I will enjoy it while it lasts, stock up, and hope that somebody else can smoothly take over manufacture of their formulas within a sustainable business structure. We will lose some great stuff if they go......T-Max, Tri-X, Portra...ah, hell.
Originally Posted by munz6869
"Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."
- Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)
This actually seems not be be new information, just one stockbroker's spin on things. Kodak released its quarterly and annual results about a week ago. It reported that film had posted an operational loss ("slipped into the red," as per the original post) for the fourth quarter of 2010 due to declining sales and increasing costs of raw materials. Kodak already indicated it would raise prices and perhaps cut some film products because of this. There is a thread about this on APUG. Today's story arises because Kodak had its annual meeting for shareholders today in NYC, I think.
The stockbroker referenced in the original post is probably George Conboy, and his words are here: http://www.whec.com/news/stories/s1956065.shtml
I didn't see anything new mentioned about film in the news stories that I skimmed today. In fact, Perez seems to go out of his way never to talk about film. And with respect, this is one stockbroker's opinion. Even if he's 100 percent right, he talks about Kodak selling the film division. Which means someone else would buy it, presumably to operate it. Kodak's film business would "go away" only in the sense that Kodak would no longer own it.
By the way, as I read the release about the 2010 financial results, the film business posted an operating profit for 2010 as a whole. Revenues and profits are declining, however. Kodak has been stating it would get out of the film business as long as Perez has been in charge. If that date arrives in 2011 or 2012, who knows, it might be all to the good.
What we have today is the \"Son of Ilford\" rather than the contemporary of Eastman Kodak.
Originally Posted by jnanian
By all accounts the son is stronger because of the pruning that occurred during the receivership. Let\'s hope Kodak can pull off the same transformation. But the current Kodak and the current Ilford are not really comparable.
Last edited by michaelbsc; 02-03-2011 at 08:55 PM. Click to view previous post history.
I would just hope they don't sell the film manufacturing to a Chinese company.
I was thinking exactly the same thing, and figuring out how much my freezer can hold . . .
Originally Posted by 2F/2F
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Whatever is affecting Kodak, whether it be economy or silver prices, it will affect Ilford! Think about that for a bit before you go off. The difference is that Ilford does not have to give details!
This is neither bad nor good, and does not change what was posted earlier this week. It is just an update.
Nah, the government will sell it to the Chinese after they take it over.
Originally Posted by bsdunek
It will be VERY hard to find an outside buyer for a business with decreasing sales, questionable current profitability, and even more questionable future profitability. That is just finance 101.
If there is to be a sale of the film division it would likely be structured as a management buyout in which certain key people in the film division would "buy" the operation via some kind of creative financing deal. Being free of certain former constraints, the management of the new company will have interesting ideas on how to operate the business profitably. The ideas might work. They might not. In any case, it will be risky.
Best for all concerned if I just watch this thread from the sidelines...
"There is very limited audience for the arty stuff, and it is largely comprised of other arty types, most of whom have no money to spend because no one is buying their stuff either. More people bring their emotions to an image than bring their intellect. The former are the folks who have checkbooks because they are engineers, accountants, and bankers—and generally they are engineers, accountants and bankers because they are not artists."
— Amanda Tomlin, Looking Glass Magazine, 2014
Not to worry, Kodak is not too big to fail. There will be no bailout and certainly no takeover.
Originally Posted by michaelbsc
"I only wanted Uncle Vern standing by his new car (a Hudson) on a clear day. I got him and the car. I also got a bit of Aunt Mary's laundry, and Beau Jack, the dog, peeing on a fence, and a row of potted tuberous begonias on the porch and 78 trees and a million pebbles in the driveway and more. It's a generous medium, photography." -- Lee Friedlander