Kodak motion picture film price increase

[Phil_F_NM]

I just checked prices on Kodak's site after they made me sign up for yet another account aside from my student account. I'm not sure how much across the board the cost of motion picture film has gone up but a single 100ft daylight spool of EK 7222 (the 16mm version of EK 5222 in 35mm) AKA Double X, has gone up about 25%. A cost increase for students of $6 per 100ft spool. Usually the cost of 400ft cores is exactly the same per-foot so I'm assuming as much.
The cost of EK 5222 looks like it has remained the same, so I guess this only affects poor student and independent filmmakers who are using 16mm. Super 8 be damned. That stuff is just as expensive for half as much footage.
I'm disappointed.

Phil Forrest

 

[zuiko85]

Darn, the cost of feeding my Minolta and Mamiya 16mm subminis is going up. Soon it will be almost a dollar a roll.

 

[Prest_400]

The cost of EK 5222 looks like it has remained the same, so I guess this only affects poor student and independent filmmakers who are using 16mm. Super 8 be damned. That stuff is just as expensive for half as much footage.
I'm disappointed.

Phil Forrest

I only check S8 prices every now and then and it is expensive, specially taking into account developing and telecine afterwards.

Did notice with still film just recently... Even last year it was some Euros less. I could get a propack of Portra 400 at 30€ and now it hits 40€... yikes. I'm seeing the B&H price holds at $29
Someone told me "Yesterday was better for buying film", I didn't expect such a hike for Europe, probably has something to do with shipping (at Emulsive Alaris said they switched to air shipping for Europe) and currency rates.
Guess it's the message to pick up B&W seriously and shoot Ilford for a while.

 

[Ted Striker]

Kodak is in VERY serious financial trouble, with several analysts predicting a second bankruptcy next year if things stay the same. Revenues are in steep decline and have been for many quarters. They need to raisep prices, a LOT to stay afloat.

This analyst values the Kodak film division at ZERO dollars! It is truly that bad for Kodak.

https://medium.com/@svafier/eastman-kodak-e1968437a8e1

 

[Phil_F_NM]

So, on our end, is Kodak's solution to just price their product out of range of most people who want to use it? Most of whom are a new generation of film users, both still and motion. They can make their products so expensive that no one will buy them at all and I don't think many folks care. But I'm a film user. Have been all my life even when I used digital for work. Kodak doesn't have the buffer of the very affluent that Leica does so it can't afford to alienate photographers.
Anyway, 16mm film is more expensive. Funny that someone is making light of it with subminiature still comments. Ha.

Phil Forrest

 

[sepiareverb]

Maybe I’ll stock up on some 400 footers.

 

[Prest_400]

This analyst values the Kodak film division at ZERO dollars! It is truly that bad for Kodak.

I know, not good. If it got dear, perhaps there would be the possibility of a investor concerned about film manufacture buying it out (that exists?).
I wouldn't mind getting it for $0. Though quite a possible headache afterwards.

So, on our end, is Kodak's solution to just price their product out of range of most people who want to use it? Most of whom are a new generation of film users, both still and motion.

Phil Forrest

There's the EK/KA thing though. The situation for Stills film seems to be quite good and demand rises. More volume eases up the pressure for price increases although under that they are using up the inelastic demand do increase prices. More or less they sit with Fuji. Supposedly in the long run prices will tend to increase, as we see. If demand volume does as well, it's good for the industry at least.

I'm not very much up to date with MP, sadly I'm guessing the trend is decreasing sales. Of course, the manufacturing volume of EK MP material is way much more important to keep Rochester B38 running...

 

[Steve M.]

The link Ted gave, well, even the author insists it's only one man's opinion. Here is the current state of all Kodak division stocks as of one week ago. According to this summary, their film division had 0% change from last year. What would worry me if I was an investor is their move into cryptocurrency.

Last year they had losses related to their inkjet technology, which they have plugged by essentially considering that a discontinued thing. Film seems to be doing OK.

I love film, dislike digital images, and feel that photography is all about film and darkrooms. But I understand the direction things are going. Film is a niche industry and will only get nichier as time goes on. As long as I can still afford Tri-X, things are OK, even if the price goes up. When I can't afford it any longer I'll switch to another film.

https://www.nasdaq.com/article/why-kodak-stock-is-surging-today-cm936044

 

[Ted Striker]

The link Ted gave, well, even the author insists it's only one man's opinion. Here is the current state of all Kodak division stocks as of one week ago. According to this summary, their film division had 0% change from last year. [/URL]

The graph in your link shows revenue information. Missing is profitability. The film division last year earned money, something like 8 million dollars. This year, it's 6 million in losses. So the situation is not as stable as it seems when looking at revenue numbers.

Kodak's top two divisions are shrinking drastically and has been for some time. Unless things change, Kodak's future is in serious jeopardy.

 

[Phil_F_NM]

The sky is falling, the sky is falling.

Phil Forrest

 

[brbo]

How much of the 6 millions in losses is from Consumer Inkjet business and how much from film production? Thanks!

 

[Ted Striker]

How much of the 6 millions in losses is from Consumer Inkjet business and how much from film production? Thanks!

Kodak does not say, but specifically mentions film and ink for the reason this division's losses increased. In the absence of further data, I'd say it's 50:50. That's being generous because Kodak has been closing down their inkjet business for years now. I'm sure it is much smaller than the film aspect of this part of their company.

YTD, Kodak's Consumer Film division is -32 million dollars.

 

[brbo]

YTD, Kodak's Consumer Film division is -32 million dollars.

Isn't that Consumer AND Film division in which "Consumer" means Inkjet business? Every financial report this far had higher drop in "Consumer Inkjet" than in "Industrial Film and Chemicals" or "Motion Picture". If your 'data' (or just assumptions?) that Inkjet is relatively small in size (and still contributing large(er) portion to the combined loss) would that mean that Film subdivision is doing better than the whole Consumer and Film division?

 

[zuiko85]

Funny that someone is making light of it with subminiature still comments. Ha.

Phil Forrest

Now now, I go through a lot of 16mm in my Minolta and Mamiya 16mm subminis.
And Double-X is the last B&W 16mm without rimjet backing that I can load directly into my cartridges. So I'm none too happy to see Kodak go under but what ya gonna do.

 

[Phil_F_NM]

Ted, what exactly is your point? I mean, if there is a thread about Kodak, you are the go-to doom and gloom guy. Are you just wanting to whip up more heated discussion for the sake of arguing? Are you looking forward to the demise of Kodak?
I'm just trying to figure out what your point of constantly letting us know that Kodak is going under, is.
Thanks.

Phil Forrest

 

[Ted Striker]

Ted, what exactly is your point? I mean, if there is a thread about Kodak, you are the go-to doom and gloom guy. Are you just wanting to whip up more heated discussion for the sake of arguing? Are you looking forward to the demise of Kodak?
I'm just trying to figure out what your point of constantly letting us know that Kodak is going under, is.
Thanks.

Phil Forrest

My point is that Kodak needs to raise prices because their current financial situation is dire. Kodak needs to grow their revenue. If they succeed in that, then some semblance of stability may be gained. Raising prices is the way to accomplish this. My posts were in direct answer to the OP, who created this thread about higher prices. I provided context as to why these prices are rising.

I shoot a ton of film (30 rolls last week) so a future supply is very much a high priority of mine. As such, I am very much interested in Kodak's future. It is beyond ridiculous for you to suggest that I am looking forward to Kodak's demise.

 

[Phil_F_NM]

Well, you chime in wherever Kodak's future is concerned and the discussions are always heated. Myself and a few others just see it as stirring up the pot. I asked what is the point because what IS your point? The community here is not going to affect what happens to Kodak yet we still get the same doom and gloom chatter in multiple threads. There really isn't any use in repeating numbers here unless someone on this forum has the power to bring big yellow out of the hole.

Phil Forrest

 

[zuiko85]

I find it curious that, if things are so bad, why is Kodak marketing a new and expensive super 8 camera. (Although I don't think it exists yet, haven't seen it for sale anywhere.)

 

[Ted Striker]

I find it curious that, if things are so bad, why is Kodak marketing a new and expensive super 8 camera. (Although I don't think it exists yet, haven't seen it for sale anywhere.)

That camera was announced in 2016 right? I think the reason why we have not seen it yet is exactly that, because times are so bad for Kodak.

 

[Ted Striker]

Well, you chime in wherever Kodak's future is concerned

I already explained why. I am seriously interested in the future of Kodak, Ilford, and Fuji.

and the discussions are always heated. Myself and a few others just see it as stirring up the pot.

Actually, it is you who is stirring the pot. Nothing I posted above, absolutely nothing, is either factually incorrect, or can reasonably be taken as being happy at Kodak's demise. It is others who make outrageous statements and attribute them to me. It's 100% pure unmitigated fiction. I will NEVER be happy if Kodak ceases to make film.

I asked what is the point because what IS your point?

I already answered this above in clear, plain English.

The community here is not going to affect what happens to Kodak yet we still get the same doom and gloom chatter in multiple threads

Someone brought up the topic of price increases with Kodak film. There was a clear lack of understanding WHY these prices are going up. I added context, without a SHRED of commentary on my part indicating pleasure at the context.

and you're always there to foment the argument.

I am arguing nothing about Kodak. I am supplying facts that not you or anyone else has cared to refute. I am arguing NOTHING. Others have to step in and start the argument. You won't find it anywhere above in my text.

There really isn't any use in repeating numbers here unless someone on this forum has the power to bring big yellow out of the hole.

Phil Forrest

Wrong. The OP (you) wrote: "I'm disappointed."

I added context as to why you should not be disappointed. Kodak needs to improve revenue to achieve stability.