Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,880   Posts: 1,520,454   Online: 959
      
Page 4 of 45 FirstFirst 1234567891014 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 450
  1. #31
    Hatchetman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    559
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristophanes View Post
    From their last reported Q (3/2011).
    What's killing Kodak revenues is film, both photo and motion picture. [/url]
    I do not understand. Nine months ending Sept 2011, film division has operating profit of $2MM compared to digital imaging division loss of $350MM. See Page 26 10-Q document.


    Nine Months Ended
    September 30,
    (in millions) 2011 2010
    (Loss) earnings from continuing operations before interest expense, other income (charges), net and income taxes:
    Consumer Digital Imaging Group $ (350) $ 345
    Graphic Communications Group (171) (92)
    Film, Photofinishing and Entertainment Group 2 86
    Total of reportable segments (520) 337
    Last edited by Hatchetman; 01-05-2012 at 09:30 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  2. #32
    Aristophanes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    505
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by werra View Post
    So doesn't it all look very similar to AGFA story?
    We should hope not.

    AGFA Film, the spin-off from the parent, died due in retrospect to the collapse of film demand. It survives on only as a label.

    All of Kodak's official statements indicate they cannot predict a bottom in demand for film. That could make it very difficult to sell the film component.

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    172
    Yes similar to AGFA, and this might mean we get new manufactured film LONGER, since this opens up a venue for smaller, hungrier and fqaster companies, with less history and obligations.....
    It might mean chinese manufacturers are finally able to find a market for developing better films and keep them in production for a longer time, than if they had to continue competing with Kodak, both going bust in the process.

    Kodak sat on digital technology for 20 years, while miliking us with their near-monbopoly in the film finishing business.....

  4. #34
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    Just from a pure business perspective, I don't see a lot of things to attract investment to EK. Yes, they have some tantalizing IP, but things move very rapidly in the sectors in which they operate, and current IP isn't worth squat unless you can defend it and constantly refresh it. Best case, they'll split up into smaller, better focused companies and, after some further devaluation, somebody will snatch up the sweet little bargain that is their film sector and stable of respected brands.

    EK should go visit their Senators and make a play for large military contracts, emphasizing the importance of immediate job growth. They need that kind of investment to stay afloat, it isn't going to come from the private sector at this moment. We uregntly need real manufacturing jobs and companies like EK are far more attractive investments than some of the fly by night operations that have recently been funneled stimulus money.
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,530
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristophanes View Post
    We should hope not.

    AGFA Film, the spin-off from the parent, died due in retrospect to the collapse of film demand. It survives on only as a label.
    True, the Agfa Film spin-off (Lupus Imaging?) now seems just to use the brand for own-label film made by Fuji (and, latterly, color negative "Made in China"...perhaps by Lucky Film?). So not an alternative independent source of film at this stage. (The other part of Agfa, in Belgium, still coats film, but, not, I believe, consumer product).

    Ilford/Harman, as a spin-off of the insolvency/re-organisation of the "old" Ilford, seems to have found its niche as a quality manufacturer and supplier of a more-or-less fixed range of "known and trusted" product for the specialist market. (And avoiding anty reliance on the declining demand for movie stock...)

    So the best hope is that the film part of Kodak might go the Ilford/Harman way of a private buy-out?

    Fuji seems an unknown quantity...they have certainly cut their film range, but are very poor at providing accurate information, even on what is actually available in any particular area. They will presumably also be affected by declining movie demand, but they give the impression of being a much more solid company with their other interests in various fields.

  6. #36
    vpwphoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,107
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by analog what is that? View Post

    Kodak sat on digital technology for 20 years, while miliking us with their near-monbopoly in the film finishing business.....
    I DO NOT BUY THIS ONE INSTANT!!. I made the transition from Film to Digital in the professional arena.
    I used one of Kodak's first digital cameras... the files couldn't be used for much!!!
    The current computer technology made editing even a scanned HRes images a LONG process.
    I remember a clipping path taking 5 minutes to render on a decent computer, and an Unsharp mask took 3 minutes to Run.

    We were not ready for anything they "sat" on.

    I then used a $30,000 DICOMED digital back that had a $55,000 computer tethered to it to run. It made real nice images digital images (the latitude before highlights "bloomed" was that of slide film), that took a while to render also.
    Last edited by vpwphoto; 01-05-2012 at 11:02 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  7. #37
    CGW
    CGW is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,798
    Quote Originally Posted by analog what is that? View Post
    Yes similar to AGFA, and this might mean we get new manufactured film LONGER, since this opens up a venue for smaller, hungrier and fqaster companies, with less history and obligations.....
    It might mean chinese manufacturers are finally able to find a market for developing better films and keep them in production for a longer time, than if they had to continue competing with Kodak, both going bust in the process.

    Kodak sat on digital technology for 20 years, while miliking us with their near-monbopoly in the film finishing business.....
    It might mean chinese manufacturers are finally able to find a market for developing better films and keep them in production for a longer time, than if they had to continue competing with Kodak, both going bust in the process.


    The fact of insufficient demand remains. While Kodak reps were crowing about increased sales as late as November, they were silent about volume.

  8. #38
    MDR
    MDR is offline
    MDR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Austria
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,041
    Lupus didn't die because they didn't sell any film but because their former parent blocked Lupus' access to its accounts and money and because of a slightly criminal Boss. The only thing in common with Kodak is the amoral CEO.

    Btw Fuji grows stronger and stronger in Tinseltown until a few years ago very few movies were shot on Fuji Stock (which is often superior to Kodak stock) but numbers a rapidly climbing furthermore a lot of film are shot on Kodak but released on Fuji or Agfa Stock (both Cheaper and just as good) and as we all know the money is in the release stock. Fuji also has new motion picture stocks (Eterna Vivid series) that still look like film (grain) as opposed to Kodak's drive for grainlessness.

  9. #39

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,530
    Quote Originally Posted by MDR View Post
    Lupus didn't die because they didn't sell any film but because their former parent blocked Lupus' access to its accounts and money and because of a slightly criminal Boss. The only thing in common with Kodak is the amoral CEO.
    Isn't Lupus Imaging the current business using (among others) the Agfa brand name for consumer goods? (See http://www.lupus-imaging-media.com/c...28/46/lang,en/ )

    Wasn't there a previous unsuccessful re-incarnation of the AgfaPhoto brand after the "old" Agfa closed...in which case you might be libelling the wrong CEO?

  10. #40
    Richard Sintchak (rich815)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    San Francisco area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,836
    Images
    1
    Film, especially B&W, will survive. But not Kodak. And I doubt anyone will buy their film division. If you like Kodak film load up the freezers or learn to love other competitor's emulsions. We still likely have another 6 months or so of their film in the distribution channel.

    Maybe we'll be lucky like it was for APX for a few years with seemingly loads around for a while (ha! I remember all that APX having 2009 and 2011 expirations and thinking how long still that was!) Now try to find expired APX25 for less than $10 a roll or APX100 for not much cheaper.
    -----------------------

    "Well, my photos are actually much better than they look..."

    Richard S.
    Albany, CA (San Francisco bay area)

    My Flickr River of photographs
    http://flickriver.com/photos/rich815...r-interesting/

    My Photography Website
    http://www.lightshadowandtone.com

Page 4 of 45 FirstFirst 1234567891014 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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