• 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

Polaroid has "another" new owner

Procession

A
Procession

  • 2
  • 0
  • 65
Millers Lane

A
Millers Lane

  • 5
  • 2
  • 89

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
202,905
Messages
2,847,283
Members
101,532
Latest member
aduvalphoto
Recent bookmarks
1

david b

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Oct 20, 2003
Messages
4,026
Location
None of your
Format
Medium Format
Bankruptcy judge declares Hilco, Gordon Brothers winning bidders for Polaroid
A tumultuous auction for Polaroid Corp. ended last Thursday with a St. Paul, Minn., bankruptcy judge declaring liquidators Hilco Consumer Capital of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, and Boston, Mass.-based Gordon Brothers Brands the winner with a bid of $85.9 million in cash and equity, reports the Star Tribune. The joint venture's bid was nearly a half million dollars lower than Patriarch Partners', but the judge deferred to creditors who urged him to approve the joint venture's bid as the best choice because of protections it offers them as minority shareholders.
It was the third round of bidding for the photo icon since the bidding began March 30, with each of the top two bidders winning once, only to have the auction reopened each time. Patriarch Partners, a New York private equity firm, technically won the auction in court with its high bid of $86.4 million, but it could not prevail as the "highest and best" bid without the judge's final approval, says the article.
Hilco and Gordon Brothers have purchased other distressed companies, including Linens 'N Things, Bombay Brands, and Sharper Image.Their bid was significantly higher than the original bid of $43.58 million in March.
Both bids included 25 percent equity in the new Polaroid, the maximum allowed in the auction, but differed primarily on the cash amount, the equity structure and the value of excluded assets, reports the Star Tribune. Patriarch's bid included Polaroid's large art collection with original works by Ansel Adams and Andy Warhol. The Hilco group's bid did not. The collection was given an estimated value of $6.5 million in the auction, but New York auction house Sotheby's actually appraised the collection between $7.3 million and just over $11 million, according to testimony Thursday.
Stephen Spencer, a director at restructuring bank Houlihan Lokey Howard & Zukin, which handled the auction, testified that Hilco's proposed equity structure was more transparent, benefiting creditors. He also said Hilco's branding model would require less working capital than Patriarch's.
Polaroid filed for bankruptcy in December, shortly after Minnesota businessman Tom Petters was indicted on charges of running a $3.5 billion Ponzi scheme. Petters denies the charges and is preparing for a trial. Petters purchased Polaroid in 2005 for $426 million. The court-appointed attorney managing his estate filed an affidavit Monday saying Petters bought Polaroid with money he fraudulently obtained through his financing entity Petters Co. Inc., reports the Star Tribune.
 
Great news in some respects, but very unfortunate about all the people that were ripped off on the journey. Petters was an @$$ hat of the highest order. The wake he left was incredible and very far reaching, he deserves all he gets. Lets hope something good can come of it and maybe type 55 back on the map!!
 
ooooooooo......maybe they will bring back instant film....just dreaming...
 
so ...
the lady in the video that was posted a few weeks ago, a canadian group and now this group all bought the old polaroid?

it is very confusing all the sales of what was one company.
i can't remember what the lady and her company bought - the name?
the canadian company last week - the intellectual property ?
and these folks the rest of it ?

this is almost as confusing as the film rebranding schemes a few years back ...


will any of it matter ? or were they just buying the names to put on batteries and baby monitors?
 
Unfortunately I think at this point Polaroid is just a name and some assets, none of which are capable of making type 55. May Petters burn in hell.
 
I believe Patriarch indicated that they would challenge the decision in court, ("as high up as we need to" was the quote of the woman who owns Patriarch) This could still drag on unfortunately. Patriarch says there are a lot of technologies in Polaroid that they would like to develop and bring to market. You can bet that doesn't include Type 55 though!

Bob H
 
What a mess. Why can't we all just get along? Such foolish sentiments. Well we will all hope for the return of instanst film. I think they should put all the ponzzi folks in one cell and see how long they would last.

Michel
 
What a mess. Why can't we all just get along? Such foolish sentiments. Well we will all hope for the return of instanst film. I think they should put all the ponzzi folks in one cell and see how long they would last.

Michel

My thoughts exactly. Guantánamo Bay may be available soon. :wink:
 
What a mess. Why can't we all just get along? Such foolish sentiments. Well we will all hope for the return of instanst film. I think they should put all the ponzzi folks in one cell and see how long they would last.

Michel

Better still - put 'em in the general population - with minimal oversight!!

Bob H
 
Charge photographers $10 a minute to be alone in a cell with the Petters of this world...the amount of money raised will easily bring back Type55.
 
I don't know.

The number of people who might pay for that would, in the most 'optimistic' scenario, be the same as that of those who would buy Polaroid films.
Polaroid is where it is today, because the number of people buying Polaroid films is so low that it does not raise the amount of money needed for them to make and sell it.
So ...
 
I don't know.

The number of people who might pay for that would, in the most 'optimistic' scenario, be the same as that of those who would buy Polaroid films.
Polaroid is where it is today, because the number of people buying Polaroid films is so low that it does not raise the amount of money needed for them to make and sell it.
So ...

Actually the sales of many Polaroid products were quite strong. The instant division had succeeded in cutting costs and the plant functioned with a minimum of labor.

What killed Polaroid was a combination of criminal (literally) mismanagement in the upper echelons, and the unfortunate fact that the real estate that the plant occupied was more valuable as a commodity for the greedy bastards to exploit in their shady activities, than the small but steady income of a viable business. While the demand was not of course even near what it was in its heyday, and was never going to return to that, the fall in demand had leveled out, and adjustments had been made to ensure continued operation. Left to its own devices the instant film division could possibly have chugged on happily for quite a few more years.

Your summation is correct only in that the instant film division was no longer a cash cow juggernaut. The sad thing about business these days is that people have become so greedy and expectations have become so distorted that a reasonable conservative business is often viewed a failure. That has all come crashing down. It will be interesting to see if the necktie idiots and joe sixpack alike really learn anything, or if everyone will work towards and wait for the abnormal normal to return, sealing their fate, just as they sealed Polaroid's.
 
Ms. Tilton, the CEO of Patriarch had promised to bring back the instant film division. They are contesting the decision in court. I hope they win.
 
You have it Jason. Once we abandoned the idea of "making a decent living" is when we started the decline. Look at the little league field - the kids are essentially told that you're either No. 1 - or you're a loser.

If this keeps up, the only growth industry will be manufacturing barricades for the revolution!!!!!

Bob H
 
Is it just me, or does EVERYONE want to OWN Polaroid, but NO ONE wants to buy it's products??? What am I missing here?

paulie
 
......."you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone. They paved Paradise - put up a parking lot"...!!!

Bob H
 
Is it just me, or does EVERYONE want to OWN Polaroid, but NO ONE wants to buy it's products??? What am I missing here?

paulie

Since the physical equipment and buildings were sold some time ago (there was a post a while back about some company making flexible solar panels with it now), the only thing left is Polaroid's "intellectual property", eg, the patents they own.

My guess is somebody thinks some other companies will pay to licence one or more of those patents, or they think a company is already in violation of one or more of them, and want to sue or settle as soon as patent ownership is transferred/established. Other than Fuji, who exactly would pay and which patents specifically is an open question.

Since this joint venture isn't interested in Polaroid's art collection according to the article, which are the last tangible assets that I can see, this is the only scenario that makes any sense to me.

Pure speculation on my part, of course.
 
J Brunner makes an interesting point. I don't know about Polaroid in particular, but I once worked for a company whose company insiders gave themselves a deferred compensation package with a minimum payout worth more than the assets of the company.

Basically, being a company insider can be a license to steal, sometimes nominally legally, sometimes not.
 
Somewhere here someone mentioned that the fundamental Polaroid products have not been updated for nearly 20 years, and another remark was made that there have been no major improvements to such products in the same 20 years.

A search of the literature showed me that Kodak patents through the 80s and 90s on instant films exist and are still in force, and Fuji work is the most recent among the patent literature. Therefore, I have to assume that there is very little in the way of unique Polaroid intellectual property remaining in force FWIW. Fuji has a more modern technology and plant and makes as good or better product.

PE
 
TheFlyingCamera said:
Let the waterboarding commence.
Way too lenient Scott.

Better still - put 'em in the general population - with minimal oversight!! Bob H

That's much more fitting. And give them pink underwear too.

Fuji has a more modern technology and plant and makes as good or better product. PE

Right! Now, if they could just squeeze the sheet film, or even just Type 55, back into their business model.
 
Therefore, I have to assume that there is very little in the way of unique Polaroid intellectual property remaining in force FWIW. Fuji has a more modern technology and plant and makes as good or better product.

PE

No argument there, but apparently at least a couple of groups think Polaroid still has something valuable. Unless they think slapping the name on some more cheap electronics is worth that much.

What exactly becomes of Polaroid's tech after this will be interesting to see.
 
Right now, everyone seems to be underestimating the difficulty of getting the Polaroid products back into production and overestimating the ROI that would be achieved.

Information I have would suggest that the only value left is the name. Otherwise, pickings will be slim except for the property value and sale of equipment that remains as scrap.

PE
 
Fuji making a better product?

Many people feel that the peel apart Fuji color is better than the Polaroid version was. IDK myself. I know it is at least as good.

I also know that they have published recent articles and patents on instant product improvements.

PE
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom