Kodak Price Increase and Hiring Spree 2023: What Do You Want Kodak to Focus on Moving Forward?

[retina_restoration]

Scanning through this thread, I'm surprised at the lack of calls for Kodachrome.

Few people bother to voice this, because its simply not going to happen, so why wish for it?

 

[Sirius Glass]

Yes, 1 for 5 rolls of film. Not full size.

Save the tags from previous times. I keep a box of them.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Few people bother to voice this, because its simply not going to happen, so why wish for it?

Finally, someone who understands!

 

[koraks]

Their mistake was not to accept digital. They were trying to protect the film industry that was their lifeblood. They would rather go down with the ship than change course. How many of us wait too long to change before it's too late? A good lesson there.

So much have been said on this. At the very least, the notion you're expressing here does very little justice to what actually happened. For instance, Kodak did embrace digital. They were among the first to explore it in the first place. Moreover, it's not that they didn't want to change course. They just couldn't. Even if they had been capable of axing the film business to free up resources to move into digital, this would have induced a massive discontinuity in the business (with catastrophic effects), and they would have found out not all resources are fungible (which of course they realized perfectly well anyway).

The failure of Kodak to successfully migrate from film to digital is too often touted as a strategic oversight or somehow a lack of situational awareness. While this certainly played a role early on, Kodak management certainly weren't excessively late in realizing where the market was heading. It was much more due to issues like path dependence and asset specificity. They walked into the abyss with wide open eyes - and that must have been a quite painful experience for many people who knew exactly what was going on. In the past two decades, I've worked for two separate companies who were (or still are in one case) in a similar position. It's really interesting to see this happening up close and personal - and trust me, large firms house more than enough intelligence and talent to understand perfectly well what's going on. Changing the course of an oil tanker, however, is darn difficult. Especially if you don't know exactly where to head to.

 

[MattKing]

Their mistake was not to accept digital. They were trying to protect the film industry that was their lifeblood. They would rather go down with the ship than change course. How many of us wait too long to change before it's too late? A good lesson there.

It isn't that they didn't accept digital. It is that they saw no way of achieving anything to the close to the sort of profit margins that they were able to rely on from film if they were making and selling things in the digital photographic marketplace.
And on that, they were entirely correct.
So the requirements of their shareholders sent them elsewhere.

 

[Anon Ymous]

@koraks @MattKing Kodak had a diverse portfolio of products, certainly not only what we would typically use. These segments were gradually spun off or sold, but they're still doing well if I'm not mistaken. Perhaps things would be somewhat better if they were kept?

 

[MattKing]

They were spun off, because the profit margins they were returning were lower than the shareholders required.
And many of them are gone now - e.g. Eastman Kodak stores, microfilm, X-ray film, etc., etc.

 

[soysos]

Me too, so make that three!

We’re up to 4. Just something about that Kodachrome blue. Modern stuff just isn’t the same.

 

[Don_ih]

Their mistake was not to accept digital. They were trying to protect the film industry that was their lifeblood. They would rather go down with the ship than change course. How many of us wait too long to change before it's too late? A good lesson there.

@koraks and @MattKing pretty much covered it. Kodak did sell digital cameras and other related paraphernalia, but they couldn't compete in that market.
Anyway, they weren't a ship - they were a continent. There was no way to change course. As it was, when the business dried up, they were saddled with a massive amount of useless money-draining infrastructure. Changing course wouldn't have alleviated that burden.

 

[Sirius Glass]

So much have been said on this. At the very least, the notion you're expressing here does very little justice to what actually happened. For instance, Kodak did embrace digital. They were among the first to explore it in the first place. Moreover, it's not that they didn't want to change course. They just couldn't. Even if they had been capable of axing the film business to free up resources to move into digital, this would have induced a massive discontinuity in the business (with catastrophic effects), and they would have found out not all resources are fungible (which of course they realized perfectly well anyway).

The failure of Kodak to successfully migrate from film to digital is too often touted as a strategic oversight or somehow a lack of situational awareness. While this certainly played a role early on, Kodak management certainly weren't excessively late in realizing where the market was heading. It was much more due to issues like path dependence and asset specificity. They walked into the abyss with wide open eyes - and that must have been a quite painful experience for many people who knew exactly what was going on. In the past two decades, I've worked for two separate companies who were (or still are in one case) in a similar position. It's really interesting to see this happening up close and personal - and trust me, large firms house more than enough intelligence and talent to understand perfectly well what's going on. Changing the course of an oil tanker, however, is darn difficult. Especially if you don't know exactly where to head to.

It isn't that they didn't accept digital. It is that they saw no way of achieving anything to the close to the sort of profit margins that they were able to rely on from film if they were making and selling things in the digital photographic marketplace.
And on that, they were entirely correct.
So the requirements of their shareholders sent them elsewhere.

The film market has for most of the 20th century has been a market of sell the camera and lens or lenses and the customer keeps coming back for film, processing or chemical and paper. The customer keeps returning.

Digital market has been sell the camera and a lens and the customer may come back for another lens or filter and the store may well never see the customer again. There is little or no repeat business from the customer.

That makes the digital market hard to build long term profit.

 

[faberryman]

We’re up to 4. Just something about that Kodachrome blue. Modern stuff just isn’t the same.

I always considered Ektachrome, rather than Kodachome, blue. Fortunately, the modern Ektachome just isn’t the same.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I always considered Ektachrome blue. Fortunately, the modern stuff just just isn’t the same.

Thus the popularity of the A-1 Skylight filter for warming up Ektachrome. I liked to say the Ektachrome gives us the skies we remember, many not as they really were.

 

[mshchem]

Save the tags from previous times. I keep a box of them.

I save box ends. It's a form of dementia.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

So much have been said on this. At the very least, the notion you're expressing here does very little justice to what actually happened. For instance, Kodak did embrace digital. They were among the first to explore it in the first place. Moreover, it's not that they didn't want to change course. They just couldn't. Even if they had been capable of axing the film business to free up resources to move into digital, this would have induced a massive discontinuity in the business (with catastrophic effects), and they would have found out not all resources are fungible (which of course they realized perfectly well anyway).

The failure of Kodak to successfully migrate from film to digital is too often touted as a strategic oversight or somehow a lack of situational awareness. While this certainly played a role early on, Kodak management certainly weren't excessively late in realizing where the market was heading. It was much more due to issues like path dependence and asset specificity. They walked into the abyss with wide open eyes - and that must have been a quite painful experience for many people who knew exactly what was going on. In the past two decades, I've worked for two separate companies who were (or still are in one case) in a similar position. It's really interesting to see this happening up close and personal - and trust me, large firms house more than enough intelligence and talent to understand perfectly well what's going on. Changing the course of an oil tanker, however, is darn difficult. Especially if you don't know exactly where to head to.

You're basically agreeing with me. Whether due to inertia or stockholders or personal prejudices, they couldn't make the jump successfully. The were stuck in the past with huge investments in film and didn't want the huge profit margins to go away. You're seeing it a little in the EV auto market today although competition is forcing everyone's hands and there's movement to start switching over or at least make some effort. Frankly, Kodak was way ahead of everyone in digital research and patents. Maybe Kodak should have bought Nikon like Sony bought Minolta.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

It isn't that they didn't accept digital. It is that they saw no way of achieving anything to the close to the sort of profit margins that they were able to rely on from film if they were making and selling things in the digital photographic marketplace.
And on that, they were entirely correct.
So the requirements of their shareholders sent them elsewhere.

Matt, that's what I posted. "They were trying to protect the film industry that was their lifeblood."

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

@koraks and @MattKing pretty much covered it. Kodak did sell digital cameras and other related paraphernalia, but they couldn't compete in that market.
Anyway, they weren't a ship - they were a continent. There was no way to change course. As it was, when the business dried up, they were saddled with a massive amount of useless money-draining infrastructure. Changing course wouldn't have alleviated that burden.

They should have bought Minolta before Sony did.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

They were too proud.

 

[MattKing]

Matt, that's what I posted. "They were trying to protect the film industry that was their lifeblood."

Actually, they could clearly see that the profits were quickly drying up. They weren't trying to protect the film industry, they were bailing ship as fast as they could - they moved almost all their energies away from film. Thus the horribly failed attempt to make the Kodak inkjet printers a success.
Their purchase of Creo, with its major position in the commercial printing industry, was somewhat more successful, but they didn't really succeed with that either.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

All I want is for Kodak to stay in the game.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Actually, they could clearly see that the profits were quickly drying up. They weren't trying to protect the film industry, they were bailing ship as fast as they could - they moved almost all their energies away from film. Thus the horribly failed attempt to make the Kodak inkjet printers a success.
Their purchase of Creo, with its major position in the commercial printing industry, was somewhat more successful, but they didn't really succeed with that either.

The key to digital is the camera. I always thought of Kodak cameras as being second best to Japanese and German. Sony, a tech firm, understood that they didn't know cameras. Of course, being Japanese, they were in a better position to buy a great Japanese camera company. But I think Kodak just was too self-centered to look to others and maybe felt it was beneath them to buy a camera company. They were used to being in control and didn't see other film makers as real competition. Many times people get stuck in the past doing what they do best. It;s really hard to let go and try something different. How many people give up their career field in midlife to try something different?

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

All I want is for Kodak to stay in the game.

That's up to us. They make good products. We have to buy them.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

That's up to us. They make good products. We have to buy them.

I do... Love their TMY-2, too much...I just won't buy it in large format anymore.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

...unless I win big in the lottery!

 

[Hubigpielover]

So do y'all want me to include the thing about the Olympics or what? Let me know because I am fixing to make my third Manhattan.

 

[mshchem]

So do y'all want me to include the thing about the Olympics or what? Let me know because I am fixing to make my third Manhattan.

God I miss drinkin'. I don't miss hangovers

Short glass, a couple ice cubes, 2 shots Jack Daniel's, a couple shots of ice cold Pepsi-Cola and a squeeze of a small wedge of lime.