Referring back to the purchase of machines to pack film in a given format for instant cameras, you will find that you need a lot of money, space and trained operators. The coating machines must be different for each product as the coating layer and format is different. It is hard to describe these serious differences, but I can say that the Polaroid format at EK required 2 machines for pack assembly (a RAM and a FAM). The integral PR10 material was put together by an entirely different machine called a COMAM. I remember seeing dump trucks carrying away the parts of these machines as they were pushed out docking bays by heavy lifters in the building.
Was the decision good or bad? If EK, Polaroid and Fuji had stayed in the business of instant imaging there would have been a race for better and better camera products and more competition with digital. After all, digital gives you an instant image but an analog instant image is a print that you can hold, share and scan! And within a year of that court decision, if it had gone for Kodak, there would have been an ISO 3000 print material and a lantern slide material. To this day, digital has difficulty making true slides. The Dmax and contrast is beyond most printers.
I think both Polaroid and Kodak should have embraced digital, not by competing with it, in a market that was already owned by others, but by complementing it. How about this, you go to the photo store, for say $20 or so, you buy a special USB drive, you dump up to 36 images on it, put it in the enclosed mailer, and drop it in the mail. They go to Kodak, who prints them onto K25 film and mails you back 36 Kodachrome slides of your digital images. They then wipe the drives and repackage them for reuse.