PDA

View Full Version : Kodak Update On Film Sale



Pages : 1 [2]

Prof_Pixel
09-19-2012, 01:01 PM
I think the problem is that Kodak is still way too big. They've gotten a lot of flak for all of the lay-offs, but I don't see any way to avoid that. If somebody does step up and buy the personal imaging business they're going to have to axe a lot of people too.

You have no idea of how SMALL in manufacturing area people Kodak is right now.

Most of you have never seen Kodak Park (now Eastman Business Park) and may think of the manufacturing location as a couple of buildings. In fact, it is a city with its own railroad, fire department, electricity generation, heating and cooling services, water and sewage treatment facilities.

See http://www.democratandchronicle.com/article/20120714/BUSINESS/307150025/Eastman-Business-Park-Kodak-Rochester scroll down for an aerial view image.

See also http://www.ebpvirtualtour.com/ You can see a lot of empty parking lots that once were full!

Being a 'city' was great when Kodak was a manufacturing giant, now it just complicates things.

Trasselblad
09-19-2012, 03:05 PM
Kodak is not going head to head with HP or Epson or any individual or even office printer manufacturer. The niche they want to develop are the specialised graphics market. We are talking big behemoths of digital processing printers some 6-10 metres long built on all sorts of technology fr advertising, graphics, typesetting, etc.

Now, the decision to drop virtually everything else - including patents for CCD image capture - can be questioned, but the truth of matters is that here are the highest profit margins.

Film is not profitable (on the scale that Kodak built their plants) any more. No matter how much we all here love the medium.

Alan Johnson
09-19-2012, 03:51 PM
This map from an old post by PE:
http://www.bing.com/maps/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=43.199506~-77.635274&style=h&lvl=16&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&encType=1
Is building 38 on the corner of W Ridge Road and Lake Avenue?

Hatchetman
09-19-2012, 03:56 PM
Fuji would be crazy not to get in there and at least kick the tires a bit. No way Ilford could afford it, nor Kodak employees. It's likely going to be be some buyout shop.

Prof_Pixel
09-19-2012, 04:00 PM
This map from an old post by PE:
http://www.bing.com/maps/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=43.199506~-77.635274&style=h&lvl=16&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&encType=1
Is building 38 on the corner of W Ridge Road and Lake Avenue?

It does a nice job of showing the empty spaces where buildings once stood - either imploded (like my buildings) or just torn down. The two buildings I spent most of my time in, once occupied the green patch of grass to the right of Dewey Ave and below the Route 104 marker. :(

kb3lms
09-19-2012, 06:37 PM
IIRC building 38 is the long building over off of Weiland Rd. Scroll to the left on the map in the link and down a bit to where 390 and Ridgeway Ave cross. Look up just a bit to the right. it's long and narrow. But never having worked at Kodak Park my building numbering may be off. I forget what number building is at the corner of Lake and Ridge.

The Park has been decimated! Perez certainly has done his handiwork well.

Prof_Pixel
09-19-2012, 06:59 PM
This is PE's walkthrough of the BING map: http://www.apug.org/forums/archive/index.php/t-64494.html

Sirius Glass
09-19-2012, 07:35 PM
Only 3 real options for Kodak film.

1. Fujifilm
2. Ilford
3. Employee buyout.

Anyone else will either be Wall Street hacks or people who have no idea how to run a film company. Private equity would be a DISASTER for Kodak.

1. Why would they want to run a company on another continent?
2. Why would they want to run a company on another continent? They do not have the money.
3. Just what we need a bunch of people with more money than brains, jump in to run a business that they know nothing about.

Roger Cole
09-19-2012, 07:41 PM
1. Why would they want to run a company on another continent?
2. Why would they want to run a company on another continent? They do not have the money.
3. Just what we need a bunch of people with more money than brains, jump in to run a business that they know nothing about.

The employees know nothing about it? I've worked many places where that would have been the only way to make it profitable.

OTOH, I can't imagine enough employees are interested AND have enough money.

Yashinoff
09-20-2012, 05:58 AM
1. Why would they want to run a company on another continent?
2. Why would they want to run a company on another continent? They do not have the money.
3. Just what we need a bunch of people with more money than brains, jump in to run a business that they know nothing about.

Kodak is not selling the manufacturing facilities. They're selling the retail business - the trademarks, kiosks, etc. Some of this could potentially have use for Fujifilm... but I feel like they probably wouldn't see the point in going to Kodak for the supply side of things, it would probably not be a good thing for us on the consumer end. Plus a lot of what they're tying into the deal is "junk", the buyer would have to axe a lot of stuff I'd think.

RattyMouse
09-20-2012, 05:23 PM
1. Why would they want to run a company on another continent?
2. Why would they want to run a company on another continent? They do not have the money.
3. Just what we need a bunch of people with more money than brains, jump in to run a business that they know nothing about.

Fujifilm runs companies all over the world including several in North America. One more will be no big deal to them.

michaelbsc
09-21-2012, 12:32 AM
Fujifilm runs companies all over the world including several in North America. One more will be no big deal to them.

Only if it makes money. I've worked for one of those Fuji America companies on several contracts. While they are perfectly willing to spend the money required to do the job to get the product they want/need, they are not willing to throw good money after bad.

I suppose if it was a product that was a matter of Fuji's internal corporate pride they would probably go to pretty great lengths to save face, just like many oriental cultures.


But you can bet they aren't going to spend a dime to save an American product unless it is a profit center for them. Or at least they perceive it can become a profit center.

RattyMouse
09-21-2012, 03:35 AM
Only if it makes money. I've worked for one of those Fuji America companies on several contracts. While they are perfectly willing to spend the money required to do the job to get the product they want/need, they are not willing to throw good money after bad.

I suppose if it was a product that was a matter of Fuji's internal corporate pride they would probably go to pretty great lengths to save face, just like many oriental cultures.


But you can bet they aren't going to spend a dime to save an American product unless it is a profit center for them. Or at least they perceive it can become a profit center.

We all hope Kodak film is profitable. And if it is, then Fujifilm could add a few bucks to their stash. Fujifilm has some holes in their film line (at least in 120 film). No ISO400 b & w as well as a highly saturated ISO400 color film.