• 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's financial woes


You're either in recovery or denial, Ken. You pick. Time to retox!
 

I've seen this movie around Toronto and its title is "Desperation." With Epson V500-600 scanners going cheap, who'd sucker for a "package" if they're shooting regularly?
 
I see a lot of posts here which can be grouped in three distinct categories:
  • "We need a Wunderwaffe!" posts calling for some marketing genius who convinces the whole world to toss their iPhone cameras and use analog equipment for their dull party shots which they are never going to look at ever again anyway.
  • "If Kodak only followed my suggestion X they would be wading knee deep in cash" posts from people with no inside knowledge and particularly no inside knowledge of Kodaks current financial situation and business strategy.
  • "It's all lost anyway" posts claiming that financial troubles at Kodak clearly mean that we won't get any film for this Christmas season anymore. And definitely nobody is ever going to produce a film based camera anymore. Ever again.

Let's face the facts: A company like Kodak won't find a "Wunderwaffe" guy and we really neither can, need nor want to brainwash the rest of the world into choosing the photographic medium we happen to prefer for whatever reason. Despite claims to the opposite, quarterly reports of publicly traded companies are full of half truth and manipulation because no company can afford to tell its competition everything about its business. Film and suitable cameras will be produced and sold for many years to come because there are quite a few companies making it and making a decent profit with it - including Kodak (I trust PE on that).
 
Let's face the facts: A company like Kodak won't find a "Wunderwaffe" guy and we really neither can, need nor want to brainwash the rest of the world into choosing the photographic medium we happen to prefer for whatever reason. Despite claims to the opposite, quarterly reports of publicly traded companies are full of half truth and manipulation because no company can afford to tell its competition everything about its business. Film and suitable cameras will be produced and sold for many years to come because there are quite a few companies making it and making a decent profit with it - including Kodak (I trust PE on that).

Re: facts. Publicly traded companies have stockholders and government organizations regulate their disclosure practices. What you're saying might be best applied to privately-held companies. Ever hear of an SEC 10-K?

Film camera sales slid along with film. Who still makes film cameras on a scale comparable to ten years ago? Nikon makes 2 now. Ever bother to look at trend lines of film sales since 2000?

There's considerable difference between "Chicken Little" alarmism and realism. It's hard to be sanguine about the next several years and film production/availability/variety as we currently know it.
 
tomalophicon said:
Huh? Who's quit the film business now?
Click to expand...

Film camera sales slid along with film. Who still makes film cameras on a scale comparable to ten years ago? Nikon makes 2 now. Ever bother to look at trend lines of film sales since 2000?
Click to expand...

While sales dropped off, it didn't justify camera makers dropping out of the film market altogether.Try to find a F6 or FM10 in stock.
Kodunk says oh lets stop making Kodachrome 64.

Between bone head manuevers of camera makers qutting the film camera biz and the great yellow father stopping production of film speeds and types they drove the industry to where it is now, THEY gave up on it.
How many people would still be shooting film if the could buy a new 35mm slr,get their favorite film,get conveinent processing etc.
The general public thinks film is dead now. They threw the market away.
 

Maybe Cosina, maybe Holga.
 
How many times do I have to say this?

KODACHROME DEMAND WAS NEXT TO ZERO. IT WAS SPOILING ON THE SHELVES. Kodak abandoned it when it could no longer sell it. And, this trend began in about 1990 with the upsurge of E6 processing and the higher quality!

Kodachrome was a round the clock operation in the early 90s, but fell off to one shift daily and then one day a week, then once a month and then once a year. Sales were terrible, in spite of ads. And yes, there were Kodachrome ads. I've posted one of the last futile Kodachrome efforts in the 90s.

Good luck guys trying to turn this one back on Kodak but it was you guys, and you guys alone.

PE
 

Velvia killed Kodachrome on photo editors' light tables in the early 90s. No contest.
 
We know, we know, PE. People quit using Kodachrome when E6 surpassed it in jazzed up, over saturated, unrealistic gaudy color.

