So they are selling off the remaining flagship products and keeping movie, graphic arts and x-ray film? Guess that tells us where the money is. Don't forget about x-ray films - millions of dollars there.
(AFAIK, they still coat the x-ray film that is then sold by Carestream.)
Film X-rays wont last long. Digital is more and more common. My kids had a set of x-rays done by the dentist recently and they were all digital.
Film X-rays wont last long. Digital is more and more common.
Sure they will. Onex/Carestream didn't buy that whole market from Kodak just to have it go T-U after just a few years. Film x-rays are cheap and can be done with equipment that has been in place for the last 25 years (or more) and fully depreciated. I'm talking about hospital imaging, not dental office stuff. Even in it's heydey, Kodak barely paid attention to dental.
In the 1990s, Kodak PROFITS in this market were 1 to 3 billion dollars per year against three heavy-hitter competitors. Granted, I've been away from it for 15 years but everytime I've gone through a hospital in the last 5 years, which has been far too many times, everything is done on ancient, cheap x-ray gear. And I doubt the Obamacare environment is going to justify stepping up to replace all that gear with multi-megadollar digital imaging suites.
New installations will go fully digital, though. No argument there.
All this has happened before, and all this will happen again.
I'd bet they could but they already have the all tools they need to make film.
The only value I see for Fujifilm in buying Kodak's film division is to own the color film market outright.
It seems to me that at least for color film that could easily become a reality, even if they didn't buy Kodak.
For B&W, what then? When Kodak "sells its film business" what does that mean? Are they selling the formulas, the coating machinery, the license to the name of e.g. "Tri-X"? If people are loyal to Tri-X because it has a different look than HP5 could not Harmon buy the formula/process for Tri-X and produce an emulsion that is a complement to HP5? If they owned it Tri-X would no longer be a competitor. In this scenario Harmon wants to make money. If they can net more money by owning and producing a onetime Kodak emulsion, why not? They already own the means of production and I bet it's not running at its full capacity.
It feels like there's an assumption afoot that if "Kodak film" dies then Tri-X (or Plus-X (or Panatomic-X (or Double X))) must die as well. That is not, by necessity, the case. It all hinges on ownership, demand, and cost of production. For all the grousing going on here about this or that film going away you must remember this: It is not outside the realm of possibility that Kodak's death is the key to having again everything you lost.
But then, I'm talking through my hat here.
s-yeah, I hoard Tri-X-a
I photograph things to see what things look like photographed.
- Garry Winogrand