Some speculation surrounding Kodak (nothing firm)

IloveTLRs · Dec 10, 2010

http://www.whec.com/news/stories/s1875306.shtml

Not a very positive article, I'm afriad (and not a great way to start the weekend, either.)

In a nutshell, there's been lots of activity with Kodak's stock and someone? thinks Kodak might sell its film business.

What are peoples thoughts on this? Does it have a bit of a barnyard aroma to it?

2F/2F · Dec 10, 2010

Maybe somebody who knows what to do with the division will get a hold of it, and it could be better for us. Or someone could get it and tank it even faster than it is going now. I am torn. My opinion would depend on who the buyer is.

dehk · Dec 10, 2010

As long as there is Tri X I'm good.

Paul Sorensen · Dec 10, 2010

I would welcome their selling their film division, because they are clearly not very invested in it themselves. No one will buy just the film division without plans or at least the desire, to make a go of it. Selling the company in its entirety does scare me, it reminds me of what happened to Polaroid, and that was very ugly.

There are lots of possible outcomes and many of them poor, but it does not look like there is much hope that Kodak will try to figure out how to survive as a boutique analog photo company while a buyer might actually be interested in trying.

brian steinberger · Dec 10, 2010

dehk said:
As long as there is Tri X I'm good.

Agree, and also the porta films. I would love to see Ilford purchase this and keep it going.

IloveTLRs · Dec 10, 2010

dehk said:
As long as there is Tri X I'm good.

Haha, that was my first thought

Ilford buying it - that would essentially guarantee us film forever

Eric Rose · Dec 10, 2010

What Kodak still sells film? I wouldn't know as I haven't used there stuff for decades.

CGW · Dec 10, 2010

Think you're all whistling in the dark. Film consumers are not their priority, as should be evident by now.

Sim2 · Dec 10, 2010

It's obvious that they are going to offload/rationalise the film and chem division - just as I get to use and like x-tol it will be sold and discontinued!!!

Ha!
Sim2.

Moopheus · Dec 10, 2010

Even if it's sold off, the bulk of the business would still be serving Hollywood, and not us. If it means the whole film/entertainment group, we'd still be bottom of the totem pole.

michaelbsc · Dec 10, 2010

IloveTLRs said:
dehk said:

As long as there is Tri X I'm good.

Click to expand...

Haha, that was my first thought

Ilford buying it - that would essentially guarantee us film forever

I wouldn't count on that. The FTC would probably consider it a monopoly and forbid it. From a regulator's point of view it is better that both companies starve and leave us no choice than that one company leave us one choice.

AgX · Dec 10, 2010

This is the 3rd thread about this issue.

Moderators, please merge.

patois · Dec 11, 2010

I thought their film business was neglected but still profitable? Especially their motion picture films for archiving? Selling of the film business would leave kodak with a bunch of unprofitable products in a field with high R&D costs. Sounds like their ruination.

michaelbsc · Dec 11, 2010

patois said:
I thought their film business was neglected but still profitable? Especially their motion picture films for archiving? Selling of the film business would leave kodak with a bunch of unprofitable products in a field with high R&D costs. Sounds like their ruination.

There is nothing illegal about being stupid.

lxdude · Dec 11, 2010

patois said:
I thought their film business was neglected but still profitable? Especially their motion picture films for archiving? Selling of the film business would leave kodak with a bunch of unprofitable products in a field with high R&D costs. Sounds like their ruination.

Their financial reports have repeatedly shown film carrying digital.
I think that's called 'milk it, baby!'

nickrapak · Dec 11, 2010

patois said:
I thought their film business was neglected but still profitable? Especially their motion picture films for archiving? Selling of the film business would leave kodak with a bunch of unprofitable products in a field with high R&D costs. Sounds like their ruination.

Well, the reasoning for them woild be to spin off the industry while it was still profitable (i.e. so someone would buy it). Perez still thinks that turning Kodak into HP is the best idea, and until he's kicked out, nothing good can happen with the business of film.

Laurent · Dec 11, 2010

As long as HP5 stays I'm good that is, after I've bitten the bullet and started using My-Tol...

R gould · Dec 11, 2010

Don't use any Kodak products these days, so as long as Ilford is here and producing the HP5 I realy don't much care about what Kodak does, they ost the plot and my business a long time ago,Richard

michaelbsc · Dec 11, 2010

nickrapak said:
patois said:

I thought their film business was neglected but still profitable? Especially their motion picture films for archiving? Selling of the film business would leave kodak with a bunch of unprofitable products in a field with high R&D costs. Sounds like their ruination.

Click to expand...

Well, the reasoning for them woild be to spin off the industry while it was still profitable (i.e. so someone would buy it). Perez still thinks that turning Kodak into HP is the best idea, and until he's kicked out, nothing good can happen with the business of film.

Agilent instruments are just as good as their HP predecessors. But the market share and brand stature are not there.

Anyone who couldn't learn from AT&T abysmal attempt to become a computer company a few decades ago deserves the rebuke the market will provide.

aldevo · Dec 11, 2010

lxdude said:
Their financial reports have repeatedly shown film carrying digital.
I think that's called 'milk it, baby!'

No longer true, I'm afraid.

Last quarter film barely broken even. The cinematic film division is now seeing plunging sales due to 3-D and raw material prices that were skyrocketing. Neither of these problems is likely to improve.

Income from licensing fees (e.g. OLED patents) is carrying Kodak at the moment.

aldevo · Dec 11, 2010

michaelbsc said:
I wouldn't count on that. The FTC would probably consider it a monopoly and forbid it. From a regulator's point of view it is better that both companies starve and leave us no choice than that one company leave us one choice.

I don't think the FDC would really care about this one way or another. It's a niche market and while it is a market that is dear to us, it is not going to affect the lives of most. It won't even be a blip.

It's wishful thinking that Ilford would buy Kodak's film division. Kodak's production infrastructure is now far too large (again) and Ilford itself has too much capacity.

From Ilford's point-of-view it would be best that EK's pictorial film division shut down operations entirely.

Steve Smith · Dec 11, 2010

aldevo said:
From Ilford's point-of-view it would be best that EK's pictorial film division shut down operations entirely.

No one is going to buy just the film division to shut it down.

Steve.

AgX · Dec 11, 2010

We saw that in Germany not that long ago.
(Or at least something that looks that way...)

Mustafa Umut Sarac · Dec 11, 2010

Stock prices are the same with film prices , film prices are going higher , stock prices are going lower.
What is the best investment ? I think They must make a film fresh until 2030.

brian d · Dec 13, 2010

Here is how kodak responded on FB ~as if that actually meant anything~
see the 2nd and 8th comments
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/kodak/posts/171763022857734?notif_t=share_reply

that was the response, not saying for a minute that I actually believe it

Some speculation surrounding Kodak (nothing firm)

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency