MattKing
Moderator
I was thinking more in terms of consultation and exchange of scientific and technical information - the stuff that isn't proprietary.
If you think about it, restricting the use of the motion picture film actually helps Harman sell their colour film, since it reduces the number of alternatives.
I was thinking more in terms of consultation and exchange of scientific and technical information - the stuff that isn't proprietary.
Aw, go on - that's fraternizing with the enemy
It depends on how you use the term "monopoly".
The definition I tend to use is essentially this one:
"monopoly: exclusive control of a particular market that is marked by the power to control prices and exclude competition and that especially is developed willfully rather than as the result of superior products or skill"
That of course comes from the sort of approach that anti-trust legislation is founded upon.
I see no effort on the Kodaks' part to "exclude competition". The fact that they (in EK's case) actually seem to make film for the entity that is their major colour film competitor argues the opposite.
I wouldn't be the least surprised to learn that the Kodaks are supportive of Harman's work with Phoenix - because success there will expand the user base, and a significant percentage of that base would consider spending more for "better" film.
Kodak does not have a monopoly.
People can switch to other manufacturers or to digital.
Besides, the reflection of @JPaker on price elasticity makes good sense - although we cannot strictly speaking know whether Alaris is deliberately testing it. I've offered a similar argument a few times before on the forum and in the same context. https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...o-focus-on-moving-forward.196708/post-2637328
Kodak went bankrupt because of digital.
Kodak isn't stopping competition. There are dozens of film companies that can make color film if they wish.
And no one has claimed that Kodak Alaris is responsible for the monopoly situation. But they are responsible for exploiting this situation by massive price increases. And they are responsible for damaging the film revival in many emerging markets (see my explanations concerning the very important Asian markets).
I don't like the prices of film going up, but I much prefer what we have now than no colour film. If colour film was 5 EUR there would be no Inoviscoat, Adox, Harman, Lucky... colour film.
To be fair, no one has done more damage than Fuji. If it wasn't for Alaris (which enabled Kodak film production to continue and is now expecting to get paid for that) colour film would be effectively dead.
- Fujifilm has now a de-facto monopoly in silver-halide RA-4 photo paper. But despite that they have kept their prices extremely low. No monopoly mark-up at all.
This is (1) because the pressure of substitute products is far larger than on color film, (2) the bargaining power of a small number of major customers is massive, (3) manufacturing volumes are still very significant, (4) it's a simpler product than CN film, and a few more reasons. Comparing these quasi-monopolies is really comparing apples & oranges.
That is a narrative often told, but nevertheless it is wrong. Kodak has been one of the most active and dominant players in digital imaging in the first decade of this century.
They produced digital sensors by their own, and were even market leader with digital cameras in North America with their Easy Share camera line.
Their problems were not caused by digital in general, but by wrong decisions in running the business as a whole. For example very profitable business units (like chemical manufacturing) have been sold, instead of keeping it.
No, there are not dozens of film companies that can make color film (there is not even one dozen being able to produce BW film).
Besides Kodak, Fujifilm (instax) and Polaroid are producing very high volumes of color film (but no color negative film at the moment).
InovisCoat is producing tiny amounts of CN film. Same for Harman technology.
Lucky: We will see.
Film Ferrania and Adox have at least the (long-term) potential to produce color film. But also only in very small amounts.
That's it.
So there is definitely no "dozens" at all. Not even one single dozen.
None of us like it in film or anything else but the point of the this phase of the discussion is whether (a) Kodak is in a monopolistic position and (b) is this being exploited either right now or leaves the consumer vulnerable in the future to such action
What is likely to be the case or is in my opinion is that Kodak like any other company is in the business of maximising its profit and it is that aspect of business behaviour in a monopolistic situation that is a real worry
I wonder, as may yourself, what the price of energy, water, etc would be if it was in the control of one company.
Now this is an extreme example, you may say, using the essentials of life and film is not one of them. I'd have to agree but while consumers may not be in the position of having to pay any price to stay alive in the case of film, a monopolistic position does give any company far greater scope to charge prices that exploit customers and is beyond what is required for the business to be viable
pentaxuser
Yes Eastman Kodak developed and even marketed digital. But their heart and wealth was in film. The people at Kodak fought digital to preserve their film advantages and markets. The loved film much like many of the photographers here.
Nevertheless Fujifilm has not exploited that lucky situation (for them) by big price increases.
Based on what I learned about this market, also in direct contact with people at Fuji, the points above do not accurately capture the present dynamics in this market. There has been at least one fairly dramatic price increase about a year ago. The pressure of substitute products is indeed very high as they truly are substitutes, and very attractive ones indeed. Moreover, those substitutes continue to improve w.r.t. quality, availability and cost, while RA4 is stagnant quality-wise (it's a mature technology) while cost goes up and availability has gone down (reduction of manufacturing sites).And the pressure of substitute products (inkjet and thermo-transfer) is also not a "100% pressure", as these alternatives are not 100% substitutes because of their quality and cost limitations.
