Some speculation surrounding Kodak (nothing firm)

lxdude · Dec 13, 2010

Aaarrrrghhh!:eek:

I clicked somewhere and was taken to a page plastered with "SO KODAK"!

I didn't mean to. It just sorta happened.

I don't feel so good.

AgX · Dec 13, 2010

brian d said:
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

The content of that link is restricted to members of that site, perhaps you could sum it up, in case it is of interest. You yourself seem not so shure about that...

brian d · Dec 13, 2010

Did you read the comment's under the commercial garbage ?

Chris Nielsen · Dec 13, 2010

I'm not on Facebook, any chance of copying and pasting those comments in here so non-FB people like myself can read them?

Cheers

brian d · Dec 13, 2010

AgX said:
The content of that link is restricted to members of that site, perhaps you could sum it up, in case it is of interest. You yourself seem not so shure about that...

Oh! sorry about that!

<Brian Dotson So is Kodak dumping the Film division or not?
Friday at 6:27pm >

and the reply;

<<Kodak Hey Brian- No Kodak is not dumping the Film division. As long as customers continue to buy our film, we'll continue to make it.>>

hpulley · Dec 13, 2010

Can probably be qualified further to, "As long as ENOUGH customers continue to buy ENOUGH OF our film TO MAKE IT WORTH OUR WHILE, we'll continue to make A LIMITED PRODUCT SUBSET OF it."

railwayman3 · Dec 15, 2010

IloveTLRs said:
Ilford buying it - that would essentially guarantee us film forever

Would Ilford (or Fuji, for that matter) want to bother with Kodak....Ilford have their own comprehensive range of quality B&W products, a loyal customer base, and an element of diversification in their own ranges of inkjet papers and other non-photo products.

If Kodak pulls out, their customers would have to get their film somewhere, so Ilford and the small manufacturers would surely benefit with no outlay on their part?

IDK, pure speculation.

eclarke · Dec 15, 2010

Steve Smith said:
No one is going to buy just the film division to shut it down.

Steve.

No, but they might buy it to coat other things, inkjet paper, banner stock, etc....

Steve Smith · Dec 15, 2010

eclarke said:
No, but they might buy it to coat other things, inkjet paper, banner stock, etc....

They might buy a small part of it for that but I think it is too big to use as a whole for that type of coating. If it was viable, Kodak would be doing it themselves (perhaps they already are).

Steve.

msa · Dec 15, 2010

Get your wallpaper (or bath tissue) while you can:

Dead Link Removed

Jeff Kubach · Dec 15, 2010

What ever happens I geuss we have to deal with it!

Jeff

bblhed · Dec 15, 2010

It amazes me how people will complain about the way Kodak runs it's business and how they don't make the products that they like, and how they drop film types and then say "that's why I don't use Kodak film, I use (insert name of other brand)". Maybe if people were buying a given type of film Kodak would keep making it, I haven't seen a change in Kodak Gold in years, and they have literary made billions of disposable cameras, that should prove that they keep the products that sell.

If you like something that Kodak sells, buy it, use it, buy more, and tell your friends, they will only make products that they can sell in quantities that justify production costs.

I thought this was the Analog Photo Users Group, not the Complain About Kodak's Business Model chat.

ntenny · Dec 15, 2010

bblhed said:
I thought this was the Analog Photo Users Group, not the Complain About Kodak's Business Model chat.

Yeah, I think we need a dedicated "grousing about Kodak" subforum.

It doesn't seem like a prospective boutique manufacturer would have too much interest in Kodak's film division---as we've discussed here many times, the division is very much geared for production at a massive scale, and some of its biggest difficulties have to do with not being able to scale down. I'm not actually sure what the attraction would be for a buyer, unless they wanted to do pretty much what Kodak is already doing: make and sell lots and lots of film.

Which, you know, would be kind of a good thing!

-NT

railwayman3 · Dec 15, 2010

bblhed said:
If you like something that Kodak sells, buy it, use it, buy more, and tell your friends.

I did. It was something called Kodachrome.

eclarke · Dec 15, 2010

Me too, TMY and TriX. 4x5, 5x7, 8x10 but now a lot of that's gone...EC

msa · Dec 15, 2010

ntenny said:
It doesn't seem like a prospective boutique manufacturer would have too much interest in Kodak's film division---as we've discussed here many times, the division is very much geared for production at a massive scale, and some of its biggest difficulties have to do with not being able to scale down. I'm not actually sure what the attraction would be for a buyer, unless they wanted to do pretty much what Kodak is already doing: make and sell lots and lots of film.

Kodak isn't going to want the division, the responsibility for spinning it down, or the environmental liability.

And a prospective buyer isn't going to want anything but the formulations. Easier to start small and scale up, than start huge, and scale it down to where it's a workable long term proposition.

I don't see Kodak letting go of those without a purchase of everything film, and even then, they might say 'no,' because they want to be a holding/licensing company rather than one that actually does something.

Pretty sad state of affairs really. In the end they may forfeit it all by expecting too much for any part of their film assets.

brian d · Dec 15, 2010

msa said:
I don't see Kodak letting go of those without a purchase of everything film, and even then, they might say 'no,' because they want to be a holding/licensing company rather than one that actually does something.

Pretty sad state of affairs really. In the end they may forfeit it all by expecting too much for any part of their film assets.

Very sad, and it seems to be the only big companies will do anything now days

aldevo · Dec 18, 2010

I think that - with this buyout rumor coming near the end of the year - it would suggest a private equity deal.

I can only guess that the buyer would break up the company and that they already have a plan for the film division.

I would expect that if there is a deal to be made for EK that it would be concluded behind closed doors for year-end and then announced early in 2011.

Just speculation on my part, but lots of private equity buyouts DO happen this time of year for tax reasons.

EK has been the subject of buyout rumors since 2004 but the timing of the deal along with the pervailing opinion that debt-financed deals are as cheap as they are likely to be for the foreseeable future has me thinking this time it COULD be different and there is some substancce to the rumors.

BrianL · Dec 18, 2010

Only products I bought religiously of Kodak was Tech Pan and Kodachrome 25. I'm not much of a color negative shooter and when I do, I usually run down and buy what is on a dealer's shelf that usually is Kodak but, there was never a loyalty for their color negative film. I am getting used to the b&w c-41 film but it has taken time.

If I were the Kodak board I'd see if I could convert from a dying industry to free up cash to develop and rebirth itself even if without an imaging division of any nature. Possibly r&d and patent licensing. I've seen a few companies that were on the back side of the slide do this and years after they would have gone out of business, they are thriving but not in the industry that they grew up in.

I could see them getting out of the business through a stock sale to help remove any issues with hazardous chemicals and EPA claims.

msa · Dec 18, 2010

It's very easy to be labeled a "responsible party," by the EPA, regardless of equity changes you make.

That is a rather sticky wicket, and is a major obstacle to any deal. Doesn't mean it won't happen, but it could be considerably harder to shed or transfer that liability than people realize.

Curt · Dec 19, 2010

That's an easy one, Kodak isn't responsible for anything, they've been working up an insanity defense for a almost a decade. What do they have that I need? Nothing. What to they have that I use? KRST. What could they make that I'd want? Panatomic-X in all sizes from minox to 20X24, Azo paper in all sizes from 2 1/4 to 20X24. What do they have that I would go out of my way to avoid? Anything digital.

Remember those Polaroid DVD players?

2F/2F · Dec 19, 2010

Curt said:
What to they have that I use? KRST.

I thought that was discontinued some years ago. Am I wrong?

Michael W · Dec 19, 2010

2F/2F said:
I thought that was discontinued some years ago. Am I wrong?

I've bought KRST from Freestyle recently, although I suppose it's put out by whatever 3rd party does the Kodak chems these days.

pgomena · Dec 19, 2010

20 years ago, the only film I used was Kodak. I used color and black-and-white, transparency and negative, sheet and roll formats. Today, I use only their color negative films, and that represents about 10% of my film consumption.

I've found Ilford and Fuji films fulfill all my B&W needs and I am very satisfied with their products. Kodak offers me little incentive to use their B&W products. If they discontinue their color negative films, I will buy a digital camera that will fill that small niche in my work, and I won't care. I will put my B&W film budget toward those manufacturers' products that I trust will be around the longest.

20 years ago Kodak still was the dominant player in the world photography market. For them to downsize to a boutique film production company won't work for them, and it probably would be too big for anyone to easily take over. It's not just the production, it's the R&D, all the engineering and chemical work, all the behind-the-scenes work that makes the machines put out the quality of product we demand. I don't have an answer for any of this, I just know that as a small-consumption end-user, I'm screwed. And I need a bigger freezer.

Peter Gomena

cmacd123 · Dec 20, 2010

Perspective is needed. The "biggest" product these days is probaly still Motion Picture release print film. a 2 Hour movie requires 11,000 feet of the stuff for each theatre. When a Movie opens in 200 conventional theatres. ten Pallets (more or less) of 2383/3383 are used by the lab making the prints.

All the Tri-x all 46000 members of APUG use in a year probably would fit on one pallet with room to spare if it was in the same 6000 ft rolls.

Some speculation surrounding Kodak (nothing firm)

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency