Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Recently posted, Kodak's latest quarter.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Wow ... they achieved a twenty seven percent increase! 
In their loss unfortunately!
In their loss unfortunately!
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Keith, I drive by the Ridge Road facilities (main part of what's left of Kodak Park) every workday morning. Not many people crossing from the parking lot across the street.
At a stoplight I was next to a fully restored and resplendent mid-60s Chevy Impala, then a cherry '57 Ford Fairlane convertible in glorious red and white two tone/tutone. At least something survives.
At a stoplight I was next to a fully restored and resplendent mid-60s Chevy Impala, then a cherry '57 Ford Fairlane convertible in glorious red and white two tone/tutone. At least something survives.
victoriapio
Well-known
there comes a point when there is no use carrying on. I am amazed that Kodak was approved for $950 million in loans when the bottom line is so bleak.There must be some serious assets left to liquidate if things get worse. Let'sface it, with it's film business almost gone, Kodak is already dead to most of us.
seakayaker1
Well-known
. . . . . in an effort to help I ordered a box of Kodak 220 Professional Portra Color Film (ISO 160) today.
Chris101
summicronia
"the ongoing evaporation of its traditional film-based business"
"the ongoing decline of Kodak’s traditional film-based business"
"the collapsing traditional film business"
That Matthew Daneman - he's a snappy writer, eh? I would swear though that the pert and chipper chick from Kodak stated, when Kodak filed for bankruptcy, that the film part of the business was profitable, and the outlook was that it was continuing to make the company money. But of course Kodak knew the future was digital, so they've gutted the profitable part of the biz, and decided to concentrate on high-end office printing and lawsuits.
In the words of Dr. Phil, "How's that working out for ya?"
"the ongoing decline of Kodak’s traditional film-based business"
"the collapsing traditional film business"
That Matthew Daneman - he's a snappy writer, eh? I would swear though that the pert and chipper chick from Kodak stated, when Kodak filed for bankruptcy, that the film part of the business was profitable, and the outlook was that it was continuing to make the company money. But of course Kodak knew the future was digital, so they've gutted the profitable part of the biz, and decided to concentrate on high-end office printing and lawsuits.
In the words of Dr. Phil, "How's that working out for ya?"
bigeye
Well-known
Much of this quarters' loss are one-time restructuring/bankruptcy costs. (Lawyers have to eat, too.)
Fuji's photography unit revenues have collapsed at virtually the same rate as Kodak's. I think it's down to 15% of their business. They successfully transitioned into healthcare and industrial coatings; Kodak did not. The situation is the same, though, the photographic business has collapsed - and that is the problem: the market is too small to support the old behemoths.
Hopefully, they can get the remaining, allegedly profitable photographic unit(s) down to a size that can be sustained by the market.
Fuji's photography unit revenues have collapsed at virtually the same rate as Kodak's. I think it's down to 15% of their business. They successfully transitioned into healthcare and industrial coatings; Kodak did not. The situation is the same, though, the photographic business has collapsed - and that is the problem: the market is too small to support the old behemoths.
Hopefully, they can get the remaining, allegedly profitable photographic unit(s) down to a size that can be sustained by the market.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Chris, how dare you impugn one of the D&C's finest writers! (Which says something about the other writers for our sorry rag...)
As to the valuable assets that underwrite the big loan ... real estate, baby. Lots of real estate.
As to the valuable assets that underwrite the big loan ... real estate, baby. Lots of real estate.
jarski
Veteran
wonder how badly lowering Hollywood film consumption will affect Kodak results in coming few years.
traveler_101
American abroad
The only real chance is if the film division is spun off--and the sooner they get started the better. It means much higher prices based on the lower volume niche film markets that remain, but Kodak film and chemical products could survive. How about the Kodak-Rochester Film Company, Inc. backed by the City and the State of New York until it gets on its feet? I guess you can tell which party I tend to vote for.
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
No wondering about it, if Hollywood goes mostly digital in the next few years. It can only have an adverse effect on revenues and profit. The only way to try and compensate would be ever higher prices if they stayed in the game.
Bob
gb hill
Veteran
Kodak should get out of New York period. Common down south where they can get tax incentives. It's working for Toyota & Hyundae, Honda, & BMW.
traveler_101
American abroad
There is plenty of money, but it stays in private hands and is invested in China. What a shame.
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
You might be right on that score but you were mentioning different levels of government in your original post. Private money generally goes to where the most chance of profit is and Kodak may be deemed not worth the risk. Time will tell on that one.
Bob
Chris101
summicronia
C'mon! The needless repetition of such opinionated words. Do they even teach this stuff in writing classes any more? I mean he's got one useless repetition of opinionated words after another. I noticed it right away that he wasted a lot of space by repeating the same opinionated words over and over. ...
traveler_101
American abroad
Not picking a fight nor did I start this with an intention of being political
. . . I just meant that if companies and wealthy individuals paid their taxes there would be more money to back ventures (e.g. Kodak film, necessary to the health of a city--) and to develop important infrastructure and other worthy measures like public education. I don't care which level of government does it, but I always preferred the local state or municipality in respect to an old American idea that the local state is closer to the people. Today's NY Times on Apple's avoidance of taxes indicates what I meant--http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/b...ms-at-low-tax-states-and-nations.html?_r=1&hp
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
Not picking a fight nor did I start this with an intention of being political
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/b...ms-at-low-tax-states-and-nations.html?_r=1&hp
No problem at all, could not agree more with everyone including companies and the wealthy paying their share of taxes. Unfortunately avoidance of paying taxes is part of making a profit and maintaining or increasing personal wealth. Same problem here in Canada more or less. Anyway I get what you mean now put that way.
Bob
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Even if money were available, the city and state governments would be incapable of doing a good job. Just do a Google search for "Rochester fast ferry".
Kodak should get out of New York period. Common down south where they can get tax incentives. It's working for Toyota & Hyundae, Honda, & BMW.
There are tax incentives here too, and they are abused just as much as anywhere. That isn't even close to the problem.