The Economist: The last Kodak moment?

[thirtyfivefifty]

Kodak is at death’s door; Fujifilm, its old rival, is thriving. Why?
http://www.economist.com/node/21542796

 

[noimmunity]

Thanks for the link.

Seen from the position of us little ones (those who like to use film), the Battle of the Titans is merely an asterisk next to the demise of of our favorite films.

 

[f6andBthere]

Fuji saw it coming and dealt with it ... Kodak didn't and will probaly, as the article said ... "Fade like an old photograph!"

It seems that Fui had one bloody minded executive with a vision who was prepared to do whatever it took ... but for his determination it may have been different for them also!

 

[Richard G]

I read this the other night. Interesting perspective. Fujifilm's Mr Komori certainly breaks the mould of the cautious Japanese corporate chief. Touching, his 'regret and emotion' for his 'respected competitor'.

 

[varjag]

Fuji seems to be dropping their emulsions as their respective master rolls end, however.

Let's hope for the best.

 

[ramosa]

Pretty amazing to consider the ascent of one film producer (I.e., Fuji) versus the descent of another (I.e., Kodak) ...

 

[gavinlg]

So kodak is really done eh...

 

[35mmdelux]

Kodak has been in its death throws for years now. The real question is how Kodak managed to hold on this long, its raison d'être?

 

[bigeye]

I hate tidy business stories. Take a look at their financial docs. They are both riding the same decline.

From 2008:

- Fuji's photo group sales are down 41%
- Total sales have dropped 23%
- Fuji photo group makes up less than 15% of sales, down from 19%

Kodak photo had about the same trend through last year (2011 report not yet out), except that the film group formerly made up 1/3 of their sales and consumer digital another 1/3. Obviously, they're more focused and less diversified, in a declining photography market (both film and digital). They're living off of other business lines, like computer screen film and medical products.

The "brands" are bigger and more associated with photography than the companies in reality are (fuji) or should be (kodak).

It's also interesting to find out that putting out "perfect products" is a problem with Kodak.

- C

 

[shadowfox]

Good comparison.
Kodak indeed ran on a single message, branding, and strategy for far too long.
Instead of using its vast resources to experiment in new branches of targeted marketing (and branding), they squander it on assumptions based on fickle (hard to predict) mass commodity trends.

I think someone with a vision can still save Kodak, with the help of a group of investors with deep pockets.

The question is, who?

 

[f6andBthere]

It's interesting looking at the survival of Fuji that they chose to release a new film camera recently in the MF folder ... albeit in cooperation with Cosina. It certainly wasn't about profit ... maybe just a statement saying "Hey we're still here and we still believe in analog photography ... for the time being!"

I've never quite managed to work out where that fitted in with their subsequent downscaling of a lot of their film products! Neopan 400 in 120 in particular!

 

[Trius]

It's the board members that hired Fisher and Perez. Those two were at the helm during much of the carnage.

 

[Sarcophilus Harrisii]

Fuji seems to be dropping their emulsions as their respective master rolls end, however.

Let's hope for the best.

"Fujifilm has mastered new tactics and survived. Film went from 60% of its profits in 2000 to basically nothing, yet it found new sources of revenue. Kodak, along with many a great company before it, appears simply to have run its course. After 132 years it is poised, like an old photo, to fade away."

I have noticed a number of comments on this site about Fuji's lack of commitment to film, as they have discontinued a number of films/sizes/quantities over recent years (not that Kodak haven't). But if the quoted information in the article is correct, from a revenue perspective, they don't really need film any more. And yet: they continue to make it, and have even released a new film camera during the last couple of years. Perhaps they are more committed to a future with it than some believe. I would like to think so. If the article is correct, from an income point of view they could have simply walked away from it altogether.

Granted, the demise of some Fuji black and white films and sizes has not gone unremarked. And I was particularly sorry to see Sensia and Astia depart. Yet there was also much, much wailing and gnashing of teeth when Kodak discontinued Kodachrome. I am not ignorant of the unique circumstances surrounding Kodachromes demise, not least of which was its processing regime; however the number one reason was that people had stopped using it (well, until just before the end, anyway). I suspect Fuji have similarly elected to concentrate on producing those films that are assured of selling, and selling well, over the medium to long term in lieu of lower volume ones.

But I genuinely wish Kodak well. I've always gravitated towards Fuji, but have used more Kodak films over the last couple of years, and like them. Tmax 100, Elite Chrome (gone, IIRC?) and Ektachrome 100VS have all been great. And Ultramax 400 is cheap, but good enough for everyday use. I bought my first ever rolls of Tri-X recently (not generally available in Australia--who knows why?), and really I hope it is still available in a few years time...
Regards,
Brett

 

[Turtle]

I desperately hope Kodak remains afloat because I love TriX. I could survive with HP5+, but would rather not have to make the transition.

 

[Lilserenity]

Elite Chrome 100 and 200 are dead.

Elite Chrome 100 Extra Colour is still alive but who knows for how much longer.

I wouldn't be surprised if Kodak is still around at the end of the year, if E100G and E100VS are the sum of Kodak's E6 range,

Shame as Elite Chrome 100 was fantastic, as was 200.

Vicky