Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,208   Posts: 1,531,946   Online: 1113
      
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 31
  1. #1

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    509

  2. #2
    tomalophicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Canberra, ACT.
    Shooter
    Sub 35mm
    Posts
    1,562
    Images
    24
    Wow. So they are splitting the commercial film side of things from the consumer film and paper side of things. Interesting.

  3. #3
    Klainmeister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Santa Fe, NM
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,493
    Images
    30
    Yeah, I don't quite get the re-structuring after reading a few articles. It seems they are downsizing the consumer film by separating it from the commercial side. Maybe good news? Maybe bad?
    K.S. Klain

  4. #4
    tomalophicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Canberra, ACT.
    Shooter
    Sub 35mm
    Posts
    1,562
    Images
    24
    Or the other way around!

  5. #5
    Poisson Du Jour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SE Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,539
    Images
    15
    A separate report has said that Kodak is actually eliminating its film group from the overall restructuring. This could mean that there will be a cut to manufacturing of film, but it is open to speculation, as analysts have pointed out.

    The report is on ABC News.

    The scenario with Kodak parallels in some respects the restructuring of Ford and GMH, both of which are seeking more and more money to continue in a market that has been crying out for change for years, but yet they persist in producing the big 6s (especially Ford) in a market that is now smaller car/SUV-driven. For Kodak, it should continue on its digital path and forget about film if it is ever to be profitable, especially with a swag of valuable patents. Not sure taking on Apple for infringement of patents is a good idea while on the cusp of Chapter 11 proceedings.
    .::Gary Rowan Higgins

    A comfort zone is a wonderful place. But nothing ever grows there.
    —Anon.






  6. #6
    tomalophicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Canberra, ACT.
    Shooter
    Sub 35mm
    Posts
    1,562
    Images
    24
    The title is misleading IMO.

  7. #7
    MDR
    MDR is offline
    MDR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Austria
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,056
    Poisson du jour it's the digital part that seems to kill Kodak the only money Kodak makes is in the Film division. So I wouldn't think that killing off the film division and competing in the digital world with companies that are 10 to 20 times larger than Kodak is a very smart idea. Kodak has become a very small fish these days even Fuji is a lot bigger than Kodak. Kodak should act like a small fish innovate and find a niche market to survive competing with companies like Seiko/Epson Hewlett Packard and Sony isn't very smart. Kodak has already sold a large amount of its profitable patents so no money from
    this side. Innovation and finding a niche not necessarily film could be in the digi realm but it has to be unique and a must have product imho the only thing that can save Kodak

    Dominik

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    San Diego, CA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,243
    Images
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Poisson Du Jour View Post
    For Kodak, it should continue on its digital path and forget about film if it is ever to be profitable
    Seems like an odd prescription: The film unit is turning a profit already, and Kodak's record of finding profitable ways to adapt to digital technology is, um, dubious. At least in the consumer space---they're done well at things like industrial process monitoring, as I understand it.

    We're all speculating here, but I suppose splitting the commercial and consumer sides of the company could pave the way for letting the commercial side focus on digital, where it actually has done well, and the consumer side on film, where ditto.

    , especially with a swag of valuable patents. Not sure taking on Apple for infringement of patents is a good idea while on the cusp of Chapter 11 proceedings.
    I do know a bit about patent gamesmanship, and I think it's at least plausible that taking on Apple has an element of playing to prospective buyers. If you're a competitor to Apple, you might take notice of a portfolio for sale that's known to have some material relevant to Apple. Again, though, speculating.

    -NT
    Nathan Tenny
    San Diego, CA, USA

    The lady of the house has to be a pretty swell sort of person to put up with the annoyance of a photographer.
    -The Little Technical Library, _Developing, Printing, And Enlarging_

  9. #9
    IloveTLRs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Switzerland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    998
    Images
    2
    I have a number of Japanese photographer friends, and they are quite worried about Kodak. Their color negative films seem quite popular over here.
    Those who know, shoot film

  10. #10
    Barry S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    DC Metro
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,250
    Images
    31
    The reorganization doesn't make much sense--other than to reassure investors that *something* is being done. There are some contradictions--film may not be the (big) future, but it's still a profitable unit. My understanding is that the bulk of film is sold to motion picture companies--so how would that fit into a consumer division? This is the classic rearranging of deck chairs on the Titanic.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin