Kodak in financing deal to leave bankruptcy

Discussion in 'Industry News' started by zsas, Nov 12, 2012.

  1. zsas

    zsas Member

    Messages:
    1,962
    Joined:
    May 12, 2011
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
  2. ntenny

    ntenny Member

    Messages:
    2,284
    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2008
    Location:
    San Diego, C
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    The article says the deal would require selling the "personalized imaging" business, which IIRC includes the film portion. No knowing what it all means for film shooters until a buyer emerges...but who? I don't think I've seen any plausible guesses.

    -NT
     
  3. arpinum

    arpinum Member

    Messages:
    95
    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Location:
    DC
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I read the article as saying the financing was conditional on being able to successfully sell off the parts of this business which have been already put up for sale. So no big news on this front.

    The big news from the report is they have reached an agreement to be able to exit bankruptcy, lowering chances of liquidation. Still contingent on a couple of things though.
     
  4. Prof_Pixel

    Prof_Pixel Member

    Messages:
    1,356
    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2012
    Location:
    Penfield, NY
    Shooter:
    35mm
  5. RattyMouse

    RattyMouse Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,812
    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Location:
    Ann Arbor, M
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Kodak sales have not gone well recently. Any ideas why the sudden inability to sell off parts of the company? Previous to this autumn, there didnt appear to be any such problems.
     
  6. arpinum

    arpinum Member

    Messages:
    95
    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Location:
    DC
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Even before bankruptcy Kodak was trying to sell off these imaging patents. CEO Perez said over a year ago that they had a number of large tech companies interested in them. My guess he was trying to start up a bidding war, and didn't have any strong buyers. So this inability to sell assets is not a new thing.

    The film sale might have a hard time attracting buyers, as the buyer would only control distribution and marketing, not production. So not an actual hard asset up for sale, and I have a hard time thinking of a company where this arrangement would fit well. Maybe MAC Group?
     
  7. snaggs

    snaggs Member

    Messages:
    325
    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2005
    Location:
    Perth, Austr
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Whatever rises from the dead wont be Kodak. With just printers left, whats the difference to liquidation? I wonder if the personal imaging division gets to keep the kodak name when sold?
     
  8. RattyMouse

    RattyMouse Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,812
    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Location:
    Ann Arbor, M
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Agreed. The proposed scenario to sell off film makes almost no business sense. It's not a real sale in the traditional sense so that may be why no buyers are coming forward. I hope Kodak is thinking harder about ways to sell off ALL of the film business so that it can survive.
     
  9. Diapositivo

    Diapositivo Member

    Messages:
    1,844
    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    Location:
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I suppose however buys the "business" of Kodak film would certainly seek to use the Kodak name, and I don't see any difficulty in obtaining it. Kodak is already using its brand to market products of different technologies. By controlling the manufacture of the film they can also be certain that the Kodak name is not spent on something of low quality which would damage the other product lines.

    The Del Monte brand was used by at least three different firms in different parts of the world until a few years ago (I don't know about now). I mean really three firms licensing the brand to produce their own products. If one had made some big mistake it would have damaged the market reputation of the other two.
     
  10. lxdude

    lxdude Member

    Messages:
    6,922
    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Location:
    Redlands, So
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I wouldn't want to put 'Kodak' on my product and damage its reputation!



    Just kidding,but couldn't resist...
     
  11. Prof_Pixel

    Prof_Pixel Member

    Messages:
    1,356
    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2012
    Location:
    Penfield, NY
    Shooter:
    35mm
    A VERY cheap shot. There may be lots of things wrong with Kodak's current management, but NOT its product reputation.
     
  12. lxdude

    lxdude Member

    Messages:
    6,922
    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Location:
    Redlands, So
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Yes, it was a cheap shot, a joke. About its image these days as a woebegone bankrupt company.

    But I would be hesitant to put Kodak on a product other than film, because it's not really perceived all that favorably among much of the buying public here in the US these days. Its coefficient of cool isn't very good anymore. It has an image as being something from yesterday, like a Philco TV.
    Kodak does not have the cachet it used to have. Even my generation mainly remembers Kodak cameras as plastic Instamatics and Disc cameras, not as a maker of high quality items the way Canon, Nikon, etc. are.
     
