What's with Kodak film pricing?

[BrianShaw]

Well said about the middlemen.

 

[Xmas]

To those expressing anger and frustration with Kodak (and other film manufacturers): "To be, or not to be, that is the question". 'Tis better for Kodak to be, IMO, and if Kodak believes raising prices is their only way survive then so-be-it. It's unfortunate that some folks may be unable continue buying their products. But please consider this: The world's wealth is cyclical. At this time, China is rapidly becoming the new world champion of wealth and prosperity... not to all who live there but that's the way it's always been everywhere in the world. There will always be those so vastly wealthy that US$100K means nothing to them and they'll waste that much every day. Others suffer at the loss of a dollar or two. Everything in this world is getting pricier. And very few peoples' incomes are keeping up with these cost increases. Kodak and every other manufacturer is just trying to survive. Believe me, they very carefully consider their profit margins and weigh these against how much they think they can get for their goods vs. sales volume. It's a tricky balancing act. And yes, they're going to maximize their profits rather than lose millions or billions in revenue just so we little folk can have our cheap film. As a corporation that's responsible to its shareholders, this is precisely what they must do. Kodak is certainly not the only corporation doing this balancing act. Everyone here knows that every single corporation does this. Anyone who believes Kodak should be a 'nice guy' and lose money out of the kindness of it's corporate heart... is fooling himself. And ranting about it is just useless bitching about not getting one's way.

The above stated: I say dump the damn middle-men. Often those are the crux of the sales volume v. pricing problems. They're friggin' leaches.

The problem here bulk is x3 times the price it should be so there is no point in buying bulk.
Maybe I might buy Kodak if it was cheaper but three times is not cheaper.
Kodak need volume or Tx is like Plusx.
Does not worry me.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Well said, except comment about middle-men. The reason they exist in so many industries is they are needed.

B&H, Freestyle and other end suppliers... yes, we need them. The regional distributors... hell no. retailers should buy direct from Kodak rather than deal with regional middle-men who absorb yet more profits and drive prices higher. They're virtually useless leaches, IMO. Kodak should never have formed that distributional process. They can still end it now.

 

[BrianShaw]

Kodak would then have to provide facilities and staff do that function. That costs and that gets passed to you. Somebody needs to do that function and the need to get paid for it.

Grocery stores aren't really buying from the farmers because the farmers can't support that part of the business. And other examples are legion.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Kodak would then have to provide facilities and staff do that function. That costs and that gets passed to you. Somebody needs to do that function and the need to get paid for it.

Grocery stores aren't really buying from the farmers because the farmers can't support that part of the business. And other examples are legion.

When I put a slice of bread in my toaster, that toaster is not directly connected by a long extension cord to the enormously massive turbine generators at Grand Coulee Dam.

The electricity from those units must first be routed over a distribution network covering the entire Pacific Northwest, and in summer all the way down to California. That distributed power must then be picked up by the regional public utility districts who have built out the infrastructure to route it to less massive substations where it is pre-processed for consumption by passing through various transformers and other devices.

From those substations it is then further physically distributed to homes and businesses where it again passes through additional voltage-reduction transformers and is eventually connected to the input meter at my house. It then passes through my own home distribution network—built out by the professional electrician who originally wired my house during construction—and into the socket in the wall where I plug in my toaster.

Expecting the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (the dam operator) to handle all of that distribution and transformation and delivery and usage tracking and billing and ongoing infrastructure maintenance for literally millions of individual customers and their toasters is just a little bit unrealistic, I think.

Same for film manufacturers...

Ken

 

[BrianShaw]

Home water wells and septic tanks may be the exceptions.

 

[Prof_Pixel]

Kodak should never have formed that distributional process. They can still end it now.

The multi-level distribution process goes back years and years. When I worked in a photo store in the early '60s, we were a Kodak direct dealer. Our cost per roll of film depended on the dollar volume of our film sales in the previous year. If I remember correctly, there were at least 4 or 5 pricing levels. There was also a small distributor in town who sold things like candy bars, popcorn, etc. to drug stores and 'mom and pop' stores. They also sold Kodak film to these stores. On the rare occasion we ran out of a film and couldn't get it from Kodak quickly enough, I'd pick it up from them at a higher cost than out Kodak direct cost. There was no way Kodak could have afforded to sell directly to these stores.

 

[gzinsel]

I am tired and frustrated with 1. the speed of change needed, and 2. the correct "change" to maintain a healthy film inventory for all of us to use. pardon my rants. most of which i said was inexcusable and rude, based on silly nonsense. But I still think kodak as a culture; its top concerns are NOT about film or maintaining a film user community.

 

[MattKing]

When people rant about the cost of bulk film, with its separate requirements for packaging and edge printing, I'm led to think that they believe that it is the cost of film manufacture itself that controls prices.

Some might recall a post here on APUG from Simon R. Galley of Ilford where he confirmed that it costs them more to buy the backing paper for 120 film than it does to make the film.

So many of the costs involved in bringing film to the consumer are surprising, and volume based.

Look at the change in prices for Kodak film in Japan - huge changes, during a period of time when there is no indication that Kodak's wholesale price, FOB Rochester, New York have changed at all.

 

[NB23]

No, I don't think so.

Here in the store, they take that same bunch of unsold boxes and apply a new pricetag on it, month after month. The supplier has nothing to say.

 

[Matus Kalisky]

I can very well understand that for many the changes in pricing of film available today had made it increasingly difficult to keep shooting it and is source of disappointment and frustration. However one needs to realise that with shrinking user base these companies can not increase their sales by paying the price down - on contrary, they are mostly forced to keep raising their prices to keep running. Of course that they start to loose some of their customers on the way and it is pretty much a loose-loose situation for them. It the long run it probably means that we will see one or another film maker giving up, but I hope that the situation will stabilise at some point and we will be left with more than one film making company.

On a lighter note - my film expenses decreased drastically since our little girl was born (though our total expenses increased significantly)

 

[Prof_Pixel]

But I still think kodak as a culture; its top concerns are NOT about film or maintaining a film user community.

It's top priority is surviving as an imaging company; not worrying about someone who hasn't bought any product from them in the past 15 years and is proud about it.

 

[NB23]

Guys, please stop trying to justify Kodak's stupid pricing. It makes no sense.
Kodak was the world worst managed company in the world.

 

[Pioneer]

Guys, please stop trying to justify Kodak's stupid pricing. It makes no sense.
Kodak was the world worst managed company in the world.

But they still make some damn fine films.

I like them therefore I buy them.

But it is certainly fun to whine once in awhile.

 

[gzinsel]

If Kodak, like other film companies, made an effort, I too would return to buying kodak and be a loyal customer. I do not care about their "imaging company"!!! I care about film. When they care about film, i too can care about them. When I want to buy a new woodworking hand tool:I buy Lie -Nielsen, because of high quality and excellent customer service!! Because L-N cares!!! not Stanley( they don't care!!) because their new stuff is junk and poor customer service. If Stanely started making quality again. . . . . You bet. . . I would take notice!!! IF/When Kodak is interested, and making a serious effort to engage. . . . in coming back to the people who helped them the first time around ( film users) then I too will take notice. They ditched me before I ditched them. I think they take all film users for granted. . . I think film is the last thing they care about!! second to last thing!! the first one being me!!! boo hoo hoo. Poor little ol'me!@!! looks like its off to Ilford and Foma and Agfa for my purchase.

 

[Pioneer]

If Kodak, like other film companies, made an effort, I too would return to buying kodak and be a loyal customer. I do not care about their "imaging company"!!! I care about film. When they care about film, i too can care about them. When I want to buy a new woodworking hand tool:I buy Lie -Nielsen, because of high quality and excellent customer service!! Because L-N cares!!! not Stanley( they don't care!!) because their new stuff is junk and poor customer service. If Stanely started making quality again. . . . . You bet. . . I would take notice!!! IF/When Kodak is interested, and making a serious effort to engage. . . . in coming back to the people who helped them the first time around ( film users) then I too will take notice. They ditched me before I ditched them. I think they take all film users for granted. . . I think film is the last thing they care about!! second to last thing!! the first one being me!!! boo hoo hoo. Poor little ol'me!@!! looks like its off to Ilford and Foma and Agfa for my purchase.

This is getting a bit crazy.

First off, Stanley tools work just fine if you are willing to put a little of your own effort into tuning up the tool. Your Lie-Nielsen costs a bunch more money. Which kind of makes them the Kodak of the tool world...right?

Second, it was because they were hoping that the film users would continue to buy their high margin film that Kodak got in trouble in the first place. It doesn't seem that you or I bought enough to keep them out of bankruptcy.

Third, I think that Alaris handles the film side now, not Kodak. All Kodak does is make it. Alaris handles pricing and all the rest. So it appears you may be ranting at the wrong company.

Fourth, Ilford, Foma, Agfa and all the rest make some terrific films so you should be happy.

Finally, Kodak is really a bunch of people. Some of them run the company, some of them sweep the floors. I personally think that you are doing a bunch of them a serious disservice by insisting that they do not care about the film, or other products they make and sell.

 

[Xmas]

Hi Dan

Your points are well made.
But here Tx and HP5+ in 135 and 120 are within a few pennies.
But there is a factor of x3 for bulk.
As well some volume outlets don't stock Kodak mono but do stock Ilford.
Last time I bought 5222 it was cheaper to buy 400 foot than 100 foot of Tx.
So KA who are local to these shops don't seem to be terribly aware, or the volume of bulk was too low so they increased price any way.
KA staff are ex EK staff.
The UK is neither a large % of stills market and bulk is smaller fraction still, but sales are important.
I only buy 135 when I run out on a week end shoot.
The only shops (a large pharmacy chain) open are the ones that don't stock Kodak mono.
Not my fault.
Fuji are hurting Nikon and Canon sales domination, Kodak stopped Retinas aeons ago.

 

[georg16nik]

The market will figure out whether Kodak's pricing is realistic or will further aggravate their brand position.

 

[removed account4]

SNIP SNIP SNIP

Now only the wealthy can afford the product.

naah, they have just narrowed their market down to people who want to spend the extra $$ to
get some of the best film in the world currently being produced. one doesn't need to be wealthy to buy a few rolls here or there
or a bulk roll, or a box of sheet film, one just need want to buy it. ( maybe save and splurge, find the best price online?)
its like suggesting a regular person can't afford a car like a bmw or benz or infinity, or lex, or other "high liner" if they really want one ...
there are plenty of ways non-rich people can afford to drive those nice vehicles ( rent, lease, buy with $$ borrowed from a bank, buy 2nd hand off lease &c ) ...

YMMV

 

[BrianShaw]

Oh, cr@p... Ramen and oatmeal. Not again. The memories bring much pain.

 

[Sirius Glass]

To those expressing anger and frustration with Kodak (and other film manufacturers): "To be, or not to be, that is the question". 'Tis better for Kodak to be, IMO, and if Kodak believes raising prices is their only way survive then so-be-it. It's unfortunate that some folks may be unable continue buying their products. But please consider this: The world's wealth is cyclical. At this time, China is rapidly becoming the new world champion of wealth and prosperity... not to all who live there but that's the way it's always been everywhere in the world. There will always be those so vastly wealthy that US$100K means nothing to them and they'll waste that much every day. Others suffer at the loss of a dollar or two. Everything in this world is getting pricier. And very few peoples' incomes are keeping up with these cost increases. Kodak and every other manufacturer is just trying to survive. Believe me, they very carefully consider their profit margins and weigh these against how much they think they can get for their goods vs. sales volume. It's a tricky balancing act. And yes, they're going to maximize their profits rather than lose millions or billions in revenue just so we little folk can have our cheap film. As a corporation that's responsible to its shareholders, this is precisely what they must do. Kodak is certainly not the only corporation doing this balancing act. Everyone here knows that every single corporation does this. Anyone who believes Kodak should be a 'nice guy' and lose money out of the kindness of it's corporate heart... is fooling himself. And ranting about it is just useless bitching about not getting one's way.

