If you read the whole article the perspective is more nuanced. Film is simply fading to obscurity because intermediary steps along the way from shooting to viewing are forced into digital for reasons of cost. Also, digital is about to catch-up to film aesthetically, or at least mimic film entirely. It's not quite there yet to the discerning eye, but most viewers don't discern.
Originally Posted by ic-racer
This is turning from an aesthetic issue into a financial issue. Entropy and depreciation will eat away at the installed camera base. As fewer film cameras are used less film will be needed. Less demand = higher costs both for manufacturing the film and processing it. Same for any new film cameras.
The burning question is: Will there be enough demand, and stabilized demand, including a continuous supply of cinema and photographic film cameras, to keep Kodak and Fuji analog film services operational? Investors and creditors will not put new money into declining demand sectors. So before all demand dries up from consumers or professionals, the money may dry up first, and the market capitulates. These are unforgiving times.
Kodak and film require a saviour like the fellow who rallied Leica. Someone with deep pockets and the skill necessary to consolidate, rationalize, and re-introduce the product. Film cannot compete with digital, so it needs to claims its own space. There's a lot of marketing power in nostalgia.