Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,957   Posts: 1,586,086   Online: 987
      
Page 8 of 31 FirstFirst ... 23456789101112131418 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 309
  1. #71

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Earth
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,560
    Quote Originally Posted by alanrockwood View Post
    When you think about it one way, Kodak has done an amazing job in keeping their film division profitable for so long. What other business can you image that could sustain a 98% drop in sales and still remain profitable, or at least nearly profitable?
    I am no math genius, but doesn't it depend on profit margins?

    If one run can supply a years worth of film in one day, that same machine and infrastructure can supply more than 300 times that at current levels per year (or however you cut the pie...)

    Maybe I am wrong; I certainly have no point to make other than to say I don't think Kodak MANAGEMENT needs a pat on the back.
    Kodak Researchers sure.

  2. #72

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    540
    Quote Originally Posted by Ray Rogers View Post
    I am no math genius, but doesn't it depend on profit margins?

    If one run can supply a years worth of film in one day, that same machine and infrastructure can supply more than 300 times that at current levels per year (or however you cut the pie...)

    Maybe I am wrong; I certainly have no point to make other than to say I don't think Kodak MANAGEMENT needs a pat on the back.
    Kodak Researchers sure.
    To oversimplify a bit, consider the following. A business typically has fixed costs and costs that vary with production. If sales dip below fixed costs then profits become negative, even if the the variable costs drop to zero. If a business is geared to run profitably at a sales volume of. let us say $10 billion, then fixed costs are probably fairly high, let us say for the sake of argument $500 million. If sales drop to $200 million (and assuming that production levels are well aligned with sales, i.e. neither over nor under production) the operation goes into the red.

    Also, for some types of business production is run in batches, and batches may have a minimum size. The product may also have a limited shelf life. I understand that film satisfies all these conditions. If the minimum batch size is relatively large, as would be typical of an operation designed for a high production rate, and if the sales rate drops too low then there will be waste as the unsold product expires on the shelf. The wasted product eats into profits, and in the worst case can cause the operation to go into the red.

  3. #73
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,990
    Quote Originally Posted by MaximusM3 View Post
    I think it's almost time to buy another freezer..
    I have two.

    <<Sigh>>

    I liked it better when the air was clean and words were dirty!
    <</Sigh>>

    Steve
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  4. #74

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Earth
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,560
    Alan,
    I did not see anything in there that I disagree with...

    But at the same time,
    the fact that KODAK is so huge is in large part a decesion...
    made out greed, not necessity.

    For example, paper can be made by the sheet as well as by the mile.

    I am all for free enterprise, but at some point things can get pretty outta wack.

    I just don't think there could have been
    no other possible outcomes in some alternate reality.

  5. #75
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,561
    Images
    65
    Well, Alan has it right. Ray, I doubt if you have had the production experience to judge this well. Sorry.

    And now the air and words are dirty!

    PE

  6. #76

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by Sirius Glass View Post
    I have two.

    <<Sigh>>

    I liked it better when the air was clean and words were dirty!
    <</Sigh>>

    Steve
    Then get rid of the extra freezer, and learn to enjoy the delights of fresh stuff again.

  7. #77
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,990
    Quote Originally Posted by Q.G. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Sirius Glass View Post
    I have two.

    <<Sigh>>

    I liked it better when the air was clean and words were dirty!
    <</Sigh>>

    Steve
    Then get rid of the extra freezer, and learn to enjoy the delights of fresh stuff again.
    This I would not be able to buy up deleted films so that I could keep those films from the hoarders. Also, I would not have deleted films to use. [In case you missed the point.]
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  8. #78
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,990
    Quote Originally Posted by Sirius Glass View Post
    I have two.

    <<Sigh>>

    I liked it better when the air was clean and words were dirty!
    <</Sigh>>

    Steve
    There freezers are 3,000 miles [5,000 Km] apart so that I have a good film supply where ever I am.
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  9. #79

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Horsham, PA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    751
    I think that the real problem is that Kodak is turning into a glorified licensing company. Up until the 1990s, almost everything that Kodak made was made in Kodak factories to Kodak specs; the notable exception being the Retina rangefinders. Now, the only thing that is really manufactured under the watchful eye of Rochester is film. Everything else is made in China and has the Kodak namebadge slapped on right before it leaves port. I have already seen Kodak branded batteries; how long is it going to be until we see Kodak TVs, DVD players, and lightbulbs?
    "Panic not my child, the Great Yellow Father has your hand"--Larry Dressler

  10. #80
    Rudeofus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,833
    Images
    10
    I would like to state a few things, please correct me if I am wrong:
    • As it appears, consumer film use has declined by way over 95% during the last 20 years, which means at the moment consumer film use is irrelevant for Kodak's bottom line regarding film.
    • Kodak make the vast majority of their film sales with cine film, which has started to decline rapidly a short time ago, mostly driven by the movie theater's drive towards digital projection, which is expected to grow stronger as digital by now seems to be good enough for the typical Hollywood film audience. Another factor in Kodak's declining cine film sales seems to be the cheaper Fuji cine films.
    • Both consumer film and all of Kodak's digital products have so far leeched off the cine film business. Consumer film, because it co-used film making equipment and research results with cine film, Kodak's digital products on the other side weren't profitable for the longest time, whatever the reason.
    • Instead of pumping profits from film sales into investments in lower volume production equipment and technology, these profits were eaten up by an ill fated drive into digital products, which were seen as more future oriented. Now the money is gone, film is no longer profitable because the old equipment can't be operated profitably at those low volumes, new equipment more suitable for lower volumes can't be afforded, and the digital branch is still not profitable enough to make the company's future certain.


    There are a few things I would like to know:
    • PE claims that color film is an extremely sophisticated product requiring the most peculiar chemicals which aren't always available. This may be an explanation why there are basically only two makers left, Kodak and Fuji. Yet quite a lot of companies make color film dev kits, and these kits do deviate from the formulations used by Kodak, so they are not just cheap rip offs. Is E6 developer so much easier to make than decent E6 film? How easy would it be for Tetenal or Arista to make color film?
    • One of Kodak's film branches biggest problem seems to be their inability to deal with low volume production. Is this because of their investment in high volume machinery which can't be converted to low volume or is there some inherent problem with low volume color film production? Note that B&W film can be made in low volume and turn out a profit.
    • Can Kodak even sell its film business? Not because nobody would want it's film business, but because Kodak's digital business alone would be even less desireable? Note that Kodak's film business has made a loss this one quarter, but Kodak's digital business, while generating a lot of business, has made losses for most of the time during the last 20 years, and there seems little reason to believe this would change.
    Trying to be the best of whatever I am, even if what I am is no good.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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