Kodak bankruptcy?

[rnt]

<p>Kodak bankruptcy?</p>

<p>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-30/kodak-said-to-weigh-bankruptcy-filing.html</p>

[joshroot]

<p>Sounds more like a legal/accounting trick than any real "bankruptcy".</p>

[JDMvW]

<blockquote>

<p>"It ain't true, is it, Joe?"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Dang.</p>

[rnt]

<p>Maybe not real as far as "going out of business" real (at the moment), but a real bankruptcy. If they decide to file I don't think it bodes well for Kodak's future. Not that their stock can go much lower- from the article:</p>

<p>"Kodak plunged 98 cents, or 58 percent, to 71 cents a share at 2:43 p.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading. The shares earlier tumbled as much as 68 percent, the biggest intraday drop since at least 1974"</p>

<p>Seems like short term profit is the name of the game now in both the public/private sector, regardless of the potential long term effects...</p>

[User_502260]

<p>I'm beginning to get that bad feeling I had the last time it looked like Ilford was going to disappear. If Kodak were to stop making film, some things, like TMY2 probably wouldn't be made by anyone else. Ilford would take up the slack in the b&w area and Fuji might have to increase production and even bring back some discontinued films and sizes. When Agfaphoto and Konica stopped making film there was some more breathing room for Ilford, Kodak and Fuji. If Kodak goes it might have the same effect for Ilford and Fuji. I can't see how an electronics company would be interested in Kodak's film related patents and I would rather see Fuji or Ilford make TMY2 than see the film simply disappear.<br>

This is an old story so I might have posted it before. Over twenty years ago my wife and I returned from our honeymoon. We flew home on a bankrupt airline. When we got off the plane we git cash from the ATM of a bankrupt bank. We opened the mail when we got home and saw there was a big sale at the local mall. Where was the sale? At a bankrupt store. In the 1980s, bankrupt didn't necessarily mean a company stopped operatinmg immediately. The bankrupt store? It's still in business and having sales all the time. I hope something like that would happen for Kodak but I am not optimistic. </p>

[leicaglow]

<p>It would allow Kodak to restructure in a way that they couldn't without B: without the pressure of managing creditors the same way as a going business. The article doesn't say they're actually doing it, and anyone who knows business, knows they will examine all their options when their back is against the wall. The problem is if their stock gets too low, they could be delisted from the exchange, and that would be a really bad thing.</p>

 

[Craig_Cooper11664875449]

<p>Regardless of Kodak obviously being in financial difficulties, the title suggests Chapter 11, which unlike the inevitable outcome of Chapter 7, is debtor protection from bankruptcy, as against <em>is bankrupt,</em> and allows for a number of possible outcomes.</p>

[jeff_z.]

<p>I woke up late last night with the TV on, to the re-broadcast of PBS' Nightly Business Report. They noted that at the end of the day, Kodak reiterated that it had no plans for bankruptcy, and the stock, after losing a huge percentage of worth on this rumor yesterday, regained a lot in after-hours trading.</p>

<p>Besides this, I read that for the executives to have drawn on that credit facility knowing that there was an impending bankruptcy, would constitute a serious criminal offense.</p>

<p>Fwiw, my take on Kodak all along has been that Perez was a follow-the-herd wrong thinking executive. Instead of downsizing the company and concentrating on their area of expertise as the plague of digital descended, he wasted <em>enormous</em> amounts attempting to get further into commodity-like business areas that were already dominated by very strong players. Saying this, I realize that I am very likely over-simplifying and could be wrong, but this is my impression over the last several years. <br /><br />I for one, cannot warm up to digital photography whatsoever, and am sure there are many more like me, and that this number could even grow, if not stabilize, if Kodak would simply <em>focus</em>, <em>market</em> film photography's strengths, and <em>advertise</em> their genuinely excellent films and chemistry. I've never been more excited about photography and use Kodak professional films exclusively. The new Portras, BW400CN, e100g, T-Max, all fantastic films that I use and love, and I know there are more. Concentrate on this area, please Kodak. Don't let an executive that thinks like Perez ever come within 10 miles of Rochester again.</p>

[randrew1]

<p>As Jeff says, bankruptcy is not the end of a company. Most of us have flown on bankrupt airlines and many of us own cars produced by a company that recently came through bankruptcy. In the local news coverage, Kodak insists they have no plans to declare bankruptcy, but they are considering all options. If Kodak were to seek protection from creditors, I think that would preserve the film business in the near term. This business is tiny compared to what it once was, but it is still profitable. There is no way a bankruptcy judge would allow a company to shut down a profitable operation.</p>

<p>Long term (4-8 years), I expect Fuji to achieve their decades old dream of becoming the largest photographic company in the world when Kodak finally exits the business. I expect they will hold this title for 2-3 years before they surrender the title to Ilford. I believe Ilford has a decent chance to stay in business for another decade or more. </p>

[d._b.3]

<p>People should keep in mind that it's the film division that's profitable and generating cash. The equipment is mostly fully depreciated and very little R&D is required because film is a mature product. Digital and printers, on the other hand, are sucking money from the corporate coffers. The Kodak 10K is worth a read if you're interested in film.</p>

[leicaglow]

Kodak has managed to make some very good, and sometimes innovative, digital

equipment, packaged in cheesy designs. A lot of their technology could go high-end if

they would get some good (possibly outside) designers.

[starvy]

<p>I read it yesterday and was quite shocked. I hope the film division survives.</p>

[Jerry_]

<p>General Motors went out of the bond business and the common stock became worthless. The Federal government saw fit to loan billions of tax dollars to assist General Motors (which now has common stock or some type of stock) to again become worthless in the future [my guess here.]</p>

<p>Kodak makes such *nice* things like the sensor for Leica digital cameras. If Kodak were to go "out-of-business," that would be one large loss to the American business world. [Please bear in mind, the top corporate officers will continue to earn competitive salaries...guiding the company through the maze of bankruptcy.]</p>

<p>Business is a tough environment to exist in....</p>

<p> </p>

[a._t._burke]

<p>Gentlepersons….</p>

<p>I think I remember a forum thread 10 or so years ago where the subject was Kodak’s President’s stupid assumption and not knowing his own business. </p>

<p>Evidentially at a stockholder’s meeting a stockholder complained that Kodak was loosing too much market share. The President was supposed to have stood up and snidely asked the reporters/photographers in the back of the room how many had Kodak film in their cameras (wrongly “knowing” that obviously the vast majority was going to raise their hands). Few hands went up. Someone in the audience yelled out “Fuji” and a lot of hands went up. </p>

<p>Is the story correct? If so, who was the President? </p>

<p>A. T. Burke</p>

[a._t._burke]

<p>Mr. Litynski…</p>

<p>You said above: "[Please bear in mind, the top corporate officers will continue to earn competitive salaries...guiding the company through the maze of bankruptcy.]"<br /><br />This made me wonder what those salaries were. According to Yahoo Finance’e list of key Executives:</p>

<p>Mr. Antonio M. Perez , 65, Chairman, Chief Exec. Officer and Chairman of Exec. Committee $1,760,000 <br />Mr. Philip J. Faraci , 55, Pres and Chief Operating Officer $820,000<br />Ms. Antoinette P. McCorvey , 54, Chief Financial Officer and Sr. VP $376,000 <br />Mr. Pradeep Jotwani , 56, Chief Marketing Officer, Sr. VP and Pres of Consumer Digital Imaging Group $159,000 <br /><br />Which looks like President Perez the highest earner, makes more than 10 times as much as the fourth highest earner, who happens to be in charge of Marketing (and I presume this includes sales).</p>

<p>Is the man most responsible for making the numbers on Kodak’s year ending December 31, 2010, balance sheet read:<br /><br />Total Assets 6,239,000, 000 <br />Total Liabilities 7,316,000, 000<br />Total Stockholder Equity (1,077,000) <br /><br />really worth ten time the money paid to the head of marketing?</p>

