Jump to content

Kodak to sell its Film and Paper business [merged]


KM-25

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

KM-25, I see. I couldnt stop imagine if one converts your invested money to only 35mm rolls. It'd be lifetime investment.

 

Nice to see a dedicated film user as you. If I lived in a house, Id buy a extra refrigator. It is too complicated to do just now in small apartment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

KM-25, I see. I couldnt stop imagine if one converts your invested money to only 35mm rolls. It'd be lifetime investment.

 

Nice to see a dedicated film user as you. If I lived in a house, Id buy a extra refrigator. It is too complicated to do just now in small apartment.

 

Andy, sorry if I have posted this photo before...

 

My fridge lives in a 8' x 8' foot storage closet along with my darkroom in our 880 square foot apartment, my Jobo CPP2 lives on a shelf in my office. Note the vertical tray system to save space. I can do 20x24 if I fold the wet paper after the developing stage, it works well, up to 16" x 20" is a breeze and sells the best anyway.

 

But back to the thread topic, use and promote film, show people not only is it not gone or done, but it still has uncharted territory in terms of creative output....

 

Make photos, not excuses.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited by KM-25
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thinking about it, I just wonder, where the difference of the situation is, compared to before this announcement.

 

If I got this correctly, Kodak announces they want to sell their film business but wouldn't have a buyer yet. The business obviously makes money, otherwise, they would have already closed it.

 

So we all put more film in our fridges (including myself - the content of my fridge should keep me going for a while). Which generates even more of this, obviously not unprofitable, business.

 

I think the technical term is "artificial scarcity". Which can be applied, when there is limited competition. Such as in the market for photographic films.

 

Stefan

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry Alan, but it might be time to realize that many who have posted here who are not you are both pros and enthusiasts alike who actually represent a mere fraction of the niche market for film. There are a great number of people who are not posting on the web that use film and want to continue to do so, many of them outright famous. So what you have to say really does not apply here, we are not your audience.

 

I just don't know why you post this stuff, no one here really cares, we have heard it all years if not a decade ago at this point. We are not the majority, we are the niche minority that use either film alone or film and digital together and are only interested in employing everything necessary to see that we can continue on this path.

 

Why don't you see this?

 

Did I miss where the thread title said, "Film Saved by Sale from Kodak to Benevolent Lover and Protector of Film."

 

I'm sorry KM-25 but it might be the time to realize I was simply responding to the person who said that the price of film going up would not reduce its usage by giving me as merely one example of how it has reduced its usage in order to dispute this one point of his.

 

I don't dispute that many like using film and will continue to use it but do you think as the price goes up usage won't continue to go down? I didn't say anything about digital being superior to film but said the price of 4x5 moved me to 120 film. And some of the reason for that was once I started scanning, the client had little knowledge or interest in what the originating material was or if a digital camera was used. This applies to most of the photographic industry... Not just to me!

 

About 25 years ago I shared a studio with another photographer and we had 3 full size fridges like yours filled with Kodak film and color printing paper. This was fairly common for a busy commercial studio (high volume product shooting in this case.) And we had cases of unrefrigerated Polaroid in packs, 4x5 sheets, and 8x10 too. I mixed 5 gallons of Kodak color chemistry at a time. We also had Kodak and Polaroid dealerships. One new assistant remarked that the value of the film in just one fridge was more than everything she owned. So multiply this example by many thousands of studios who stopped shooting film you get just one small aspect of what is at the heart of the economic problem. And we were small potatoes compared to industrial, commercial, military, and government film users. And then the consumer market... My cousin owned two camera stores that did a good business in Kodak commercial and consumer film, chemicals, paper sales and Kodak processing. Those stores are closed now... blah blah blah. Who wants to hear this? Not you I'm sure.

 

If people don't accept that things like this are driving the market they will be continually surprised when the companies making film fail to live up to the fantasies they have about them. Yes it is painful and we've heard it for years but want to deny it. I should put you in touch with a friend of mine who worked at Kodak for 30+ years before being let go if you want a real earful of how bad it is.

