Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 73,970   Posts: 1,632,726   Online: 810
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27
  1. #11
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,590
    It seems as if they want to wash their hands of all the packaging and distributing and marketing garbage and just concentrate on making the film product. This could be a good thing.

    If I were a wealthy entrepreneur I'd buy the business, be the 'middle man' and sell the film to Fuji, Foma, Ilford, Adox, Freestyle etc. There would be no more KODAK BRAND film, but it will say "film manufactured in Rochester, USA by Kodak" or something like that and those guys can come up with their own names for the emulsions.

  2. #12
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,552
    Making the film is what they do best. The rest is what they do very poorly. Could be a win/win to hand that off to someone who can do it better.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    17,479
    Blog Entries
    5
    Images
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post
    Thanks Prof_Pixel it's unusual to hve such honesty from ex Kodak employees on this forum.

    Ian

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post
    That may be the case but others add layers of unfounded nothingness.

    Ian
    i couldn't agree with you more ian ...


    john

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Castle Rock, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,601
    Images
    69
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    Making the film is what they do best. The rest is what they do very poorly. Could be a win/win to hand that off to someone who can do it better.
    Funny, but they used to be geniuses at branding and marketing. I remember, as a 9-year-old kid, seeing an ad during the Andy Williams show that made me feel guilty if I used anything but Kodak film to photograph my daughter's college graduation.

    It's just a bunch of shitheads running the place now.

  5. #15
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,914
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    So essentially it sounds to me like Kodak wants to sell off their highly productive and very active film sales and marketing division.

    Wow, my wife is a programmer, she could do the the web page work, if I work at it too and hit the big pro-photographer trade shows I could seemingly double Kodak's marketing efforts, sales should skyrocket.

    WTF Kodak, wish I could sell something that doesn't exist for big bucks and keep the cash cow too.
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

  6. #16
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    Quote Originally Posted by ic-racer View Post
    If I were a wealthy entrepreneur I'd buy the business, be the 'middle man' and sell the film to Fuji, Foma, Ilford, Adox, Freestyle etc. There would be no more KODAK BRAND film, but it will say "film manufactured in Rochester, USA by Kodak" or something like that and those guys can come up with their own names for the emulsions.
    I think what Kodak is about is something including the brand, which in the film world is still quite an asset.

    I think they are looking for somebody who buys the Kodak brand and cares about all the marketing and distribution both as Kodak Portra, Ektar etc. and, in addition to that, to whomever else wants to license the product and sell it under their own brand, i.e. firms like Agfaphoto, or distribution chains, shops etc. like Freestyle, and maybe people like Ilford or Adox who could leverage their distribution network but would not want embark in the big business of the Kodak brand.

    They would keep the production, and therefore the quality, under control and so they would run no reputation risk in selling the Kodak brand for still film while maintaining full operation for the Kodak motion picture film.
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

  7. #17
    RattyMouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Shanghai, China
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,518
    Images
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by Diapositivo View Post
    I think what Kodak is about is something including the brand, which in the film world is still quite an asset.

    I think they are looking for somebody who buys the Kodak brand and cares about all the marketing and distribution both as Kodak Portra, Ektar etc. and, in addition to that, to whomever else wants to license the product and sell it under their own brand, i.e. firms like Agfaphoto, or distribution chains, shops etc. like Freestyle, and maybe people like Ilford or Adox who could leverage their distribution network but would not want embark in the big business of the Kodak brand.

    They would keep the production, and therefore the quality, under control and so they would run no reputation risk in selling the Kodak brand for still film while maintaining full operation for the Kodak motion picture film.
    Who wants to buy into a business that has a single supplier? A supplier that is literally on death's door? Seems suicidal to me.

  8. #18
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,827
    Images
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by RattyMouse View Post
    Who wants to buy into a business that has a single supplier? A supplier that is literally on death's door? Seems suicidal to me.
    That's what I was wondering. In their present state, they cannot offer any guarantees for continuous supply of product.


    Steve.
    "People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.

  9. #19
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    That's what "Rollei" does with film which is produced by Agfa (that's not AgfaPhoto, but "real" film producer Agfa). Agfa makes the manufacturing, and "Rollei" conducts the "business", which is all operations beyond manufacturing.

    On a smaller scale, that's what AgfaPhoto does. Fujifilm makes the film and AgfaPhoto operates the business.

    On another and larger example, that's what Vivitar always did. They never manufactured anything. They only conducted the "business". Another example is Hama and there are many others.

    The problem here is to find somebody who thinks film as a business can be operated profitably.

    ****

    Kodak as a film manufacturer is not on death's door IF film remains profitable as it is at the moment.

    Even if the company does not exit from Chapter 11 and goes into full-fledged bankruptcy procedures (Chapter 7) IF film production remains profitable and maintains a profitable "outlook" then the creditors will acquire the property of the entire assets of Kodak and will sell film production to somebody (the obvious assumption being that where there is a profit there is a buyer).

    When a company goes bankrupt what goes lost is risk capital (shareholder's money). In the US case maybe other stakeholders lose money (employees having some health insurance or so).

    Brand and manufacture, if profitable, can survive no problem. I can cite Cirio, Parmalat and Alitalia as recent cases in Italy (Alitalia being a bit more complicated).

    "Bankruptcy" means that creditors take the barn and sell it (or its saleable parts) to recover their money. Doesn't mean that the barn is shut down.

    IF film production is profitable and if it maintains a profitable "perspective" it is certain that it will survive even if Kodak does not emerge from Chapter 11.

    Seen from a film consumer standpoint the problem is not whether Kodak exits Chapter 11 successfully (which is irrelevant). The problem is whether film production is profitable and if an investor thinks that it is going to remain profitable in the long run.
    Last edited by Diapositivo; 09-08-2012 at 10:30 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by RattyMouse View Post
    Who wants to buy into a business that has a single supplier? A supplier that is literally on death's door? Seems suicidal to me.
    Every single McDonalds franchisee?

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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