|
|
|
-
 Originally Posted by NB23
If kodak was a solid Digital player today (R&D, sensors, Cameras...), they would have kept producing film even if it would be losing money just for the sake of being present in the market.
Kodak as a succesful digital company would have been the key to keeping film alive. As it is now, even if their film division is making a small profit, it is no guarantee of survival.
Fuji is a successful player in digital, and they aren't keeping around any spare emulsions. Each emulsion has to pull its own weight, and reformulations are weighed against the return profit. Witness the demise of Acros 400 in 120. Companies only go for a loss in a product if it promises a future ROI. That's why Microsoft keeps the lights on for MSNBC. When a product needs to be reformulated in a shrinking market, there is very little chance for that product's continued manufacture.
-
Originally Posted by Brian C. Miller
Fuji is a successful player in digital, and they aren't keeping around any spare emulsions. Each emulsion has to pull its own weight, and reformulations are weighed against the return profit. Witness the demise of Acros 400 in 120. Companies only go for a loss in a product if it promises a future ROI. That's why Microsoft keeps the lights on for MSNBC. When a product needs to be reformulated in a shrinking market, there is very little chance for that product's continued manufacture.
Ah, but MSNBC is now NBCNews.com. NBC bought out Micro$oft.
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.
-
What's that saying " rearranging deckchairs on deck of the Titanic".
-
Originally Posted by benjiboy
What's that saying " rearranging deckchairs on deck of the Titanic".
You obviously did not read this entire thread! 
PE
|
|
Adv Reply
