we onlyknow a fraction of the things they are working on
and they don't have all their eggs in the ink business.
their printers are all in one, fax, copier, scanner, printer, and work amazingly well
from all reports. ( i wish i had one ! ) i just hope their other " ideas/products" make it to market before
the "fire cupper" is done, and they fall to pieces.
The railroad analogy is an interesting one. Back in the early 70s, all major railroads were facing bankruptcy (and most in the northeast did declare) because they were still operating in the same way that they did when the railroad was the only choice for transportation. However, after a major restructuring in the 1980s, railroad traffic has grown as the railroads realize that they are now not always at odds with trucking, but they can provide service in tandem with trucking to provide benefits to the customer. Just change "railroads" to film manufacturers and "trucks" to digital, and the parallels become clear.
Originally Posted by daleeman
"Panic not my child, the Great Yellow Father has your hand"--Larry Dressler
Here's a short but interesting report on Kodak's current situation:
And the sign said, "long haired freaky people need not apply"
One of the best reports on Kodak I've seen in the mainstream media, allowing Robert Shanebrook to get a plug in for his book; a shame the piece couldn't be longer.
Originally Posted by waltereegho
Aren't we clear by now about what sank the Titanic? And Kodak?
Originally Posted by waltereegho
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
An inability to find a substitute revenue stream to replace the absolute decline of film. This despite having pioneered digital imaging. The wrong people made the wrong decisions with shareholder money. Sad. Seen before, though.
Originally Posted by CGW
Oh about two decades ago.
Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson
The thing is, their low-cost inkjet idea would be a great one... in the 1990s. And that's around when the seemed to start falling behind the curve. Somehow Kodak's research management didn't notice that the consumer innovations sector moves waaaay faster now. Publically-traded companies need to show a lot more long-term vision. If Apple doesn't bring out a shiny new product every other quarter, people think the company is tanking. Long gone are the days when a company like Polaroid could bring out an innovation and then count on it for uncontested revenue for a decade or two.
By and large, the consumer sector has moved from must-haves to want-to-haves. And Kodak is stuck in the must-haves. So they have been completely missing the boat on American consumer trends for, oh, at least a decade.
John, its true that we don't know all the things Kodak was working on, and that is precisely the problem. You cannot raise capital (sell shares and bonds) when nobody has a clue what your vision is. And if the vision is merely catch-up - make the same products less expensive- then that isn't an exciting enough vision to bring in more investment. For example, if Kodak were making heads up night-vision displays for cars something like that, they'd probably be making a killing. Land would have been working toward that kind of innovation in the 90s. I can name dozens of things like that which would be perfect for Kodak's brand. And they also need to go after and acquire new technologies and make them their own, that's the investment part that is also vital to a big company. But now, Kodak is (by all appearances) poking pathetically at ideas that have been around for a long time and already have somebody else's name on them.
Last edited by keithwms; 11-05-2011 at 09:48 AM. Click to view previous post history.
What a lot of people here seem to forget is that Kodak might be the big Guy in the Film World, but is in fact a dwarf compared to its competitors outside the film world. Sony, Nikon, Panasonic, Samsung, Canon are in fact huge companies Nikon's parent employs 3 Million people. And those companies not owned by huge corporations are owned by huge Banks and insurance companies. Kodak can't compete with the big digital guys simple because it doesn't have the money or the sugar daddy to help it. BTW there are some Family tie between Fuji and Nikon so even Fuji is in reality the more powerful company. Furthremore Kodak constantly invents things but nobody takes them serious because they don't have the political and monetary clout to make people use them unlike some other companies.
Long live Kodak, long live film
The ship hit an iceberg. It wasn't a design fault or poor metallurgy, it hit a an iceberg.It was not designed as an icebreaker.
Originally Posted by CGW
Kodunk sunk because of poor investment choices in markets they had no business venturing into.They also fell into an old trap and stopped advertising the virtues of film photography.
The Parable of the Hot Dog
There was man who lived by the side of the road and he sold Hot Dogs. He was hard of hearing so he had no radio. He had trouble with his eyes so he read no newspapers, nor did he watch television. But he sold good Hot Dogs.
He put signs on the highway telling how good they were. He stood on the side of the road and cried ""Buy a Hot Dog Mister?"" And the people bought. He increased his meat and bun orders. He bought a bigger stove to take care of his trade. He finally got his son home from college to help him.
But then something happened......
His son said, ""Father, haven''t you been reading the newspaper? There is a big depression on. The European situation is terrible, the domestic situation is worse. Everything is going to pot.""
There upon the father thought, ""Well, my son''s been to college, he reads the newspapers, he listens to the radio, he watches the television and he ought to know."" So the father cut down on his meat and bun orders took down his advertising signs and no longer bother to stand out on the highway to sell Hot Dogs.
And his Hot Dog sales fell almost overnight.
""You''re right son,"" the father said to the boy. We certainly are in the middle of a great depression.""
"They are the proof that something was there and no longer is. Like a stain. And the stillness of them is boggling. You can turn away but when you come back they’ll still be there looking at you."
— Diane Arbus, March 15, 1971, in response to a request for a brief statement about photographs