- Joined
- Jan 24, 2016
- Messages
- 555
- Format
- Multi Format
Thanks, that is the information I remember reading.
Post #59 in the same thread as the earlier Kodak Alaris email quote:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)
Email I just received from Kodak Alaris...
Dear Andrew,
Some good news to share. We have decided to maintain availability of the 50 sheet-4 x 5 black and white film items along with the new 10 sheet items for the time being.
Best regards,
Thomas J. Mooney | Film Capture Business Manager
Kodak Alaris Inc., 2400 Mount Read Blvd., Rochester, NY 14615-03020
thomas.j.mooney@kodakalaris.com | Office: 585.310.5776 | Mobile: 585.520.2639
www.kodakalaris.com
cid:image001.png@01D0784F.34F11A30
Good news, eh!
Kodak Alaris markets the film, but the film stock is supplied to Kodak Alaris by Eastman Kodak as I understand it. Maybe Kodak Alaris has no choice but to raise the price if Eastman Kodak is milking Kodak Alaris? I don't really know and I don't really care since I have found B&W film that is plenty good enough for me and I'm happy.Well my humble opinion of Kodak B&W is they are making everything so expensive that they hope sales will drop and enable them to discontinue all their B&W photographic products,,,
Perhaps you would prefer Kodak Alaris' answers to questions posed as part of the Emulsive newsletter question and answer session:
Here is the link to the full session: http://emulsive.org/articles/commun...kodak-alaris-community-interview-results-time
- We have no intentions of removing any films from our current portfolio. Let us be very clear here: Film is our heritage and our team loves this industry. We will do everything in our power to keep our current portfolio sustainable for the future!
Kodak, including Thomas Mooney, can be 100% trusted to respond to the market. If 10-sheet boxes sell well and 50-sheet boxes don't, count on the 50-sheet boxes being discontinued. It will all be determined by film purchasers, not Kodak.
We have a great friend in AlfordYes, that's what I read also. Unfortunately, I think the folks above are insinuating that there will only be 10 sheet boxes or none at all since the cost is to high. I've switched to Iford for the bulk of my B&W work. I refuse to pay that much difference in cost for the yellow brand. It's a sad day since I think this is a "shot in the foot" type move on Kodak Alaris's part. Of course they might not have a choice in this. It could be their film supplier is gouging them with high price film stock????? Either way, I'm happy with Ilford.
Yup, me too Ralph!We have a great friend in Alford
Hmmmmm! Seems like Sal has a firm grip on the concept "supply and demand" in a business's decision of what to make and how much to sell it for.......Regards!
Such a poll would be just as useless as the ones conducted before last November's U.S. election.You might gauge Sal's grip better by conducting a poll. How many sheet film users or potential sheet film users would rather buy in quantities larger than 10, and would be willing to pay less per sheet for that privilege?
This has reminded me: Did we ever get to the bottom of why Kodak charges so much for its bulk rolls in relation to its cassettes compared to the case with Ilford and the likes of Foma?Well my humble opinion of Kodak B&W is they are making everything so expensive that they hope sales will drop and enable them to discontinue all their B&W photographic products,,,
One of the questions asked in the Q&A with Kodak Alaris that Emulsive published recently was whether Kodak Alaris was considering offering bulk colour film rolls. Their answer may be relevant: "To be quite honest, in our experience bulk rolls end up being small volume and high cost."Maybe this is one for our friend "Emulsive" who conducts interviews with those "In The Know" in Kodak's seniour management? I am sure a lot of us would like to know
You are forgetting the set-up and take-down costs, different edge printing, the different core, the different can, the different box, the different insert, the different sku (for distribution).There was no attempt to explain why when Kodak produces film in tens of 1000s of feet why simply cutting that into 100 feet rolls and packing it into boxes, as does Ilford, was high cost.
When volumes were high, bulk rolls were more economical.Finally can I ask those users of Kodak bulk rolls: Has Kodak bulk rolls always been more expensive than cassettes or is this a very recent phenomenon despite Kodak suggesting that film sales in recent times have a sunnier outlook?
Such a poll would be just as useless as the ones conducted before last November's U.S. election.
The only 'poll' that matters is the one Kodak is conducting by offering products and observing the market reaction to them. Everything else is just a bunch of people babbling on the Internet.