I go back far enough to remember when Kodachrome was king of saturation and E4 films, and early E6 films, simply couldn't compete. Once they became good quality and selection expanded to offer garishness (like Velvia, IMHO, for many but not all subjects and lighting) Kodachrome with its unique look, archival resistance to dark fading and "realistic" pallette simply didn't appeal any more.

Heck, I think E100G is pretty saturated and Astia was, both beautiful (though different) but pretty realistic, Provia is over the top for most of my subjects and tastes, and the only use I have for Velvia is to get colors that should be bright to pop on overcast days. I also love film and not digital. My tastes are clearly minority.
 
Photo Engineer said:
Good luck guys trying to turn this one back on Kodak but it was you guys, and you guys alone.
Click to expand...

Aaauuuugggghhh. Yikes, that hurts...

[Ken just chopped off both of his hands to keep from typing.]



Ken
 
Ken Nadvornick said:
Aaauuuugggghhh. Yikes, that hurts...

[Ken just chopped off both of his hands to keep from typing.]



Ken
Click to expand...

Don't bleed to death Ken!

But, the truth is the truth. Kodak did not kill Kodachrome. Lack of sales to you customers killed it! That is the absolute truth.

PE
 
from that ^ linked article
"Digital photography has won out because its images are visible immediately and are easily stored on tiny computer chips, eliminating the need to carry and develop clunky rolls of film."

clunky rolls of film LOL
 
Ken Nadvornick said:
*$@ggvoV374$&&#&HDBOg#g#()4HFH. HJF:likjDoO8&Y^^9bdb...

&^$&%)hOBVdN=+)9*^%2fKNDKbK.^!!!

&g$
Click to expand...

I can see that when it comes to typing, you are now stumped!
 

My girlfriend used to work at Unique Photo (yes...that Unique Photo) when they were located in Florham Park, NJ. Seldom a day went by when she'd get a call from someone, such as a customer or camera store, for a particular film, paper or chemical, only to be told that, "Sorry, the manufacturer has discontinued that product." (Or in the case of Agfa, "discontinuing" the entire company.) The disappointment was palpable.

You're right about the manufacturers' throwing the market away, if my GF's experience is any indication. The demand for these things is very much still there, despite what the marketing hype will say otherwise; witness The Impossible Project's resurrection of Polaroid instant film. In light of the "digital juggernaut," companies such as Kodak, Ilford, Fuji and Agfa hit the panic button when they saw "alarming" declines in the film market. It was a knee-jerk reaction, too.

Dieter Zakas
 
CGW said:
Re: facts. Publicly traded companies have stockholders and government organizations regulate their disclosure practices. What you're saying might be best applied to privately-held companies. Ever hear of an SEC 10-K?
Click to expand...
As PE already pointed out, it's quite easy to shift profits between departments. Seriously, if accounting were so strict and simple and wouldn't allow for creative trickery, most corporations wouldn't bother with tax heavens.
CGW said:
Film camera sales slid along with film. Who still makes film cameras on a scale comparable to ten years ago? Nikon makes 2 now. Ever bother to look at trend lines of film sales since 2000?
Click to expand...
Film camera sales must have sled a lot more since you can shoot film only once whereas cameras last for a long time. The used camera market is swamped with professional analog gear in top condition. And apart from sensor technology there hasn't been much progress in camera technology: sensor vs film aside, the Canon EOS 5D Mark II is a piece of junk compared to my 12 year old EOS 3.

And despite all that, there are still makers and buyers of new analog cameras. Think about it.
CGW said:
There's considerable difference between "Chicken Little" alarmism and realism. It's hard to be sanguine about the next several years and film production/availability/variety as we currently know it.
Click to expand...
Some films will go away, others will come. I weep for Fuji Astia and would really weep if Kodak E100VS ever went away. At the same time I cheered for Fuji Provia 400X and the new Kodak Portra films.

I am quite sanguine because I have access to a large freezer and to quality film stock that our ancestors couldn't have dreamed of.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register