OT & FID Warning: Fuji Offers Good News, Bad News

[bmattock]

Thanks for the update, Bill. I'm one of those optimists who sees this as industry consolidation but not the death of film. As long as there are customers demanding film, even just a market niche, there will be a supply. But here's a question: should we all be buying our film from one maker, i.e. Ilford or Fuji, to pool our resources and not spread our dollar "votes" too thinly?

I'm sure you've heard my opinion on the 'supply and demand' concept as not being applicable, so I'll leave that out and hope for the best, like you.

I think we should buy what film we prefer and we can get, as usual. I know this sounds pessimistic, but film was a 3 billion dollar industry - the purchases made by a few tens of thousands of enthusiasts around the world aren't going to influence much. I'm sorry, wish I felt differently.

Some have said that we should buy from those companies who support us, and that's a reasonable thought - so Ilford and Fuji, right? But really, I don't feel it matters enough to make a difference, so I buy what I want and can afford, pretty much.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

 

[bmattock]

On this I disagree, Corporations operate in the society, take advantage of society, and make profit from society; the fact that most of them don't think they should have some sort of social responsibility to me looks like (and smells like) a bad thing.

Corporations are run by people, and those people control whatever social conscience the corporation appears to have or not have. People are mostly skunks; greedy, self-centered, short-term thinkers, and ego-driven. Their corporations show that. But the real culprit of society IS society. We just would rather have a scapegoat than to realize that in the end, we're all trash.

As Pogo said, "We have met the enemy, and he is us."

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

 

[amateriat]

So...two large companies face shrinking sales in a business where there's already too much product and not enough demand to absorb all those products. Announced remedies include the usual stuff: closing factories and a large cut in the payroll, streamlining/"right-sizing" development and production. One company even mulls the idea of eliminating one product subcategory altogether. Wall Street grumbles and takes said companies' stock price down another peg or two. I don't know what any of you guys drive, but...

(Oh...sorry, folks, I thought I was in the Domestic Car Enthusiasts Forum!)

You get my drift: this sort of thing is going around in several different circles. For the time being GM and Ford will have to figure out the best way to make a buck in the business they're best known for, because leaving that business would likely mean effectively going out of business. Same deal with Kodak and Fuji (and camera companies are hardly immune here, either - as Kyocera, Konica Minolta, and Olympus discovered the hard way, when anyone can slap their name on a digital camera, charge a lowball price and call themselves a major player in the biz - and be treated as such - having an sterling reputation won't mean much). Ilford has figured this out before anyone else (having been the first to tackle the ugly part of "transition", and head-on). Agfa(Photo) apparently didn't deal with it, and we all saw what happened there. Fuji is still dealing with it, but the little green boxes keep on comin' (yay!). Old Yeller is dealing with it...and dealing with it...and...well, I think the little yellow boxes will also keep on comin', but just how all this shakes down in Rochester is anybody's guess. But they won't stop making film cold. In a sense, they can't afford to. They haven't a lot else unique in terms of product, and while the market for that product is obviously reduced, it ain't miniscule (yet), so they have to make it work for as long as possible, or at least until the Next Big Thing comes along for them (and I sure wouldn't bet the farm on that happening soon - we're not talking about Apple here).

Take a deep breath, walk around the block/yard a few times, then load some more film.


- Barrett (who understands the car/film analogy isn't exact, but still somewhat relevant)

 

[bmattock]

Old Yeller is dealing with it...and dealing with it...and...well, I think the little yellow boxes will also keep on comin', but just how all this shakes down in Rochester is anybody's guess. But they won't stop making film cold.

They *said* they would stop making film. Several times, and most recently was yesterday. A few weeks ago, their CEO said yellow box film was history in two years. Are you saying they're not telling the truth and will continue to make film?

In a sense, they can't afford to. They haven't a lot else unique in terms of product, and while the market for that product is obviously reduced, it ain't miniscule (yet), so they have to make it work for as long as possible, or at least until the Next Big Thing comes along for them (and I sure wouldn't bet the farm on that happening soon - we're not talking about Apple here).

If they are losing a billion dollars a year (Kodak), and most of that loss comes from massive sales drops in film, they can't continue - it is pretty much that simple. Their own financials, released yesterday, showed in black and white that most of their operating revenue came from digital sales, and they lost their shirts on film.

