Kodak Warning + Later Clarification

[mshchem]

If junk film keeps my cameras fed then so be it. We can't all shoot Portra or Tmax. I shoot what I can get my paws on.



My '90 Corolla keeps on ticking. The dealer wants a look at it but I don't trust 'em. I think they want it for the showroom.

Sure thing! I gave up my 03 Forester in 2013 to a buddy of mine. His kid is still driving it last I checked

 

[gbroadbridge]

Either way, it's mostly all outsourced junk. Who wants junk film too?

One mans trash is another mans treasure.

I'm sure that there is room (and demand) for both.

 

[Model71]

Evidently Kodak put a statement out on X roughly two hours ago.. regarding misleading media statements.

https://x.com/kodak/status/1955796193398714550?s=61

 

[BrianShaw]

That EDIT: MESSAGE FROM KODAK was quite clear. Now if folks EDIT: WHO LIKE TO SPECULATE WITHOUT READING ORIGINAL SOURCE MATERIAL would actually read it.

Thanks very much for posting the link! EDIT: I SINCERELY APPRECIATE IT AS I WOULDN’T HAVE SEEN IT OTHERWISE

 

[Model71]

That was quite clear. Now if folks would actually read it.

Thanks very much for posting the link!

Unless I’m misunderstanding, the context for the X link above relates to this very thread topic.

 

[BrianShaw]

You appear to be completely misunderstanding, Captain. I’ll edit to help you out…

 

[0x001688936CA08]

None of which are actually needed any longer. The whole world moved to eCommerce mediated sales. Companies like B&H, Freestyle, Amazon, Target, Zoro, Walmart, Sam's Club, eBay, etc. could be used as channels to market and Kodak could run a drop ship warehouse for a whole lot less than what they are likely paying now for a distribution network or even outsource that to a 3PL of some kind. They could focus on product innovation and support by getting rid of the obsolete distribution model they are currently using. I wonder how many end point retailers even see a Kodak rep anymore.

The world changed, Kodak's leadership has not (or not enough). Either that, or they are trying to figure out how to unburden themselves of the Alaris albatross with all this kerfuffle. (In which case I take it all back.)

This fundamentally misunderstands the value of distributors and the complexity of B2B commerce in the real world.

Manufacturers and vendors use distributors to avoid things that are not their core business. It's infinitely easier for Kodak in Rochester to focus on making film and stuffing it into containers than it is to make film AND manage a global sales and distribution network servicing 30,000+ retailers across 50+ countries, each with incredibly heterogeneous regulatory requirements, payment terms, and cultural norms.

Unfortunately it's not as simple as "just take orders and ship it out" when you're talking about getting product into every major city globally.

If direct ecommerce were truly superior to distributors, Coca-Cola would have done it decades ago with their near infinite resources and market domination.

 

[Model71]

You appear to be completely misunderstanding, Captain. I’ll edit to help you out…

Yup, I miss understood, thanks - Captain out.

 

[dcy]

The Eastman Kodak pension plan investment has a surplus, which they are trying to access, while the pensioners are resisting.
Which may be what is actually behind this announcement.

I once heard it say that Eastman Kodak is basically a pension plan with a side business in chemistry and film.

 

[djdister]

Evidently Kodak put a statement out on X roughly two hours ago.. regarding misleading media statements.

https://x.com/kodak/status/1955796193398714550?s=61

For those who don't want to go to X to read Kodak's statement, here it is on their website:

Statement Regarding Misleading Media Reports

 

[dcy]

The reality was that there's nothing the Kodak management could do. Absolutely nothing. You are forgetting how huge Kodak was at their peak: over $200 billion (!) in annual revenue (adjusted for inflation), which is about as much as Microsoft made in 2024. And Microsoft is a $3.9 trillion (!) company.

...

TLDR: Kodak management wasn't nearly as incompetent as most people think, and the most successful survived parts of their business simply aren't as known because they no longer use the brand.

Exactly. People vastly overestimate what is feasible and physically possible. You mention the sheer size of the company back then. On top of that, there's a mismatch of expertise and equipment. You can't instantly pivot from making a very specific type of photo-chemistry and coating it on gelatin to suddenly making the world's best digital sensors.

 

[mshchem]

So I guess with the extra 500 million we get Kodachrome back! 135, 127, 620 and 828!! Rock on!

 

[Craig]

P.S. If it were up to me, every single Bachelor's degree would have the usual 4 year requirement PLUS another 2 years of internship in the field of interest before the degree was granted. Apprenticing has a long and rewarding history in the trades and this should be carried into the university setting.

In order to become a Professional Engineer in Canada you need the university degree and 4 years experience under another P. Eng. - basically an apprenticeship.

 

[Cholentpot]

This fundamentally misunderstands the value of distributors and the complexity of B2B commerce in the real world.

Manufacturers and vendors use distributors to avoid things that are not their core business. It's infinitely easier for Kodak in Rochester to focus on making film and stuffing it into containers than it is to make film AND manage a global sales and distribution network servicing 30,000+ retailers across 50+ countries, each with incredibly heterogeneous regulatory requirements, payment terms, and cultural norms.

Unfortunately it's not as simple as "just take orders and ship it out" when you're talking about getting product into every major city globally.

If direct ecommerce were truly superior to distributors, Coca-Cola would have done it decades ago with their near infinite resources and market domination.

Coca Cola started by contracting bottlers but eventually made a huge push to buy them all out. There are nowhere near as many independent bottlers as there used to be.

 

[MattKing]

I once heard it say that Eastman Kodak is basically a pension plan with a side business in chemistry and film.

A better statement about Eastman Kodak historically would be to describe it as a large, multi-national marketing and distribution entity, employing thousands and thousands of well trained and well paid employees, with excellent benefits, including a well funded employer paid pension structure. In support of that entity, they also had much smaller numbers of employees involved in R&D and manufacturing.
When an entity like that collapses or nearly collapses, the well funded pension plan stays around.
The biggest problem with the numerous Kodak pension funds is that the employees of Eastman Kodak's oldest and largest international subsidiary, UK based Kodak Limited, have/had the maddening tendency to live longer than actuarial projections would indicate - probably because the health benefits were so good.
My father worked for Canadian Kodak/Kodak Canada for 36 years, and then collected his pension and enjoyed his additional benefits for another 33 years. The pension benefits were never in doubt, even through the bankruptcy. There was some uncertainty about some of the additional benefits during and after the time of the bankruptcy, but they never stopped during his lifetime.

 

[BrianShaw]

So who’s to blame (or thank) for longevity, the actuarial staff or socialized medicine.

 

[MattKing]

So who’s to blame (or thank) for longevity, the actuarial staff or socialized medicine.

Well, the benefits I referenced are additional benefits, above the comprehensive benefits available to the public at large. Things like extended health benefits and fairly generous holiday time.
And as far as the ability of the actuaries to predict (in terms of statistical likelihood) the lifetimes of the workforce:
1) actuaries are a somewhat depressing lot; and
2) I refer you to that other thread about how long-lived photographers are. Like many Kodak employees, my Dad enjoyed a lifetime of photography, and was able to continue enjoying it until his eyesight started to fail him in his 90s.

 

[Europan]

I confess, I have become rather conservative over the past years. Yesterday I brought a parcel to the post office, in it an Arriflex 16 St that I’ve just serviced. Thinking that the owner might put the camera in a vitrine would make me sick. Each film camera or projector I revive gives me hope that somebody is going to make a worthy movie. From a tripod.

It’s the little things I miss, all 16-mm. film available perforated on both sides for the many cameras that deserve it. Think of a Victor 3/4/5 or a Mitchell 16 Professional. The one is lightweight and well portable, the other is still the Queen of the 16-mm. cameras—on sticks (weight). Then the 50-foot spools and fresh Kodak loaded 25-foot Double-Eight magazines. 35-mm. camera stocks P perforated for all the old machines with a crank on them.

Yeah, behind that all must be the will to propagate cellulose triacetate and PETP with a light sensitive slurry on it. It’s to talk to the young (I am 63) so that they hear it from the epicentre of film manufacturing (it began with Reichenbach and Eastman in 1889 [unlawfully]), that they’re worth more than only pressing buttons. Heaven, young strong people idling trough life with electronics around them is so sad. Kodak, make and let them do what’s film. Cut that digital trinkets out. A Kodak Reflex Special, open but loaded with white leader, for the world to see what you’re about, Ciné-Kodak Specials on fluid heads, the mirror reflex finder explained. Twelve perfectly restored Kodak Electric 8 cameras in a line at the CES would certainly make an impression. And projection! No Kodak booth without a popcorn-free (not smelling) pretty little cinema. Why not new, improved Kodak film splicers? Substantial things!

 

[foc]

This fundamentally misunderstands the value of distributors and the complexity of B2B commerce in the real world.

Manufacturers and vendors use distributors to avoid things that are not their core business. It's infinitely easier for Kodak in Rochester to focus on making film and stuffing it into containers than it is to make film AND manage a global sales and distribution network servicing 30,000+ retailers across 50+ countries, each with incredibly heterogeneous regulatory requirements, payment terms, and cultural norms.

Unfortunately it's not as simple as "just take orders and ship it out" when you're talking about getting product into every major city globally.

If direct ecommerce were truly superior to distributors, Coca-Cola would have done it decades ago with their near infinite resources and market domination.

+1

 

[Agulliver]

With the obvious caveat that film manufacturing comprises only a small fraction of Kodak's revenue stream, I do think they would benefit from putting out more film products with higher regularity. Most companies benefit from periodically producing new products, as it maintains customer interest, but Kodak has been pretty quiet on that front (for probably understandable reasons, of course, but still).

My sense is that the "film photography revival," of which I'm a big fan, is starting to wane a bit, and my intuition is that much of the waning is due to a lack of new products, as well as a lack of product availability overall (e.g., Fuji E6 film). My hope is that Kodak getting past this hurdle in 2026 will allow them to press "reset" and start offering some new products.

At the top of my list would be: 1) the Kodak-branded E6 chemistry that they claimed was going to be released in 2024; and 2) another color E6 film to fill the void left by Velvia 50's near-unavailability (a reformulated E100VS would be great). Bringing these two out together (or something along those lines) would be a nice and much-needed shot in the arm for the analog community.

Honestly, that would be a huge risk. The revival is very much lead by increased sales of consumer grade C41 film. Kodak already makes superb consumer and pro grade C41 film. Ultramax is probably the best consumer grade C41 film ever to exist, with the only possible exception being Fuji Superia. I don't see evidence of the revival waning. It's not growing as strongly as it was a couple of years ago but it's not contracting. And 95% of the people driving it aren't interested in shooting E6, much less developing it. What's at the top of your or my list isn't actually going to help Kodak or anyone else because we're outliers - most of us on Photrio are.

What Kodak needed to do regarding photographic film - and what they achieved - was get their production sorted so that C41 film is consistently available on the shelves and with online retailers. Creating new films or modifying existing ones to create effectively new products would involve huge cost, and big risk for likely very little return. The "big" money, such as it is, in the analogue photography market...is in general purpose colour negative film. And Kodak already have all the bases covered there. As for me personally, I'd love a cheaper 800ISO or faster C41 film. But I strongly suspect the reason for the high price of the extant 800 film that goes into the single use cameras and gets branded as "Lomography" for 135 sales is because I'm pretty unusual in this desire and they don't sell much of it.

I'm disappointed but not surprised at the panic, clickbait articles I'm seeing online. And young photographer friends have already contacted me as they are worried.

 

[dcy]

What Kodak needed to do regarding photographic film - and what they achieved - was get their production sorted so that C41 film is consistently available on the shelves and with online retailers. Creating new films or modifying existing ones to create effectively new products would involve huge cost, and big risk for likely very little return.

I agree. There is a finite number of film shooters, and a finite amount of film they can shoot. Every time I shoot Aerocolor IV ("Flic Film Elektra") is one time I did not shoot Kodak Gold. I don't imagine that there are a lot of people who do not shoot film but would if there was another Kodak color film in the market. Nor do I imagine that many people would shoot *more* color film if there was another Kodak color film in the market.

The color negative market is already almost entirely Kodak competing against Kodak.

 

[tykos]

Film was in no way $5 a roll in the 80's, maybe on paper but I remember there were always deals, and sales, and cheaper alternatives. $1.99 for the roll and .99 1 hour development at the minilab plus prints. I'm sure list price was $5 but I don't remember spending that much on a roll of film in the 90's or even the 00's.

don't know there, but here those deals were on really bad films and processing. The 14-15y.o. me in the 90s was super happy about that, but looking at those prints now makes phoenix I look like velvia.
So yeah, we're comparing price of portra and gold, two very high standard films, with some third party obscure products...

 

[Prest_400]

I Thought it is worth to repost it again, and I include a quote of their main points:

Statement Regarding Misleading Media Reports

Kodak clarifies it is not closing or filing bankruptcy; plans debt repayment and pension fund transaction for a stronger balance sheet in 2025.

www.kodak.com

The most important things to know are:

• Kodak has no plans to cease operations, go out of business, or file for bankruptcy protection.
• To the contrary, Kodak is confident it will repay, extend, or refinance its debt and preferred stock on, or before, its due date.
• When the transactions we have planned are completed, which is expected to be early next year, Kodak will have a stronger balance sheet than we have had in years and will be virtually net debt free.
• The "going concern disclosure" is a technical report that is required by accounting rules.
• We will continue to meet our obligations to all pension fund participants.

***

Again, now some of my opinion: Which actually the "stronger balance sheet... virtually net debt free" is beautiful to read and hope it comes to fruition.

About the "yellow journalism" of media, I literally was startled by the headlines about this; then as well how they name again the failure to adapt into digital. It has been 20 years since that began, and let's say by 2010-14 and specially the bankruptcy there was the point of the obsolescence and failure to adapt, in overly simplified terms. My pet peeve here is that this is still mentioned as it happened yesterday, but we already have a decade from that "Kodak moment". Aka, now they are undergoing further diversification but film is going strong!

As for me personally, I'd love a cheaper 800ISO or faster C41 film. But I strongly suspect the reason for the high price of the extant 800 film that goes into the single use cameras and gets branded as "Lomography" for 135 sales is because I'm pretty unusual in this desire and they don't sell much of it.

I have been often thinking about how ISO 800 film would be able to be positioned more strongly in the current market. One stop extra sensitivity and the additional granularity is now a desirable characteristic. Shorter shelf life as well, but would not deem that so relevant if it gets 2 years.
Of course, it very probably is more costly to manufacture, and might come with a lower markup by that as well as cannibalizing the current range with a standalone Ultramax 800. Kodak anyways makes it already in 135 and 120, just not under their own branding.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Evidently Kodak put a statement out on X roughly two hours ago.. regarding misleading media statements.

https://x.com/kodak/status/1955796193398714550?s=61

First thing to leap into my mind was...

But thanks for the link. Sets the record straight. I'll go back to watching my film dry now.

 

[Trail Images]

Oh well, my birthday is in 4 days anyway so I just bought $500 worth of Kodak E-100 in MF & LF to help them out..