Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,907   Posts: 1,555,875   Online: 988
      
Page 6 of 17 FirstFirst 12345678910111216 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 164
  1. #51

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    7,046
    Isn't there the small matter of current U.K. Kodak pensioners to consider when we discuss the benefits of ending KA?

    pentaxuser

  2. #52
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,433
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by pentaxuser View Post
    Isn't there the small matter of current U.K. Kodak pensioners to consider when we discuss the benefits of ending KA?

    pentaxuser
    I still don't understand the pension thing... When a company goes under, isn't the pension fund separate? So it ends up being managed by someone but still pays out?
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  3. #53

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Penfield, NY
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,048
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    I still don't understand the pension thing... When a company goes under, isn't the pension fund separate? So it ends up being managed by someone but still pays out?
    In the past big companies were/are self funded when there were defined benefit plans. Now most just have 401K type retirement programs that are separate from the companies.

  4. #54
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,566
    Images
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    I still don't understand the pension thing... When a company goes under, isn't the pension fund separate? So it ends up being managed by someone but still pays out?
    The UK pensions, like all Kodak pensions (AFAIK) were held in trust and managed by the various individual Kodaks.

    Like all pension funds, the contributions were calculated based on actuarial estimates of how many people were likely to survive, and for how long, as well as estimates of how much investment income was likely to be earned by the fund.

    The assumptions that formed the basis of those estimates were just that - assumptions. People are living longer, and investment returns from the sorts of investments permitted to pension funds are less than expected.

    So there are projected shortfalls in the pension funds.

    In the UK, there is a government fund available to help make good on some of the shortfalls, but in addition there is legislation that:
    a) makes non-UK parent companies (Eastman Kodak) liable for the UK pension obligations; and
    b) gives the government fund priority over other creditors in a bankruptcy.

    So in the case of the UK pensioners, there was a government with a big stick that forced the other creditors of Eastman Kodak to settle for less money.

    To a great extent, the actual pension payments for most Kodak employees are reasonably well protected.

    Where there is a massive shortfall is in those countries where things like medical services benefits are both absolutely necessary and unconscionably expensive - essentially the USA.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  5. #55
    omaha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    362
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    If Kodak were IBM, they would have dropped film back in 2002... We are lucky Kodak is as bad at profiting as it is...
    Truth.

    For all the complaining about the failures of Kodak management, the fact is the only reason they are still selling film at all is precisely because they lacked a nimble and efficient management structure.

    Financially, an aggressive management team would have seen 15 years ago that film was going away and taken action to get into something else.

    I mean, suppose Kodak had had a really brilliant product development group and managed to invent the smart phone a year ahead of Apple. Kind of a natural, really. Kodak had a great brand, and a natural association in the mind of consumers with photography. A KodakPhone would have been perfect.

    Ok, so suppose these hypothetical, brilliant Kodak managers had put all that together and hit the market in 2006, a year ahead of Apple. With proper execution, they would be rolling in cash today, the very idea of a bankruptcy would seem ridiculous. Kodak stock would be up 1000%.

    And Kodak film would be long gone.
    I shoot digital when I have to (most of those shots end up here) and film (occasionally one of those shots ends up here) when I want to.

  6. #56
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,433
    Images
    225

    Gerbershagen The new Head of Kodak Alaris says he wants input.

    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    The UK pensions, like all Kodak pensions (AFAIK) were held in trust and managed by the various individual Kodaks.

    Like all pension funds, the contributions were calculated based on actuarial estimates of how many people were likely to survive, and for how long, as well as estimates of how much investment income was likely to be earned by the fund.

    The assumptions that formed the basis of those estimates were just that - assumptions. People are living longer, and investment returns from the sorts of investments permitted to pension funds are less than expected.

    So there are projected shortfalls in the pension funds.

    In the UK, there is a government fund available to help make good on some of the shortfalls, but in addition there is legislation that:
    a) makes non-UK parent companies (Eastman Kodak) liable for the UK pension obligations; and
    b) gives the government fund priority over other creditors in a bankruptcy.

    So in the case of the UK pensioners, there was a government with a big stick that forced the other creditors of Eastman Kodak to settle for less money.

    To a great extent, the actual pension payments for most Kodak employees are reasonably well protected.

    Where there is a massive shortfall is in those countries where things like medical services benefits are both absolutely necessary and unconscionably expensive - essentially the USA.
    Ouch, gotcha, thanks for explaining.
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  7. #57

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,520
    Blog Entries
    2
    Images
    8
    i read this thread thinking it would be worthwhile but it is yet another
    status quo kodak bashing thread .. its really kind of lame ...
    at least the info on how the pension-stuff is interesting ...

    i find it funny people actually wonder why kodak / alaris doesn't have a presence here ?

    another thread soon to be on ignore ...

  8. #58
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,757
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Cunningham View Post
    Very well done messaging. I would buy anything from him.
    I'm curious, who is buying a billion dollars of Alaris products? That's not roll film, boys and girls.
    Photographic films and papers is just a fraction of the Alaris revenue.

  9. #59
    Ken Nadvornick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Monroe, WA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,453
    Images
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by jnanian View Post
    another thread soon to be on ignore ...
    Reasoned and relevant discussion is occurring here.

    Ignoring such threads is also always an option.

    Ken
    "They are the proof that something was there and no longer is. Like a stain. And the stillness of them is boggling. You can turn away but when you come back they’ll still be there looking at you."

    — Diane Arbus, March 15, 1971, in response to a request for a brief statement about photographs

  10. #60
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,757
    Quote Originally Posted by omaha View Post
    I just remain of the opinion that there is a massive disconnect here when it comes to scale of operations and expectations. This guy talks about being a "billion dollar" company? Please. I think realistically the future of film manufacturing will involve companies who would consider $5 million in wholesale revenue to be a very good year. I think that is the scale film people need to be planning on.
    Keep in mind that the revenues of halide materials are still huge in absolute figures. You are totally off with your figure for the moment.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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