B&H, Freestyle and other end suppliers... yes, we need them. The regional distributors... hell no. retailers should buy direct from Kodak rather than deal with regional middle-men who absorb yet more profits and drive prices higher. They're virtually useless leaches, IMO. Kodak should never have formed that distributional process. They can still end it now.

I agree with these comments. Yes, middle men are necessary but without too many layers.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

its like suggesting a regular person can't afford a car like a bmw or benz or infinity, or lex, or other "high liner" if they really want one ...
there are plenty of ways non-rich people can afford to drive those nice vehicles ( rent, lease, buy with $$ borrowed from a bank, buy 2nd hand off lease &c ) ...

YMMV

Yup. I bought my 2009 BMW in mid 2010 as an "executive demo" with 7k on it. Sticker was $45k, I got for $32k with 3.5 more years left on the warranty. Can be had now from a dealer in excellent shape and low miles for about $16k. One person admired my ride the other day and asked how much. When I told her what year it was and what the blue book was from a dealer she flipped thinking I was driving a $40k car.

If new film is too much people can have patience and buy expired or slightly expired from here or elsewhere and stock up their freezer. The days of pros dumping their freezers full of film and getting it for $1 a roll on eBay are gone (and are in MY freezer!) but you can still get it for 20-50% less than buying new fresh film.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Yup. I bought my 2009 BMW in mid 2010 as an "executive demo" with 7k on it. Sticker was $45k, I got for $32k with 3.5 more years left on the warranty. Can be had now from a dealer in excellent shape and low miles for about $16k. One person admired my ride the other day and asked how much. When I told her what year it was and what the blue book was from a dealer she flipped thinking I was driving a $40k car.

If new film is too much people can have patience and buy expired or slightly expired from here or elsewhere and stock up their freezer. The days of pros dumping their freezers full of film and getting it for $1 a roll on eBay are gone (and are in MY freezer!) but you can still get it for 20-50% less than buying new fresh film.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Quoted for truth...

This is getting a bit crazy.

First off, Stanley tools work just fine if you are willing to put a little of your own effort into tuning up the tool. Your Lie-Nielsen costs a bunch more money. Which kind of makes them the Kodak of the tool world...right?

Second, it was because they were hoping that the film users would continue to buy their high margin film that Kodak got in trouble in the first place. It doesn't seem that you or I bought enough to keep them out of bankruptcy.

Third, I think that Alaris handles the film side now, not Kodak. All Kodak does is make it. Alaris handles pricing and all the rest. So it appears you may be ranting at the wrong company.

Fourth, Ilford, Foma, Agfa and all the rest make some terrific films so you should be happy.

Finally, Kodak is really a bunch of people. Some of them run the company, some of them sweep the floors. I personally think that you are doing a bunch of them a serious disservice by insisting that they do not care about the film, or other products they make and sell.

The market will figure out whether Kodak's pricing is realistic or will further aggravate their brand position.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Regarding Kodak bulk film costing more...

If more people bulk-loaded their film the cost would go down. Apparently, bulk loading has lost favor over the last several years so sales have dropped. Therefore, price per foot increases.

Think about it. Let's use toilet paper as an example. If you owned a manufacturing company that sold TP in two different formats... common 100 foot rolls and 3,000 foot bulk rolls of the same product. Packaging, labeling, warehousing, delivery, etc. are all different. Let's say your company sells one billion rolls of the six inch variety but only ten rolls of the bulk variety. Yes, I know this is extreme... just trying to make a point.

In that scenario, would your corporation charge less per linear foot of the bulk rolls of TP? I hardly think so. If it were my company I'd have stopped offering the bulk rolls long ago and suffered the 'slings and arrows' of the mighty ten upset customers who come pounding on the front gates of my factory demanding I cater to their wants and sell my products at a loss. Tough decision? I think not.