Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,775   Posts: 1,516,652   Online: 1131
      
Page 6 of 26 FirstFirst 12345678910111216 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 257
  1. #51

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,827
    Quote Originally Posted by RattyMouse View Post
    When was the last time Kodak turned a profit? It has been many, many years hasn't it? That tells us something.
    Obviously, it tells *you* what you want to hear. As for some of us, we keep shooing Kodak, Ilford, Fuji, etc. daily and go about our daily lives as image making photographers. Kodak is making and selling film, until I hear different, I don't really care about any of this crap.

  2. #52

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    127.0.0.1
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    604
    2007, according to Wikipedia. I'm not sure what that tells us. I just know I want to keep on using Kodak film and paper products as long as I possibly can, and I hope they stick around. Somehow.

  3. #53

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Shanghai, China
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,711
    Images
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by PKM-25 View Post
    Obviously, it tells *you* what you want to hear. As for some of us, we keep shooing Kodak, Ilford, Fuji, etc. daily and go about our daily lives as image making photographers. Kodak is making and selling film, until I hear different, I don't really care about any of this crap.
    Whoa boy. Calm down. FYI I just bought my first film camera last week. First film camera since about 10 years ago. I dont have any anti-film bias here AT ALL. PERIOD.

    We are participating in a discussion about the longevity of Kodak. You dont like it? Then get out of this thread. If you dont care, as you claim to, then why are you here?

    I bought two rolls of Kodak TMax 400 and a few of Porta400. But I am not going to buy anymore Kodak because I'd rather try to help a healthy film company survive. Ilford deserves more business because they clearly have competent managers. Fujifilm too.

  4. #54

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Shanghai, China
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,711
    Images
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by SkipA View Post
    2007, according to Wikipedia. I'm not sure what that tells us. I just know I want to keep on using Kodak film and paper products as long as I possibly can, and I hope they stick around. Somehow.
    Kodak's future is out of their hands. The courts have the final say in Kodak's exit from bankruptcy. Can they exit without showing a profit? Is that even possible?

    5 years without a profit is a loooong time.

  5. #55
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,747
    Quote Originally Posted by SkipA View Post
    What's for sale? I thought it was Kodak digital patents, some 1100 of them. That's what the article linked in the OP and a couple of subsequent posters have said.

    Suppose someone buys them and Kodak doesn't have to file chapter 8, what of the film and paper division? Is there any reason to think that Kodak will continue to produce and market film and paper? It doesn't seem like there's enough money there to keep Kodak going.
    My understanding was that the film products were one of the few areas, maybe the only area, in which they ARE making a profit. Not a big one, certainly not big enough to help the overall company that much, but turning a profit on film and paper none the less.

  6. #56

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    127.0.0.1
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    604
    The only products from Kodak that are important to me are film and paper. If the company survives but the film and paper division does not, then it ceases to be relevant to me.

  7. #57
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,020
    Images
    60
    It has been clear for a long time that the market for analogue photography products would never again be near what it once was.

    Kodak used to make huge profits from that market. As Kodak is a public company, its Board of Directors has and had the legal duty to attempt to replace those profits with similar profits.

    When the world started turning away from film, it was clear that Kodak had to look elsewhere to replace most of those huge profits.

    They have done a very poor job of finding and taking advantage of replacement profit sources. In addition, arguably they have done a very poor job of maximizing the benefit of that portion of their old analogue photography products that still produced significant, albeit smaller profits.

    If the patent auctions don't produce enough cash, there will be a large number of creditors left being owed a large amount of money. Some of them may be forced into bankruptcy.

    By itself, Kodak's film operations currently produce a profit. If you assign those operations responsibility for some or all of Kodak's legacy costs (particularly unfunded retiree's benefits and to a small extent unfunded pensions) than the accountants will tell you that the film operations don't make a profit.

    I would surmise that Ilford really doesn't want Kodak to fail, because Ilford is relatively very small, and the failure of Kodak will hurt the market Ilford trades into much more than any benefit Ilford may gain from no longer needing to compete with Kodak.

    If you like Kodak products, buy them. You won't hurt Ilford by doing so.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  8. #58

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Shanghai, China
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,711
    Images
    30
    Yes, you are most probably right in that Kodak's film division only turns a profit when discounting the massive legacy costs. That is what makes the future look so grim. You can't just disconnect the legacy costs can you? Certainly I am no expert at all this but shafting the retirees is not an option. At least I hope it is not.

    There's no way Kodak's tiny film division today can support the enormous legacy cost of Kodak.

  9. #59

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Shanghai, China
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,711
    Images
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by SkipA View Post
    The only products from Kodak that are important to me are film and paper. If the company survives but the film and paper division does not, then it ceases to be relevant to me.
    I think we can all agree on that!

  10. #60

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,967
    Quote Originally Posted by RattyMouse View Post
    ... the massive legacy costs. That is what makes the future look so grim. ...the legacy costs ... Certainly I am no expert at all this but shafting the retirees is not an option. At least I hope it is not.

    There's no way Kodak's tiny film division today can support the enormous legacy cost of Kodak.
    It seems unlikely, doesn't it. Very sad thought.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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