What happens to the M9 if Kodak goes out of business?

willie_901 said:
Generating profits is not necessarily sufficient. Sometimes corporations are only interested in generating high-volume cash flows. I have been personally aware of decisions that killed a perfectly viable product predicted to generate $250 million dollar per year cash flow (and significant profit) because the corporation was only interested in bringing products to market with $500 million or larger cash flows.

Niche products require niche manufacturers.
Click to expand...

Agfa's former film business is an example. They had the largest, most advanced film coating plant in all of Europe and used it to make vast quantities of film. When the film market changed and it became necessary to make film in smaller quantities, they couldn't, and out they went. You can't run a film coating plant only 2 hours per day. So much for Agfa.

Kodak's film business seems to be somewhat similar.
 
semilog said:
Only for the first 30 years or so. Even the Summitar was designed for color.
Click to expand...
Yes, know. I have a nice Summitar from 1949 that I used quite a bit. I was kidding since I often read that Leica is meant for B&W and while I do enjoy it as much as any camera in that mode, I also like the way the M9 with its Kodak sensor renders color.
 
For anybody who believes that Kodak only make one sensor, for the M9, think again. It is a large manufacturing division owning patents for much of what goes on in sensor technology around the world. It makes digital sensors for other manufacturers, not just Leica, in MF, and industry.

But if the main company did fold the separate divisions will be bought up by investors to asset strip for the non-profitable ones, and re-invent for those that have a future. As digital technology doesn't look at the moment like it is going to decline, I wonder which way it would go? That is a rhetorical question bye the way.

Steve
 
Kodak designed the sensor. I doubt they actually manufacturer it themselves. Some electronics company in Japan or China likely has the blueprints and pumps them out on a monthly basis at Leica's expense and kicks a fee to Kodak for each one.
 
Bad news people.

http://www.kodak.com/ek/US/en/Image_Sensor_Solutions/Products/Discontinued_Products.htm

The CCD for the DCS-100 is discontinued.

reminds me of a Star Trek Episode. The Enterprise sensors pick up an ancient digital camera coming across the viewscreen.

Captain Kirk "Spock, isn't that a DCS-760, used a Kodak KAF-6301 sensor?"

Spock "No Captain, much older. A Kodak DCS-200, used a KAF-1600. Unquestionably damaged from Gamma Radiation. I think we have an old CMOS sensor on board"

Scotty "Captain! You just can't plug in any detector into a camera body! The whole thing could overload and end all life as we know it!"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
rxmd said:
Agfa's former film business is an example. They had the largest, most advanced film coating plant in all of Europe and used it to make vast quantities of film. When the film market changed and it became necessary to make film in smaller quantities, they couldn't, and out they went. You can't run a film coating plant only 2 hours per day. So much for Agfa.

Kodak's film business seems to be somewhat similar.
Click to expand...

That is something that people never think about. Most of the old machines still existing were likely scaled to produce economically for the film market as it was 10 or more years ago. To be economical they are meant to run 24/7/365 days a year as fast as possible. The production equipment/facility has to be scaled to the market. You can never have too much production capacity in an expanding market but to keep that capacity in a permanently greatly shrunken market will eventually kill you. If I read right Adox did not take over the old Agfa machine but has a smaller plant near Berlin.

Bob
 
Nikon Bob said:
That is something that people never think about. Most of the old machines still existing were likely scaled to produce economically for the film market as it was 10 or more years ago. To be economical they are meant to run 24/7/365 days a year as fast as possible. The production equipment/facility has to be scaled to the market. You can never have too much production capacity in an expanding market but to keep that capacity in a permanently greatly shrunken market will eventually kill you. If I read right Adox did not take over the old Agfa machine but has a smaller plant near Berlin.
Click to expand...

You're right on both points.

On the other hand, this means that if you actually invest into a smaller plant, it will still be economical to produce for the smaller market - or in the case of Adox, even economical to start an entirely new production line. No matter what happens to Kodak, there will still be products from those manufacturers who built up smaller-scale production facilities, and there are several of those (the likes of Ilford, Foma, Adox). So no worrying on that front.

Of course this has nothing to do with sensors. If Kodak or whoever stops making this particular sensor, the same thing will happen as what happened when Seiko stopped making the shutter in the Leica R6 - nothing, until the inventory runs out, and then the end of service.
 
You could be right about the sensor outcome. I am not too sure what is involved in producing one. I worked in Pulp and Paper for over 35 years and think producing that and film are very similar propositions. I have no interest in seeing either film or the sensor for the M9 disappear. I use neither but a choice is always good to have. No need to panic but a good hit of reality is needed.

Bob
 
If there's demand, someone will by the licenses and patents and keep making sensors. Leica doesn't seem to have any trouble selling M9P's as fast as they can produce them. Since the sensors in those don't cost a penny more than the plain jane M9's that means plenty of margin available to play with here to create a new business relationship with whomever when it becomes necessary.
 
Start up cost for another facility to start producing KAF-18500's would be cost prohibitive. Much more likely that Kodak will re-org, and either keep the CCD facility- or someone will buy them out and continue the operation.

I've had some custom work done, including having custom chips done. Had a clause in it that the IP would be turned over in the event the company could no longer supply the part. It was incentive- no company wants to give their IP to a competitor.

When using critical parts from a vendor, we would get "end of life" notices and do a life-time buy of the part. In the worst case, it was necessary to Rev the board to accommodate a new part. In the case of a Sensor change-out, that would be a major redesign.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
  • Article Article
The Leica as a work of ART: Selling the image of elegant exclusivity
2
Replies
27
Views
1K
Pioneer
Pioneer
caila77
the nightmare of buying online
2
Replies
23
Views
2K
Beemermark
Beemermark
J
  • Article Article
The Rise & Fall of the Kodak Empire:Part 2: How the Colossus of Film was broken by a disruptive technology
2
Replies
23
Views
4K
Muggins
Muggins
J
  • Article Article
Film fanatics freak out as Kodak Alaris is sold to venture capitalists! Is Kodak film now an endangered species? As they say, it’s complicated.
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
Retro-Grouch
Retro-Grouch
J
Did Nikon really blow Leitz and Zeiss out of the water in 1950? Not quite, but....
Replies
9
Views
1K
aoresteen
aoresteen
Back
Top Bottom