PDA

View Full Version : Kodak clarification



Pages : [1] 2

Prof_Pixel
09-07-2012, 02:52 PM
Just posted on Facebook:

Kodak Professional

This to clarify some confusion regarding our still consumer and professional films. Our film manufacturing for all our business lines happens in the same factory. Therefore, we expect that whomever purchases the BUSINESS that sells our still consumer and professional films will create a supply agreement with Kodak. As we've also stated, we will be open to negotiating a licensing agreement.

What does this mean – this means the quality of the film you use today, whether it be PORTRA, EKTAR or any of our B&W films, will not change. We've always worked to ensure that we bring the best films to market.

donkee
09-07-2012, 03:01 PM
Shouldn't that read

What does this mean – this means the quality of the film you use today, whether it be PORTRA, EKTAR or any of our B&W films, will not change. We've always worked to bring the best films to be discontinued.

Couldn't resist. :p

DREW WILEY
09-07-2012, 03:58 PM
That was indeed a Jackass remark. The films Kodak currently supplies are simply superb. Maybe a favorite for one person or another has been discontinued due to relative lack of demand or other
logistical issues; but the sheer quality and versatility of what they are still currently offering is unsurpassed.

Ian Grant
09-07-2012, 04:10 PM
Thanks Prof_Pixel it's unusual to hve such honesty from ex Kodak employees on this forum.

Ian

lxdude
09-07-2012, 04:25 PM
Geez, Ian. He just quoted their Facebook post.

Ian Grant
09-07-2012, 04:28 PM
Geez, Ian. He just quoted their Facebook post.

That may be the case but others add layers of unfounded nothingness.

Ian

Sirius Glass
09-07-2012, 05:08 PM
That was indeed a Jackass remark. The films Kodak currently supplies are simply superb. Maybe a favorite for one person or another has been discontinued due to relative lack of demand or other
logistical issues; but the sheer quality and versatility of what they are still currently offering is unsurpassed.

* 2

Benoît99
09-07-2012, 05:18 PM
Whatever happened to plain talk? This is what I understand from the OP:

1. Kodak's movie and still film is all made in the same factory, which Kodak is not selling.

2. Kodak is selling its consumer and professional still film marketing and distribution business.

3. Kodak "expects" the buyer of the film business buyer to conclude a contract with Kodak under which Kodak will manufacture film for the buyer, who will market and distribute it.

Is my understanding correct? What happens if the buyer decides to find another film manufacturer?

Sirius Glass
09-07-2012, 05:29 PM
It ain't over until the fat lady signs.

lxdude
09-07-2012, 05:33 PM
It ain't over until the fat lady signs.

Which is handy if you're deaf...

Roger Cole
09-07-2012, 05:44 PM
Whatever happened to plain talk? This is what I understand from the OP:

1. Kodak's movie and still film is all made in the same factory, which Kodak is not selling.

2. Kodak is selling its consumer and professional still film marketing and distribution business.

3. Kodak "expects" the buyer of the film business buyer to conclude a contract with Kodak under which Kodak will manufacture film for the buyer, who will market and distribute it.

Is my understanding correct? What happens if the buyer decides to find another film manufacturer?

Contract will probably be worded to preclude that.

Curt
09-07-2012, 05:45 PM
"Whatever happened to plain talk?"



That is exactly what I thought. Plain English please without the obfuscation that is all too prevalent today.

obfuscate[ ob-fuh-skeyt, ob-fuhs-keyt ]http://m.dictionary.com/res/dictionary/superphone/320/iconsound.png (http://static-api.dictionary.com/dictstatic/dictionary/audio/luna/O00/O0006900.mp3)http://m.dictionary.com/res/dictionary/superphone/320/iconfaveoff.png (http://m.dictionary.com/d/?q=obfuscate&o=0&l=dir#)

verb (used with object) ob·fus·cat·ed, ob·fus·cat·ing.

1. to confuse, bewilder, or stupefy.

2. to make obscure or unclear: to obfuscate a problem with extraneous information.

3. to darken.

ic-racer
09-07-2012, 05:45 PM
It seems as if they want to wash their hands of all the packaging and distributing and marketing garbage and just concentrate on making the film product. This could be a good thing.

If I were a wealthy entrepreneur I'd buy the business, be the 'middle man' and sell the film to Fuji, Foma, Ilford, Adox, Freestyle etc. There would be no more KODAK BRAND film, but it will say "film manufactured in Rochester, USA by Kodak" or something like that and those guys can come up with their own names for the emulsions.

Roger Cole
09-07-2012, 05:50 PM
Making the film is what they do best. The rest is what they do very poorly. Could be a win/win to hand that off to someone who can do it better.

jnanian
09-07-2012, 05:56 PM
Thanks Prof_Pixel it's unusual to hve such honesty from ex Kodak employees on this forum.

Ian



That may be the case but others add layers of unfounded nothingness.

Ian

i couldn't agree with you more ian ...


john

pbromaghin
09-08-2012, 12:13 AM
Making the film is what they do best. The rest is what they do very poorly. Could be a win/win to hand that off to someone who can do it better.

Funny, but they used to be geniuses at branding and marketing. I remember, as a 9-year-old kid, seeing an ad during the Andy Williams show that made me feel guilty if I used anything but Kodak film to photograph my daughter's college graduation.

It's just a bunch of shitheads running the place now.

markbarendt
09-08-2012, 05:58 AM
So essentially it sounds to me like Kodak wants to sell off their highly productive and very active film sales and marketing division.

Wow, my wife is a programmer, she could do the the web page work, if I work at it too and hit the big pro-photographer trade shows I could seemingly double Kodak's marketing efforts, sales should skyrocket. :errm:

WTF Kodak, wish I could sell something that doesn't exist for big bucks and keep the cash cow too.

Diapositivo
09-08-2012, 06:20 AM
If I were a wealthy entrepreneur I'd buy the business, be the 'middle man' and sell the film to Fuji, Foma, Ilford, Adox, Freestyle etc. There would be no more KODAK BRAND film, but it will say "film manufactured in Rochester, USA by Kodak" or something like that and those guys can come up with their own names for the emulsions.

I think what Kodak is about is something including the brand, which in the film world is still quite an asset.

I think they are looking for somebody who buys the Kodak brand and cares about all the marketing and distribution both as Kodak Portra, Ektar etc. and, in addition to that, to whomever else wants to license the product and sell it under their own brand, i.e. firms like Agfaphoto, or distribution chains, shops etc. like Freestyle, and maybe people like Ilford or Adox who could leverage their distribution network but would not want embark in the big business of the Kodak brand.

They would keep the production, and therefore the quality, under control and so they would run no reputation risk in selling the Kodak brand for still film while maintaining full operation for the Kodak motion picture film.

RattyMouse
09-08-2012, 08:35 AM
I think what Kodak is about is something including the brand, which in the film world is still quite an asset.

I think they are looking for somebody who buys the Kodak brand and cares about all the marketing and distribution both as Kodak Portra, Ektar etc. and, in addition to that, to whomever else wants to license the product and sell it under their own brand, i.e. firms like Agfaphoto, or distribution chains, shops etc. like Freestyle, and maybe people like Ilford or Adox who could leverage their distribution network but would not want embark in the big business of the Kodak brand.

They would keep the production, and therefore the quality, under control and so they would run no reputation risk in selling the Kodak brand for still film while maintaining full operation for the Kodak motion picture film.

Who wants to buy into a business that has a single supplier? A supplier that is literally on death's door? Seems suicidal to me.

Steve Smith
09-08-2012, 08:43 AM
Who wants to buy into a business that has a single supplier? A supplier that is literally on death's door? Seems suicidal to me.

That's what I was wondering. In their present state, they cannot offer any guarantees for continuous supply of product.


Steve.