Topic: News from Kodak

[Terry]

I just got this in an email from Kodak, hence the quick cut-and-paste (my underline):


Next Steps to our Future Success
by Kim Snyder

Last week, Kodak announced its next steps in emerging from Chapter 11 as a company primarily focused on commercial, packaging, and functional printing solutions as well as enterprise services. The company has now initiated a sales process for its market-leading Personalized Imaging and Document Imaging businesses.

So what does this mean for Entertainment Imaging and its motion picture film products and services? For clarity, I can assure you that Kodak's motion picture films are not part of this announcement and will remain with the company.

Kodak will continue to manufacture and distribute its quality line of motion picture film products. As a matter of fact, all film manufacturing will actually stay with Kodak, including that of consumer and professional still film. We will continue providing our entertainment customers with the products and support they have come to depend upon from Kodak.

In addition to manufacturing film, we are pursuing potential vertical markets that will utilize our film technologies for a variety of alternative and exciting products. This includes Functional Printing applications as well as Thin Film and Specialty Chemicals growth opportunities.

And speaking of new opportunities, based on market demand, we just announced a new color asset protection film and will be adding a black-and-white separation film to the portfolio later this year.

As I'm sure you know, Kodak has worked in partnership with Hollywood Studios for many years. We're very happy to see them show their confidence in the Kodak brand by recently signing multi year agreements with the company.

Kodak's plan for the future has a sharper focus now, and as part of that plan, our market-leading motion picture products will continue to provide the innovation and creative choices that the production and post community need.

I am happy to be able to share this news and to take this opportunity to thank all our motion picture customers who have remained so loyal throughout the last months. As Kodak continues to evolve, we are pleased to continue to offer the technology and the products that have supported this industry for over a century. As always, our global sales force is available to answer any questions you may have or to help meet your production needs.

Thank you.

Kim Snyder
President and General Manager
Entertainment and Commercial Films Group
Vice President of Eastman Kodak Company
   
      
   
 
 
        Join us on Facebook
 
        Follow us on Twitter at Kodak_ShootFilm
 
        Watch us on YouTube
   

[Lino]

  oh kodak

And speaking of new opportunities, based on market demand, we just announced a new color asset protection film and will be adding a black-and-white separation film to the portfolio later this year.

Curious about this one... i'm guessing it's only for the movie films ?

[Terry]

Of course you can load them into your own canisters...

[Francois]

Somehow, this feel counter intuitive in a way. All the news say they'll sell the consumer film business yet they still make the film

My guess is that they will manufacture the emulsion but have another company cut and package it... is it just me or is it just not resolving in my brain?

[sapata]

"As I'm sure you know, Kodak has worked in partnership with Hollywood Studios for many years. We're very happy to see them show their confidence in the Kodak brand by recently signing multi year agreements with the company".


I'm curious to know the reason why that famous theathre was renamed from Kodak to Dolby, lack of money to sponsor?  If so, the so called "partnership" goes down the drain when it comes to "who pays more"...

[moominsean]

Yeah kind of sounds like that. They will manufacture the film, and it says including still film. Film may be one of the only money makers because of hollywood. Sounds like they got some studios to invest and keep this part of the company going. I wouldn't mind seeing kodak as a smaller film only company again. Guess it depends on how greedy the owners are. Seems like so many companies that are failing have this all or nothing mentality. If we aren't making the kazzilion dollars we used to make, why bother? Rather than, gee, any profit is better than nothing at all.

[moominsean]

"As I'm sure you know, Kodak has worked in partnership with Hollywood Studios for many years. We're very happy to see them show their confidence in the Kodak brand by recently signing multi year agreements with the company".


I'm curious to know the reason why that famous theathre was renamed from Kodak to Dolby, lack of money to sponsor?  If so, the so called "partnership" goes down the drain when it comes to "who pays more"...

I'm sure that is exactly what happened. Same reason stadiums get renamed. Desert sky out Here got renamed cricket pavilion, then blockbuster desert sky...not sure what it is called now. It's all about who pays the most money. Big ruckus a few years back about bank one bal
Park. City used taxpayer money to build it, then slapped on a corporate name because bank one payed someone some money. People were mad about the sponsership to someone who had nothing to do with paying to build it.

[original_ann]

There's been lots of banter back and forth on some of the other film forums about this news (about movie film and in ambiguous words some or all of the still film not being part of the sell off, though they won't market or distribute). 

I wish someone would put out an announcement in clear, concise terms and specify the still film part.  But I suppose if true, it's predicated on their emerging from their bankruptcy filing.

[Late Developer]

I keep hearing this "whirring" noise and a lot of banging and screaming but I've no idea what it is. Oh, wait; it's old man Eastman spinning in his grave........

Not only does Kodak not seem to know what to do for the best, they also seem to issue some very mixed and ambiguous messages. Inkjet printing materials? FFS 

All they need to do is confirm that their line of colour and monochrome still films will (or won't) remain on sale as they are at present. How difficult can providing a clear message be? Their customers (i.e. us) have a right to know. If Kodak can't put our minds at rest, they risk - and deserve - our defection to Fuji, Ilford and whatever other film manufacturers remain.

[Francois]

I think their press releases are written by the same people who also write the annoying Readers Digest sweepstake papers my mom keeps receiving...

[Photo_Utopia]

Somehow, this feel counter intuitive in a way. All the news say they'll sell the consumer film business yet they still make the film

My guess is that they will manufacture the emulsion but have another company cut and package it... is it just me or is it just not resolving in my brain?

I don't get that either. I mean if the only existing coating building stays in the hands of the current owners then what are they buying? Just the confectioning and trademarks?
If so why would anyone do that?  Why not just approach them to make a batch of film and re-badge it Retro xxx.

I'm not getting how they are going to keep the coater for movie film and lease it for stills...

[Francois]

I'm not getting how they are going to keep the coater for movie film and lease it for stills...

Simple, Kodak will become a subcontractor to other companies. They sell the right to use the name Kodak to a packaging company and keep producing the film. But now, instead of having customers buy the product, they sell the entire batch to another company which cuts and packages the product.

Since they don't have to figure out the market, they automatically eliminate losses due to poor market performance. Instead, this risk is dumped to the packaging company which becomes responsible for measuring the volumes to be produced.

Think of Kodak's production not as a final product but as a simple part. The company that produces springs has a lower risk of encountering losses than the company that makes a consumer device containing a spring...

[Terry]

And bear in mind that Kodak's entertainment imaging division has been its most profitable one in recent years.  The latest Batman flick was shot on 65mm 5219 stock.  It's still the highest-res motion imaging system out there.

And the bit about inkjet technology no doubt refers to the commercial/industrial printers--the ones that can work 6 meters wide (billboards etc.) and the ones that produce the giclee prints that most film labs are now pushing.

[Photo_Utopia]

I'm not getting how they are going to keep the coater for movie film and lease it for stills...

Simple, Kodak will become a subcontractor to other companies. They sell the right to use the name Kodak to a packaging company and keep producing the film. But now, instead of having customers buy the product, they sell the entire batch to another company which cuts and packages the product.

Since they don't have to figure out the market, they automatically eliminate losses due to poor market performance. Instead, this risk is dumped to the packaging company which becomes responsible for measuring the volumes to be produced.

Think of Kodak's production not as a final product but as a simple part. The company that produces springs has a lower risk of encountering losses than the company that makes a consumer device containing a spring...

How would that work though? I mean if the distribution company don't sell enough through channels how will that help the situation with production and keeping the machines running, people employed etc.

For years anyone can get Kodak to coat a master, if you want you can have them coat a 54" 11k foot roll and have it delivered any current product.
What would be in it for a company apart from the Kodak name?
So effectively they are giving the right to the name, and allowing anyone to buy rolls and confection and distribute–can't see anyone swallowing that!

[Francois]

Well, the rights to use the name will be sold for a price, that means profit in Kodak's pocket.
And Kodak in itself gains the removal of risk due to market fluctuations.

No risk, no losses, no problem.

Think of Kodak now like Star Wars. Anybody can buy the Star Wars trademark and put out a product. Yet Lucas doesn't run the slightest financial risk by doing so.

[Photo_Utopia]

I understand that, problem is who would be stupid enough to enter a deal like that? Basically you just get the name, have to work out distribution, confectioning and sales (something Kodak is failing with on an epic scale) –not an attractive prospect for anyone to buy into.

So if you buy the name that's all you get, you have no real assets as in factory space, or any real control. If the company that did buy it made an error all the infrastructure Kodak had could collapse, i.e they misjudge the market Kodak might have to lay off factory workers temporarily because they have no control or idea about distribution.

The only way it could work is if they sell Building 38 (and room 14) and enter into an agreement for the new company to supply the forward contract for movies, the problem of supply demand could then be managed easier through existing channels as the plant wouldn't have the problem of guessing.

I don't think this is like Star Wars Pyjamas, we are dealing with trying to keep an existing plant running, not badging cheap PJs made in Hong Kong and just branding.
It all sounds like a total *ock up to me, selling the name isn't going to be possible even as a short term fix, sounds like desperation and incompetence on a massive scale.

Sorry Francois, I'm a little perplexed at why anyone would want the name without any security or real estate in the deal, if that's the case the deal is stillborn from a business perspective.
This isn't a rant at you  BTW

[Francois]

I know, and I rarely hold hard feelings towards friends. Opinions will differ but only time will tell what happens in the end.

Thing is, business and the economy are just acting weird these days. No matter how much I have studied economics, what's going on these days just doesn't register as normal in my view of things. And with all the subcontracting that goes on in today's business world, things can get quite hard to follow.

[Photo_Utopia]

Possibly leave it there, because as long as I can buy Ektar, Portra and Tri-x I'm not bothered how its made, who makes it or what colour box they put it in....
 

[Francois]

Trust me that the box will still be yellow for some time.