KODACHROME DEMAND WAS NEXT TO ZERO. IT WAS SPOILING ON THE SHELVES. Kodak abandoned it when it could no longer sell it. And, this trend began in about 1990 with the upsurge of E6 processing and the higher quality!
Kodachrome was a round the clock operation in the early 90s, but fell off to one shift daily and then one day a week, then once a month and then once a year. Sales were terrible, in spite of ads. And yes, there were Kodachrome ads. I've posted one of the last futile Kodachrome efforts in the 90s.
Good luck guys trying to turn this one back on Kodak but it was you guys, and you guys alone.
Velvia killed Kodachrome on photo editors' light tables in the early 90s. No contest.
We know, we know, PE. People quit using Kodachrome when E6 surpassed it in jazzed up, over saturated, unrealistic gaudy color.
I go back far enough to remember when Kodachrome was king of saturation and E4 films, and early E6 films, simply couldn't compete. Once they became good quality and selection expanded to offer garishness (like Velvia, IMHO, for many but not all subjects and lighting) Kodachrome with its unique look, archival resistance to dark fading and "realistic" pallette simply didn't appeal any more.
Heck, I think E100G is pretty saturated and Astia was, both beautiful (though different) but pretty realistic, Provia is over the top for most of my subjects and tastes, and the only use I have for Velvia is to get colors that should be bright to pop on overcast days. I also love film and not digital. My tastes are clearly minority.
from that ^ linked article
"Digital photography has won out because its images are visible immediately and are easily stored on tiny computer chips, eliminating the need to carry and develop clunky rolls of film."