Quote Originally Posted by Aristophanes View Post
1) Olympus' scandal has little impact on a high-growth industry. Others can step in. Kodak's demise puts a giant question market on exactly how much demand there is for film of any kind, especially in the long term.
Why would there suddenly be a question mark? At the moment photographic film seems to have stabilized at a low level while movie film is in steep decline. Kodaks film unit has been mostly profitable throughout the last ten years, while their digital branch wasted money quarter after quarter.
Quote Originally Posted by Aristophanes View Post
2) Enron did blow up the power market. Certainly in California. I am a bond analyst. That was downright ugly, and the lawsuits are still ongoing at enormous cost to all ratepayers in many states. Enron's demise and lack of diligence all around exacted a huge toll on consumers, and still does.
3) Kodak going south means that extending credit to all other film suppliers becomes an issue because the central point is the enormous erosion of demand for emulsion products worldwide. Instead of credit and financing being offered mostly on the financials of the supplier, analysts will be looking at the underlying customer base of the product. This could apply to the company making parts for Fuji processing machines to suppliers of emulsion chemicals to distribution wholesalers. If Kodak has to pay cash up front to get its film products on the shelf, then that could very well spread to everyone in the market.
So which other major power company went bust shortly after the Enron thing or as a consequence thereof? No reasonable investor thinks photographic film has a huge growth potential right now, so the demise of Kodak won't even create shock waves like Lehman or Enron. I just don't see that bunch of investors scratching their head "we would have never thought this digital fad would catch on" ...
Quote Originally Posted by Aristophanes View Post
4) Yes, the whole question about the survival of roll and cartridge film will reside with the ability to manage small volumes with adequate QC.
Cutting film to rolls is trivial compared to proper coating. You should rephrase this as "4) Yes, the whole question about the survival of coated film stock will reside with the ability to manage small volumes with adequate QC." And while it is quite popular here to rag on Foma/Adox/Efke here in this forum, a lot of people seem to be happy with their products, especially in larger formats. In a few years a lot of Kodak's film patents are due to expire so we could suddenly see a hike in film performance from former low cost vendors.
Quote Originally Posted by Aristophanes View Post
5) Doom and gloom is a function of economics and business. Where there's risk, there's doom.
If you want to beat the market consistently you will have to separate the wheat from the chaff. Omnidirectional doom&gloom panic in the face of a little risk won't do much good.
Quote Originally Posted by Aristophanes View Post
6) My major concern when looking at film production and the transfer of assets to someone other than Kodak is the entropy in the camera market. Basically any takeover of the Kodak's operations is like taking over a car part manufacturer for 1980's vehicles. This applies to Ilford as well as Fuji. At a certain point--when it is not known--the suppliers of credit and financing are going to ask where the new customers are, and where they are getting their equipment to load your emulsion product in. Like all creditors they may need more certainty that eBay sales volumes and flea markets. No supply of cameras could lead to a contraction ins the supply of credit and operational funds for film manufacturers. Prices rise, more customer leave as a result, and so on. That's the threat.
Unlike digital cameras, you don't have to buy a new analog camera every two or three years, so analog camera sales are a lot less relevant to film sales than you make it look. I own and use three analog cameras right now, none of them was bought new. I bought my last new camera 25 years ago, yet I still go through a lot of film every year.