Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Industry News' started by Prof_Pixel, Sep 15, 2012.
It's right on!
If they somehow were able to let go of Perez, who should replace him, or who would want to replace him?
"The Butcher of State Street..."
Wow. Hadn't heard that one before. This is getting really ugly.
How's this for a laugh? Back in February of 2011, he was nominated for President Barack Obama’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness.
"The White House noted that since joining the Kodak in 2003, Perez has led the worldwide transformation of Kodak from a business based on film to one based primarily on digital technologies"
i don't know thomas,
maybe the employees can buy the company
and have someone with VISION in charge ...
it is unfortunate that kodak is in the position it has found itself in
but unfortunately they seem to have lost touch with any ideas that
might lead them out of the dark and into the light ..
My vote is for PE to take the job.
Maybe Bain Capital needs to step in.
It would be nice if Kodak could do what Ilford did and just concentrate on scaled down film production. Return to its roots, as a much smaller company. Lose all the other baggage. But I don't see that happening.
In the vein of Sweeney Todd, the Demon Butcher of Fleet Street?
Antonio Perez, the demon butcher of State Street.
The president of Xerox is on the same council and for the same reasons. Xerox is doing the same thing as EK but more creatively. They sell a division to a foreign company and then the new owner lays off people. Nice?
I'll do it, and for only $500,000 a year!
A sign of the times,take a look at http://247wallst.com/2012/08/06/outrage-bonus-paid-to-kodak-ceo-antonio-perez/ sad but it happens to Much.
And that's just one of many articles stretching back years, something many of us have been constantly highlighting.
Perez has managed to do something nearly impossible.
He's equally pissed off film customers, digital customers, commercial customers, employees, retirees, suppliers, vendors, institutional investors, individual investors, engineers, marketers, PR people (what happened to Colleen??), middle management, Wall Street analysts, bankers, the citizens of Rochester, Paul Simon, my dog,* and just about everyone on APUG.
And he's still in charge after having been publicly labeled as one of the worst CEOs of the year.
Looking back, it's an astounding accomplishment, really...
* He used Kodachrome too.
Several years running.
The president of the US likes him and the EK Board likes him!
There is a whole raft of people that I know and like very much; that I would never hire.
Great people, lots of fun at a party. Would have the same business results as Perez.
Business, in the end, has to be business.
My point was that the board keeps Perez on, with ample evidence before them that he is apparently not competent.
The President of the US likes him on his "jobs" council, when in fact, Perez is laying people off and moving work overseas.
Having met Perez in person, I can say that he is a very pleasant person. Very much "presence" and very convincing. That last comment is very important in the present situation.
It doesn't matter. Firing Perez at this point would be like firing the captain of the Titanic after they've already hit the iceberg.
Throwing him off the sinking ship first, however, would no doubt provide some small satisfaction.
"Pérez was named president of Kodak on April 2, 2003. On May 19, 2005 Pérez was named CEO of Kodak after the retirement of Daniel Carp. On January 1, 2006, he became Chairman of the companys Board of Directors."
There was no one who could have stepped up and fired him? Emperor for life?
Kodak's assets are being undervalued, largely because the popular culture has fallen in love with all things digital. Witness the swoon over Apple products and the respect shown to Bill Gates. But what they've done is very much the same as Kodak's accomplishments: they have developed a huge bank of technological inventions which support the production of new, high quality consumer products. In the popular mind Kodak is viewed as the "telegraph" to digital photography's new-fangled "telephone". So the powers that be consign chemical imaging to the ash heap of history. But this is only because no one sees the chemistry involved in producing a digital image. Digital cameras are just glorified Autochromes which use a silicon light sensor instead of a silver emulsion. The photo-lithography used to produce both the screen that captures the image and the screen which displays it is well within the skill of an old school photo engineer; it is just a paradigm shift to think in terms of electrons moving through circuits, rather than electrons being transferred to molecules and producing oxidation products.
Consumers don't get hung up on the technologies used.
When I was making imaging technology presentations for Kodak (in the late '80s and early '90s) I used to tell people, "technology becomes a success when it becomes transparent to the user. You don't how to know how an automobile engine works to drive a car."
Some time around 2000, the technology became transparent and consumers started going digital for the CONVENIENCE and RESULTS, and NOT for the technology.
What? We're going to drug PE and trick him? I didn't think we were that cruel.
Let's be clear here. For the marketing-driven perception of convenience and results.
Marketing is like religion. If done correctly, the subject ends up believing in the truth of what they are told without ever questioning, or having any proof of, it's validity. By definition that's what faith is. Belief without proof.
They were told digital was easier and better by people who wanted to sell them that perception. The vehicle of those perceptions was irrelevant. This time around it just happened to be digital cameras. In years past it was microwave ovens because fire had become obsolete. So it's no surprise that then became the commonly quoted wisdom. And camera-puchasing pattern.
If the marketers had told them that colored pencils and sketchpads were the wave of the future, that their core inner self-validations rested on them making pictures using this new analog technology, then we'd be overrun by hipsters sitting on park benchs sketching the ducks on the pond. And being convinced to replace their colored pencils with new and improved upgrades every other day.
One of the benchmarks of a life well-lived is to finally reach the point of not getting fooled over and over and over, again...
I wondered why my coffee tasted funny. It made me dizzy too, so I dumped it. Good thing! Thanks Michael for the warning. I'll be more alert.
Ask Fred if he wants the job.