Statement from Harman Technology regarding recent sale to Pemberstone Ventures Ltd.

timparkin · Sep 17, 2015

Jerevan said:
But ay, there is the rub ... moving a plant like this is a pretty serious undertaking. It could cause some large disruptions in production, even when having some experienced people working on setting it up again, so where is the incentive to that in the shorter timescale?

I don't know why people haven't' taken a look at the other companies Pemberstone own. For instance

1) An Ethical Goods consulting company

2) Two companies that specialise in injection moulding, tooling and manufacturing facilities

3) A company who specialise in removing, transporting and reinstalling heavy plant machinery and process lines.

It just so happens that Andrew Barker, the CEO of Pemberstone is a major player in the Ethical Goods company. If you wanted a company that would take Ilford and run with it I can't imagine one looking better to be honest. It means they can move the company, know about how to acquire and use land and also consult in new tooling if needed.

It sounds like a fairly perfect match to me..

Tim

p.s. From AG-Photograph's post on FADU

"Managing director Peter Elton and finance director Andy Taylor will continue to run Harman following the deal. Pemberstone chief executive Mark Anslow and chairman Andrew Barker will join the Harman board."

So the sales director, Simon, has left. I wouldn't say this was the end of the world and he may have wanted to leave for various reasons. Retaining the Managing Director and Finance Director show enough confidence in the board from what I know of the corporate world (I've been on the board of a group of companies and have also built and sold my own company).

peter k. · Sep 17, 2015

My Gott is this still going on?

Well what should I shoot today.. Arista 400 or HP5+ ... hmmm ...

Got HP5 both in 35mm and 4x5.. ah what the 'ell... will take it all, and shoot what is right when I get dar,, where ever there is... like this thread... but a least something will be accomplished...

meanwhile , you guys carry on...

RobC · Sep 17, 2015

Bob Carnie said:
Actually a very good idea.. Deverre (Odessey Sales) make a digital enlarger that would accept silver paper which btw is compatible with digital exposure. Combine that expertise and now we have something of note for young users who have never used a film camera.

This type of acquisition by Pemberton would be an outstanding signal to the marketplace.

I'm not so sure about the Odyssey enlarger. First of all I don't think they make new analogue enlargers anymore. They refurbish old ones. i.e. there's probably already enough in the market place. Secondly that digital enlarger is hellish expensive which is not conducive to young people or old people buying it. It's really for collegs and graphics houses and a few businesses which find it useful. Thirdly, the lcd transmission array wiggles about to de-pixelise the image. i.e. It ain't ever going to be as sharp and detailed as analogue. And fourthly, max image size is limited becasue of the pixel array size. 20x16 is pushing it. That may be OK for many but not so good for others.

So yes it has its place but only for a few and not the masses (not that the masses amouint to many these days).

The LCD panel is only 17 megapixels. Do the maths, that won't even get you 300dpi at 20x16 and it wiggles about to de-pixelise.

RobC · Sep 17, 2015

Just to be contrary, it could be that those that have left are the ones who wanted sell and they just did it. The ones still there are maybe more hopeful.

It should be noted that the Harman / Ilford site sits approximately 1 mile short of the end of Manchester airport runway. The primary reason for planning application being rejected was because of noise levels under the take off/landing path of aircraft being above what is deemed environmentally acceptable for domestic housing. Air traffic at the airport is projected to rise fourfold. Getting planning to change the use from industrial to residential is going to require some serious snake oil lubrication. Do you see the problem...

Logically I assume the problem is also that there aren't the businesses to take leases on the available industrial land. So the land owners are in a pickle, the can't find people to take leases and they can't re-develop for housing. That may actually be very good news for Harman becasue their lease is likely to be renewed since the owners don't seem able to make money on it any other way. You would would think that with the proximity to airport, plenty of businesses in the export/import line would be looking for sites near to an airport (maybe not right under the flight path though).

AgX · Sep 17, 2015

RattyMouse said:
You dont know much about Ilford do you? Simon used to promise that "Ilford would be THE last one standing" in the film world.

That's pretty clear and unambiguous.

Agfa made the same statement. And both companies still are alive and making film.

But what "guarantee" can one deduce from such "promise"?

miha · Sep 17, 2015

Given the fact that Agfa still coats various light-sensitive emulsion I don't quite understand why don't they make a run of normally sentisized panchromatic emulsion every once in a while.

AgX · Sep 17, 2015

Agfa once made the decicision to leave the consumer field and they have not changed their mind.

After the unsuspected (?) demise of AgfaPhoto they could have changed their mind. Doing themselves what Maco did. But they refrained.
But nevertheless they are participating in consumer productions.

miha · Sep 17, 2015

They (Agfa) have six b&w emulsions (aviphot/avitone), one colour emulsion, a vario contast B&W paper and a RA-4 colour paper in ther portfolio under Speciality Products.

Sirius Glass · Sep 17, 2015

Simon Galley has been a great supporter in the past and I hope that he will stay around here in the future.

xo-whiplock · Sep 17, 2015

timparkin said:
I don't know why people haven't' taken a look at the other companies Pemberstone own. For instance

1) An Ethical Goods consulting company

2) Two companies that specialise in injection moulding, tooling and manufacturing facilities

3) A company who specialise in removing, transporting and reinstalling heavy plant machinery and process lines.

It just so happens that Andrew Barker, the CEO of Pemberstone is a major player in the Ethical Goods company. If you wanted a company that would take Ilford and run with it I can't imagine one looking better to be honest. It means they can move the company, know about how to acquire and use land and also consult in new tooling if needed.

It sounds like a fairly perfect match to me..

Tim

p.s. From AG-Photograph's post on FADU

"Managing director Peter Elton and finance director Andy Taylor will continue to run Harman following the deal. Pemberstone chief executive Mark Anslow and chairman Andrew Barker will join the Harman board."

So the sales director, Simon, has left. I wouldn't say this was the end of the world and he may have wanted to leave for various reasons. Retaining the Managing Director and Finance Director show enough confidence in the board from what I know of the corporate world (I've been on the board of a group of companies and have also built and sold my own company).

Thank you for the post and giving insight that helps to put this sale in context. I understand the mix of responses, but this one is the most helpful IMO (along with the more detailed press releases). Too bad this forum can't have an area of fully moderated content, where things are verified before going public, and also adhere to a base set of "quality" standards to be published publicly. A kind of "secure" area like we see inside companies and corporations.

flavio81 · Sep 17, 2015

xo-whiplock said:
Thank you for the post and giving insight that helps to put this sale in context. I understand the mix of responses, but this one is the most helpful IMO (along with the more detailed press releases). Too bad this forum can't have an area of fully moderated content, where things are verified before going public, and also adhere to a base set of "quality" standards to be published publicly. A kind of "secure" area like we see inside companies and corporations.

You want fully moderated content? For real? If this existed, then some of your posts in the thread you created, "Marketing and Advertising Photographic Film" would have never been approved to appear. Because they verged on trolling.

For the ones who don't remember:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Bottom line: People have the right to speculate on Ilford if they want to, because we're all concerned. If you only want to read peer-reviewed, quality content, go for the Encyclopedia Britannica.

Mike Crawford · Sep 17, 2015

timparkin said:
I don't know why people haven't' taken a look at the other companies Pemberstone own. For instance

1) An Ethical Goods consulting company

2) Two companies that specialise in injection moulding, tooling and manufacturing facilities

3) A company who specialise in removing, transporting and reinstalling heavy plant machinery and process lines.

It just so happens that Andrew Barker, the CEO of Pemberstone is a major player in the Ethical Goods company. If you wanted a company that would take Ilford and run with it I can't imagine one looking better to be honest. It means they can move the company, know about how to acquire and use land and also consult in new tooling if needed.

It sounds like a fairly perfect match to me..

Tim

p.s. From AG-Photograph's post on FADU

"Managing director Peter Elton and finance director Andy Taylor will continue to run Harman following the deal. Pemberstone chief executive Mark Anslow and chairman Andrew Barker will join the Harman board."

So the sales director, Simon, has left. I wouldn't say this was the end of the world and he may have wanted to leave for various reasons. Retaining the Managing Director and Finance Director show enough confidence in the board from what I know of the corporate world (I've been on the board of a group of companies and have also built and sold my own company).

Thanks for pointing out some positivity in the debate Tim. I had looked at the Pemberstone site but had not managed to go into details of many of their companies. I'm being eternally optimistic and hoping it will be a good thing in the end. Not much choice otherwise!

RattyMouse · Sep 17, 2015

flavio81 said:
You want fully moderated content? For real? If this existed, then some of your posts in the thread you created, "Marketing and Advertising Photographic Film" would have never been approved to appear. Because they verged on trolling.

For the ones who don't remember:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Bottom line: People have the right to speculate on Ilford if they want to, because we're all concerned. If you only want to read peer-reviewed, quality content, go for the Encyclopedia Britannica.

Well said.

xo-whiplock · Sep 17, 2015

flavio81 said:
You want fully moderated content? For real? If this existed, then some of your posts in the thread you created, "Marketing and Advertising Photographic Film" would have never been approved to appear. Because they verged on trolling.

For the ones who don't remember:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Bottom line: People have the right to speculate on Ilford if they want to, because we're all concerned. If you only want to read peer-reviewed, quality content, go for the Encyclopedia Britannica.

Not the whole site, just setup an area that requires a mod or admin to read it first before it can be posted. The "Partners" threads would be a very good place to implement a new policy of FULL moderation to protect the interest of the partners and members.

BTW, the link you give is a very good example of another area that should be protected. "Industry News" should be about industry news, that's what the OP was about, a RFC on "Marketing and Advertising" and none of the responses were appropriate as a response to the RFC.

RattyMouse · Sep 17, 2015

xo-whiplock said:
Not the whole site, just setup an area that requires a mod or admin to read it first before it can be posted. The "Partners" threads would be a very good place to implement a new policy of FULL moderation to protect the interest of the partners and members.

BTW, the link you give is a very good example of another area that should be protected. "Industry News" should be about industry news, that's what the OP was about, a RFC on "Marketing and Advertising" and none of the responses were appropriate as a response to the RFC.

I am so very glad you have zero say over APUG's policies.

alanrockwood · Sep 17, 2015

xo-whiplock said:
...Too bad this forum can't have an area of fully moderated content, where things are verified before going public, and also adhere to a base set of "quality" standards to be published publicly...

Now, where would be the fun in that?

MattKing · Sep 17, 2015

xo-whiplock said:
Not the whole site, just setup an area that requires a mod or admin to read it first before it can be posted. The "Partners" threads would be a very good place to implement a new policy of FULL moderation to protect the interest of the partners and members.

BTW, the link you give is a very good example of another area that should be protected. "Industry News" should be about industry news, that's what the OP was about, a RFC on "Marketing and Advertising" and none of the responses were appropriate as a response to the RFC.

I can think of so many responses that would get this thread bounced into the Soap Box so fast you would have little time to blink.

Sirius Glass · Sep 17, 2015

xo-whiplock said:
Not the whole site, just setup an area that requires a mod or admin to read it first before it can be posted. The "Partners" threads would be a very good place to implement a new policy of FULL moderation to protect the interest of the partners and members.

BTW, the link you give is a very good example of another area that should be protected. "Industry News" should be about industry news, that's what the OP was about, a RFC on "Marketing and Advertising" and none of the responses were appropriate as a response to the RFC.

What and take the ability to start wild rumors away from us?

Xmas · Sep 17, 2015

miha said:
Given the fact that Agfa still coats various light-sensitive emulsion I don't quite understand why don't they make a run of normally sentisized panchromatic emulsion every once in a while.

They used to, it did not sell...
It was nice film.

You need to be able to make so you can sell at a profit.

Making enlargers when you can get a used one for free is hard work, you need to identify a gap in market.

One of the releases indicates Ilford has 200 staff.

Henninger says Kodaks coater has 300 staff (memory?)

Kodaks Harrow UK coater made 400 people redundant when it was stopped, (2004 ish)

Maybe Ilford know what they are doing?

Sirius Glass · Sep 18, 2015

Why do people think that the engineers at Kodak, Ilford, Fuji, ... [insert others here] do not know what they are doing? With the exception of Antonio Perez who just wanted to turn Kodak into a computer printer company while destroying the rest of Kodak, the directors and managers want their companies to make a profit. They may make mistakes, but they do understand how to run a company; Antonio Perez not included with the rest of them.

xo-whiplock · Sep 18, 2015

MattKing said:
I can think of so many responses that would get this thread bounced into the Soap Box so fast you would have little time to blink.

I can think of so many responses that would make this thread so much more beneficial to those that read it.

Roger Cole · Sep 18, 2015

Yeahwell, if anyone were making those responses you are fantasizing about they apparently aren't here. And that means they wouldn't be here on a moderated forum either - no one is making them (whatever they might be.)

I pretty much avoid pre-moderated forums. For that matter I've been known to avoid some that are moderated only after posting but too heavy handidly. I avoided one astronomy forum for over a year for that reason (and no, it wasn't my posts that were disallowed.)

railwayman3 · Sep 18, 2015

paul_c5x4 said:
Limited Liability companies and most other registered businesses must register accounts with Companies House every year in the UK. For small businesses (sole trades, mom'n'pop corner stores), there is generally no requirement.

The information on most companies is publically available on www.companieshouse.gov.uk. Most sccounts and documents are now becoming available for free on their new Beta search system, all you need is the exact registered name of the company.

blockend · Sep 18, 2015

Sirius Glass said:
Why do people think that the engineers at Kodak, Ilford, Fuji, ... [insert others here] do not know what they are doing? With the exception of Antonio Perez who just wanted to turn Kodak into a computer printer company while destroying the rest of Kodak, the directors and managers want their companies to make a profit. They may make mistakes, but they do understand how to run a company; Antonio Perez not included with the rest of them.

Photographic companies had difficulty navigating the economic cliff film plummeted from in the years following the millennium. They were set up to make tens of millions of rolls, but that does not mean there isn't a viable business model making hundreds of thousands of rolls in a suitably downsized business. My suspicion is entrepreneurs believe there is a larger scale model to be had from film that does not risk the remaining core business but will increase profits. They may be absolutely correct in their assumptions, but I don't see it in the current climate. Film has been reinvigorated by Lomography (film as fun lifestyle item) and Harman Ilford (monochrome film as creative tool). If there's a third way we'll no doubt see it in good time.

xtolsniffer · Sep 18, 2015

I'm always suspicious of VC companies as they have the unenviable reputation of 'get in, make cash, get out' often to the detriment of the original company. On the other hand, let's be optimistic. They can smell money, which is why they got in in the first place. If there was no viable business model they wouldn't be in it. They can also bring investment. If they think that investing can bring greater returns, they will do it, which is perhaps what is needed. Ilford is a very strong brand. What other film manufacturer still has two emulsions in two formats still in the high street (my local small town has XP2 and HP5 in 35mm, sometimes FP4 too, and HP5 in 120 in the Boots shop)? My worry is that some unprofitable niche products would go because they are kept on despite making losses 'just for the love of it' by a committed board who use the products too. If the VC board members are sensible they will look at the community that uses Ilford products, which let's face it, are wonderful, and understand what we use, why we use it, and also understand that on the whole we are a grumpy lot who feel threatened and alienated due to an ever shrinking pool of increasingly expensive products. On the other hand, we are a dedicated bunch who love what we do and will carry on doing it until the last emulsion rolls off the production line. Then we'll start making our own. In our sheds. Let's hope they start some dialogue with the community, which Simon was so good at doing, but let's also hope they have a thick skin and can take it on the chin.

Statement from Harman Technology regarding recent sale to Pemberstone Ventures Ltd.

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency