• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Kodak price cut on 120 film

Arcadia4

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
322
Location
UK
Format
Multi Format
Following on from the lomography announcement, it appears Kodak Alaris has also reduced the wholesale prices of all its 120 films, due to a ‘change in the market situation’ (code for demand drop off presumably?). actual cuts depend on supplier but Example of 25% reduction in KG200 by nordfoto germany.

Film Price Drop!

Why is it that when Kodak Alaris and Lomography have lowered the prices of many of their popular 120 films, this news is unreported?
silvergrainclassics.com

It seems likely this will take a while to come through the market with new stock. No formal change to 35mm prices.
 
I needed to spend some money at B&H, I picked up a propack of Gold 120, $39.95 delivered. I'm not real fond of this film but Ektar was 58 bucks for 5 rolls. That's crazy.
 
mshchem said:
I needed to spend some money at B&H, I picked up a propack of Gold 120, $39.95 delivered. I'm not real fond of this film but Ektar was 58 bucks for 5 rolls. That's crazy.
Click to expand...

The price for Ektar may be high but I think I would be inclined to buy the Ektar over the Kodak Gold. However I do like a good sale so if anyone knows of a sale on Kodak Ektar I would certainly like to hear of it.
 
Pioneer said:
The price for Ektar may be high but I think I would be inclined to buy the Ektar over the Kodak Gold. However I do like a good sale so if anyone knows of a sale on Kodak Ektar I would certainly like to hear of it.
Click to expand...

I just dbl checked Ektar is 58.99 for a propack . I will need to figure out something to shoot the Gold on, it's OK, don't see how it can be called Professional
 
I am mainly a MF color photographer and 2023 has been the first year ever that I didn't buy fresh film in my anual purchase. Sooo expensive! I need to go for short expiration or recently expired film instead to cut some cost. Glad to see that inflation balloon starts to deflate at last.
 

Don't hold your breath about the deflation thing It doesn't stay like that for long.
 
halfaman said:
Glad to see that inflation balloon starts to deflate at last.
Click to expand...

IMHO it's not about cost reductions that made this price decrease possible. It was sales volume that decreased and forced them to take this decision.
 
They finally figured out one of the principles of economics, so they dropped the price. I knew the last price increase was going to be bad for film. Past a certain point people start to question if it is worth it.

I thought at the time it was a monumentally dumb move. Film was an expanding market. Must have been some corporate bean counter that made the decision to increase the prices. Short term profits over long term health. In effect throwing water on the fire.
 
Anon Ymous said:
IMHO it's not about cost reductions that made this price decrease possible. It was sales volume that decreased and forced them to take this decision.
Click to expand...

Sure. Same thing is happening with Lomography, 120 stocks are high and they are trying to decrease them. It doesn't surprise me, 120 prices in 2023 were crazy...
 
Last edited:
Good! Unlike other forumers I have stocked up in 2023. Both color and B&W film but at the price levels on stock without incurring the last increase.
Portra 160 120 I recently purchased at the equivalent of 60€ a pack; it's currently listed at 78.5€ in Maco and Fotoimpex.
For us in EU I recently noticed that also the USD strength does not help us and interestingly, due to stock movement, Gold 200 can be more expensive than Portra or Ektar here (Maco: 66,8€). I have seen a couple retailers discounting some 120 film due to short date and expiration.

Anon Ymous said:
IMHO it's not about cost reductions that made this price decrease possible. It was sales volume that decreased and forced them to take this decision.
Click to expand...
(Post)Covid supply chain difficulties plus energy and other costs... If it is in a small part due to improvements in that, welcome. The energy crisis was mostly noticeable in Europe and IDK how US handled it.
As 35mm is unaffected, that is clearly price inelasticity.
 
Prest_400 said:
As 35mm is unaffected, that is clearly price inelasticity.
Click to expand...

And let's keep in mind that 120 costs more to produce than 135, but had always been cheaper per roll. Ask too much and sales will suffer. It's always a "what the market will bear" thing, but greed is punished.
 
Anon Ymous said:
Ask too much and sales will suffer. It's always a "what the market will bear" thing, but greed is punished.
Click to expand...

Remember, it's also greed that lowered the prices.

Alaris/resellers figured that they will make more money if they drop prices on film that is in lower demand and/or getting closer to expiry date. If they weren't greedy (and just plain evil as every corporation is, righ?!) they would just increase the prices even further...
 
Everyone's "greedy". Buyers want to spend only ten cents a roll. They're just coming at it from the other side. That's how price is developed. Between greedy sellers who want to maximize profits and greedy buyers who want to get it for free, both sides arrive at a price that seems fair to both of them and close the deal. That's how price determination works. Otherwise there's no deal and the price is revised until there is a deal.
 
brbo said:
Remember, it's also greed that lowered the prices.
Click to expand...

Eh, no, they're companies, not charities and they need to make profit. Greed is something different. There comes a point where you alienate your customers. And even though I might sound as a broken record, I'll restate the obvious: film hasn't been the only option for few decades now. You don't need to use film to take a photo.
 
Whatever the cause of the price hike, it certainly put the damper on my purchasing film and probably did for others as well.

Yeah, film is expensive by it's nature, but when it becomes so expensive it alienates a notable segment of the user base, profit margins need to be pragmatically reassessed.
 
pentaxuser said:
Well if it is not then you could always donate the difference to EK or KA depending on which you feel needs the more support

pentaxuser
Click to expand...
I mean in relationship to the general health of the market.
it could go both ways.

It could be a tempering of potential opportunistic greed in anticipation that the market is stable and sensible.

Or it could be that they are giving up or getting into a wait and see stance.
Or even worse (*selfmoderation* warning: Unwarranted doom and gloom) that they are purging stock and stopping production.
 
Last edited:
More than greed it's just basic market economics. Classic Adam Smith "Invisible hand" at home. Folk won't buy expensive film: price has to be decreased to what the market tolerates. Meanwhile for 35mm people pay the price level demanded, and this aggregates to a supply bottleneck and so it is. In this case, it's a film market but there are different segments by format and the pricing model should follow it. Business and each party wants to maximize their value and utility.

Helge said:
Or even worse (*selfmoderation* warning: Unwarranted doom and gloom) that they are purging stock and stopping production.
Click to expand...
Kodak manufacture Gold in 120, with the latter being a recent introduction, and I doubt they would do that if they were on the way out. Then they have a full range of cine and still films. And aside of supply chain issues, another price factor was the reinvestments in overhauling operations that was mentioned after 2019. Let's remember that the digital revolution era and film pricing were very low.

Except for Fuji, who we don't know the status of their (120) still films, I would already give up that doom and gloom days behind. Kodak films are being produced, it's not 2008-10 anymore and for once it's nice to discuss B38 being used well, compared to how they had to continuously downsize back then.
 
You know Adam Smith mentioned that hand once in passing in his writings, and he still has to hear for it.
When you have close to a monopoly, you can milk the market if you see fit. It's usually a very bad idea since it works up fatigue and animosity. It's the classic short term high gain vs. a long term solid market.

I'm not saying that is what Kodak does mind you, but surely it has crossed the minds of most of its customers.
 
Last edited:
There's a lot more paper-based & printed components (that require highly specific manufacturing steps to avoid well known faults) in a roll of 120 compared to 135. The components in question are going to be highly sensitive to wholesale energy costs that have impacted across paper and print industries.
 

But Kodak has many competitors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register