Take a deep breath, walk around the block/yard a few times, then load some more film.

- Barrett (who understands the car/film analogy isn't exact, but still somewhat relevant)

No one is getting hysterical here. Just reporting the news and interpreting what that means to us with logic and intelligence.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

 

[ch1]

Here in Europe it is not a completely new thing, traditionally a company has some moral responsibility to it stakeholders as well (and film users are definitely stakeholders here)
Unfortunately this has started to fade in recent years and probably in a not too far future even here companies will consider themselves responsible only to their shareholders; at the end of the day morals don't make money, so why bother...

B.M. obviously does not accept that there are other models of capitalism besides the American one (and I am an American saying this). It is very conceivable that a Japanese corporation will continue in a business line that offers little profit or even some level of losses iout of regard for the users of that product or business line.

Obviously no firm can have "just losers" - but Japanese and other non-American shareholders do not have the same perspective Ameicans do - and are more willing to accept that their firm operates within a larger social framework.

Sorry to come in on this - I try to avoid these threads. :bang:

 

[ChrisPlatt]

When it is no longer profitable for Fuji to make and market film
Fuji will stop producing it.

"Excelsior, you fathead!"
-Chris-

 

[bmattock]

I try to avoid these threads.

I thought you were leaving for greener pastures, George. There is nothing for you in this thread - you've blown your credibility with your recent personal attacks on me. Why don't you go away? Or do you want to take me up on my offer of fisticuffs in the street in front of my residence? I'm still waiting.

 

[fgianni]

B.M. obviously does not accept that there are other models of capitalism besides the American one

But he has a point, unless forced to behave otherwise, eventually all corporations will drop any social responsibility for the simple reason that it does not make them money.
One way to do reverse the trnd is to boycott the worst offenders, there are a few companies from which I try not to buy from (mainly companies that exploit child's labour), I am not going to list them here because it will be beyond the scope of this forum.
I just want to point out that the consumer can have a say in how the big corporations behave.

 

[aterlecki]

Hmm, corporations losing their social responsibility in Europe, and gaining it in the USA?

I'll see how it goes, but soon might be the time to think of moving across the pond.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry at that (I've lived extensively on both sides of the pond). Suffice to say don't let yourself be fooled by any corporate affectations of responsibility. Any they show is cost-anaylsed to maximise their profit. Many corporations would happily kill if it meant higher profits and if they knew could get away with it.

 

[bmattock]

I just want to point out that the consumer can have a say in how the big corporations behave.

Absolutely true. It happens all the time, small groups can have a big voice when they use the media and publicity well. But remember, it is not the 'corporation' that suddenly takes on a more responsible stance - it is the people who run it. If they leave - if the pressure goes away - often the reformed behavior does too.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

 

[KoNickon]

OK, how's this for totally "irrational exuberance" (in honor of Mr. Greenspan): The future of film manufacture becomes like the beer industry, with lots of (OK, some) niche regional players making their "artisanal" film and paper. Lower production, more expensive, but decent -- and available.

Mainly joking, of course, but if a reorganized Ilford can continue to be successful, there's no reason why the Green and Yellow folks can't allow management buyouts of their own film businesses, which are then run on a smaller scale but which do continue. Or, entirely new manufacturers enter the business. It might be that much of the manufacture shifts to China or elsewhere in the developing (no pun intended) world.

Somebody mentioned, maybe in another thread, about the fact vacuum tubes are being made again, in China, for the miniscule number of audio enthusiasts who swear they deliver better sound than solid state electronics. The point is that this is a product the Chinese are willing to make, and presumably they are turning a profit. There will be people who have a business plan to make film profitably. Where they will emerge remains to be seen.

 

[amateriat]

No one is getting hysterical here. Just reporting the news and interpreting what that means to us with logic and intelligence.

Didn't say you were 😛 (you made a lot of good points all around, too). But Kodak is a crazy-inscrutable company when it comes to announcements. How they move out of film, if their timetable is to be beleived, is what needs to be watched. And the wheels keep going 'round...


- Barrett

 

[RJBender]

I'm sorry to hear it. In the US, Fuji has a film-production facility in Greenwood, South Carolina, which employs 1,500. I am trying to ascertain the status of the plant - no luck so far.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

Call the plant at (864) 223-2888.

They ain't fixin' to close.

The shipping department is getting ready for their peak season... spring.

R.J.

 

[ch1]

OK, how's this for totally "irrational exuberance" (in honor of Mr. Greenspan): The future of film manufacture becomes like the beer industry, with lots of (OK, some) niche regional players making their "artisanal" film and paper. Lower production, more expensive, but decent -- and available.

Mainly joking, of course, but if a reorganized Ilford can continue to be successful, there's no reason why the Green and Yellow folks can't allow management buyouts of their own film businesses, which are then run on a smaller scale but which do continue. Or, entirely new manufacturers enter the business. It might be that much of the manufacture shifts to China or elsewhere in the developing (no pun intended) world.

Somebody mentioned, maybe in another thread, about the fact vacuum tubes are being made again, in China, for the miniscule number of audio enthusiasts who swear they deliver better sound than solid state electronics. The point is that this is a product the Chinese are willing to make, and presumably they are turning a profit. There will be people who have a business plan to make film profitably. Where they will emerge remains to be seen.

This is a very well-reasoned analysis.

One problem I see is whether or not Kodak has the "smarts" to spin-off its film business before running it into the ground. On this, I am not hopeful. Kodak seems to wallow from one mis-step to another in an ongoing effort of successful value destruction!

 

[paulfitz]

Sorry to hear that people are losing their jobs in the Netherlands. It's not good; as a professional that had a career in analog imaging and moved so many times from consolidations and tech change I hope they can find suitable work.

Regarding the comment about KonicaMinolta pulling out of the film business, they did publish and exit strategy, as did Kyocera with Contax cameras. The time table is much shorter than it used to be. Perhaps this is indicative of change in Japan. Perhaps the "honorable" timetable is now shorter 🙂

I have not been for awhile.

 

[ch1]

Sorry to hear that people are losing their jobs in the Netherlands. It's not good; as a professional that had a career in analog imaging and moved so many times from consolidations and tech change I hope they can find suitable work.

Regarding the comment about KonicaMinolta pulling out of the film business, they did publish and exit strategy, as did Kyocera with Contax cameras. The time table is much shorter than it used to be. Perhaps this is indicative of change in Japan. Perhaps the "honorable" timetable is now shorter 🙂

I have not been for awhile.

Yes, and the very fact that Fuji announced layoffs is a far different approach than the Japan of 20 years ago. I guess a decade-long recession has put to rest for good the idea of lifetime employment. 😱

 

[RJBender]

I thought you were leaving for greener pastures, George. There is nothing for you in this thread - you've blown your credibility with your recent personal attacks on me. Why don't you go away? Or do you want to take me up on my offer of fisticuffs in the street in front of my residence? I'm still waiting.

Bill, as I'm reading this, you're offline with 3,666 posts. Is this an omen?

I hope you're just kidding about challenging a New York lawyer to a fist fight in the streets of Wilson, NC.

R.J.

 

[jan normandale]

Corporations are run by people, and those people control whatever social conscience the corporation appears to have or not have. People are mostly skunks; greedy, self-centered, short-term thinkers, and ego-driven. Their corporations show that. But the real culprit of society IS society. We just would rather have a scapegoat than to realize that in the end, we're all trash.

As Pogo said, "We have met the enemy, and he is us."

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

re: corporations and people:

Bill, don't be so dark... it's not good for your head. Besides the tree huggers are always trying so there's your proof in the pudding.. some people are plugging away.

We are in the late evening of the golden days of film choice and selection. Many lines will probably disappear, however there will be something around to expose however limited the selecition, and people will do it. Old stuff never dissappears it just gets shoved out of the limelight. Oil paints used to be the only medium for canvas, then along came acrylics. Oil is still around and its improbable that it is ever going to dissappear.

cheers, Jan the optimist

 

[bmattock]

Bill, as I'm reading this, you're offline with 3,666 posts. Is this am omen?

Not that I'm aware of...

I hope you're just kidding about challenging a New York lawyer to a fist fight in the streets of Wilson, NC.

R.J.

Why would I be kidding? I'm very serious. This is no fooling around, I mean it.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

 

[fgianni]

I don't know whether to laugh or cry at that (I've lived extensively on both sides of the pond). Suffice to say don't let yourself be fooled by any corporate affectations of responsibility. Any they show is cost-anaylsed to maximise their profit. Many corporations would happily kill if it meant higher profits and if they knew could get away with it.

I wasn't that serious 😉