 

You and others sometimes come up with knee jerk reactions when I write anything rather than actually trying to understand that I am only making a small point or two about the industry... not trying to deny you the pleasure of shooting film. But it is always fun to attack the messenger isn't it?

 

Coming up with some kind of model to sustain the industry in times like this has worked for small nimble players but the Kodak facility may not fit into anyone's long term model.

 

We are not living in la la land where economic rules don't apply and Weyerhauser Corporation or the tooth fairy is going to come to the rescue because they appreciate the culture of film and will be determined to make the best film possible at any price. And surely once they do that it will sell like gangbusters but only to a small niche market. I think this summarizes a concept of unrealistic hope.

 

I guess some want their news sugar coated but plan on hoarding film to hedge their bets. So maybe that hoarding reveals that you and others are actually on the same page as me. Have you no faith in the future of Kodak films?

 

Stuart Smalley to Kodak.... You're Good Enough, You're Smart Enough, and Doggone It, People Like You.

 

I feel much better now that I reflected on the Stuart's wisdom.

Edited by AlanG
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The photo chemistry portion is also for sale, as per Kodak's PR rep:

 

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1950869&postcount=31

 

I was talking about the motion picture industry, not still film. "Film photo chemicals" and "movie film processing" (e.g., ECP-2D chemistry) are two different businesses. Kodak will remain in the motion picture film and chemical side of it according to the industry here (Los Angeles.)

 

Their very latest product (as of a few days ago) is Color Asset Protection Film 2332. It's processed in ECP-2D and is built on the current Kodak Vision Color Print Film 2383 technology.

 

They've simply bailed out on still film products. It's a shame since they will still be coating their Kodak Vision products and supplying chemistry for the motion picture industry. But of course it's not just about the cost of making still film, it's also the costs of marketing and distribution, etc.. With written contracts already in place with the major studios to use Kodak film, there's also less cost in marketing and distribution when it comes to motion picture film.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alan, no doubt you bring solid points to the table, but.....could you let us bask in the realm of possibility for a few days? I have been firing emails back and forth to my contacts at Kodak all day, there really is hope sir, even if it gives the patient only 2-3 more years to live.

 

You have moved on from using film, so put your self in our shoes and re-read what you just wrote, ok?

 

Have a great weekend everyone, that goes for you too Alan...

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have moved on from using film, so put your self in our shoes and re-read what you just wrote, ok?

 

My experience is that it's former film users who are most eager to see it disappear. Like a divorcée that professes to have no bitter feelings, but inwardly longs for his ex's unhappiness.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

My experience is that it's former film users who are most eager to see it disappear. Like a divorcée that professes to have no bitter feelings, but inwardly longs for his ex's unhappiness.

 

Good point...

"In the misfortunes of our best friends we always find something not altogether displeasing to us." - Francois De La Rochefoucauld

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Make photos, not excuses.

 

Great darkroom!

 

Yeah no excuses, I think it might be possible store loads of 100ft/30.5m cans in the freezer and give up freeze food. Cans save lots of space.

 

30 cans = 540 rolls :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

I bemoan Kodak's move, but I'm not sure whether I ought to load my fridge at this point. I already gave up TMX for Acros and XTOL for Diafine recently, so this might be a good occasion to look into something new and replace my remaining Tri-X stock once it's gone. Maybe Superpan 200 or HP5 might work as well for me? Buying another load of Kodak stuff would just be delaying the inevitable, I guess.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I can accept that some might have needs to speculate about me, my personality, and my motives however that has nothing to do with anything that will actually happen in the Kodak film business. It is just another distraction. For those of you who are board certified psychologists, I welcome your free long distance work based on whatever you've put together about me. After I get enough reports and donations ($100 minimum each) I will hire an analyst and report back who is most on target.

 

Until then here are the issues at play as I see them and I'd write the exact same things if I only shot with film cameras or wasn't a photographer at all. I am a stock investor and that is the perspective I am using, not a photographer's.

 

1. Can Kodak's large facilities still be viable and economical for someone to buy and run "as they are"... producing large batches at a time? If so for how long?

 

2. Can Kodak's manufacturing facilities be scaled to a smaller size to reflect a reduced demand (and niche markets) and still be economically viable even if this means having to charge a higher price per roll due to lower efficiency of production, marketing, and distribution?

 

3. Can someone buy the name and formulas and make some Kodak products in smaller batches long into the future using either new or other existing facilities?

 

4. Are any of these possibilities likely to be attractive enough to another party?

 

5. How many types and sizes of Kodak film (made by anyone) will be around in 5 years?

 

6. What is the maximum upside of any of these plans?

 

So all I see are some business issues and I've simply tried my best to be objective about describing them and giving my opinion that there is no slam dunk solution here.

 

On question #1... If there is currently a profit making it this way, it might be possible for this to continue at least a while longer. But is the potential profit enough to cover the purchase costs and future risks? Long term these facilities may prove too large so this might be just a relatively short term possibility on the way to a longer term plan.

 

On question #2... I believe the answer is no. But that is based on what I have heard and not what I can say I know for sure.

 

On question #3... For sure someone can do this but we have no way of judging if this will be economical or attractive to anyone. Or if the products will be the same or even have similar quality without the knowledge and specialized equipment that Kodak has. Consider how few film manufacturers there are in the world.

 

On question #4... I have no idea.

 

On question #5... I have no idea. So maybe hoarding is a good way to cover yourself.

 

On question #6...I have no idea again due to lack of information. But at best you'd be planning for a steady state not a growing market. At worst you'd have to plan to be in business for a short term.

 

Considering we all share the same lack of information, I feel my guesses and questions are as good as anyone's. But the best case scenario ultimately will depend on a smaller more flexible operation of some kind or you eventually will see more consolidation of Kodak film types and then finally none at all. Perhaps it will always be possible to sell enough Tri-X to keep it going on a large scale batch but that alone might not be profitable enough to keep the rest of the manufacturing operation going if the equipment is under-utilized.

 

So what can the current facilities be worth? We just don't know and time will tell. Doggone it. HP just wrote down $8B that it overpaid for EDS 4 years ago. So you never know.

Edited by AlanG
Link to post
Share on other sites

If Kodak 35mm film becomes extinct, then I will happily abandon 35mm. In my opinion, 35mm film is dead anyway. I will continue with medium-large (6cm X 9cm and 12cm) and LF. For '35mm' I will be happy with digital. The apparent difference does not appear in 35mm. Medium to large is clearly different. And there will be film for those formats for a long, long time.

.

You know that there are MF cameras nearly as compact, and certainly as inconspicuous as Leicas. No? They have been about since the Thirties.

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Kodak 35mm film becomes extinct, then I will happily abandon 35mm. In my opinion, 35mm film is dead anyway. I will continue with medium-large (6cm X 9cm and 12cm) and LF. For '35mm' I will be happy with digital. The apparent difference does not appear in 35mm. Medium to large is clearly different. And there will be film for those formats for a long, long time.

.

You know that there are MF cameras nearly as compact, and certainly as inconspicuous as Leicas. No? They have been about since the Thirties.

.

 

Well there will never be a problem with large format b/w plates. That's how Kodak got started. Some photographers just couldn't be bothered to make their own.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alan -- your questions are good and reasonable ones to ask, but i would add that kodak has already scaled back production and while the film business is still profitable it is no longer profitable enough to support other endeavors and that profit is expected to shrink further. why do i say profitable? because in a bankruptcy you can only sell what there is a bid for and there is no bid for a business that loses money and no possibility for a turnaround. i think the film business has stabilized and over time will grow minimally. it isn't a bad business to be in longer term it just isn't the same centerpiece product it once was. so it is a niche fill. there will be a buyer at the right price and the buyer will likely negotiate to get the the movie film products as part of the package. just my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alan -- your questions are good and reasonable ones to ask, but i would add that kodak has already scaled back production and while the film business is still profitable it is no longer profitable enough to support other endeavors and that profit is expected to shrink further. why do i say profitable? because in a bankruptcy you can only sell what there is a bid for and there is no bid for a business that loses money and no possibility for a turnaround. i think the film business has stabilized and over time will grow minimally. it isn't a bad business to be in longer term it just isn't the same centerpiece product it once was. so it is a niche fill. there will be a buyer at the right price and the buyer will likely negotiate to get the the movie film products as part of the package. just my opinion.

 

I think you are wrong about what can be sold in bankruptcy. There is no requirement that something has to be profitable for a sale to take place. Companies buy out machinery, buildings, etc. in liquidation because it is cheap enough and they have some kind of plan for them. In any case what is at issue is longer term profitability not whether the division is making money today. Heck if the price is right, someone could buy out the facilities with the long range plan to use the equipment and buildings to make something other than photographic film once demand drops below a certain threshold.

 

I am no expert on how Kodak has scaled back production but they have dropped various products from production as not being profitable. So it seems that when demand falls below a certain level, it may no longer be profitable to make a specific film product in Kodak's facility, market, and distribute it to these legendary "niche" markets. (This happened fairly recently to to all transparency films, Plus X, Type B long exposure negative films, 4x5 Readiload and various "specialty" films.) Again we don't know for sure what is the minimal amount needed to justify the continuation of Kodak's existing facilities. Whether this is measured in total number of rolls for the entire facility or minimal number of rolls of specific emulsion types. Motion picture, aerial, and specialty films are not part of this sale... unless things change.

 

I do not see how you could have acquired any data to support a conclusion that "i think the film business has stabilized and over time will grow minimally." And I don't see how any potential buyer would purchase the film division with a plan that is based on that assumption. The quote below is from the BJP article that was linked on the first page...

 

------------------

BJP's technology contributor Jonathan Eastland says the announcement could push more photographers towards digital photography. "In the short term, this latest snippet in Kodak's sorry on going saga to regroup and rebuild will push many more photographers still dabbling with film but teetering on the edge of the digital divide, over the cliff. They'll simply give in to the inevitable, faced as they surely will be with ever increasing costs-per-silver-frame and further contracting lab infrastructure.

Edited by AlanG
Link to post
Share on other sites

we shall see, but they are selling the business -- this is not a case of auctioneers coming in to liquidate machinery and the like. second, as for growth/shrinkage of film here is my reasoning. first off, the mass consumer market for film (the brownie/instamatic/disposable camera brigade) have long since dropped film for p&s digital. in fact, the big move in this market is away from the p&s (sales have been dropping on a y/y basis) into cell phone cameras. point is, that market has made its massive shift out of film. second, in the pro area, i would say that professionals have also long since shifted into digital. many still use film for their personal use but for work? news pros, studio, fashion shoots, went digital a long time ago. so where is the great big shift out of film going to come from? it will either be a gradual slow decline as fewer dinosaurs like myself are roaming the earth or some gradual growth along with people re-discovering film (increased sales at adorama and b&h) that coincides with population growth. my guess is the birth/death divide will run to even with a slight bias towards growth (people live longer). now, rationalizing the business to that size, well fuji and ilford seem to be having a good go at it along with some niche players. kodak's name can as well IF the business (not the machines) can be sold at a price that makes sense.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

...here is my reasoning. first off, the mass consumer market for film (the brownie/instamatic/disposable camera brigade) have long since dropped film for p&s digital. in fact, the big move in this market is away from the p&s (sales have been dropping on a y/y basis) into cell phone cameras. point is, that market has made its massive shift out of film. second, in the pro area, i would say that professionals have also long since shifted into digital. many still use film for their personal use but for work? news pros, studio, fashion shoots, went digital a long time ago. so where is the great big shift out of film going to come from? it will either be a gradual slow decline as fewer dinosaurs like myself are roaming the earth or some gradual growth along with people re-discovering film (increased sales at adorama and b&h) that coincides with population growth. my guess is the birth/death divide will run to even with a slight bias towards growth (people live longer). now, rationalizing the business to that size, well fuji and ilford seem to be having a good go at it along with some niche players. kodak's name can as well IF the business (not the machines) can be sold at a price that makes sense.

 

Well if anyone can reason oneself into believing film use won't decline much more, then buying Kodak's film division might also seem reasonable. I don't know what assumptions actual prospective buyers will make before they tender their offers.

Edited by AlanG
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...