earleygallery Posted January 5, 2012 Share #21 Â Posted January 5, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Chapter 11 was inevitable I'm surprised it took so long! They seriously need to restructure. Â Let's remember though that film is one of the few lines actually making profits for Kodak. They're in trouble now because they have failed to find a way to make a profitable business from digital products. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 Hi earleygallery, Take a look here kodak bankruptcy. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Steve Ash Posted January 5, 2012 Share #22  Posted January 5, 2012 I am optimistic that both color and BW film will survive. I see a chance that the film division will prosper as soon as it get rid of its dinosaur mother. Regards, Steve   Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StS Posted January 5, 2012 Share #23 Â Posted January 5, 2012 (...) Color - and particularly the various flavors of Portra - are most of what I see being used by the professionals I know or see still using film. Particularly true in the wedding business. (...) Â What I find interesting is the decreasing price of Portra, I saw in the last months over here. Just a speculation - they move out amateur films and offer lower-priced Portra as replacement for the few remaining film-using amateurs, hence streamlining the portfolio and having enough load to keep selected lines going? Â I do not understand enough about film making, from my limited view, the critical point should be the manufacturing of the coating material itself, the coating and cutting should be pretty standard procedures. But I could be wrong here. Â Difficult to say - if Portra goes away, I have to learn to scan 400H, which gave good results as well (got a roll as a freebie in a camera store). So no disaster for me. It would be anyhow a bit disproportional to moan about the loss of my favourite colour film, where the people, who make it, are probably concerned about the loss of their jobs. Â Stefan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted January 5, 2012 Share #24  Posted January 5, 2012 Chapter 11 was inevitable I'm surprised it took so long! They seriously need to restructure. Let's remember though that film is one of the few lines actually making profits for Kodak. They're in trouble now because they have failed to find a way to make a profitable business from digital products.  I agree but what was their alternative but to explore new businesses since sales of film and thus profits have been declining so much? They tried to use the profits from film to fund their entry into other businesses but were not very successful to date. (Although they report progress in the other divisions.) Some of the problems were that they did not anticipate the revenue from film to decline so quickly thus they thought they would have more money and more time to make the changes. It is easy to look back and say they should have diversified a lot when they were flush with cash. But they tried that back in 1988 when they bought Sterling Drugs so it wasn't as if they were blind to the future. I think Kodak lost $2-$3 billion on that one.  In the 3rd quarter of 2011 the entire film, processing and entertainment group had sales of $389 million and only had $15 million in revenue. That is a decline from $28 million in revenue for the 3rd quarter of 2010. The revenue from film is no longer that significant a factor for the company. Considering the declining profits and poor prospects it is pretty unattractive to potential buyers.  It looks like their strategy of using film sales to prop up the company until other divisions took off is pretty much played out. So now if they go into chapter 11 we will see how much value is left in the various assets. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted January 5, 2012 Share #25 Â Posted January 5, 2012 Depends on what the court decides provides the best overall outcome for all the parties. Â True, but under Chapter 11 the debtor company (Kodak) has time to exclusively submit an initial reorganization plan to the the bankruptcy judge. We don't yet know what Kodak has in mind for that. Â Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted January 5, 2012 Share #26 Â Posted January 5, 2012 In the 3rd quarter of 2011 the entire film, processing and entertainment group had sales of $389 million and only had $15 million in revenue. That is a decline from $28 million in revenue for the 3rd quarter of 2010. The revenue from film is no longer that significant a factor for the company. Considering the declining profits and poor prospects it is pretty unattractive to potential buyers. Â Depends on who is buying Alan, I have two friends who *love* photography and are pretty flush, one being on the Forbes 500 list. You never know who could be out there, especially considering Ilford's revenue is less than that and yet, they have what is considered to be the most respected and successful adaption of film manufacture and distribution in a niche market. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted January 5, 2012 Share #27 Â Posted January 5, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Depends on who is buying Alan, I have two friends who *love* photography and are pretty flush, one being on the Forbes 500 list. You never know who could be out there, especially considering Ilford's revenue is less than that and yet, they have what is considered to be the most respected and successful adaption of film manufacture and distribution in a niche market. Â Well I guess that is one way to assure you get a supply of film and chemicals. What do they know about the film business that Kodak doesn't know? Â I've read many of the reports and analysis of Kodak's current position, the potential bankruptcy, work out plans, etc. There is talk of winning lawsuits and selling more non core assets (whatever these are?) and some of their patents. But I haven't seen any suggestion in those articles about selling the film business and what it could bring in. Likewise, in Kodak's recent financial statements they make a point of emphasizing their move toward various digital technologies and don't show film as part of any long range plan. So I have no idea if this is considered much of an asset today nor if there are any eager buyers at $??? price. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted January 5, 2012 Share #28  Posted January 5, 2012 As mentioned, the likelihood is this will be Chapter 11 (if it comes to pass). Kodak stays in business, but a lot of its contractual obligations, that it can no longer fulfill as a much smaller company, get nullified. Current stock value drops to zero, shareholders(owners) get zip, creditors get "haircuts" of some percentage (just as may happen to banks holding Greek debt), Kodak can welch on commitments to pensions and retirement healthcare. Some big movie studios may get their contracts for film rewritten by the bankruptcy court - and some silver suppliers may get their contracts rewritten, too.  What happens to the film division also ends up in the hands of the court. As a profit center (if it is) it may stay with Kodak as their "sole source of support" to pay the bills. Or it may get sold. Or it may shut down, with the brand names and formulas licensed or sold off. Depends on what the court decides provides the best overall outcome for all the parties.  I don't think you can go into bankruptcy and leave shareholders and creditors holding the bag if the various assets are worth as much as some claim. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen in Montreal Posted January 6, 2012 Share #29 Â Posted January 6, 2012 Depends on who is buying Alan, I have two friends who *love* photography and are pretty flush, one being on the Forbes 500 list. You never know who could be out there, especially considering Ilford's revenue is less than that and yet, they have what is considered to be the most respected and successful adaption of film manufacture and distribution in a niche market. Â The film division could HAVE been spun off and sold as a niche market industry and could have remained profitable for a long while. But I think with Kodak selling off the gelatin division that looks less likely. Â The numbers are just too small for Mr. Bentley and Company Lear jet to even consider. His eye is on how long he much longer he can suck out the 3.5 million annual income he makes driving Kodak into the ground. I bet he retires at the end of this ride. He is 65, this is his final "big haul". Â For the film division to be viable, it needs to be retooled to adapt to low volume runs. A web store for special items/orders will be a must. It sure as hell is working for the Impossible Project, I just bought my daughter a box of IP film, $$$$$ They are making it work. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted January 6, 2012 Share #30 Â Posted January 6, 2012 Jeff S and AlanG - yes, all bankruptcies are complex - and different. Especially under Chpt. 11. All the stakeholders get to present their cases and claims - and plans - to the court, including Kodak itself. And the court gets to decide who gets what, keeping in mind that the goal is for Kodak to come out the other end as a going concern. Â Put it this way - if Kodak had the resources to pay all its commitments, including retirement benefits and everything else, and remain a healthy company...they wouldn't file for bankruptcy. The fact they do file for bankruptcy (if it happens) means they don't have the resources - and someone will have to eat the difference between what they owe, and what they can actually pay. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted January 6, 2012 Share #31  Posted January 6, 2012 As Kodak struggles, Eastman Chemical thrives | Reuters  Interesting article, I've not had time to read it in full yet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted January 6, 2012 Share #32  Posted January 6, 2012 Jeff S and AlanG - yes, all bankruptcies are complex - and different. Especially under Chpt. 11. All the stakeholders get to present their cases and claims - and plans - to the court, including Kodak itself. And the court gets to decide who gets what, keeping in mind that the goal is for Kodak to come out the other end as a going concern. Put it this way - if Kodak had the resources to pay all its commitments, including retirement benefits and everything else, and remain a healthy company...they wouldn't file for bankruptcy. The fact they do file for bankruptcy (if it happens) means they don't have the resources - and someone will have to eat the difference between what they owe, and what they can actually pay.  Yes I understand this but some claim that just 10% of Kodak's patents (the digital imaging ones they are trying to sell) are worth more than $1 billion. So what is the whole patent portfolio worth? Some reports say that Chapter 11 bankruptcy will make it easier to put these patents up for sale. And if Kodak can succeed in some of its lawsuits, that will bring in some money too. But apparently there are a lot of complexities involved in these patents.  Kodak's Patent Pivot May Not Avert Bankruptcy (Update 1) - TheStreet  What I am getting at is there may be more than enough assets to cover debts, bondholders, and shareholders if they went through liquidation instead of Chapter 11. But they'll need to reach an agreement if they'd rather try to sell off some of those assets and perhaps invest more to extend their risk in order to keep Kodak running and trying to make it profitable again. So whatever re-organization plan that is proposed will have to be convincing enough to sell it rather than the alternative of liquidation. Of course if the assets are not worth enough, that will really complicate things and those with the least guarantee (stock holders, workers) will be hurt the most.  By the way, in the US often when a company fails the pensioners lose some or all of their benefits because they are rarely fully funded. Sometimes the pensions get passed on to the federal government via the PBGC (Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation.) But in most cases current and former workers of bankrupt companies receive much less than they would have otherwise received. Often these pensions were originally part of union compensation negotiations where workers gave up some salary in return for larger pensions and after bankruptcy, they get screwed for this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeverettfine Posted January 6, 2012 Share #33 Â Posted January 6, 2012 Yesterday Kodak stock was down to $0.42. Rather incredible for a company that used to be one of the best of the blue chips on the fortune 500. They may even be kicked off the NY Stock Exchange. Â Film is still alive, though many kinds have disappeared. What I miss is all the wonderful high-silver content single grade fiber base papers that are gone. Fred Picker was right some 30 years ago when he recommended photographers to get a deep freeze and buy a life-time supply of paper now. It would never again be as cheap or of the same high quality. In 1980 many wonderful papers had already disappeared. Digital prints are nothing like a good silver print. They are more fragile and do not have the visual depth. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clickie McPete Posted January 6, 2012 Share #34 Â Posted January 6, 2012 I sure hope Kodak films can survive and it will be a terrible loss if they disappear but film in general is definitely still alive and kicking. There are more film users out there than just all you fine art guys and old fashioned wedding and studio photographers. Don't forget about the tens of thousands of toy camera users too. The Lomography community is stronger and larger than ever. And we have some cool films that you guys should be trying such as the fabulous Redscale XR 50-200 which produces wonderful and unique warm tones in the low ISO ranges. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posto 6 Posted January 6, 2012 Share #35 Â Posted January 6, 2012 One thing that often gets forgotten, is how Kodak's slice of the photographic pie has been declining since the 1980's (remember when they tried to use the USTR to pressure Fuji, who were already capturing a lot of their market share- well before digital arrived on the scene? Â Kodak has been mismanaged and overweight since at least the 1970's- digital has merely served to accelerate the process! Â Move on everyone, and support the winners, for these are the future of film. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted January 6, 2012 Share #36 Â Posted January 6, 2012 I sure hope Kodak films can survive and it will be a terrible loss if they disappear but film in general is definitely still alive and kicking. There are more film users out there than just all you fine art guys and old fashioned wedding and studio photographers. Don't forget about the tens of thousands of toy camera users too. The Lomography community is stronger and larger than ever. And we have some cool films that you guys should be trying such as the fabulous Redscale XR 50-200 which produces wonderful and unique warm tones in the low ISO ranges. Â No offense to you but this is a long way from the days when a typical enthusiast saw himself as a real craftsman, had a darkroom, and would pick from one of the many papers and then tone it. I don't see this as any different than p&s (film or digital) photography if the photographer is no more involved in the process. I see this and other Lomography items as mostly a gimmick for poseurs who want to associate themselves with "real" photography but are not willing to put out the effort that requires. To me it is just another sign of decline towards convenience over craft. Â Back in the 50s and and 60s Kodak had a huge selection of photographic papers and it was very common to own a darkroom or have access to one. Â When I was a student at RIT in the early 70s the campus bookstore had several long aisles of photographic paper from Kodak, Agfa, DuPont?, and others. The quantity and variety is something you can't imagine today. Yes, there may still be a future for film but the heyday for b/w was a long time ago. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 6, 2012 Share #37 Â Posted January 6, 2012 I sure hope Kodak films can survive and it will be a terrible loss if they disappear but film in general is definitely still alive and kicking. There are more film users out there than just all you fine art guys and old fashioned wedding and studio photographers. Don't forget about the tens of thousands of toy camera users too. The Lomography community is stronger and larger than ever. And we have some cool films that you guys should be trying such as the fabulous Redscale XR 50-200 which produces wonderful and unique warm tones in the low ISO ranges. Well, yes, but how do tens of thousands of lomoists compare to the hundreds of millions of film users by the end of last century? - Film is descending into a niche market and will remain alive and kicking in that niche - but for the large mass producers of yore it is a slaughterhouse.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveYork Posted January 6, 2012 Share #38 Â Posted January 6, 2012 Depending on what type of bankruptcy, it is unlikely Kodak goes out of business. Just a reorganization of debt. Didn't Ilford go through bankruptcy? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted January 6, 2012 Share #39 Â Posted January 6, 2012 I hope they sell it to Ilford. Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted January 6, 2012 Share #40 Â Posted January 6, 2012 the value is now only $37.00. Â Enough to buy about 5 rolls of Portra. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.