So you think it is fair to critize Fujifilm for serving the market with color negative film much much longer than Agfa, Konica, Ferrania and Lucky?
But I would not be surprised if Fujifilm is restarting their color negative film production next year. When their latest huge 30 Mio. $ investment in their (instax) film production is finished (due to their press release these factory upgrades should be completed this year).
- Fujifilm has now a de-facto monopoly in silver-halide RA-4 photo paper. But despite that they have kept their prices extremely low. No monopoly mark-up at all.
The price-performance ratio of RA-4 in general is unsurpassed and limits the attractiveness of potential alternatives.
Digital is a substitute for film. BW is a substitute for color.
I agree to 100%.
From my experience travelling especially in these SEA emerging markets, and talking there to film shooters, labs and film shops, the film revival has been really huge in these countries, with yearly growth rates for color film in the 20-40% range. And we are talking about markets with a total population of about 2 billion people.
This growth is now completely gone, killed by Kodak Alaris price increases. Even worse, the demand is declining now there.
Respooled film has been a way to at least attenuate the negative effects on demand in these markets. When this will not be possible anymore, too, the decrease in general film demand will be even more significant.
And both EK and KA will suffer from that in the mid- and long-term.
I've had the interesting experience of being a millenial that picked up film during the digital revolution and great recession, so bridge the experience of legacy cheap film with digital as a substitute to have become a very valued media for its qualities and flaws as well as getting high price increases post pandemic. I've never been a user of respooled film (except one roll of Cinestill 800T) so I have all but ignored ECN2 and still keep buying Brand Kodak C41. However, being a Medium format shooter limits this quite a bit.The fact that Kodak lost 95 plus percent of its film users to digital is, ipso facto, the proof it is not a monopoly. Just because there are a few die hard users of film still doesn't make it a monopoly and even they to a large degree will switch to digital if the prices get too high.
I bet it would be incredible if we'd tell that to the past! I recently saw an interview to the owner of a photographic chain, which paraphrasing him, Digital swept the business very quickly and swiftly and then came the 2008 crisis to nail the coffin. As it has been discussed elsewhere (I think even PE validated it), the Photographic industry had huge margins then and after all this time even standalone digital cameras have declined.If my Dad was still with us, and I told him that Kodak was making film for Fuji, he would be aghast!
It occurs to me that I don't know whether the Kodak lab he worked at for nearly a quarter century (as customer service manager) would have accepted a roll of E6 Fujichrome for processing.
I would love 220 for travel! Cinestill are in cahoots with EK, or have a special agreement at least for the remjetless manufacturing. IMO it's good they are filling the gap of Kodak branded chemistry as a distributor but their films are even more expensive than KA's own.And finally, the elephant in the room, CineStill. Yes, I believe they almost certainly had their finger in the pie. I do not like them as a company for reasons that are not relevant to the discussion. But I think it’s worth noting that, from what I’ve read and been told, no one will ever get bulk cine deals like CineStill. No one will ever get bulk pricing on any film like CineStill. Anyone who thinks otherwise hasn’t been paying very much attention.
Now that I’ve put that out there, I can go about enjoying my evening, hopefully figuring out a way to cut rollfilm backing paper that doesn’t require several thousand dollars of equipment.
Bless and hoping that Fuji come back in C41, with additional availability of E6 and not just cash cow Instax. As to the same lines at the beginning of the post, I tend to remember how in the late 2000s there were discussions around here about who would be the "last standing" film manufacturer; and at that time the odds were given to Fuji. Top of my mind, it seems Kodak brought back more color (roll) film products in the 2015-20s than Fuji. E100 and Gold 200 120 whereas Fuji progressively discontinued 160NS, 400H, Superia, etc. Not much is said to Jeff Clarke, the CEO who avoided the plan of Kodak's board to just shut down the whole film operation; Kodak film was to be no more if that had happened in 2014/5.So you think it is fair to critize Fujifilm for serving the market with color negative film much much longer than Agfa, Konica, Ferrania and Lucky?
The current monopoly situation is a result of the fact that all those five have not been able to continue production.
But I would not be surprised if Fujifilm is restarting their color negative film production next year. When their latest huge 30 Mio. $ investment in their (instax) film production is finished (due to their press release these factory upgrades should be completed this year).
At least Fujifilm as a monopolist is behaving much much more consumer friendly than Kodak Alaris:
- Fujifilm has now a de-facto monopoly in silver-halide RA-4 photo paper. But despite that they have kept their prices extremely low. No monopoly mark-up at all.
- Almost the same in instant film: Fujifilm has more than 90% market share. Nevertheless their instant films have become even much cheaper over the years (if you consider and calculate inflation, about 30% cheaper than 15 years ago!).
Yes Eastman Kodak developed and even marketed digital. But their heart and wealth was in film. The people at Kodak fought digital to preserve their film advantages and markets. The loved film much like many of the photographers here.
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?