Jump to content

PRICE HIKES HIT SURVIVING KODAK FILMS (Rumor?)


Recommended Posts

<h2><a href="http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Price_hikes_hit_surviving_Kodak_films__news_311757.html">PRICE HIKES HIT SURVIVING KODAK FILMS</a></h2>

<p> I haven't seen confirmation directly from Kodak so it may be early to start stocking up. </p>

<p>If this is just a rumor, it could have been planted to spur sales at the end of the quarter. The old Kodak would never have done this, but who knows these days.</p>

<p>If this turns out to be true, it signals the beginning of the end. A price increase of this magnitude would be part of a harvest strategy to extract as much profit from film as soon as possible. I've been out of the company for 6 years, but I still live in Rochester. I've never seen more desperation from company execs.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

<p>There's always Ilford. Actually it seems as though all of the film prices, like everything else, have risen the last few years. I would expect film to rise in price as it becomes less mainstream. I'm going to keep using it though but these days I do my high volume shooting digitally. The days when I burned through thousnds of feet a year are gone. More's the pity.</p>

<p>Rick H.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p> It's fine with me. Prices are going up and my wages are not. Every price increase of anything I might buy means less of something else. Last month I decided to try out Kodak Gold again and the film seems fine to me. Scans well on my Plustek. Probably I will just quit buying Portra and stick to Gold 100 and 400 and be happy. </p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Most people who are still using film are doing so for a reason. They're a mixed bag-- film enthusiasts, a few creative amateurs, and a fair number of professionals who still use film in their personal work. </p>

<p>That group is not going to get excited about having to pay an extra $0.02 per exposure, and they'll pay it for the ability to keep using Portra or Ektar. This is what economists call <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_elasticity_of_demand">low elasticity of demand</a>.</p>

<p>Stated differently, the variation in the retail price of a roll of film is huge, so this 15% will get buried in that. I don't even know what a roll of film costs anymore; I just order from B & H twice a year and it's about $4 (120) to $5 (35mm). Sound about right? All I know is they have the best prices, and I'll pay double that at some other retailers, so 15% won't get noticed.</p>

<p>Kodak's marketing folks have probably thought this one out carefully. It's a sound idea, and it will make Kodak a few million bucks, but it won't affect the final outcome materially. I think the end's still a decade or so away for Kodak C41.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I wonder if Kodak has been greedy all along.<br>

Walmart not the lowest price around but generally trying so sell things for less.<br>

( ali id less expensive)<br>

several years ago Walmart started selling only a few kinds of Fuji films.<br>

I can still recall kodak film and even 110 on the racks at walmart.<br>

Is it a matter of price -original cost- ?<br>

walmart used to post signs saying how this oir that product was made in america<br>

those signs are all gone for years.<br>

With the old man dead have his children gone intenational?</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p> I think I am going to set a cap of $5.00 for a roll of 36 exposures. That would include tax and shipping as it is applicable. I can shoot Gold or Superia at that price no problem. I am no longer going to have a photo CD made as it cost a lot for an inadequate scan and it's wasteful to make those things. I would be ok with putting my pictures on-line or on a thumb drive but no more CD's. I will just have my film processed for me. It's quicker anyway. The last time I did that I had to spend 40minutes standing around because the machine was acting up. <br>

However I have no problem with Kodak increasing their prices. They are trying to keep their doors open and that is what they should do. As was said above many people will just pay the price and keep on truckin. That is what Kodak is hoping for. </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I'm not terribly upset by this. Kodak is no doubt trying to make their remaining businesses profitable again. If it helps them stay open then it's worth it; it isn't going to put me off buying Portra, any more than Ilford's price increases put me off buying XP-2 Super or Pan F Plus.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Oh, yes, greed is actually the root of Kodak's problem. They pretty much managed to setup a monopoly on film in the US, and managed that to get 80% profit margins, which are extraordinarily high margins. <br>

Every time Kodak tried to diversify, because some smart manager saw the "end of film" coming, they couldn't make 80% profit margin in the new product line. Eventually the bean-counters (accountants) shot down the diversification, and either shut it down, or sold it off, because it didn't make 80% profit margin.<br>

Meanwhile, the 80% profit margin business was shrinking, shrinking, shrinking.<br>

Of course they have to raise prices, they clearly weren't charging enough to pay the bills. </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>That group is not going to get excited about having to pay an extra $0.02 per exposure</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Many may have tolerance for price increases in general but, its doubtful its a per exposure analysis. Unless every exposure is a keeper which is far far removed from reality. Rather, the analysis may be cost in general to get the amount of useful images the photographer is likely to obtain. Also, this is not a one time hike. Over time prices have been increasing so its not a one snapshot in time type measurement that counts. Moreover, the measure doesn't account for the any price increases or hassles arising from more limited processing choices. Tolerance may be high but its not going to be based on the particular figure presented here.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>It wasn't the been counters who shot down diversification efforts. When George Fisher arrived as CEO, he reversed decades of mostly successful diversification and divested Eastman Chemicals, sold the blood analyzer business to J&J, sold the pharmaceuticals business to Bayer, sold the household products to somebody (I forget who), split off Ultra-life batteries, and sold the space sensing systems to ITT. The stated goal was to raise enough capital to invest in digital imaging to be successful. They were also milking the film business in those years for the same reason. The current value of all of the billions of dollars poured into digital imaging is less than zero. If Kodak has kept those other assets and planned an orderly decrease in the film business, the company would be thriving today. </p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>It's a tax write off for me either way, so I try not to think about price increases too much. I am also *very* stocked up, over 1,700 rolls of Portra 400 in 220, Tri-X, TMX, Ektar 100, Acros 100, HP5, PanF, APX 25, Techpan, HIE and Rollei IR 400 in 120 alone, so I just order 20 rolls of a still available type of film at a time and rotate stock according to expiration date.</p>

<p>Right now, you can get 120 Tri-X from Freestyle for $3.79 a roll, HP5 is $4.29 a roll so this 15% increase makes the price the same as HP5. Even if Tri-X in 120 were to go for $8 a roll in 5 year's time, I would much rather give that to Kodak instead of some opportunist on ebay who is making a killing on a discontinued film. </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I for one, am about as angry and frustrated as I've ever been... I'm really hoping that this is a rumor; there WAS a considerable price hike<strong><em> just several weeks ago </em></strong>on most Kodak films, both color and black and white!! I can't believe that no one mentioned this. And upon news of the E100g discontinuance, I noticed that B&H almost IMMEDIATELY jacked up the price YET AGAIN!!! This, AFTER the last recent price hike I mentioned, upon which they raised it from an already expensive $7.50 to $8.50! This was one of my all-time favorite films, but they've now made it impossible for me to stock up and pay their outrageous current $10+ price, let alone 15% more!!</p>

<p>I love the Portra films too, and <strong><em>they've already raised most of them about 15% recently, too!!</em></strong></p>

<p>Before I'll take up digital photography, which sure seems like what these greedy (add terrible managers in the case of Kodak!!) so and so's are all attempting to force us into, I swear, I will find another pastime, though photography has been #1 with me for many years. I've tried digital, and it simply leave me cold; no interest WHATSOEVER.</p>

<p>Can anyone confirm or deny this awful news? Here I am spending yet more time worrying about future supplies on a beautiful day instead of getting out and taking pictures. Thanks mainly to Kodak and its legacy of incompetent, ridiculously and obscenely overpaid top executives (along with virtually <strong><em>all</em></strong> of their big company counterparts in the U.S.).</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think you are *quite* getting it Jeff, this is the same 15% that has been talked about for weeks, now it had been

made official by Kodak as well as the announcement that Kodak E-6 is history. The price on 120/220 Porta and Ektar has

not changed since I bought 200 rolls of it back in November on the announcement of Kodak's possible and now real C-11

filing. How on EARTH did you not see this coming man?

 

Demand for color slide film is falling straight down to earth at terminal velocity and you think this is Kodak being greedy,

lol! The price of silver is not helping this either, the price we pay on both film and silver gelatin paper is going to continue

going up, that is why I am buying another 100 rolls of Tri-X in 120 today, from Freestyle, who is charging far less for it

than B&H. Freestyle is also charging the same as B&H for the now finite supply of Kodak E-6 films you are talking about.

 

If I were dead set on using Kodak E-6 stock, I would put my order in NOW from Adorama at $8.95 a roll:

 

http://www.adorama.com/KKE100G36U.html

 

Or give Matt a call at Glass Key Photo in SF on Monday to see what he can do for you:

 

http://glasskeyphoto.com/

 

But to blame Kodak for this when they are trying like mad to hold onto film production in a rapidly sinking market is utterly

insane my friend, really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>I don't think you are *quite* getting it Jeff, this is the same 15% that has been talked about for weeks, now it had been made official by Kodak as well as the announcement that Kodak E-6 is history. The price on 120/220 Porta and Ektar has not changed since I bought 200 rolls of it back in November on the announcement of Kodak's possible and now real C-11 filing.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Daniel, I sure hope you're right; that is, that this price hike IS the one that happened several weeks ago, okay, maybe it was back in November, but I'm almost certain that B&H, Adorama, and Unique, have raised prices much more recently, and by about that much! I'll have to check my receipts, but it was recent in my mind. I'm in an awful hurry right now, but I will pull them later. And I'm virtually certain that B&H Photo, an otherwise decent outfit, imho, jacked up the price to over 10 bucks a roll on the very recent discontinuation news after they raised it to $8.50 just a short while ago, as per that recent price increase I mentioned.</p>

<p>Sure, I did see this coming as far as the steep drop off in slide film. What I'm blaming Kodak "leadership" for is for the mistakes that Ron Andrews mentions; this has been going on for YEARS. Had they done what Ron mentioned, they'd be in good shape, albeit, the film division would be smaller, of course. They've done almost absolutely NO MARKETING, no advertising, yet their film division has been consistently profitable, perhaps the only division to do so!</p>

<p>Please don't get me wrong. I LOVE Kodak films; that's why I'm so mad. I have the utmost appreciation for the good people that have brought us these products, and the utmost contempt for the executives that have run it all into the ground through their gross misallocation of capital and generally terrible decisions. And in these tough times, while so many get continually squeezed in all areas of life, the executive class, no matter how lousy, continues to collect its millions.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeff, I know what you mean. But in order for Kodak to have pulled this off w/o a re-structuring like Ilford did, they would

have had to have started making big moves about 10 years ago. That did not happen and then Sept. 2008 happened and

the whole world went to crap.

 

I love the products and it is frustrating to know that it could have been different. But I also think the work by Kodak

engineers Garrett Kokx, Barb Ulreich, and Bob Masters in giving us their all shows in what we still have, they must feel

like crap to hear people say how Kodak utterly failed when some of the best films the company has ever made are sitting

on shelves going out of date because the novice, memory sharing brigades opted for instant and near-disposable

Facebook galleries instead of tactile prints.

 

There is not one single film maker that has flourished from their heyday point, they have all either gone out of business or

vastly re-scaled and continue to re-scale in a steadily declining market. Ilford and other small black and white only

companies have made realistic forecasts for this decline and have both refined their product lines and priced them

accordingly. The two big things now that foretell film's future is demand and material cost.

 

As far as Kodak's ability to succeed in coming out of this with a re-scaled business plan for film, it is anyone's guess, but I

would think that you can expect more varieties to drop off in the coming years as times and needs continue to change.

As much as I use it for work, I think what digital and the Internet have done to the photo world flat out sucks. If the day

ever comes I can not shoot black and white and print it in my darkroom, I am finished with photography.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, the prices on good silver gelatin paper are not exactly a joy either, I am looking at investing $10,000-$30,000

in the next 5 years....that's insane amounts of money to me. If my fine art scheme does not pan out, my wife may put all my gear and

ME on eBay!

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...