  13. jk0592

    jk0592 Member

    Messages:
    70
    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2011
    Location:
    Canada
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    When i was young, any camera was referred to as a "Kodak". We had friends who had a Nikon Kodak. Times have really changed, but I hope we will still be able to buy quality films branded with the Kodak name for years to come.
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. lxdude

    lxdude Member

    Messages:
    6,922
    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Location:
    Redlands, So
    Shooter:
    Multi Format

    Same here. I have never found a defect on any Kodak film. My film of choice when they make what I need.
     
  16. RattyMouse

    RattyMouse Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,812
    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Location:
    Ann Arbor, M
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I've shot primarily Fuji, but also a lot of Ilford and Kodak. Never once have I seen a roll of film that had even the slightest problem with it. Amazing quality from the top 3 companies, for sure.
     
  17. RattyMouse

    RattyMouse Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,812
    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Location:
    Ann Arbor, M
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    More details released, that are new to at least me. Kodak has secured 800 million dollars in new financing, but MUST sell off their patents and consumer imaging divisions in order to secure the loans.

    So now we have a timeline so to speak of when Kodak will be out of the film business. At longest they have until mid 2013.

    "The deal, which still needs bankruptcy court approval, will come in the form of new loans from Centerbridge Partners, GSO Capital Partners, UBS (UBSN.VX) and JPMorgan Chase & Co (JPM), Kodak said in a statement. The financing is contingent on the company receiving at least $500 million for a patent portfolio it has been trying to sell for more than a year, Kodak said.

    The package should allow Kodak to emerge from bankruptcy in the first half of 2013, Antonio Perez, Kodak's chief executive, said in the statement.

    "The significance of this agreement for Kodak is that it establishes a clear path for our emergence as a stronger, more focused company," Perez said.

    Kodak will likely be a different company exiting bankruptcy than it was going in. In addition to selling its patent portfolio, Kodak must sell all or part of its document imaging and personalized imaging businesses in order to convert the loan into post-bankruptcy financing."
     
  18. Prof_Pixel

    Prof_Pixel Member

    Messages:
    1,356
    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2012
    Location:
    Penfield, NY
    Shooter:
    35mm
    They (Kodak) must also resolve outstanding issues with retirees in England
     
  19. Roger Cole

    Roger Cole Subscriber

    Messages:
    5,205
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Location:
    Atlanta GA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    So for our purposes, nothing has changed. The fate of the personalized imaging division is what's paramount for analog photographers.
     
  20. MattKing

    MattKing Subscriber

    Messages:
    15,216
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Except...

    If there plan to emerge from bankruptcy and continue to manufacture the film and paper is successful, then at least that source of high quality manufacturing will remain.

    That model is interesting - certainly it appears to in part be what Harman/Ilford is doing. I wonder what percentage of Harman/Ilford's manufactured output is not branded either Ilford or Kentmere?
     
  21. RattyMouse

    RattyMouse Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,812
    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Location:
    Ann Arbor, M
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I just dont see how anyone would want to get into bed with Kodak (buy their film selling operation but still rely on Kodak for the actual film) after seeing how incompetent Perez is the past many years. It seems like an awfully foolish business plan. But what do I know.
     
  22. Roger Cole

    Roger Cole Subscriber

    Messages:
    5,205
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Location:
    Atlanta GA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Maybe they'll make Perez's exit a requirement for the deal.
     
  23. Steve Smith

    Steve Smith Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,970
    Joined:
    May 3, 2006
    Location:
    Ryde, Isle o
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I suppose it's reasonable for the head of a large company to have his own entrance and exit!


    Steve.
     
  24. RattyMouse

    RattyMouse Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,812
    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Location:
    Ann Arbor, M
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Heh heh...now that's funny.
     
  25. lxdude

    lxdude Member

    Messages:
    6,922
    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Location:
    Redlands, So
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I don't know why they would keep Perez.
    What has he done to make anyone want to keep him? He's ridden along with the company as it spiraled down into bankruptcy, for most of that time assuring everyone that the company was ready to turn around. So why would anyone put faith in anything he says? I mean, looking at it rationally, not emotionally: is he the guy to trust now? If I were a potential investor I would not be inclined to put my faith in him.
    I am really baffled as to why he has lasted this long.
    Oh, well. What do I know? I'm just a guy who always had to perform well in my job to keep it.
     
  26. Diapositivo

    Diapositivo Member

    Messages:
    1,844
    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    Location:
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Probably someone would because "you push the button and they do the rest". Depends on tastes :smile: