What if Kodak fades away?

Cost is generally contained by competition in the market place. The loss of kodak would surely increase fim prices. But, I don't think the B&W film market is price sensitive. Even $20 a roll would probably have little impact on B&W film sales. Which offers some hope fo it's continued existance.
 
Steady consumption and not this over reactive hoarding mentality is what will save film!
Click to expand...

We of the hoarding gene don't see it thattaway, since we're driven by security over logic.

There's a favorite mechanical pencil I use, that has been discontinued. No matter. I remain secure in the knowledge that I pre-purchased over a hundred of them. And don't get me started on my forty year supply of ATRA razor blades.

😛
 
Pickett Wilson said:
... But, I don't think the B&W film market is price sensitive. Even $20 a roll would probably have little impact on B&W film sales. Which offers some hope fo it's continued existance.
Click to expand...

So, you equate the demand for film with the inelastic demand for heroin.

Well, brace yourselves for a shift in the supply curve!!

🙂
 
I think if Kodak were to go away, and never make film again, that takes away a big competitor from Ilford, Fujifilm etc. and their sales would go through the roof. Sometimes unpleasant changes are required to move on. However, as I understand it Kodak's film division makes rather a lot of money, and Hollywood plus stills photographers still demand their film.

I'd expect Kodak's film division to be split off, and run as a separate company. I read somewhere (probably RFF), that Kodak's film unit's revenue was about $2bn per year, that's a lot even in Fortune 500 terms, so I can't seem it just being shut down, would not make sense.

However good that would be for the other film companies.
 
thegman said:
I think if Kodak were to go away, and never make film again, that takes away a big competitor from Ilford, Fujifilm etc. and their sales would go through the roof.
Click to expand...

Well this is a common idea yet a huge mistake as per the nowadays' economy rules.

If Kodak were to go away, only a tiny fraction of the people who used to shoot Kodak films would switch to Fuji and Ilford, while the main part of them would either definitely switch to digital or cease to take photos.

The demise of a competitor is never some good news for other manufacturers because it recesses the market.

Same goes with that darn film hoarding habit. Hoarding film would be the best thing to do if the hoarders purpose were to see all films manufacturers go away.

Bottom line for the OP : Agfa has gone away already.

Re. Kodak my main concern would be with the D76 although I know there are other good developers and the possibility to cook my own D76 at home.
 
Pickett Wilson said:
Cost is generally contained by competition in the market place. The loss of kodak would surely increase fim prices. But, I don't think the B&W film market is price sensitive. Even $20 a roll would probably have little impact on B&W film sales. Which offers some hope fo it's continued existance.
Click to expand...
I humbly think that you are wrong.
at 20$ a roll, I for one will regrettably move to digital.
 
There's lots of great emulsions out there. I just printed a 16x20 fiber print on Arista Premium 35mm negative and you'd be hard pressed to find a single person out there in the entire world who would be able to tell the difference between that print and the same one shot on Tri-x. Discontinuation of film products is nothing new. Film users and printers have been adapting to products leaving the market for years. We'll live, so will film and great photos will still be taken and great prints will be made from a selection of paper. Stop the fear mongering already.
 
sanmich said:
I humbly think that you are wrong.
at 20$ a roll, I for one will regrettably move to digital.
Click to expand...

Same here. I don't know many fools who would continue shooting film at $20 a roll.

For instance since E6 processing costs $10 a roll I almost totally ceased shooting E6, my freezer is full of E6 films I don't shoot and which are slowly getting expired because I can't afford the processing price.

Just calculate how much would now cost your E6 photos once back from a trip somewhere with 25-30 rolls burnt and you get the idea.
 
jordanstarr said:
There's lots of great emulsions out there. I just printed a 16x20 fiber print on Arista Premium 35mm negative and you'd be hard pressed to find a single person out there in the entire world who would be able to tell the difference between that print and the same one shot on Tri-x.
Click to expand...

Hey - Arista Premium is Tri-X.

If Kodak goes away, no Arista Premium any longer 🙄
 
**** [edit: sorry for the cursing mighty php-god - that was the F word] FUJI .. i want neopan400 back! 😀
What would I do without TriX? Portra800? I don't even want to think about it.
 
Highway 61 said:
Well this is a common idea yet a huge mistake as per the nowadays' economy rules.

If Kodak were to go away, only a tiny fraction of the people who used to shoot Kodak films would switch to Fuji and Ilford, while the main part of them would either definitely switch to digital or cease to take photos.

The demise of a competitor is never some good news for other manufacturers because it recesses the market.

Same goes with that darn film hoarding habit. Hoarding film would be the best thing to do if the hoarders purpose were to see all films manufacturers go away.

Bottom line for the OP : Agfa has gone away already.

Re. Kodak my main concern would be with the D76 although I know there are other good developers and the possibility to cook my own D76 at home.
Click to expand...

I see what you're saying, and agree to a point, but even if only 10% of Kodak customers moved to Ilford, that would probably be a 100% sales increase for Ilford, if not more.

I'm not convinced that it can be stated as a fact that Kodak sales can only be Kodak sales and those of us (like me) who buy Kodak film could not fathom getting film from elsewhere. The enthusiasts know about alternatives, and the non-enthusiast probably just get whatever is on offer at the local supermarket.
 
Highway 61 said:
Well this is a common idea yet a huge mistake as per the nowadays' economy rules.

If Kodak were to go away, only a tiny fraction of the people who used to shoot Kodak films would switch to Fuji and Ilford, while the main part of them would either definitely switch to digital or cease to take photos.
Click to expand...

Huh...digital sure, but why would they quit? Do you truly know anyone who would quit because they cannot get Kodak film?
 
Well, there is this: http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9S2BBGO0.htm

It was also on the news this morning in the Washington DC area, along with the mention of Penn Camera going for Chap 11 (which was mentioned in another thread yesterday).

Others have already mentioned the seeming craziness of Kodak's business methods. It seems the new paradigm is to make a profit any way possible now, for new excessive bonus money. Doesn't matter what current actions may do to the long term benefit of the company. Or I just don't understand economics and business.

But I don't think film is going away soon. Up in price maybe, although I doubt to the $20 range very quickly.
 
maddoc said:
I am more worried about HC-110 than the Kodak films ...
Click to expand...

Kodak already outsourced their b&w chemistry production years ago - so that is one part which will, in the age of international mail order, continue almost without a hitch (except for perhaps a name change) even in a worst case scenario.
 
I recently read an editorial on why Sears should dump it's K Mart stores. The thinking was, in a world with Walmart and Target, who needs K Mart.

To paraphrase this, in a world with Ilford and Fuji, who needs Kodak.

I would miss some Kodak films but life would go on.

Joe
 
Highway 61 said:
If Kodak were to go away, only a tiny fraction of the people who used to shoot Kodak films would switch to Fuji and Ilford, while the main part of them would either definitely switch to digital or cease to take photos.
Click to expand...

That is not a matter of Kodak or not - any gap in the supply chain will accelerate the move to digital, as a large group of casual film users choose film for no better reasons than habit and availability. A extended shortage of all and any film at their local supplier will switch them to digital (they won't bother to locate a alternative film source) - but if the yellow boxes in the shelf turn green or red over night, most of them won't even notice, and even fewer will care.
 
I'd just like to point out that Ilford went bankrupt about 10 years ago and we still have their film. The conventional wisdom is that if there is profit in it, someone will pick up the business. I think Kodak definitely has a market for its film products. But you will see fewer of them and at higher prices. My bet: Tri-X will be the last silver emulsion to sink beneath the rising digital waves.



Ben Marks
 
sevo said:
Kodak already outsourced their b&w chemistry production years ago - so that is one part which will, in the age of international mail order, continue almost without a hitch (except for perhaps a name change) even in a worst case scenario.
Click to expand...

Thanks for this information !
 
I am hoping for a long shot in that when/if Kodak film is no longer being made that one of the other companies would buy the rights to make a few of their most popular films. That is a long shot at best but one can hope. Jim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom