Kodak licences its brand name

[AgX]

correct, but as I read it it has nothing to do DIRECTLY with kodak film

I never said so. A lot of of postings here about the Eastman Company are not film related.

Wherever you go in the world—no matter how remote the
location—you are apt to see the Kodak trademark. It is one of the
world’s most famous and trusted brands, and is Kodak’s most
valuable asset.

Kodak 2007


As far as I know the Kodak tradename has not been licenced so far (aside of products that were not photography related but served Kodak as advertising tool) so that would be at least interesting news for the industry minded.

[Marc B.]

There is nothing new here.
Basically, just rehashing old news...announced 09 FEB last year.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/10/bu...eras.html?_r=0

[BrianShaw]

I never said so. A lot of of postings here about the Eastman Company are not film related.

That's correct. You never said so. Nor did anyone else say so. What's more... the comment I made was about something someone else said in response to a question about the impact on Kodak film. I was completing a thought that was made by MattKing... making specific something that was implied (perhaps even so clearly implied that my addendum was unnecessary). Why are you being so defensive? I'm confused.

[Prof_Pixel]

There is nothing new here.
Basically, just rehashing old news...

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/10/bu...eras.html?_r=0

Not true, The actual licensing agreement mentioned by AgX was only announced in the Rochester paper yesterday. So it IS current news.

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

I wish the best luck to Kodak , I have 9 rolls waiting for the lab but lab quality and prices really upset the home finance and me. Whatever photographers publish red skies with Fuji , at normal photographs , Fuji never reached to Kodak quality.

[benjiboy]

This is just what's called in the trade "label engineering".

[mgb74]

At best, licensing your valuable brand is a last ditch effort to stave off the wolves. More likely, it's just a landing on a spiral staircase that is "down only". Worst case, it's a recognition that nothing of value is left except the memories of what once was (i.e. "Polaroid").

It's the ultimate triumph of marketing and image over engineering and innovation. I think for Kodak, it's a necessary evil. But not a good sign.

[wblynch]

Does this mean I will be able to buy Kodak Christmas Lights once again?

JK (just kidding) Imaging, indeed!

[RattyMouse]

At best, licensing your valuable brand is a last ditch effort to stave off the wolves. More likely, it's just a landing on a spiral staircase that is "down only". Worst case, it's a recognition that nothing of value is left except the memories of what once was (i.e. "Polaroid").

It's the ultimate triumph of marketing and image over engineering and innovation. I think for Kodak, it's a necessary evil. But not a good sign.

Very very true.

[MDR]

I thought this 2006 Kodak ads fit the topic quiet well "just when you thought it was dead. Funny advertisement unfortunately for Kodak batteries but still funny. http://www.frederiksamuel.com/blog/2006/10/kodak.html