|
|
|
-
Hoarding Kodak = Killing Kodak?
Nobody is for certain what the future holds for Kodak. We all hope that to some degree their coating business will continue to operate far into the future. But I had a thought earlier. If a large number of photographers go out and hoard film, there will be a nice little spike in sales, followed by what could be a long, and steep, drop in sales as people get over their fears and shoot out their stock. Even more dangerous is that film is a perishable item. That could reflect very poorly on a quarterly balance sheet, especially for a company that is under judicial oversight for finances.
I'm sure that there won't be enough hoarders to really show as a blip on the financial radar, but I think the theory is interesting enough to discuss.
-
I think that the photo market is so small compared to the motion picture market that on the industrial scale necessary to move the needle, it makes little difference. The limiting factors are people's disposable income to hoard, and storage space. Those are finite.
-
If photographers are strictly depending on movie film to keep still image film afloat at Kodak, we might as well give up now. I don't see Hollywood shooting much film in the coming years; not with 8k around the corner and the proliferation of digital projectors in theaters.
-
Due to its sheer size and capacity, Kodak could sustain an analog output in B&W and Color as big or 10x bigger than Ilford and still leave room for Fuji. This is profitable. If it were not, there would be no Ilford.
Therefore, the problem lies within Kodak. But, it can be done.
PE
-
I don't think we can do anything other that still buy film. Kodak must find other ways to sustain its business. Whatever we do will only be temporary. The decline in film sales is real but Kodak should have found ways to keep its business profitable. Its not the market's fault.
-
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
-
 Originally Posted by stavrosk
I don't think we can do anything other that still buy film. Kodak must find other ways to sustain its business. Whatever we do will only be temporary. The decline in film sales is real but Kodak should have found ways to keep its business profitable. Its not the market's fault.
It is ALWAYS the market's fault. It's hard to blame the seller when there are fewer buyers.
-
If the buyer is somehow convinced that he cannot buy film then it is not the buyer's fault. I now have no place near me to buy any sort of film. I can get disposable cameras and I can mail order film.
PE
-
Originally Posted by PeteZ8
Nobody is for certain what the future holds for Kodak. We all hope that to some degree their coating business will continue to operate far into the future. But I had a thought earlier. If a large number of photographers go out and hoard film, there will be a nice little spike in sales, followed by what could be a long, and steep, drop in sales as people get over their fears and shoot out their stock. Even more dangerous is that film is a perishable item. That could reflect very poorly on a quarterly balance sheet, especially for a company that is under judicial oversight for finances.
I'm sure that there won't be enough hoarders to really show as a blip on the financial radar, but I think the theory is interesting enough to discuss.
A spike in sales is still beneficial because it gives hints about how many people might still buy film when the threat to supply is not present. I wouldn't be surprised if Ilford watches this sort of thing very carefully, on guard for contagious panic. They sell film too, remember? Film's going to die, right? Why wouldn't they be watchful. Kodak is their canary.
In a robust film market a hundred rolls is 'stocking up'. But when Kodak declares bankruptcy it's 'hoarding'. I'd better keep it in the basement with the canned beans and 16 gauge deer slugs. 
s-a
-
I don't think any sales can be bad at this point, even if they are one-off, big purchases that won't repeat. Film makers are not going to scale up production and get stuck with inventory; if anything they will scale back and raise prices.
-
A surge in sales of endagered films could certainly help rethink their direction at this critical juncture. Toward the end I got the impression they
were lopping off this and that in desperation. Now that the worst is over
(temporarily) they can think smaller and more sustainably. Hard to get a
firm clue, but they seem to have withdrawn their discontinuance notice of
Ektar sheet film from their website since Chapter 11 and maybe want to
leave the option still there. But panic hoarding of Ilford back during their
troubles was probably a factor in Forte's demise. I'm stocking up the freezer to capacity for my own sake. But one positive thing all us hoarders can do is rotate our inventory with fresh stock if it becomes available and
affordable again, and keep business steadily flowing to Kodak. For instance, I plan to participate in any upcoming custom runs of 8X10 TMY,
both to replenish what I shoot and to help sustain Kodak's committment.
|
|
Adv Reply
