Jump to content

Kodak reports increasing professional film sales


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

<p>I used to buy a 5 pack of tmy (120) a week, when it was about $21. The local sharks here jacked it up past $31 a year and a half ago, way before Kodak did. I did the same for Ektar (120), but stopped for the same reasons. My freezer is getting empty. This must hurt Kodak.</p>

<p>I buy more volume, but less frequently online now. This has also introduced "other" brands of greater value into my freezer space... I'm happy, but Kodak may not be....</p>

<p>Sadly, I don't 'Love' tmy like I did txp. Lucky for them I also lost Neopan 400 (120) or I would not be buying tmy at all. There is not much (fast) in 120 that is super high quality. Did I mention that I miss txp?</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

<blockquote>

<p>Their real challenge is to properly manage their business.</p>

</blockquote>

 

 

<p>It sounds like that's what's happening. He's very careful to say that "revenue" increased, not volume, which he avoids. So they have been successful at raising prices when volume isn't growing.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>This is why I buy 120. Others can buy 35mm. I do shoot 35mm but I would say 99% B&W and mostly bulk film. I though did buy some 35mm From Freestyle a few months ago as it was a good price on ACROS. One thing I also try to do is also buy developer every now and then. I do all my B&W processing at home so I worry about chems as much as film.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>He said that until the middle of October this year they have already sold as much films as in the whole year 2010.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><a name="pagebottom"></a></p>

<p>He absolutely did not say that. I'm pretty amazed at the listening skills being demonstrated here. He says, at 2:08, that the REVENUE in October is the same as 2010. Not the volume, the REVENUE. Because he avoids saying anything about volume, it would appear that they have made the REVENUE by raising prices, not by increasing volume. REVENUE is money, not volume.</p>

<p>I really don't care, but I do follow Kodak. I used to do a lot of business with them (as a product vendor.)</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p><a href="http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9MTEzODE3fENoaWxkSUQ9LTF8VHlwZT0z&t=1">Operating earnings from film has DECREASED by 98% from last year for 9 months: 86million (2010) vs 2 million (2011)</a><br /> Then there's this:<br /> <a href="http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9MTEzODEzfENoaWxkSUQ9LTF8VHlwZT0z&t=1">Film, Photofinishing and Entertainment Group third-quarter sales were $389 million, a 10%<br />decline from the year-ago quarter, driven by continuing industry-related volume declines.<br />Third-quarter earnings from operations for the segment were $15 million, compared with<br />earnings of $28 million in the year-ago period. This decrease in earnings was primarily<br />driven by significantly increased raw material costs, particularly silver, and industry-related<br />declines in volumes, largely offset by cost reductions and price actions across the segment.</a></p>

<p>Then there's the private equity firms that<strong> want Kodak out of the consumer printing, digital camera and FILM busines</strong> that have invested millions upon millions into Kodak - see any financial website and look for news on 'EK'.</p>

<p>Then there's<a href="http://247wallst.com/2011/11/16/investment-firm-wants-kodaks-poison-pill-killed/"> Kodak's management's poison pill </a>preventing any take-overs that are not management approved.</p>

<p>And any increase in film sales for a particular line just isn't good enough - assuming that the news is correct that those lines have increased. The decline in film sales are so great, those increases are chump change - which means they are in no way enough to keep the film division (FPEG) going.</p>

<p>Sorry folks, Kodak is doing what her founder did: commit suicide.<br>

<br /><br /></p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Perhaps we can agree that film sales aren't dead. At the store I work at outside Chicago, we process C-41 and E-6, as well as hand-processing traditional B&W, in sizes up to 120. Sales of film and processing obviously aren't what they were before the advent of digital photography, but they're good.</p>

<p>In particular, we do a brisk business in the sales and processing of 120 film. Hobbyist photographers who couldn't have afforded 120 cameras ten years ago find relative bargains on the cameras. Once they start shooting and see the image quality they can get from larger films, they're hooked.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>Perhaps we can agree that film sales aren't dead.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes I agree. But try to stay in business (i.e. pay your: bills, your employees while you can keep them, location, etc ... )<br>

This isn't about ideology - this is about market forces.<br>

Will film die completely? Nope. Can everyone who's made a living on film keep doing what they're doing"? Nope.<br>

Film will go the way of Glass Plates - not as fast - the curve for the slide will decline at a smaller slope.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p> We still have glass plates. :) Yes for me it is a hobby nothing even remotely like making money from it. Will some Pro photographers continue to use film? Yes but only as a part of their business. Fine Art photographers? Well they will use the bulk of film along with people like me who just enjoy using film. I am one of the strange people who still finds it magical every time I take the lid off a daylight tank and see an image that I made with nothing but a few chemicals and a roll of film that I loaded and shot in one of my many cameras be they classics,antiques or even toy cameras.</p>

<p> Larry</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>We still have glass plates. :)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's my point - we still have glass plates but not manufactured by big companies.And glass plates are a specialty item that costs quite a bit of money - too expensive for our typical artist.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Fine Art photographers? Well they will use the bulk of film along with people like me who just enjoy using film</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It's not enough to keep an entire division in business. In other words, keep using film all you want but it's not enough for big companies like Kodak to stay in the business.</p>

<p>Kodak must leave the film business and other business lines or it will die. Period.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Or let me state it this way:<br /> In 2017 you will pay ....<br /> $20 for a 36 exp roll of B&W film.<br /> $200 for a 100 pack of B&W paper for your typical resin coated paper.<br /> Chemicals ... I don't know ... they're not silver based so I'm not sure what they're going to do. But rest assured they'll be much higher.<br /> Color?!? digital is killing it. Just look at the E6 kits and C41?!? Jobo doesn't make their stuff anymore and support is nil at best.<br /> Color film is going to be dead, dead, dead.</p>

<p>B&W is going to be just an artsy fartsy market - not enough for a big multinational. In other words, in 2017 we'll just have Harman (Ilford and Kentmere) and Foma. after that? don't know.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>There is significance in the availability of chemicals.</p>

<p>I would be happy shooting E6 if the developers were actually available were I live (Montreal is not exactly a remote small town). Developing C41 is pretty much Dependant on me getting stuff through the mail (powders), which is not prime.</p>

<p>Too many idiots have figured out how to make bombs from anything they can get their hands on. DIY developers become a bit nuts to acquire and will only get worse as time gos on.</p>

<p>This is what will kill those two markets.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Peter, if the viability of the E-6 film/processing market was predicated on people who hand-develop their transparencies, Ektachrome-type films would have been dead shortly after their introduction in the 1940s. The number of people who ever hand-developed Ektachrome films has always been small as compared with people who have hand-developed traditional B&W films.</p>

<p>There is no good reason to hand-develop color films. Unlike B&W films, color negative and transparency films were designed to be machine-processed, and you can't do a better job hand-developing them as opposed to running them through a procesor.</p>

<p>In DuPage County, Illinois, we used to have four E-6 labs. Now my store is the only one.</p>

<p>I'm certain there will come a time- in a matter of years, not decades- when we'll close our E-6 line. That said, I'm somewhat surprised and pleased by the number of folks who still shoot E-6 films and bring them in for processing.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...