Oh, my bad, I didn't know you work for Kodak.Originally Posted by SAShruby
Oh, my bad, I didn't know you work for Kodak.
You guys do realize that Kodak may actually have a really low bar for producing a run of film in a specific size, right? I am guessing that the reason that they have discontinued 8x10 in 400 is that there was less than $15,000 sold last year. I don't think that $15,000 of product is an unreasonably high threshold. If there are fewer than 30 people in the world shooting $500 worth of it per year (50 lousy sheets), is it any wonder that the size has been discontinued?
I remember when Konica would produce runs of IR in 120. Oh, how we would anticipate the production run. Then Ilford started churning out IR 120, and Konica dropped its line. Kodak is the only company cutting color film in 8x10 at all, and the fact is that they will listen when money talks.
So pony up the money and start talking.
(And no, Kodak will never bring back TechPan. The equipment was scrapped. Yes, I do miss it, too.)
Obviously everybody's gonna get the press-release-reply. At least a thought out letter might make it to a meeting. Most companies do care about what their customers think.
As far as 'hot air' goes, I said:
a) I need Portra 400nc to do the work I'm doing with my life. They're aware of why someone would need a faster film, especially with 8x10.
b) The artists I mentioned (and many others) need it. To me it would be a huge loss, just culturally if they couldn't work on film anymore.
c) Large format is defiantly gaining popularity. I'm suggesting it could be worth sticking it out, even if the numbers are slightly down right now.
d) I'd imagine at this time 400nc in 8x10 is almost exclusively used by photographers like those I mentioned. I do believe keeping that product around for them is great advertising for Kodak. Even if they're taking a slight loss. Which I doubt given the prices/sales volume.
My only hope is that Kodak 'recovers' from the vicious 'hot-air' attack they fell victim to. If not I fear they may discontinue the entire Portra line for spite alone.
Time to shoot some Portra. See ya later.
I don't need to work for Kodak. It's quite common knowledge that this film was the best Kodak ever made and it was best film ever made, and it was expensive even back in time. The demand for this film got hammered by production cost cheaper films, besides many other reasons.
You never know what Kodak can do in the future. If they hear there is a steady demand for the film, they'll make it. Hypotetically, if machines would be available, $15,000 order would be very easy to fulfill. I'd buy it for myself and stock up the freezer anytime.
And, on personal note, sarcasm won't get you anywhere either.
Maybe there should be a "group buy" forum section set up, to make it easier to organize (and for readers to find) when someone is trying to set one up?
John
John, that's a fantastic idea.
The fact that they dropped 8x10 speaks volumes about the business viability of the product, and the lack of steady demand for the film.
Just because something produces a profit doesn't mean doing it is a good business decision. Even if the machinery is available, it requires materials and man-hours to operate - ie. funds. And if those funds would a get higher return on investment (or economic value added if you want to get fancy) when put into, say, producing a new line of entry-level point and shoots, they will produce a new line of entry-level point and shoots.
Besides, a miniscule $15k run every year or so of a product where the engineers have moved to other projects complicates matters further - the machines might require extra maintenance due to lack of use, new calibration, the know-how might have been partly lost, and the engineers might be tied up on other tasks, causing disruption on other, perhaps more lucrative, projects. With this film it looks like it should be easy if all they have to do is custom-cut it, though.
On a personal note, neither do throw-away statements with no backing from basic business reasoning
I third the motion. It's clear from following the message traffic here that sometimes these organizing efforts get lost in the blizzard of other threads and don't get seen by everyone who might be interested. A designated place would make it much easier to check for any open efforts and would reduce the chance that a potentially successful group buy will fail only for lack of awareness.
Even better, everyone needs to shoot more film.
Steve
Nothing beats a great piece of glass!
I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.
Rule number one in business is, if you make profit you run it until you can't. Portion of profits are invested in development of new products. However, this world is based on increased profit margins which most of the time goes against the quality of the next product. Also, businesses sometimes do make bad decisions and IMO, Kodak made one here.The fact that they dropped 8x10 speaks volumes about the business viability of the product, and the lack of steady demand for the film.
Just because something produces a profit doesn't mean doing it is a good business decision. Even if the machinery is available, it requires materials and man-hours to operate - ie. funds. And if those funds would a get higher return on investment (or economic value added if you want to get fancy) when put into, say, producing a new line of entry-level point and shoots, they will produce a new line of entry-level point and shoots.
Besides, a miniscule $15k run every year or so of a product where the engineers have moved to other projects complicates matters further - the machines might require extra maintenance due to lack of use, new calibration, the know-how might have been partly lost, and the engineers might be tied up on other tasks, causing disruption on other, perhaps more lucrative, projects. With this film it looks like it should be easy if all they have to do is custom-cut it, though.
On a personal note, neither do throw-away statements with no backing from basic business reasoning
I don't care what their cost is, it's their problem. Even their initial costs would be $500,000, they would still make money. This film stopped being profitable at time when they dropped it, but it doesn't mean it would be the same story today. Honestly, you know diddly squat about business.
I can make a statement with solid backing, I made my own conclusions about where the film business is. I`m not afraid to make a decision, while you`re trying to take no risk by making closing statement. It's so funny that there are many people with lot's of theories, but if it comes down to make decision, all they do is shitting their pants. Funny world.
Three years ago, there was a big gap in film business, especially for LF. Iflord filled it, they restructured into new company, and make film again. Kodak had a chance to sell their film business to investors but they asked too much. Bad for us. They really made some bad decisions over last 10 years. See http://quote.morningstar.com/Stock/s.aspx?t=EK (Select MAX option on graph to see where Kodak went)
Maybe they listened to you.
Last edited by SAShruby; 15-Sep-2010 at 21:51.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks