for them by a company with a manufacturing facility for film.
They have elected not to create from scratch their own distribution network, but instead continue with the existing set-up of independent distributors, which was what Eastman Kodak was using prior to the bankruptcy.
They bought the complete RA-4 department/production.
C-41 chemicals production had been outsourced by Kodak before their deal with Kodak Alaris.
alaris accepted the Eastman Kodak factory at Harrow London UK as a going concern in part payment for a debt.
Alas Harrow has not coated film for more than a decade and staff long gone.
They also paid something like $600 million into the bankruptcy.
Did they?
They were one of the chapter 11 creditors...
They did not exist as a corporate entity before EK ran out of money...
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?