This is the first indication I've seen of Eastman Kodak expressly saying that they are acting as a distributor themselves - selling to multiple other distributors.
No direct to end user sales, or even direct to retailers though.
This should lower prices to the end users.
Now EK just has virtually a monopoly for color film manufacture. So logically those prices won't change much.Alaris had a monopoly as a distributor.
That’s 5x7, not 4x5. B&H lists that same box for $500. But 4x5 is $80 / 10 sheets, so $400 for 50 sheets.
How did I miss that? Thank you for pointing that out.
5x7 color anything is so rare!
Personally, I think we are getting back into "Depression Era" spending as far as color sheet film is concerned. What I mean by that is a story my Father (who grew up on the tail end of the Depression) used to tell me. They had a battery powered radio; their only real form of entertainment; no electricity in the rural farm they worked. Once a month, they would take this one battery down to the local merchant and have it charged via a windmill dyno. When the battery ran out of juice later that month, that was it for entertainment until the next month.
At best, this box of 5x7 would be my yearly battery...
Now EK just has virtually a monopoly for color film manufacture. So logically those prices won't change much.
Matt, I don;t understand your point. My understanding is that Eastman eliminated the contractual requirement for Alaris to distribute their films. They can use other competing distributors and gain the benefit of competition from them. Why assume Eastman will charge more to the other distributors for the film? If they keep the same wholesale prices, and distributors markup less than Alaris due to competition, the final prices to stores and end users will be less, even overseas.Maybe in one part of the world - the USA.
The rest of the world will probably see increases plus reduction i availability.
Because the extra cost overhead will likely end up in increasing the price Eastman Kodak charges KA.
Now EK just has virtually a monopoly for color film manufacture. So logically those prices won't change much.
That's based on the assumption that Alaris' margin was sufficient to allow for increased competition in the sales channels to erode price in a meaningful way, as well as the assumption that no other factors will drive up prices and thereby eliminate any gains potentially accruing from that increased competition. Personally, I think it's virtually guaranteed that there's not going to be a positive net effect for end users/consumers, especially in the long run and that the 'more competition' argument is just too shallow and simplistic.The reduction in price will come from more competition on the distributor side once Alaris no longer has an exclusive right for distributorship..
Eastman Kodak probably has higher costs than Kodak Alaris for the distribution efforts and infrastructure - particularly in the short term - and as a publicly traded entity with capital limitations will most likely require a higher margin be tacked on to the price in order to justify those costs and earn a profit on the distribution part of their business.
And I certainly don't expect to see lower priced motion picture film marketed to still film users. The motion picture film division won't be interested in diluting their position.
But Kodak isn;t doing direct distribution, except possibly in the USA. They'll be giving their film to established film distributors besides Alaris. These distributors will just add Kodak to their already established distribution. Their costs will be less than Alaris since they're already distributing other photography equipment and film. So they can do it with lower markups and lower end user prices. Alaris distribution is more dedicated to Kodak only. Plus new distributors can;t be as greedy as Alaris who had a monopoly on Kodak film distribution.
Those other distributors are the ones that Kodak Alaris was selling to previously - Kodak Alaris never sold directly to retailers or end users.
So now, Eastman eliminates the Alaris markup hopefully lowering prices for us.
And add a higher markup, due to having higher costs and management that is more aggressive about requiring return on investment, due to having to compete internally for access to resources and capital.
More competition among distributors will lower prices. That's how markets work.
More competition among distributors will lower prices. That's how markets work.
There are oodles of distributors of Microsoft products. Yet, the same Windows 11 license costs the same regardless of the channel through which you purchase it in any given region. So apparently, markets don't work the way you believe and there's more going on. In reality, the market for film will show dynamics that are somewhere in-between those of a fixed price monopoly and a quasi-perfect "cost price +" free market dynamic. How exactly it'll pan out, we don't know as one of the key issues still unresolved is what the distribution network is exactly going to look like. Also, as I indicated earlier, there are plenty of factors that can erode or even entirely negate whatever theoretical savings might accrue from this supposed increased competition.More competition among distributors will lower prices. That's how markets work.
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?