FujiFilm film segment declines

Discussion in 'Film and Processing' started by doug_harl, Jan 13, 2012.

  1. The top graph for Imaging Solutions shows 'Color Films and Others' (bright green bar) declining exponentially since '08.
    This tells us:
    • This is not a "Kodak Only" thing.
    • It is happening throughout the industry.
    • Much of FujiFilm's business is in Asia, FYI.
    • I'm not making this stuff up.
    Why does it matters to you:
    • You won't go up to your favorite photo web store in the future wonder why they don't have your favorite film.
    • If your favorite film is "discontinued" you won't say, "I wish I knew it was on the skids because I would have stocked up."
    The data is just piling up ...
    I will not respond to posts.
    Enjoy the moment. Nothing is forever and change is the only constant.
     
  2. Actually, the chart does not show an "exponential" drop in color film sales. In fact it shows, though 2 years is not a long enough trend to really make a statement, that the decline looks to be levelling off for Fuji. A four year chart is basically worthless to show or prove anything. Using the word "exponentially" in this case is just wrong.
    As someone else said a few threads ago...enough already! Shoot film if you want to, or don't, but color and B&W film products will be around for quite a while, still.
     
  3. I guess it could be called exponential if you don't know the meaning of the word.
     
  4. If we were to try to judge anything based on this chart, we'd have to conclude that Fuji's digital imaging business isn't doing well either: it's dropped from 164 billion yen (30% of 547.1 billion) in 2008 to 114 billion yen (35% of 325.8 billion) in 2011 -- a loss of 30% over the four-year period shown.
    But I agree with the above comments that it's hard to judge much of anything from this, and that the word "exponential" isn't applicable.
     
  5. Well whatever. I will just buy film and shoot it. I just buy a brick or two when I order and then go shoot it. When I cannot shoot film any longer then I will just move on to something else. Life is like that.
     
  6. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    Actually, the chart does not show an "exponential" drop in color film sales.​
    The drop in "film" is the change in the green segment. That has declined for at least three years in what looks like an exponential rate. If one estimates the 2011 film at 5%, necessary since it seems to have been removed as an exact percentage, the drop is from 76B yen to 16B yen. I don't see how that can be considered "leveling off."
     
  7. I guess it could be called exponential if you don't know the meaning of the word.
    If PhotoNet had a FaceBook style 'like' button I would have clicked it by now!
     
  8. That's not exponential, it's logarithmic. The rate of decrease is decreasing, not increasing.
     
  9. The drop in film sales looks much closer to asymptotic than exponential (but lacks enough labels to say with certainty).
    On the other hand, it would appear that not all is exactly rosy for Fuji's imaging solutions division:
    [​IMG]
    Seven straight years of losses isn't exactly what you'd normally hope for. Even though the losses were pretty small a couple of those years, they're still enough to work out to an overall loss over the period.
    At the same time, I feel obliged to point out a couple more items:
    1) this is both film and digital (neither of which seems to be doing extremely well).
    2) at least if you believe their annual report, appreciation of the Yen is to blame for much of the problem, at least recently.
     
  10. So he refuses to respond after trolling the opiginal post. Meh. Let's all shoot more film and declare Doogie dumb...
     
  11. Doug seems to have a real "hate on" for poor old Kodak as well if you look at his other posts in recent threads.
     
  12. Well there is always a possibility Doug has funds tied up in Kodak shares, and then I can't really blame him either.
    I do remember a whole lot of people being real skeptical of Microsoft's IPO.
     
  13. That's not exponential, it's logarithmic.​
    Exactly my point, thanks Andy. Like I said initially, and others reinforce, a 4 year graph is worthless given the resolution the graph shows. The last two years of the graph, if taken as 50% of the time period of evaluation, do indeed show a "leveling off", especially when you also look at the portion of the graph showing processing. If the "trend" were to continue, as Andy rightly points out, the trend line will flatten.
    Not that any of that matters. Fuji plans to be a big player over the next few years in the digital market.
     
  14. The real trend is the growth in cell-phone camera use, eclipsing all other photo-capture methods, or so our local rag tells us:
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10778633
    One commentator states:
    "digital cameras would not become completely obsolete, but in the next 10-15 years they would become a niche product."
    Of the five major crises currently threatening the capitalist system, I feel the energy crisis will be so acute in 10-15 years time that digital production will itself be threatened. Perhaps sooner. Digital production energy costs are increasing, promising further steep price rises. Look at this article on computers, their energy and pollution costs:
    http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2009/06/embodied-energy-of-digital-technology.html
    The 'embodied energy' in a computer chip is phenomenal. From the above article:"The most up-to-date life cycle analysis of a computer dates from 2004 and concerns a machine from 1990. It concluded that while the ratio of fossil fuel use to product weight is 2 to 1 for most manufactured products (you need 2 kilograms of fuel for 1 kilogram of product), the ratio is 12 to 1 for a computer (you need 12 kilograms of fuel for 1 kilogram of computer). Considering an average life expectancy of 3 years, this means that the total energy use of a computer is dominated by production (83% or 7,329 megajoule) as opposed to operation (17%). Similar figures were obtained for mobile phones.
    While the 1990 computer was a desktop machine with a CRT-monitor, many of today's computers are laptops with an LCD-screen. At first sight, this seems to indicate that the embodied energy of today's machines is lower than that of the 1990 machine, because much less material (plastics, metals, glass) is needed. But it is not the plastic, the metal and the glass that makes computers so energy-intensive to produce. It's the tiny microchips, and present-day computers have more of them, not less."
    The financial press is indicating that 2012 will be the year that the debt collectors finally come calling for the collapse of 2008. Will the Euro survive? Unlikely. What about the Pound Sterling and the US Dollar?
    We will all know in a few years. Already the US pull-out from Iraq has happened. Too expensive. Lots more 'unthinkable' events will occur too.
    I'll stick my neck out and predict that this year "consumers" may find it increasingly difficult to fund new digital camera purchases.
    Meanwhile millions of film cameras already exist. Compared to the price of one fab line for a single chip, the cost of even a new film coating plant is negligible.
    Kodak may go bankrupt, but I sure it's film division will get resurrected in some form. I remain optimistic that color film production will be around for decades.
    Fuji's fate is tied up with Japan's own energy crisis. Japan doesn't have any energy resources. How long will they manage to keep those aging, dangerous boiling water reactor's going?
    My guess is until the death rate stats from Fukushima get so bad that there's no hiding them, even with a press like Japan's. I'm not sure a locked-down social structure like Japan's will survive that one.
     
  15. Well, Doug, I hope you read this thread, even if you won't reply to it. You've made up your mind and don't want to discuss it further. You seem to want to make your point and not have to defend it. A good example of a closed mind.

    Maybe you will see from the answers that others are not quite as dumb as you think they are, and you're not quite as sharp as you think you are.
     
  16. Moderators, ban this guy. He is not a useful contributor to this forum, and only posts inflammatory, anti film, put a stick in your eye film shooters, and Im outta here type posts. Pathetic.
     
  17. I do think maybe one of the grownups should have a talk with him.
     
  18. I will not respond to posts.​

    Don't bother posting then.
     
  19. Truly pathetic! So long as Doug is having fun.
     
  20. I agree with Doug. The time to stock up on Kodak and Fuji color film is upon us.
     

Share This Page