Eastman Kodak: Next Insolvency?
Old 02-13-2018   #1
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,452
Eastman Kodak: Next Insolvency?

Hi,

a topic so far not discussed here, but nevertheless very important for all of us film shooters:
Eastman Kodak is the manufacturer of all current Kodak photo films.
All these Kodak films are distributed by Kodak Alaris, a company founded after the Eastman Kodak insolvency / chapter 11 in 2011 / 2012.

After its insolvency Eastman Kodak tried to focus its operation on the printing industry. Film products are only about 10% of its revenue today.
But:
The focus on industrial printing unfortunately failed! Kodak is loosing much money in this business (which is globally under pressure and declining). At the end of last year they had to fire about 400 workers. Kodak stock crashed at the NYSE.
Lots of experts and business analysts fear that Eastman Kodak is facing the next insolvency .

Their film production is not the problem, because it is profitable. But it is only 10% of the whole business, so film cannot compensate the losses of the rest of the company.
So we cannot do much to improve the situation, as buying more Kodak film would not change anything.
So "hope and pray" is unfortunately all we can do.
Especially hoping that if the worst case is happening, finally the film department will be separated from the crappy rest and be independent (or united with Kodak Alaris).

For more than 15 years now Eastman Kodak is trying to "re-invent itself" and trying to find a working business model (outside photography).
All that failed.
The company declined from about 145,000 workers to now less than 4,000.
In the same time Fujifilm gets stronger and is now bigger and more successful than ever. In lots of different areas, including photography.

I really really hope that whatever happens to Eastman Kodak, the profitable film production can be kept alive, separated from the not-working rest.
I've said it several times: We need all of the current film producers: Kodak, Fujifilm, Ilford, Adox, Foma, Film Ferrania. With all of them a sustainable, long-term film revival will be possible. Let's support all of them!

Cheers, Jan

P.S.: Some further information can be found here:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/thread...o-5-45.154891/
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2018   #2
ulrich.von.lich
Registered User
 
ulrich.von.lich is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 264
Kodak Alaris is both the manufacturer and the distributor of traditional photographic supplies. The UK Kodak Pension Plan (now Kodak Alaris) got the whole thing, which means the original Eastman Kodak doesn't have anything to do with its old film division now.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22351676
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2018   #3
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,452
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulrich.von.lich View Post
Kodak Alaris is both the manufacturer and the distributor of traditional photographic supplies. The UK Kodak Pension Plan (now Kodak Alaris) got the whole thing, which means the original Eastman Kodak doesn't have anything to do with its old film division now.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22351676
Sorry, but that is totally wrong!! With all respect to BBC, but in this case they did not a proper reporting.

Kodak Alaris is not the manufacturer of the photographic film!
They never have been!
The production of the films has remained at Eastman Kodak in Rochester. That has been again and again explained in detail by both companies.
At Photokina, biggest photo fair in the world, Kodak Alaris also has confirmed that to me.
In the insolvency process Alaris wanted the film production, but Eastman Kodak did not want to give it away, because it was profitable.

Kodak Alaris had the photo paper production. But they closed their factory in Harrow near London about three years ago.
The Kodak photo papers are now produced by Carestream in Windsor, Colorado. Carestream is the former healthcare department of Eastman Kodak (sold more than a decade ago). They also produce x-ray film.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2018   #4
ulrich.von.lich
Registered User
 
ulrich.von.lich is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 264
The amount of the settlement was £419m. I can't imagine Kodak Alaris paid that amount of money for merely the distribution right, instead of the property. It simply wouldn't make any sense.

Wikipedia also states Kodak Alaris now owns the film division.

Could it be possible that Eastman Kodak is manufacturing films in Rochester for Kodak Alaris?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2018   #5
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,452
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulrich.von.lich View Post
The amount of the settlement was £419m. I can't imagine Kodak Alaris paid that amount of money for merely the distribution right, instead of the property. It simply wouldn't make any sense.
Kodak Alaris bought the distribution rights - not the manufacturing! - for photo films (not movie films!), they bought the photo paper manufacturing, the photo kiosk business, and some other (digital based) products.
80% of Kodak Alaris is about digital imaging, only about 20% of their business is about film.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ulrich.von.lich View Post
Wikipedia also states Kodak Alaris now owns the film division.
OMG! You quote Wikipedia? Honestly?
It is one of most unreliable sources on the internet, because every idiot can write something there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ulrich.von.lich View Post
Could it be possible that Eastman Kodak is manufacturing films in Rochester for Kodak Alaris?
That is the case!
That is what I have told you here. And that has been confirmed by both companies again and again for years.
If you don't belive me, just ask Eastman Kodak and Kodak Alaris. Or go over there to photrio.com (former apug).
There are Kodak employees from Rochester who will tell you that the Kodak photo films are produced by Eastman Kodak in Rochester, and Kodak Alaris has the distribution rights to sell them worldwide.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2018   #6
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is online now
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,276
Quote:
Originally Posted by HHPhoto View Post
OMG! You quote Wikipedia? Honestly?
It is one of most unreliable sources on the internet, because every idiot can write something there.
Calm down. Not every idiot can edit Wiki pages (and make it stick). Every idiot can write any bull**** on RFF, though.

So, will you tell us, please, the details of the Kodak Alaris - Eastman Kodak agreement regarding film distribution? How much does Kodak Alaris pay for film, can Eastman Kodak charge whatever they want for their film? Is there any obligation for Eastman Kodak to produce film for Kodak Alaris at all? Cause, you make it sound like there is none.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2018   #7
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,452
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
Calm down. Not every idiot can edit Wiki pages (and make it stick). Every idiot can write any bull**** on RFF, though.
The endless number of wrong or outdated (not updatetd data for years) articles on wikipedia is proof enough that their editor system is'nt working well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
So, will you tell us, please, the details of the Kodak Alaris - Eastman Kodak agreement regarding film distribution? How much does Kodak Alaris pay for film, can Eastman Kodak charge whatever they want for their film? Is there any obligation for Eastman Kodak to produce film for Kodak Alaris at all? Cause, you make it sound like there is none.
I've never said that.
Facts are
- that Eastman Kodak is producing the films
- only Kodak Alaris has the right to distribute these films
- the coating plant in Kodak Park in Rochester, called Building 38, has a too high capacity for being only sustained by photo film production: to run this huge coating machine economically further products like movie film and pcb film are needed.

In an interview Eastman Kodak CEO Jeff Clarke said that in 2014 they have been "short before closing Building 38 and stop all film production". It was then saved by a bigger order for movie film by the major Hollywood studios.
That cleary indicates that Eastman Kodak is the more powerful partner, Kodak Alaris being the weaker one, and EK has the power to "pull the plug" if they have to.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2018   #8
ulrich.von.lich
Registered User
 
ulrich.von.lich is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 264
Well, to be completely honest, I have better things to do than caring about the fate of Kodak photographic films. If they go away, I'll switch to other offerings.

With all due respect, I still trust Wikipedia more than online forums.

According to the few online articles I read, Kodak Alaris got Personalised Imaging and Document Imaging businesses from the settlement, and the Personalised Imaging business "includes still camera film products, photographic papers, retail print solutions and souvenir photo products sold at theme parks and other venues."

http://www.photographyblog.com/news/...ng_businesses/

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...222197521.html

You can find more articles but they all suggest the same thing.

I was only wondering whether it could be possible that Eastman Kodak was manufacturing films in Rochester for Kodak Alaris, the new owner.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2018   #9
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,452
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulrich.von.lich View Post
Well, to be completely honest, I have better things to do than caring about the fate of Kodak photographic films. If they go away, I'll switch to other offerings.

With all due respect, I still trust Wikipedia more than online forums.
With all respect, I expect you not to trust online forums but Eastman Kodak and Kodak Alaris themselves!
They know better than any questionable media what they are producing and what not.
I have asked them directly, and I have got the correct answer.

Just have a look at their latest announcement. In that they absolutely clearly say what is the case:
"Eastman Kodak will produce KODAK PROFESSIONAL EKTACHROME Color Reversal Film for distribution by Kodak Alaris."

https://www.kodakalaris.com/en-gb/ab...ome-still-film

That was Kodak Alaris.
Here the statement from Eastman Kodak, confirming that:

"Kodak will produce EKTACHROME at its film factory in Rochester, N.Y., and will market and distribute the Super 8 motion picture film version of EKTACHROME Film directly.
Kodak Alaris, an independent company since 2013, also plans to offer a still format KODAK PROFESSIONAL EKTACHROME Film for photographers in 135-36x format. "

https://www.kodak.com/corp/press_cen...lm/default.htm
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2018   #10
ulrich.von.lich
Registered User
 
ulrich.von.lich is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 264
I'm afraid it is not absolutely clear to me as it is to you, although you still might be right. The truth is most people won't care that much.

The press release only states Kodak is the producer, Alaris is the distributor, but doesn't state who is the owner.

Here is an article which I find more relevant:

https://www.photocounter.com.au/2013...-kodak-alaris/

"Where will manufacturing happen for paper, chemicals and film?

All of our paper manufacturing capability around the world will move to the new company. Our (Kodak Alaris) consumer and professional film will continue to be made in Kodak’s world-class film factories via a supply agreement. This gives us the best of both worlds: the ability to continue to innovate on thermal and silver halide paper where Kodak Alaris’ Personalized Imaging already has scale, and to enjoy the manufacturing scale provided in partnership with Kodak, which will continue to make motion picture and commercial film."

Therefore it seems clear to me Kodak Alaris now has the ownership of still camera films, and Eastman Kodak is producing them for Kodak Alaris under a supply agreement.

Whether Eastman Kodak can shut down the building 38 without paying damages to Kodak Alaris should be clear once you read the agreement.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2018   #11
vdonovan
Vince Donovan
 
vdonovan is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 494
I know votes aren't the same as facts, but I will throw in my hat with HHPhoto here. I know several Kodak employees (both Kodak Inc. and Alaris) and I believe the business arrangement is as HHPhoto describes it:

Kodak Inc. manufactures all Kodak film.
Kodak Inc. owns rights to distribute and market Kodak motion picture film.
Kodak Alaris (indeed the Kodak pension plan) owns the rights to distribute and market Kodak film for still photography.

No one really likes the arrangement, but that's how it all fell out of the bankruptcy.

Alaris is quite a small company, with few resources.
__________________

Vince Donovan
Portrait Photographer
San Francisco, CA
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2018   #12
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is online now
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,276
Quote:
Originally Posted by vdonovan View Post
Alaris is quite a small company, with few resources.
So you think that all that Kodak Alaris got for $3bln is the right to distribute some film that they have to pay for?!

That is absolutely nuts. Even in the Kodak universe.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2018   #13
farlymac
PF McFarland
 
farlymac's Avatar
 
farlymac is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Roanoke, VA
Posts: 5,813
This article from PetaPixel kind of explains it. Kodak, and Kodak Alaris are definitely two separate entities.

Somewhere else a couple of months ago I read an article where an engineer at Kodak was explaining they are in the process of making new machines to handle the smaller batches of film, so they can make more than one type of film at a time, and in more economical portions.

If you ask me, it's all the other stuff the folks at EK are getting into that could be their downfall.

PF
__________________
Waiting for the light
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2018   #14
jarski
Registered User
 
jarski's Avatar
 
jarski is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,396
I trust KODAKCoin saves them from insolvency
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2018   #15
vdonovan
Vince Donovan
 
vdonovan is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
So you think that all that Kodak Alaris got for $3bln is the right to distribute some film that they have to pay for?!

That is absolutely nuts. Even in the Kodak universe.
As noted by others above, that article contains some sloppy reporting. Alaris didn't pay anything for the marketing rights. It was given to them in exchange for their claim to pension payments from Kodak.

Prior to bankruptcy, Kodak had a multi-billion dollar liability toward the UK retirement fund. (See this article) (And this one) Giving the retirees the rights to sell Kodak film was a way for Kodak Inc. to reduce this pension liability while giving the retirees an income stream. (Kodak still pays some money to the retirees, but as a result of this deal it is much less than before).

Since Kodak was in bankruptcy, the UK pension fund didn't have much choice. The Kodak still photography business had a positive cash flow, so it was better than nothing, which was the alternative.

Kodak did not give the retirees the factory because they did not have the resources to manage it.
__________________

Vince Donovan
Portrait Photographer
San Francisco, CA
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2018   #16
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is online now
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,276
That is all true.

But bankruptcy doesn't mean that your assets are zero. Kodak UK Pension Plan had a claim of $2.8bln. Sure, they would get far less than that if Eastman would've been shut down for good, but they would get something. Plus, they paid several hundreds of millions of dollars to get Kodak personalized imaging and document imaging. If you pay that kind of money you don't just get "marketing rights" and be a slightly bigger Freestyle (or whatever you have in US) so that you can buy Kodak film priced at whatever Eastman Kodak wants for it and sell it at whatever market allows.

We might never know about the detail of the supply agreement but I seriously doubt that agreement allowed Eastman Kodak to just stop making film with no repercussions...

Jan likes to quote a Kodak CEO from 2014 that Kodak was just about to be forced to pull the plug on film production. Well, it makes for a nice Hollywood story and looks good on your resume if you are the guy who saved the film (and all that in the first year on your job!). Either film production is weighing Kodak down or is profitable. We are hearing both (from the same people here, LOL). Which is it then?
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2018   #17
css9450
Registered User
 
css9450's Avatar
 
css9450 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
We are hearing both (from the same people here, LOL). Which is it then?
Don't you know? I just re-stocked my film fridge. I can see the headlines now: Film sales are up in 2018!
__________________
Nikon S2, S3, F, F2, F3, FM2, FA, N90S, D80, D7000, D750, Sony a6000, Canon IIf, Leica CL, Tower type 3, Zorki 4, Vito B, Perkeo II, Rollei 35....
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2018   #18
traveler_101
American abroad
 
traveler_101 is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 969
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
That is all true.

We might never know about the detail of the supply agreement but I seriously doubt that agreement allowed Eastman Kodak to just stop making film with no repercussions...

Jan likes to quote a Kodak CEO from 2014 that Kodak was just about to be forced to pull the plug on film production. Well, it makes for a nice Hollywood story and looks good on your resume if you are the guy who saved the film (and all that in the first year on your job!). Either film production is weighing Kodak down or is profitable. We are hearing both (from the same people here, LOL). Which is it then?
Throwing in my two cents: paradoxically both are true. Trying to remember Economics 201: profitability is a function of sufficient demand at a specific price point. At the price Kodak Aleris is able to sell film for still cameras demand is sufficient to make a profit.

However the second aspect is that price reflects production costs. Kodak's production costs are low assuming demand is sufficient to justify employing its high volume production facility. But that facility assumed demand for film from multiple volume users - including and especially for cinema. Wholesale film sales for Kodak was ALWAYS much greater than retail film sales. In short, demand for retail film sales for use in still cameras is insufficient to maintain necessary production levels.

Kodak's reprieve was the agreement a couple of years ago with Hollywood to produce a fixed number of linear feet over the next few years. But Kodak will have to secure other such agreements to continue film production. At some point the game in Rochester will be up and Kodak film will be no more.

Securing the future of film over the next few decades requires the strategy employed by ADOX in their new production facility in Berlin: small scale production with newly refurbished/rebuilt equipment manned by a new generation of technicians. Production is aimed at the retail market. The day I visited their retail outlet in Berlin this past summer, it was filled with customers - and I mean young guys - buying film.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2018   #19
Oren Grad
Registered User
 
Oren Grad is offline
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by traveler_101 View Post
However the second aspect is that price reflects production costs. Kodak's production costs are low assuming demand is sufficient to justify employing its high volume production facility. But that facility assumed demand for film from multiple volume users - including and especially for cinema. Wholesale film sales for Kodak was ALWAYS much greater than retail film sales. In short, demand for retail film sales for use in still cameras is insufficient to maintain necessary production levels.

Kodak's reprieve was the agreement a couple of years ago with Hollywood to produce a fixed number of linear feet over the next few years. But Kodak will have to secure other such agreements to continue film production. At some point the game in Rochester will be up and Kodak film will be no more.
Apropos of which, the following is from Kodak's latest SEC 10-Q, filed on Nov 8, 2017 (emphasis added):

Consumer and Filmís revenue was unchanged compared to the prior year quarter and declined $23 million (13%) compared with the prior year first nine months. Segment earnings declined $3 million and $28 million compared with the prior year quarter and first nine months, respectively, driven by the declining installed base of consumer inkjet printers, increased unit costs in the film businesses and one-time items that favorably impacted the prior year. A modification to a brand licensing agreement improved current quarter results. Kodak plans to continue to promote the use of film to utilize as much film manufacturing capacity as possible.

http://investor.kodak.com/secfiling....64590-17-22748
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2018   #20
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 693
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulrich.von.lich View Post
The press release only states Kodak is the producer, Alaris is the distributor, but doesn't state who is the owner.
The film factory - "Building 38" - is owned by Eastman Kodak.
They have the control over production.
If Eastman Kodak fails (I hope not, I love TMY-2) Kodak Alaris has a real problem:
They still have the right to sell films under the Kodak brand name, but that is then worthless.
Only Eastman Kodak can make Kodak films, no other one:
You need the Kodak engineers, the Kodak know-how, the original emulsion kettles and the original coating machine.

It is impossible to make a Kodak film at Fuji, at Ilfords factory, at InovisCoat, Adox or Film Ferrania. And vice versa: You cannot make a Fuji or Ilford film at Building 38.
If Kodak Alaris would go to a different manufacturer, they would perhaps get some film. But that film would have nothing to do with Kodak films. They only could put the Kodak name on it. Would there be (enough) demand for such products? I have my doubts......
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2018   #21
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 693
Quote:
Originally Posted by vdonovan View Post
I know votes aren't the same as facts, but I will throw in my hat with HHPhoto here. I know several Kodak employees (both Kodak Inc. and Alaris) and I believe the business arrangement is as HHPhoto describes it:

Kodak Inc. manufactures all Kodak film.
Kodak Inc. owns rights to distribute and market Kodak motion picture film.
Kodak Alaris (indeed the Kodak pension plan) owns the rights to distribute and market Kodak film for still photography.

No one really likes the arrangement, but that's how it all fell out of the bankruptcy.

Alaris is quite a small company, with few resources.
Thank you Vince.
You have described the current situation absolutely precisely.
It could not have be better described.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2018   #22
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 693
Quote:
Originally Posted by vdonovan View Post
As noted by others above, that article contains some sloppy reporting. Alaris didn't pay anything for the marketing rights. It was given to them in exchange for their claim to pension payments from Kodak.

Prior to bankruptcy, Kodak had a multi-billion dollar liability toward the UK retirement fund. (See this article) (And this one) Giving the retirees the rights to sell Kodak film was a way for Kodak Inc. to reduce this pension liability while giving the retirees an income stream. (Kodak still pays some money to the retirees, but as a result of this deal it is much less than before).

Since Kodak was in bankruptcy, the UK pension fund didn't have much choice. The Kodak still photography business had a positive cash flow, so it was better than nothing, which was the alternative.

Kodak did not give the retirees the factory because they did not have the resources to manage it.
Again, thanks Vince!
Perfect description of the situation.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2018   #23
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is online now
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,276
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
Perfect description of the situation.
It's a description that doesn't tell us anything about the supply agreement in place between Eastman Kodak and Kodak Alaris. Maybe people here should stop guessing at the nature of that agreement. Would you transfer your multi billion claim + additional money into a "promise" that someone will or will not sell you some or none of the product that they are or are not even interested in making?!

I've worked in a business that had supply agreements with the buyer so tight that they practically owned (parts of) the production.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2018   #24
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 693
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
It's a description that doesn't tell us anything about the supply agreement in place between Eastman Kodak and Kodak Alaris. Maybe people here should stop guessing at the nature of that agreement. Would you transfer your multi billion claim + additional money into a "promise" that someone will or will not sell you some or none of the product that they are or are not even interested in making?!
You are again missing the point:
Building 38 is so big that it needs several film product groups to be run economically:
- movie film (camera film and archival film)
- pcb films
- photo films (unfortunately currently the smallest part).

The biggest segments are movie film and pcb film.
And all that is in the hand of Eastman Kodak.
If Building 38 cannot be run economically anymore, then Kodak Alaris cannot change that, no matter how the supply agreement was.
As Vince said:
The deal was bad for the UK Pension Fund / Kodak Alaris, but it was the best deal they could get: That or nothing.

But all that is not the main point today:
The main point is:
Eastman Kodak is making huge losses in their main sector industrial printing. In which way will these losses affect the film production? Will the small profits in film production again burned in their other activities (that is for about 15 years Kodaks problem!)? Can EK avoid another insolvency? What happens with the film production if EK is going again in chapter 11?
No one knows at this time.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2018   #25
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is online now
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,276
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
You are again missing the point:...
No, I'm not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
If Building 38 cannot be run economically anymore, then Kodak Alaris cannot change that, no matter how the supply agreement was.
An agreement or contract could force or incent Kodak to invest into downsizing their production lines when before the agreement such incentive just wasn't there. If Ektachrome isn't just a stunt they are doing their first steps into adjusting production to current demand. Of course, no one here really knows if Ektachrome has anything to do with Kodak Alaris agreement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
Can EK avoid another insolvency? What happens with the film production if EK is going again in chapter 11?
No one knows at this time.
Correct. You should reread your quote a few more times.

Speculation about Kodak stopping all film production is like speculating which Fuji film will be discontinued next.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2018   #26
Paul T.
Registered User
 
Paul T.'s Avatar
 
Paul T. is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,958
Such an informative and civil thread, this one.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2018   #27
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 693
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
An agreement or contract could force or incent Kodak to invest into downsizing their production lines when before the agreement such incentive just wasn't there.
For years the film production at Kodak is downsized as much as possible. No possibilities for further scaling down.

Ektachrome has nothing to do with scaling down. It is all about Kodak needing reversal film for a success for its Super 8 camera. Because the S8 enthusiast want reversal film and real projection.
To make such a new reversal film production possible, you need the additional amount of 35mm film from photographers.
That is why Eastman Kodak want to offer Ektachrome in S8 and Kodak Alaris in 35mm photo film.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
Speculation about Kodak stopping all film production is like speculating which Fuji film will be discontinued next.
Please read the postings here correctly. I have not written with one word that Kodak will stop all film production. Nor anyone else had.

Last edited by Skiff : 02-14-2018 at 02:02. Reason: typo
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2018   #28
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is online now
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,276
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
Ektachrome has nothing to do with scaling down.
Kodak plans to make Ektachrome in far smaller scale than when it was discontinued. I would call that scaling down.

Kodak even said it will be not be made on old machines. It wasn't possible to do that in 2013 and now it suddenly is?! Unless some serious R&D happened to make that possible I'd say that they simply weren't that interested in making small quantities of slide film in 2013 and now they are. Could be the same for "building 38 is too big" mantra.

Of course, Ektachrome project could still turn out infeasible or even a pure PR stunt.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
Please read the postings here correctly. I have not written with one word that Kodak will stop all film production. Nor anyone else had.
The OP lays it down pretty clear and literary writes that this time the survival of Kodak film production is in God's hands. Now, maybe he actually believes in divine powers, but for my agnostic soul that reads like a sure prediction of the imminent end of it.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2018   #29
kkdanamatt
Registered User
 
kkdanamatt's Avatar
 
kkdanamatt is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 267
Kodak is hurting while Fuji is Flourishing!

"Fujifilm Holdings has posted its financial results for the first three quarters of the 2017 fiscal year, and it's all good news for the Imaging Solutions division.
The segment recorded a revenue of 297.7 billion yen (approximately $2.77 billion USD), a bump of 15.6% year-on-year.
Imaging Solution operating income totaled 50.0 billion yen (approximately $465 million USD), up 76.1% over the same period during the previous year.

From the figures in its earnings presentation, it seems the bulk of the increase comes from the Photo Imaging businessóread: Instax camerasóbut strong sales in the Electronic Imaging business show the X-Series is starting to deliver.
Quarterly revenue for Electronic Imaging is up 39%, thanks to strong sales of the X-E3, X-T20 and X100F models, and the mirrorless medium-format camera GFX 50S and corresponding lenses.

Sales also increased in the Optical Devices business, largely due to strong sales of various industrial-use lenses, used for example in vehicle cameras or projectors.
And, finally, Fujifilm's presentation also mentions the launch of the new MK series of lenses, which are designed for cinema cameras and targeted at the growing area of video creation for online purposes.

If you want to dive into more detail, you can find all the report documents, including a video of the presentation, on the Fujifilm Holdings website.
But long story short: Fujifilm's Imaging Solutions division seems to be doing very well."
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2018   #30
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 693
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
Kodak plans to make Ektachrome in far smaller scale than when it was discontinued. I would call that scaling down.
No, that is not correct.
1. The last coating of all Ektachrome films was 2010. In beginning of 2012 they announced the discontinuation saying the remaining stock will last for probably about 9-12 months depending on demand.
So these production runs were intended for a longer time span. And it were two films: E100VS and E100G.
And it was all formats: 135, 120, sheet film, Super 8.

2. Now Kodak said in their podcast that they are again making several master rolls (not only one). But of one film, and only in two formats. And it is not intended for a longer time span.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
Kodak even said it will be not be made on old machines.
You probably have misunderstood something. The main machinery you need are the emulsion kettles, and the coating machine. And that is all the same as for the current negative film production.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2018   #31
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 693
Quote:
Originally Posted by kkdanamatt View Post
From the figures in its earnings presentation, it seems the bulk of the increase comes from the Photo Imaging businessóread: Instax camerasóbut strong sales in the Electronic Imaging business show the X-Series is starting to deliver.
Photo Imaging department is about 69% of the photography revenue. And it is much more than Instax cameras and films: Photo film, single use cameras, RA-4 silver-halide photo paper (huge business), photo chemistry, mini labs (RA-4 and inkjet), inkjet papers.
So that is (with the exception of inkjet) their "analogue business".

Their digital photo business is about 31% of its photography related revenue.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2018   #32
Ste_S
Registered User
 
Ste_S is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulrich.von.lich View Post
Well, to be completely honest, I have better things to do than caring about the fate of Kodak photographic films. If they go away, I'll switch to other offerings.
I think Kodak failing should be a concern for anyone who shoots colour. If Kodak fails you're left with just Fuji, and they seem to be doing their best to pull out of the non-instant film business
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2018   #33
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is online now
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,276
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
No, that is not correct.
Yes, it is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
You probably have misunderstood something.
No, I didn't.

Listen to the Kodakery podcast from Nov. 14, 2017. You will hear the comment that they will use "all new equipment which is much smaller scale" at around 5:20s.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2018   #34
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,452
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
The OP lays it down pretty clear and literary writes that this time the survival of Kodak film production is in God's hands. Now, maybe he actually believes in divine powers, but for my agnostic soul that reads like a sure prediction of the imminent end of it.
???
I have not written anything like that.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2018   #35
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,452
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
Listen to the Kodakery podcast from Nov. 14, 2017. You will hear the comment that they will use "all new equipment which is much smaller scale" at around 5:20s.
In the podcast there is no information that they had installed new emulsion making facilities or a new coating machine.
Especially the last would also be impossible, because such a machine would cost millions of dollars. They would never get a ROI for that.
Ektachrome will be coated on the existing coating machine in B 38.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2018   #36
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is online now
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,276
Quote:
Originally Posted by HHPhoto View Post
???
I have not written anything like that.

Cheers, Jan
You wrote, and I quote :

"So "hope and pray" is unfortunately all we can do."

Quote:
Originally Posted by HHPhoto View Post
In the podcast there is no information that they had installed new emulsion making facilities or a new coating machine.
There is also no information that they haven't. All we have from an official source is "new equipment" and "much smaller scale".

As always it's a personal matter who you believe, you or some guy from Kodak. My reply was to Skiff who claimed that I made that up or "misunderstood" what I wrote.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2018   #37
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,452
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ste_S View Post
I think Kodak failing should be a concern for anyone who shoots colour. If Kodak fails you're left with just Fuji, and they seem to be doing their best to pull out of the non-instant film business
It would be a concern for all film shooters, including BW shooters:
- Tri-X and both T-Max films going away
- less competition in the market
- higher prices
- very bad PR for film in general, very negative effect on getting more (younger) photographers into film.

I repeat it again: We need all film manufacturers: Kodak, Fujifilm, Ilford, Adox, Foma, Film Ferrania.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2018   #38
Peter Wijninga
Registered User
 
Peter Wijninga's Avatar
 
Peter Wijninga is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,942
Perhaps you should post in capital letters....
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2018   #39
ulrich.von.lich
Registered User
 
ulrich.von.lich is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 264
I still think what matters the most is the supply agreement, but I do understand your point.

Unlike the Impossible Project who bought the factory while not films, Kodak Alaris bought the films while not the factory. I think it's the easiest way to put it.

In reality, some manufacturing facilities and employees were transfered to Kodak Alaris under the settlement.

Source:
https://www.photocounter.com.au/2013...-kodak-alaris/

Quote:
"A number of manufacturing facilities and employees who are dedicated to the (Personalized Imaging and Document Imaging) businesses are included in the transaction. Those major manufacturing locations include Harrow in the UK; Shanghai, Xiamen and Wuxi in China ; Windsor, CO; Manaus, Brazil; Malanpour, India; Pereslavl, Russia; and Rochester, NY."


However, photographic films are still being produced in the Building 38 in Rochester and by Eastman Kodak. Probably it's because Eastman Kodak still needs the building for the production of its motion films. Most online articles seem to have failed to mention it.

Since Eastman Kodak is manufacturing photographic films for Kodak Alaris under a supply agreement, I think it's very likely the agreement has already covered the event that the Building 38 must be shut down. The agreement could very well oblige Eastman Kodak to transfer essential facilities (machines etc.) and employees to Kodak Alaris, and the production could be restarted elsewhere. I really think it's nothing but logic, but without knowing the exact terms, I'm just speculating.

In theory, Kodak Alaris should be able to manufacture photographic films themselves. I see they enjoy emphasising their independence from Eastman Kodak.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
The film factory - "Building 38" - is owned by Eastman Kodak.
They have the control over production.
If Eastman Kodak fails (I hope not, I love TMY-2) Kodak Alaris has a real problem:
They still have the right to sell films under the Kodak brand name, but that is then worthless.
Only Eastman Kodak can make Kodak films, no other one:
You need the Kodak engineers, the Kodak know-how, the original emulsion kettles and the original coating machine.

It is impossible to make a Kodak film at Fuji, at Ilfords factory, at InovisCoat, Adox or Film Ferrania. And vice versa: You cannot make a Fuji or Ilford film at Building 38.
If Kodak Alaris would go to a different manufacturer, they would perhaps get some film. But that film would have nothing to do with Kodak films. They only could put the Kodak name on it. Would there be (enough) demand for such products? I have my doubts......
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2018   #40
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 693
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulrich.von.lich View Post
Source:
https://www.photocounter.com.au/2013...-kodak-alaris/

Quote:
"A number of manufacturing facilities and employees who are dedicated to the (Personalized Imaging and Document Imaging) businesses are included in the transaction. Those major manufacturing locations include Harrow in the UK; Shanghai, Xiamen and Wuxi in China ; Windsor, CO; Manaus, Brazil; Malanpour, India; Pereslavl, Russia; and Rochester, NY."
Dear Ulrich,

this article is again very misleading. Journalists have no clue about film production.
Only film producers have. Therefore we have to listen to the film producers, not the journalists.

To the localities listed above:
Only Harrow, Windsor and Rochester have to do with silver-halide products. All others are about digital or regional distribution points.
Harrow was the photo paper plant. But that was shut down by Kodak Alaris. There is no production anymore. It is dismantled!

The listing of Windsor is wrong. Windsor was never part of the deal, because the factory in Windsor is owned by Carestream!
https://www.carestream.com/en/us
(Carestream was in former times the healthcare department of Eastman Kodak. But EK sold it about a decade ago (stupid decision, by the way)).
But in Windsor now the photo paper is produced by Carestream for Kodak Alaris.
KodakAlaris has no own silver-halide production factories today.

Rochester: Most of the administration of Kodak Alaris (offices) are in Rochester in Kodak Park.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ulrich.von.lich View Post
Since Eastman Kodak is manufacturing photographic films for Kodak Alaris under a supply agreement, I think it's very likely the agreement has already covered the event that the Building 38 must be shut down. The agreement could very well oblige Eastman Kodak to transfer essential facilities (machines etc.) and employees to Kodak Alaris, and the production could be restarted elsewhere. I really think it's nothing but logic, but without knowing the exact terms, I'm just speculating.
Sorry, no. You cannot simply transfer B38 to different location and start production again. Too much technological hurdles and especially: Much too expensive!!
You would never get the huge investment needed for that back!
You should read Robert Shanebrooks (former Kodak engineer) excellent book "Making Kodak Film". Then you will see immediately why such a move is impossible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ulrich.von.lich View Post
In theory, Kodak Alaris should be able to manufacture photographic films themselves. I see they enjoy emphasising their independence from Eastman Kodak.
No, they cannot manufacture films by themselves. They have neither the staff, nor the know-how, nor the factory for that.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:12.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.