Quote Originally Posted by ic-racer View Post
What Kodak needs....seriously
I like it...

Too often I think these discussions devolve into reiterating the same stale patterns over and over. I don't know how it is elsewhere, but in this culture (USA) the Wall Street mentality has permeated completely from top to bottom. Everyone thinks that way. Most do and don't even realize it. Many here do, and don't even realize it.

If you can't be the biggest, the most powerful, the richest, the most controlling (that's a BIG one), well then, you can't be anything. You're a failure. Might as well kill the entire game by taking your ball and going home. Everything can - and should - be reduced to equivilent piles of $100 bills. And my pile has to be the biggest while your pile has to be empty. The success or failure of a business, or of an entire industry, is reduced to the level of clicking the Recalc button on a spreadsheet. Nothing else counts but the height of that pile. And nothing else should.

You can even see it here all over APUG. How many times have you read it? If my broken camera will cost $75 to fix, but when fixed will only fetch $60 on eBay, my only choice is to throw it away. No matter that after it's fixed it will probably continue to work perfectly for another 20 years. No matter that it has worked perfectly for the previous 20 years. And no matter that $15 spread over 20 more years is only 75 cents per year. No, the Recalc button says throw it way. Why are you even wasting time thinking about it? Wall Street says just do it.

Can Kodak survive? Of course. But it can't happen if those attempting to rescue it believe that the only valid definition of success is regaining 100% market share, a relisting on the Dow, a brand new film camera in the hands of every photographer on Earth, and dozens of worldwide coating facilities running 24/7/365 to supply them all. And regaining the biggest pile.

If they believe that the only way to succeed in the future is to repeat the past, well... they haven't been paying attention to the past. And they have no credibility in now predicting the future.

Ken