<p>A. T. Burke</p>

[Jerry_]

<p>Total Assets $6.2 billion</p>

<p>Total Liabilities $7.3 billion</p>

<p>Annual salary of $1,760,000 for "leading a company towards bankruptcy" ... <strong>priceless</strong>.</p>

<p> </p>

[d._b.3]

<p>Those high salaries are needed to stop the "brain drain". Pay up or Kodak could lose their executive team to competing companies! </p>

[Ken Katz]

There is blood in the water and this may not end well for Kodak. They are bleeding cash, had a $400 million operating loss in the first half of 2011 (including a $14 million loss in film & photofinishing), and face fierce completion from far better capitalized competitors. For film users, the concern would be is there a viable, sustainable business to reorganize around or for someone to purchase, or will Kodak ultimately be broken up (and who will pick up the film division)

[randrew1]

<p>Mr. Burke,<br>

I remember a slightly different story when George Fisher asked photographers what film was in their cameras knowing full well that most used Fuji. He then replied that Kodak would change that. I was working on an improved version of Kodak's 800 speed film at the time so I remember this one. When we introduced that film in 2000 many pros told us they would switch to it except they were switching to digital. The story you recall may have occurred earlier when Kay Whitmore was CEO.</p>

[randrew1]

<p>D. B. <br>

The brain drain argument has come about in more recent times when companies started hiring executives from outside the company. In the past (especially at Kodak), executive talent was developed internally. After spending entire careers working their way to the top, execs were not likely to jump ship. </p>

[a._t._burke]

<p>Mr. Andrews…</p>

<p>Ah-ha. That is probably the incident that I heard about but was either unintentionally or intentionally misstated. </p>

<p>I do remember in first grade or so (about 1924?) the teacher was talking about how rumors get started. She whispered something to the front row kid nearest the door and asked him to pass it on. It snaked around the room to the last person who, when asked, said something totally unrelated. I know I repeated verbatim what I heard. How many kids said what they thought they heard, but did not? How many kids rephrased the thought? How many kids changed it for the fun of fouling up the experiment (thereby perfecting the experiment)? It was obviously a meaningful lesson, well taught. After all, I remember it 86 or 87 years later and that remembrance has given me pause many times in those years. </p>

<p>Thank you for letting me hear it from the “horse’s mouth.” Ya’ know what ya’ get from the other end! :)</p>

<p>A. T. Burke </p>

 

[rashed_s]

I am very sorry, I could not yet understand what this means ( bankruptcy ) neither I could find an

alternative word for it, I have seen this for last few days on Yahoo site, please does this mean all of

the films will be stopped producing?

 

Thank you

[chris_raney]

<p>Well, I have a radical, ridiculous thought. For those of us enamored-for-life with film, specifically black & white film. What would be the possibility of perhaps buying out or leasing processing patents and film production facilities as a non-profit, international consortium of dedicated Luddites? There are simply too many fine cameras in existence today to relegate to the attic or to the desk as a paperweight, and too many photographers still breathing who will adore film to their dying days for this spectacular product to possibly be killed-off during this sustained economic downturn. </p>

<p>As a website with international reach, are there at least a million of us throughout the world who feel this way? Would we each pay the equivalent of $10 into this project, $10 million? Would we be willing to pay the equivalent of $30, which would multiply out as $30 million?</p>

<p>Some of us can pay little, others can pay far more. What if within a couple of years our little consortium could collect an average of about $200 a head? Could a combined collection of a hundred, or even two-hundred million dollars, with perhaps an annual fee of $20, ensure us that we would be able to buy film in virtual perpetuity? If millions of people can line-up to gobble-up Apple's newest life-saver within days, are there enough of us in the world to make something like the saving of black & white film, happen? </p>

<p>I'm not a wealthy man, but I'm willing to cough-up $200 bucks right now to ensure that my beloved Tri-X is available long after I become obsolete. </p>