Switch to English Language Passer en langue franšaise Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,691   Posts: 1,548,914   Online: 767
      
Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 103
  1. #21
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,067
    Images
    65
    The drop has been higher than the 15% reported above. It is fluctuating, but at the current rate of decline it is 4x the value predicted by all models constructed by all manufacturers.

    This is why it hit Agfa and Ilford and Forte so hard. No one can predict what is going on.

    PE

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Cambridge, MA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    At the present time the film (B&W and color) and color paper units are making a healthy profit for Kodak. There is even some R&D going on, believe it or not.

    PE
    Well, they made a $98 million operating profit on $1.36 billion for film, paper, and chemicals. That margin isn't as good as in years past, and they cited raw material costs as the factor.

    Kodak probably does as good a job as anybody in the industry in terms of mitigating the effects of rising raw material costs (e.g. recycling unused silver as scrap), so I'm a little concerned what that might mean for smaller players.

    This isn't so simple as just raising your prices to compensate for the cost. You can announce a price increase any old time you want, but you won't see any incremental revenue until distributors re-order your products at the increased price.

    On the plus side, film sales only declined 15% year-over-year, while they had been declining between 20-30% year-over-year every quarter for the past several years. I'd like to think that we are beginning to see a slowing of the decline in film sales - but then the discontinuation of film and paper operations from Agfa and Konica Minolta probably played a role.

    I'd certainly be interested in finding out where the declines are greatest (E-6 > C-41 > B&W, I would expect) but I know of no reliable source for that information.

  3. #23
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,067
    Images
    65
    I've already posted the distribution of the declines so many times, I leave it to you to look it up!

    BTW, the decline is an exponential curve, and we are getting onto the toe of the curve as it asymptotically approaches the theoretical zero point.

    PE

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Rochester, NY/Toronto, ON
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    559
    Quote Originally Posted by Soeren View Post
    Yes, Maybe the film division will do better without Kodak
    Cheers
    S°ren
    Easy to say, I think it would be a far rougher transition than most think.

    Quote Originally Posted by aldevo View Post
    Kodak probably does as good a job as anybody in the industry in terms of mitigating the effects of rising raw material costs (e.g. recycling unused silver as scrap), so I'm a little concerned what that might mean for smaller players.
    Exactly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    BTW, the decline is an exponential curve, and we are getting onto the toe of the curve as it asymptotically approaches the theoretical zero point.

    PE


    Time for even more drinks, Ron.
    Honey, I promise no more searching eBay for cameras.

  5. #25
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,067
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by Earl Dunbar View Post
    Easy to say, I think it would be a far rougher transition than most think.



    Exactly.




    Time for even more drinks, Ron.
    Earl, lets go out and have one on me.

    Regards.

    Ron

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Cambridge, MA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    I've already posted the distribution of the declines so many times, I leave it to you to look it up!

    BTW, the decline is an exponential curve, and we are getting onto the toe of the curve as it asymptotically approaches the theoretical zero point.

    PE
    Still, I'd like to hold out some hope that we may flatten out entirely (lambda = 0) before it becomes impossible for any maker to produce film and paper profitably.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Cambridge, MA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by jd callow View Post
    This may be true of some, but as consumers of a product many here have very relevant observations.

    I love Kodak product, but I don't believe Perez has the skills to communicate Kodak's vision properly. If he knows that Kodak will be out of the film business at some point than he should nurture that portion of the business for the betterment of his stockholders / Kodak’s share price. He seems to be doing a good job at alienating his film customer whilst he simultaneously makes the film market and Kodak's film business look unattractive to potential suitors.
    This is somewhat off-topic, but it sorts of strikes me that Perez has an axe to grind:

    a) He's a former HP exec who...
    b) Is about to enter the inkject market where HP is a major player
    c) And is expected to announce a deal to market said printers with Dell (which just happens to be HP-Compaq's largest competitor in PC's)

    See a pattern there?

    I'm not a Perez fan (I don't really understand the drive forEK to enter the home inkjet market - because that's slowing in sales and "generic inks" are really curtailing the available profits). Ultimately, Kodak might be jumping out of one declining market - only to enter another.

    That said, I don't think any comments of his (which are often out of context) will affect the value of the film unit.

    Ultimately, the financial statements and forecasts for the film/paper market will determine what it's worth to a perspective buyer.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Van Buren, Arkansas
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,412
    Images
    101
    Kodak selling inkjet printers does not affect their film business. Why would it? The only thing affecting their film business is volume of film sales. They are not going to stop selling film, just to sell inkjet printers. They will stop selling film when sales get to the point where manufacture is unprofitable. Kodak selling inkjet printers in an already crowded market is not going to make more people stop using film. You can make nice prints on many inkjet printers from scanned film.particularly in color.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Van Buren, Arkansas
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,412
    Images
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    At the present time the film (B&W and color) and color paper units are making a healthy profit for Kodak. There is even some R&D going on, believe it or not.

    PE
    Would this R&D be related to still film, or would it (more likely) be related to motion picture film stocks?

  10. #30
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,067
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by PHOTOTONE View Post
    Would this R&D be related to still film, or would it (more likely) be related to motion picture film stocks?
    AFAIK, a bit of both.

    PE

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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