You are forgetting the set-up and take-down costs, different edge printing, the different core, the different can, the different box, the different insert, the different sku (for distribution).
With 35mm, all of that is highly, highly mechanized, and the volumes are high as well.
Harman is set up to do small volumes, whereas Eastman Kodak is set up to do high volumes.
Assuming by "they" you mean Kodak Alaris, that might be a good idea, but I don't know whether the deal between Eastman Kodak and Kodak Alaris would make that possible.Oh well, in that case they can outsource bulk roll finishing - packaging to someone else who can do it at a lower cost.
(ducks for cover)
Assuming by "they" you mean Kodak Alaris, that might be a good idea, but I don't know whether the deal between Eastman Kodak and Kodak Alaris would make that possible.
And it wouldn't seem to make sense if they would have to ship the film to another continent to make it happen. Is there anyone else in North America besides Eastman Kodak who have the equipment?
Hmmmmm! Seems like Sal has a firm grip on the concept "supply and demand" in a business's decision of what to make and how much to sell it for...
You might gauge Sal's grip better by conducting a poll. How many sheet film users or potential sheet film users would rather buy in quantities larger than 10, and would be willing to pay less per sheet for that privilege?
...The only 'poll' that matters is the one Kodak is conducting by offering products and observing the market reaction to them. Everything else is just a bunch of people babbling on the Internet.
Quite the contrary; it's the only thing that will.yeah but that won't tell us anything about your grip...
So far, Kodak Alaris hasn't failed at all. The market defines what's reasonable. Since Alaris claims its film sales have increased, its customers have by definition declared its prices to be reasonable....it makes you wonder how other companies manage to offer a reasonably priced product, while Kodak Alaris fails spectacularly...
Given the volume of still film sold today, I'd expect higher prices from Kodak than its competitors, specifically because of Eastman Kodak Bldg. 38's huge production capacity....You'd expect that 135 bw film by Kodak would be priced competitively and cheaper than their competitors, given their huge production capacity...
Again, given HARMAN's smaller and more agile coating line in Mobberley, that's exactly what I'd expect. Also, as noted previously, Kodak prices have risen steadily for decades....Instead of that, we're seeing their film prices rising steadily and lately even becoming more expensive than their direct competitors (Ilford) in some cases...
That's how the market sets prices. If enough customers continue to purchase Kodak-branded still film, the asking prices are just right. If you and a sufficient number of others stop and patronize HARMAN instead, given Eastman Kodak's cost structure, 400TX will be discontinued....Of course, they are free to charge whatever they want in order to stay afloat, but at some point loyal customers may consider other products. I personally find it much more likely to buy a bulk roll of HP5+ than continue using 400TX.
We have a great friend in Alford
As Sal has indicated, huge production capacity is only a cost saver if there is huge demand.Heh, that was meant to be a joke, but still it makes you wonder how other companies manage to offer a reasonably priced product, while Kodak Alaris fails spectacularly. And IMHO, it's not just the bulk rolls. You'd expect that 135 bw film by Kodak would be priced competitively and cheaper than their competitors, given their huge production capacity. Instead of that, we're seeing their film prices rising steadily and lately even becoming more expensive than their direct competitors (Ilford) in some cases. Of course, they are free to charge whatever they want in order to stay afloat, but at some point loyal customers may consider other products. I personally find it much more likely to buy a bulk roll of HP5+ than continue using 400TX.
If someone wants lower bulk film and other film prices from Kodak Alaris, just get 10,000 or so of your closest photographer friends together and try to work a deal on a distribution agreement and a huge bulk order buy.
So far, Kodak Alaris hasn't failed at all. The market defines what's reasonable. Since Alaris claims its film sales have increased, its customers have by definition declared its prices to be reasonable.
Given the volume of still film sold today, I'd expect higher prices from Kodak than its competitors, specifically because of Eastman Kodak Bldg. 38's huge production capacity.Again, given HARMAN's smaller and more agile coating line in Mobberley, that's exactly what I'd expect. Also, as noted previously, Kodak prices have risen steadily for decades.That's how the market sets prices. If enough customers continue to purchase Kodak-branded still film, the asking prices are just right. If you and a sufficient number of others stop and patronize HARMAN instead, given Eastman Kodak's cost structure, 400TX will be discontinued.
Simple supply and demand.
... And Kodak Alaris and Harman Technologies are to some extent at the mercy of their distribution network...
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?