Quote Originally Posted by lensworker View Post
Apparently Kodak should have long ago ceded the printer market to Epson and focused on their strengths - film, chemistry and paper and continued their digital sensor and camera technology work.

Instead, it appears that they became obsessed with unseating Epson as the printer king and continued to head butt a brick wall. Not a smart move.

Kodak is now paying for their poor decision making. Poor decision making pretty much equals poor management, or lack of strategic vision and planning at the very minimum.

Going to war with a company who is the world leader in a given market segment in an attempt to steal a chunk of their cash cow looks to be a fool's errand. Common sense should tell a corporation to follow the money - their own money, not another company's money.

JMHO.
But that's the problem.

Their shareholder value was tied up in a revenue stream from film that had been obliterated. Sensors are now dominated by CMOS and by electronics companies: Sony, Canon, Samsung, and Panasonic. Kodak clings to some CCD processes, but with tiny volume. Public companies and sometimes their entire product line can disappear along with share prices.

Film might be profitable if it avoids competition with digital, but the real issue is investor capital. It's vanishing. When it goes, the expertise goes, the technical knowledge, etc. One can hardly blame the management for going digital as that's where the consumer went and 99.99% of the market. Kodak customers overwhelmingly have gone digital. Even for B&W survival of mass manufactured film depends on end product demand. This demand can, in the short term, be met through legacy cameras, but with no new film cameras being made en masse, who will recapitalize a film factory? Hollywood/Bollywood?

I scan tech portfolios looking for any interest in film and camera manufacture and there is no investment interest anywhere. No new cameras in volume = no new film in volume.