Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,879   Posts: 1,520,391   Online: 1019
      

View Poll Results: Regarding Kodak's Film Division if sold. Do you believe it can survive and prosper?

Voters
108. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes and I would you put my savings in it.

    8 7.41%
  • Yes and I would you work for that new company.

    10 9.26%
  • Yes and I would like to be part of the management team.

    6 5.56%
  • Yes and I will commit to buying 160 square inches (2-rolls), of new stock, every week.

    42 38.89%
  • No

    42 38.89%
Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 102
  1. #21
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,911
    Images
    65
    The property on which Kodak Park sits has a huge legacy of chemical usage and storage. It therefore inherits a huge EPA burden in cleanup charges that may be imposed during a sale.

    Therefore, a sale of the property is just not economically feasible for anyone to undertake under those conditions. So, in addition to being a cash cow as it now exists, it becomes an anchor when sold to anyone. No one would buy it, and at present, no one is interested in buying it.

    The huge drop in film sales has taken place about 3x in the last 10 years. These were unpredictable by any existing sales model. No company has truly "survived" the 30% dips in 1 quarter associated with these changes. Yes, 30% drops in sales have taken place about 3x, once in 2005 and twice during the current economic downturn. This applies to the entire analog photo industry.

    Kodak has destroyed all of the smaller, slower machines at KP except those in research. I have never heard of them buying any GAF equipment at all, ever. Is there a reference?

    PE

  2. #22
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,186
    Images
    148
    Kodak bought the GAF coating equipment when they took over Anitec from International Paper, but it came as part of the package rather than them specifically buying the coating lines to use themselves.

    Ian

  3. #23
    eclarke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    New Berlin, Wi
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,940
    Images
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post
    Kodak bought the GAF coating equipment when they took over Anitec from International Paper, but it came as part of the package rather than them specifically buying the coating lines to use themselves.

    Ian
    Hi Ian,
    Yes, they bought the whole company, razed the place and made a ceremony out of cutting up the big steel from the coating machine. The remains of the rollers were on display on Broome St. for a fair while. Ansco/GAF/Anitec was my brother in law's only job after graduation from RIT until IP closed the placed. I worked across the street for a long time and got to go in quite a bit, Danny was a director level employee and in charge of QC and Tech Services. I think Kodak would chop the stuff up!!..TTYL..Evan

  4. #24
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,911
    Images
    65
    Something is missing here.

    GAF exited the consumer photo business in 1977. The coating equipment for that end of the production was demolished at that time. Anitec was part of Ilford and produced graphic arts materials until 1998 when it was bought by EK. IDK how much equipment was there, but the consumer product coating was not in business since 1977. The equipment was apparently demolished back then. There was a later destruction of the Anitec graphics arts equipment that made some type of photo product. GAF was part of a Hong Kong company by then.

    Anitec/Kodak produced some digital products after 1999.

    http://home.att.net/~wlcamp/ansco.htm

    PE

  5. #25
    eclarke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    New Berlin, Wi
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,940
    Images
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Something is missing here.

    GAF exited the consumer photo business in 1977. The coating equipment for that end of the production was demolished at that time. Anitec was part of Ilford and produced graphic arts materials until 1998 when it was bought by EK. IDK how much equipment was there, but the consumer product coating was not in business since 1977. The equipment was apparently demolished back then. There was a later destruction of the Anitec graphics arts equipment that made some type of photo product. GAF was part of a Hong Kong company by then.

    Anitec/Kodak produced some digital products after 1999.

    http://home.att.net/~wlcamp/ansco.htm

    PE
    Yes it was the graphic arts line, that was Anitec's business but it was a coating line. Digital typesetting really brought a screeching halt to the whole operation. Danny started there in the late 60s and I started working on Clinton St. in the early 70's, it was a real shock to see the place flattened, it was sort of a local landmark...EC
    Last edited by eclarke; 02-09-2010 at 11:44 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  6. #26
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,911
    Images
    65
    GAF film and paper coating equipment for consumer use was apparently demolished and sold in the early 80s by GAF as they entered the Linoleum business. They sold a lot of diverse plastics and flooring products for a while.

    PE

  7. #27
    MikeSeb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Prospect (Louisville), KY, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,062
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post
    ....because the management would be more rational and committed to our needs.

    Ian
    With the humblest respect, I would ask how you can know Kodak's management is acting irrationally. Not doing what you might want them to is not irrationality per se. You can't say that until you have the same information they have,and the same responsibilities they have.

    It's not management's job to be committed to OUR needs. They are agents for their shareholders, with a fiduciary duty to look after THEM. Sure, looking after customers well usually results indirectly in better results for shareholders. But knowing how to connect the one with the other is not always easy or obvious.

    Not picking on you here personally, Ian . But I think this misunderstanding underlies a lot of needless frustration among photographers.

    If you like it, BUY it and try to convince your friends to do the same. Markets, which ARE (mostly) rational, will do the rest.
    Michael Sebastian
    Website | Blog

  8. #28
    MikeSeb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Prospect (Louisville), KY, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,062
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Smith View Post
    It may add to the speed of the demise of Kodak's film production. This would put Ilford and Fujifilm in a stronger position though.
    Wow. So out of the right corner of the mouth we castigate Kodak for dropping 320TXP in medium format. Meanwhile, out of the left, we voice hope on the largest analog-only web forum in the world that worldwide film production (a declining industry) will be further concentrated among fewer producers, each with a fraction of Kodak's resources (even in their current diminished state.)

    Kodak could be forgiven for saying, "F--k this, why bother? We improved Portra and TMY, gave them Ektar, and they're still not happy. Let's just sell printers and digicams and those ingrate film users can choke on Provia and HP5+."

    Reason has left the building, it seems. Not picking on Steve personally here, only the shared attitudes that the quote speaks to.
    Michael Sebastian
    Website | Blog

  9. #29
    MikeSeb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Prospect (Louisville), KY, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,062
    Quote Originally Posted by benjiboy View Post
    What I meant was Kodak films demise, if they knew so much about films future how did they allow themselves to get into to current situation ?
    Exactly. And until its critics can provide a better answer to this question that can Kodak's own management, they might oughta leave off giving Kodak advice.

    Not spanking you benjiboy, just expanding on a point you may have unwittingly made.
    Michael Sebastian
    Website | Blog

  10. #30
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,547
    Images
    122
    The problem Kodak management have is that they can't predict the future. They cannot be sure which products will continue to sell and which will diminish. In the current situation their best hope is to just keep going and that means maintaining production of anything which is making a profit, however small.

    The current financial state of the world is not one to make radical changes of direction in.


    Steve.

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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