Eastman Kodak: Next Insolvency?

[Ted Striker]

The idea that building 39 is going to be moved is simply unthinkable. You cannot move an operation that size. When Kodak folds, building 39 is going with it. There will be no saving it.

 

[brbo]

You can't move B38. But you can move the ownership of the B38. There are countless examples of carving out a good part of a bad company and selling/transferring it to another entity. Not so unthinkable.

 

[Ted Striker]

You can't move B38. But you can move the ownership of the B38. There are countless examples of carving out a good part of a bad company and selling/transferring it to another entity. Not so unthinkable.

B38 used to roll film 24x7x365. That's the economy of scale it's supposed to work at. Today it doesnt meet 10% of that level of production.

Whether Eastman Kodak owns Building 38 or Kodak Alaris does, the same economics will determine the fate of it.

 

[Hogarth Ferguson]

This thread is a disaster

 

[Ted Striker]

This thread is a disaster

A lot of useful facts contained in this thread. You find this upsetting?

 

[SaveKodak]

I think the 'worst case' scenario for still film shooters would be Kodak itself having another insolvency. However given the interest level in film and the fact that it's clearly a stable market, if not slightly growing, someone would be interested in carving out that part of Kodak. I just don't seem them pulling a Polaroid and destroying all the works. The Impossible Project essentially succeeded even though for a long time their product was barely usable, and much more difficult to produce.

Part of me wishes that the film making division would be owned by a small, Ilford like company that is there to make the quantity of film that the market sustains, free from the whims of Wall Street and industrial printing ventures. I'm willing to bet the new owners would even be able to license the Kodak name...

 

[Hogarth Ferguson]

A lot of useful facts contained in this thread. You find this upsetting?

I find a lot of contradictory statements and distilling fact from fiction is not easy, as it seems to be a lot of "i heard" and "no, I heard"

 

[Hogarth Ferguson]

I think the 'worst case' scenario for still film shooters would be Kodak itself having another insolvency. However given the interest level in film and the fact that it's clearly a stable market, if not slightly growing, someone would be interested in carving out that part of Kodak. I just don't seem them pulling a Polaroid and destroying all the works. The Impossible Project essentially succeeded even though for a long time their product was barely usable, and much more difficult to produce.

Part of me wishes that the film making division would be owned by a small, Ilford like company that is there to make the quantity of film that the market sustains, free from the whims of Wall Street and industrial printing ventures. I'm willing to bet the new owners would even be able to license the Kodak name...

Yeah, that is the hope, really. Plus, licensing means you get some kickbacks with none of the risks or production.

 

[ulrich.von.lich]

I find a lot of contradictory statements and distilling fact from fiction is not easy, as it seems to be a lot of "i heard" and "no, I heard"

That's what makes me uncomfortable to comment on anything, I provide sources each time but they all seem to be unreliable. According to HHPhoto, Skiff and vdonovan, all I have read so far is inaccurate. However, none of them has access to the Settlement and to the Supply Contract between Eastman Kodak and Kodak Alaris, which I consider important, especially the latter. They basically suggest the existence of Kodak photographic films is conditioned to the existence of the Building 38, which is owned and run by Eastman Kodak.

I have never been to a photo factory, but, despite of everything other posters said, I'm still inclined to believe, in the event the Building 38 must be shut down, some essential facilities such as expensive machineries etc. can be and will be transfered to another location, as well as all the manufacturing employees, who otherwise would have become a burden for Eastman Kodak in the procedure of bankruptcy.

If Kodak Alaris really worths the money they claim ($3 billions?), I think they will build a smaller factory. Let's see. I really think it will happen in some years.

Currently I only shoot films, mostly black and white, including of course lots of TRIX, and I'll say it again, no, I don't care about the fate of Eastman Kodak. I sleep well at night. If I wake up and see no more films (which I highly doubt), I'll put my film cameras in the closet and buy a digital camera. Simple as that. To be completely honest, if your photographic accomplishment is conditioned to the existence of TRIX or TMAX (whose existence to the Building 38 according to some) or even to the existence of films, you are possibly a pretty sh*tty photographer.

 

[Oren Grad]

[deleted for now - will revisit later]

 

[Michael Markey]

Currently I only shoot films, mostly black and white, including of course lots of TRIX, and I'll say it again, no, I don't care about the fate of Eastman Kodak. I sleep well at night. If I wake up and see no more films (which I highly doubt), I'll put my film cameras in the closet and buy a digital camera. Simple as that. To be completely honest, if your photographic accomplishment is conditioned to the existence of TRIX or TMAX (whose existence to the Building 38 according to some) or even to the existence of films, you are possibly a pretty sh*tty photographer.

Well said.
I use both but if film disappeared I`d just carry on with digital.
My photography is not preconditioned to film either and neither is it constrained by its availability.

 

[Skiff]

B38 used to roll film 24x7x365. That's the economy of scale it's supposed to work at. Today it doesnt meet 10% of that level of production.

Whether Eastman Kodak owns Building 38 or Kodak Alaris does, the same economics will determine the fate of it.

Exactly that.

 

[Skiff]

I think the 'worst case' scenario for still film shooters would be Kodak itself having another insolvency. However given the interest level in film and the fact that it's clearly a stable market, if not slightly growing, someone would be interested in carving out that part of Kodak. I just don't seem them pulling a Polaroid and destroying all the works. The Impossible Project essentially succeeded even though for a long time their product was barely usable, and much more difficult to produce.

Part of me wishes that the film making division would be owned by a small, Ilford like company that is there to make the quantity of film that the market sustains, free from the whims of Wall Street and industrial printing ventures. I'm willing to bet the new owners would even be able to license the Kodak name...

Yes.
That is what all we film lovers probably are hoping for. Especially that film production and film distribution will be again united, under one roof.
The separation of Eastman Kodak and Kodak Alaris is very artificial, and make things much more costly and complicated than needed.

But that the film production is separated from the (not well operating) rest of Eastman Kodak is something we are hoping for about 14 years now.
But it has not happened.
Instead Eastman Kodak is running from one new strategy to another, from one adventure to another, burning money in most of these adventures without any sustainable success......

Therefore I am not very optimistic that we see our wishes being fulfilled. So far it looks like Eastman Kodak is unable to learn from their mistakes of the past.
I hope I will be wrong!!

 

[Skiff]

That's what makes me uncomfortable to comment on anything, I provide sources each time but they all seem to be unreliable. According to HHPhoto, Skiff and vdonovan, all I have read so far is inaccurate.

Ulrich, as explained in detail in the posting above, not all, but essential parts of the articles published by journalists you've quoted have been wrong.
Most journalists are underpayed, have to work very hard in a hurry, and are no experts for film production, which is in fact "rocket science".
I don't expect 100% correct information under such circumstances.

Which are my sources?
1. Eastman Kodak and Kodak Alaris. I've talked to them directly on many fairs in the last years.
2. Robert Shanebrooks excellent book "Making Kodak Film".
3. Former Kodak employees, located in Rochester, who are active on photrio. They have also close contacts to current Eastman Kodak and Kodak Alaris staff.
4. Big distributors with direct contacts to EK and KA.

 

[valdas]

Which are my sources?
1. Eastman Kodak and Kodak Alaris. I've talked to them directly on many fairs in the last years.
2. Robert Shanebrooks excellent book "Making Kodak Film".
3. Former Kodak employees, located in Rochester, who are active on photrio. They have also close contacts to current Eastman Kodak and Kodak Alaris staff.
4. Big distributors with direct contacts to EK and KA.

I am not taking sides here, but my personal opinion is that employees of the company is one of the most unreliable sources. To what extent they can know very often confidential agreements that are signed by top management/shareholders.? As someone who (in my previous professional career) was very often involved in financial/legal due diligence in various M&A deals I can say that company staff is the best source of various speculations, rumours, misinterpretations etc. Someone who knows perfectly the technology side might be completely incompetent in legal matters... Again - I don't know facts and believe that most of us just speculates based on assumptions. But I wish Kodak (whichever Kodak it is) to continue manufacturing film because the choice is good for competition and end consumer.

 

[Skiff]

@ Valdas:

The sources I am using have been extremely accurate and reliable for years. Reality has always proven them right.
Therefore I don't have any reasons to not trust them.

 

[mani]

This thread reminds me of another one on this forum, that dated from before my interest in film, where the original poster in that thread stated with great certainty, and according to reliable inside sources, that Leica had totally stopped producing film cameras and would forthwith stop selling them.

I forget the date that thread was started (maybe it was around 2007 or 2008?) but I missed it the first time around, and it was lucky I didn't see it, because it was exactly the sort of thing that had put me off trying film for a long time.

In any case, it re-surfaced a few months ago, when someone jumped into the ancient thread and posted a new comment.

What struck me was a sad reflection: at least two of the participants in the original discussion had since died.
Leica still sells film cameras.

We're wasting our time with these discussions. The only thing we can do is buy and use more film. Anything else isn't worth worrying about until it happens.

 

[zuiko85]

But I thought you said that she said that someone said that something was might gonna happen!

I thought I was a reasonably good reader but I just can't make out who is who in this thread.

 

[HHPhoto]

This thread reminds me of another one on this forum, that dated from before my interest in film, where the original poster in that thread stated with great certainty, and according to reliable inside sources, that Leica had totally stopped producing film cameras and would forthwith stop selling them.

I forget the date that thread was started (maybe it was around 2007 or 2008?) but I missed it the first time around, and it was lucky I didn't see it, because it was exactly the sort of thing that had put me off trying film for a long time.

In any case, it re-surfaced a few months ago, when someone jumped into the ancient thread and posted a new comment.

What struck me was a sad reflection: at least two of the participants in the original discussion had since died.
Leica still sells film cameras.

I well remember that thread.
But there is a big difference: At that time it was quite easy to realize the statement is wrong, because just a short time before reports (videos) about the production of film cameras at Leica have been published. Leica was also very clear about its commitment to film camera production at Photokina fairs in 2008 and 2010.

And, even more important:
No one here in this thread has said that Kodak will definitely stop film production.
This thread is about the current troubles of Eastman Kodak with their main business field industrial printing, which is making severe losses. And the danger that these problems could / might affect their film business in a negative way.

The only thing we can do is buy and use more film.

Yes.
And supporting all real film manufacturers: Kodak, Fujifilm, Ilford, Foma, Adox, Film Ferrania.
And getting more (young) people interested in using film.

Cheers, Jan

 

[Ste_S]

Was there any truth in the rumour that Nolan, Tarantino, Abrams et al were offered Kodak's film division around the time they guaranteed to shoot a number of movies on film each year ?

On a side note, there was reports on the internets that Nolan was going to open a new Kodak motion picture development facility in Mumbai. Anyone know what that was about ?
Trying to drum up interest in using film in Bollywood ?