Lodima is terrific contact speed paper, although the grade 2 Lodima on which I recently printed was faster than the same grade of Azo when developed in amidol. Much faster. In some cases I had to cut exposure time by a factor of 10 when switching from grade 2 Azo to grade 2 Lodima on the same negative. It wasn't as fast as enlarging paper, but was very difficult to control with such short exposure times. The next time I print with it I will use a lower wattage bulb rather than my usual 300 watt R40 combination photoflood/space heater.

I have quite a good supply of Azo, which lasts for all intents and purposes forever. As much as I've been printing lately it will probably last longer than I will. So I can continue to contact print for many years even if nobody produces any more contact speed paper. However, I intend to buy some Lodima because it's just right for some very high contrast negatives which I have been unable to print acceptably on Azo. That is, if the formulation of this next batch is same as what I've already got. I'll just have to take my chances on that.

What I do know is that a lot of printers have made great prints with Lodima paper and it is therefore a good product even if perhaps over zealously promoted. However, IMO to accuse Michael Smith of disingenuousness seems a bit, well, disingenuous.