Kodak

[George Stewart]

Here is a posting I made nearly eight years ago, on photo.net, after the announcement that Kodak was haulting production of their MF digital backs. I stand by my predictions.

"Unfortunately I feel this is very indicative of Kodak's eventual failure in digital imaging, soon removal from the Dow and eventual bankruptcy. I admire a company that acts quickly to drop unprofitable products, but digital is the future and Kodak needs to suck-it-up (losses in digital imaging) for now. I know they’re trimming employees and buying other companies but that’s not enough.

Kodak has several problems that probably won't be solved:

First, its corporate culture is similar to many chemistry and Dow companies - slow acting (brought about by cash cow products with life cycles measured in decades not months like in the electronics industry), with too many layers of management (to protect the higher ups from bad decision making) that only results in poor communications and no or too late decision making. Most of its competitors have been in the electronics industry for a long time, and as such have been hardened by cut-throat competition and tight margins. Kodak management is afraid to rock-the-boat. With big salaries and millions of dollars in retirement waiting for top management they won’t take sufficient risks needed to compete.

Second, Kodak apparently isn’t marketing well as is evident by lesser products, poor product design, web site, and advertising. Marketing is the controlling force in any corporation. It should monitor the external environment and ensure a company’s products and services meet all customer expectations. I can’t think of one Kodak advertisement (they’re not memorable). I can’t think of one Kodak P&S digital product designator (product name) – I can name many of their competitors P&S cameras. Kodak’s flagship product the 14n has the word “Professional” written on it. If one has to say pro, guess what, it probably isn’t pro. Has any of Kodak’s products won any industrial design awards? Are Kodak’s cameras beautiful? Kodak’s poor marketing is brought about by years of cash cow products that haven’t required marketing – they sold themselves. Now that Kodak has to start marketing with the big boys it doesn’t have the expertise or the will to do so. Intel has stickers that go on PCs that indicate “Intel Inside” or “Pentium.” I know what processor is in my computer equipment. What’s so special about Kodak imagers? I don’t know the name of one of them. Does the average consumer know what imager is in their camera? Do consumers ask for cameras with Kodak imagers – I think not. Why not? Kodak should be very worried.

Finally, Kodak lacks the manufacturing expertise needed to compete. Making a spy satellite, big ticket optics or coated plastic/paper is not the same as having an electronics assembly line that makes thousands of cameras per day. As a result, Kodak doesn’t have the economies of scale necessary to compete in the camera industry. Its recent purchase of all of Chinon shows this. But, Chinon even with Kodak’s money won’t rocket into the same position as Canon. Kodak’s lack of a proper corporate culture and marketing will keep them back.

Here are my recommendations:

Trim many layers of management including most of the fat at the top of the company. 99% of those with chemistry degrees should be gone.

Move corporate headquarters from Rochistan to Silicon Valley where the electronics expertise is, an environment of high competition exists and the weather is good. Not too many good people in the electronics industry are going to move to NY when California is so attractive in comparison. This will also help Kodak get a new attitude about what kind of company they are.

Hire an Italian design studio to design your consumer products – they should look like the Ferraris of the camera world.

Higher a new VP of Marketing (or get rid of whom ever is hampering this individual) and start correcting the above mentioned issues. When a consumer asks for a camera they should demand one with the “Kodak Digital” mark on it. The consumer should be trained in such a way that any camera without “Kodak Inside” is unacceptable.

Stop all analog R&D and keep enough chemists to run the analog factories.

I could go on and on."

[Drew Wiley]

Hindsight is always interesting, but if Kodak had jumped headlong into electronics they
might have gone under already. No unique niche and lots of big sharks in them thar
waters. And moving a major corp to Silicon Valley isn't all that easy. At that time,and
still to a considerable extent, land and home prices would be staggering. So I guess
when I'm reminiscing with some other toothless geezers in the old folks home, we'll
be mentioning words like Sears, Kodak, and Woolworth that will be totally unintlilgible
to the current generation, who will not doubt be functionally illiterate anyway. Film
will be something collecting on our dentures.

[Jay DeFehr]

So I guess
when I'm reminiscing with some other toothless geezers in the old folks home, we'll
be mentioning words like Sears, Kodak, and Woolworth that will be totally unintlilgible
to the current generation, who will not doubt be functionally illiterate anyway.

That's funny, Drew, but statistically, college kids are more literate than we are.

[Brian C. Miller]

Hindsight is always interesting, but if Kodak had jumped headlong into electronics they might have gone under already. No unique niche and lots of big sharks in them thar waters.

Nokia went from a lumber operation to electronics, bringing in expertise in radio communications, and later cell phone technology. There are always sharks in the water, there is always competition. The question is, do you have something unique?

In 1975, nobody was producing a digital imaging system. That is the exact time to get into something full force, when you are a unique leader in the field. Unfortunately, that time is past, and it's way past. Kodak has sold off its digital sensor production, and is trying to establish itself in the losing end of the product pool. Nobody wants its patents. There have been court decisions against Kodak.

Somewhere in that corporate ziggurat, they must know that Kodak has no digital future now. Kodak stock is, as of this post, trading at $0.66 per share.

[redrockcoulee]

Its all just another Saab story.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/12/19/auto...P_LN&hpt=hp_c2

That is one of the cruelist postings ever on this forum

Time to use my remaining 35mm and 4X5 Technical Pan on a couple of 900 Turbos.


To the original topic

Just as we are not bound to any one company or product, Kodak is not bound to any one market and if they feel that one market is not feasible for them, that is a business decision. It may not be the correct one, especially from our points of view, but it is a business one not an anti large format one. I will continue to buy their products as well as Ilford, Fuji Efke and Foma but not a single company depends on my minor purchases. I do not understand Fuji's pricing on Acros, the cheapest major in 120 and the most expensive in 4X5 but then I am not a whiz in business either. I do hope that either through special orders or from the other companies that a variety of emulsions are available in LF larger than 4X5.

[Drew Wiley]

Heck Jay - I'm right down the street from what's allegedly the No.1 university in the world. Most of those kids don't have 1/4 the vocabulary my Grandpa had and probably
couldn't point out Brazil on a globe. They're all techies. They can't cross the street without a GPS. Students coming in from China and India seem better educated,
even in English vocabulary. But I better step cautiously - my own wife went thru UCB.

[Jim Shanesy]

That's funny, Drew, but statistically, college kids are more literate than we are.

I'm not sure I agree with that statement. BTW, what do you mean by 'statistically'? Are there statistical metrics for literacy?

[jp]

Its all just another Saab story.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/12/19/auto...P_LN&hpt=hp_c2

Not quite... Saab is/was an underdog, and Kodak was the big 800 lb gorilla like GM.

GM and Kodak would be a better comparison, but GM was "rescued" as too big to fail like some of the banks we are not happy with.

GM bought Saab for it's turbo and safety tech and European and world domination aspirations. With cheap gas prices, GM was slow to adopt Saab's fuel saving clean engines and turbos. Some engines made it into Saturns after a very long time. GM basically supressed Saab so as to not compete against it's coveted Cadillac brand and never actually tried to make it a strong successful brand. Then they subjected the Saab brand to some random reactive shots in the dark like the Saabaru and the Trollblazer SUV to dilute the brand even more. Now that Saab is dead, their theme of 4 cylinders and a turbo is catching on pretty good where people have had pain-at-the-pump.

[Helcio J Tagliolatto]

Here is a posting I made nearly eight years ago, on photo.net, after the announcement that Kodak was haulting production of their MF digital backs. I stand by my predictions.

"Unfortunately I feel this is very indicative of Kodak's eventual failure in digital imaging, soon removal from the Dow and eventual bankruptcy. I admire a company that acts quickly to drop unprofitable products, but digital is the future and Kodak needs to suck-it-up (losses in digital imaging) for now. I know they’re trimming employees and buying other companies but that’s not enough.

Kodak has several problems that probably won't be solved:

First, its corporate culture is similar to many chemistry and Dow companies - slow acting (brought about by cash cow products with life cycles measured in decades not months like in the electronics industry), with too many layers of management (to protect the higher ups from bad decision making) that only results in poor communications and no or too late decision making. Most of its competitors have been in the electronics industry for a long time, and as such have been hardened by cut-throat competition and tight margins. Kodak management is afraid to rock-the-boat. With big salaries and millions of dollars in retirement waiting for top management they won’t take sufficient risks needed to compete.

Second, Kodak apparently isn’t marketing well as is evident by lesser products, poor product design, web site, and advertising. Marketing is the controlling force in any corporation. It should monitor the external environment and ensure a company’s products and services meet all customer expectations. I can’t think of one Kodak advertisement (they’re not memorable). I can’t think of one Kodak P&S digital product designator (product name) – I can name many of their competitors P&S cameras. Kodak’s flagship product the 14n has the word “Professional” written on it. If one has to say pro, guess what, it probably isn’t pro. Has any of Kodak’s products won any industrial design awards? Are Kodak’s cameras beautiful? Kodak’s poor marketing is brought about by years of cash cow products that haven’t required marketing – they sold themselves. Now that Kodak has to start marketing with the big boys it doesn’t have the expertise or the will to do so. Intel has stickers that go on PCs that indicate “Intel Inside” or “Pentium.” I know what processor is in my computer equipment. What’s so special about Kodak imagers? I don’t know the name of one of them. Does the average consumer know what imager is in their camera? Do consumers ask for cameras with Kodak imagers – I think not. Why not? Kodak should be very worried.

Finally, Kodak lacks the manufacturing expertise needed to compete. Making a spy satellite, big ticket optics or coated plastic/paper is not the same as having an electronics assembly line that makes thousands of cameras per day. As a result, Kodak doesn’t have the economies of scale necessary to compete in the camera industry. Its recent purchase of all of Chinon shows this. But, Chinon even with Kodak’s money won’t rocket into the same position as Canon. Kodak’s lack of a proper corporate culture and marketing will keep them back.

Here are my recommendations:

Trim many layers of management including most of the fat at the top of the company. 99% of those with chemistry degrees should be gone.

Move corporate headquarters from Rochistan to Silicon Valley where the electronics expertise is, an environment of high competition exists and the weather is good. Not too many good people in the electronics industry are going to move to NY when California is so attractive in comparison. This will also help Kodak get a new attitude about what kind of company they are.

Hire an Italian design studio to design your consumer products – they should look like the Ferraris of the camera world.

Higher a new VP of Marketing (or get rid of whom ever is hampering this individual) and start correcting the above mentioned issues. When a consumer asks for a camera they should demand one with the “Kodak Digital” mark on it. The consumer should be trained in such a way that any camera without “Kodak Inside” is unacceptable.

Stop all analog R&D and keep enough chemists to run the analog factories.

I could go on and on."

George,
My wife's sending you compliments for such an accurate diagnosis (she has just graduated on marketing)

[Greg Blank]

I was just making a joke. You know like "SOB" crying shame, or maybe even Son of a Biscuit eater? But now your leading me to ask what exactly is a "TrollBlazer",....Is that motorized cart for hauling gruff billies under the bridge

Not quite... Saab is/was an underdog, and Kodak was the big 800 lb gorilla like GM.

GM and Kodak would be a better comparison, but GM was "rescued" as too big to fail like some of the banks we are not happy with.

GM bought Saab for it's turbo and safety tech and European and world domination aspirations. With cheap gas prices, GM was slow to adopt Saab's fuel saving clean engines and turbos. Some engines made it into Saturns after a very long time. GM basically supressed Saab so as to not compete against it's coveted Cadillac brand and never actually tried to make it a strong successful brand. Then they subjected the Saab brand to some random reactive shots in the dark like the Saabaru and the Trollblazer SUV to dilute the brand even more. Now that Saab is dead, their theme of 4 cylinders and a turbo is catching on pretty good where people have had pain-at-the-pump.