Reading mode: Light Dark

HP Bought Kodak?

Go to last post
R

RobertE

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
383
Reaction score
2
Location
Sydney, AU
Hi,

The HP take over Kodak rumour mill is active again. I hear the deal was done last week and an announcement is imminent.

-- Robert
 
... maybe HP will announce it then?

Still, this brings the question: if a merger does happen, what will HP do with the still well-respected Kodak brand? My bet: HP would use it as a value-priced "fighter brand" to ward off new and low-priced competitors, while making HP the premium brand. It's sorta like what they already do in home computers, where HP Pavilion is the premium brand and Compaq Presario is the value brand.

If the merger happens:
-Kodak's dye-sub products will be phased out in favor of HP's inkjet strategy.
-HP will really get into the professional printing space, again with inkjet.

-HP will immediately sell off the Kodak Health Imaging business to Siemens, GE, or the like.

-Snapfish will return to Kodak paper after a brief stint with Konica Minolta stuff.

-Kodak's traditional film business will be shut down or sold (but silver-halide color paper would stay).
-Get ready for another round of layoffs in Rochester.
 
What would HP get in a transaction like this that it can't build itself? Kodak seems to be mostly in diminishing markets and in the markets that are growing they are not run-away leaders in any of them. I don't see a huge win for HP here unless they could get Kodak fro dramatically less than book-value. Something which is highly unlikely in the age of shareholder activism.
 
Hp would get the Kodak name which is worth a lot of money. ie the kodak moment. I haven't heard anything of this yet but HP does like to make lots of stupid moves.
 
If this happened, the combined company would continue to make film products as long as they are profitable, and even with rapid shrinkage of market, they still are, because Kodak has the film manufacturing equipment all paid for. There are millions and millions of feet of professional 35mm motion picture film exposed each year, as well as bilions of feet of 35mm color release print stock made. Some movies are released to theatres in additions of 4000 prints. each print is about 10,000 feet long. Not a trivial amount of film if you do the calculations. Kodaks cine film business should be fairly strong, since Agfa (once a big player in that field) went away. Now, I know someone will mention that theatres are going to Digital Projection, and they are s l o w l y. Still, you cannot judge the worldwide market for film prints based on the USA, as third world countries, which are big markets for film, cannot afford to invest in digital projection yet. Even movies that are released on Digial media are shot on film, because that is what "Hollywood" is geared up to use, and change comes slowly in the Union Jobs in the film industry.

As a side note....I thought Polaroid went bankrupt. Odd, since I can still get all the Polaroid 4x5 proofing materials I use. There must still be a market for various Polaroid materials. Law Enforcement is still a good market for Polaroid prints.

Also, if Kodak exited the film business, all the Eyemax and Iwerks theatres would have to close down, as Kodak is AFAIK the sole supplier of color release stock in 70mm size, as well as the color negative stock used to shoot these jumbo films.

So, film coating equipment is film coating equipment. You can make a batch of Tri-X once a year and continue to offer it, if you keep your equipment for cine film coating. And that is the way film is made, in batches, and it is kept and aged and released when needed. It is not even cut, spooled and packaged until inventory is required.

McCluney Commercial Photography
 
I hope not, HP is a disaster company, and trashes anyone it takes over..

Useless...
--

 
Ross said:
Ross said:
-Kodak's traditional film business will be shut down or sold
Click to expand...
Does that mean there wont be any more movies?
Click to expand...
Many movies these days are shot using video technology. Almost all are edited electronically.

--
Thom Hogan
author, Nikon Field Guide & Nikon Flash Guide
editor, Nikon DSLR Report
author, Complete Guides: D50, D70, D100, D200, D1 series, D2h, D2x, S2 Pro
http://www.bythom.com
 
Craig Harper said:
What would HP get in a transaction like this that it can't build
itself?
Click to expand...
Market share. With the leading digicam makers (Sony, Canon, Kodak) all around 20% market share each and HP at 5%, it should be clear by now that HP can't get to one of the top positions without some big move.

But the question is being asked backwards. It's easy enough to see what HP might gain in such a transaction, but it's very unclear what Kodak would gain other than the ability to say "that's all folks..."

--
Thom Hogan
author, Nikon Field Guide & Nikon Flash Guide
editor, Nikon DSLR Report
author, Complete Guides: D50, D70, D100, D200, D1 series, D2h, D2x, S2 Pro
http://www.bythom.com
 
As Kodak is the owner of Cinesite, a move like this would bring HP to the show bussiness.
Many post production and effect facilities like cinesite use HP equipment.

Kodak is a dying company, like it or not. They recently invested heavily on buying Chinon (inventor of autofocus) so they would get into camera manufacturing. Now they "outsourced" this bussiness to chinese giant Flextronics. They are selling their medical department to 3M. Their photo film bussiness is no longer profitable. Their chemical department is long shut down.

It's true that cinema film is still profitable and will possibly be for years to come, but something tells me that by the end of the decade, it will be exclusively made in Kodak factories in India and China.

It is the same story, not unlike Agfa, Minolta and Polaroid.

I would like to remind everybody that Kodak was the undisputable leader of digital photo technology. As far as I am concerned it is 100% bad management that let fade like this.
 
Philippos said:
Kodak is a dying company, like it or not. Their chemical department is long shut down.
Click to expand...
This is such an odd statement. I regularly order and receive promptly Kodak processing chemicals for processing E-6 transparency film, C-41 color negative film, and b/w film. The chemicals are fresh and they are made in the USA. The store I order chemicals from has a current Kodak processing chemical catalog and can order whatever they want. Where do you get this information about the "chemical department long shut down?" I regularly receive catalogs from major photographic supply vendors and they still list all the popular Kodak chemicals for processing. Some things have been discontinued in the last few years, but not the popular stuff. Just because you don't use processing chemicals doesn't mean they aren't available.

Gene McCluney
McCluney Commercial Photography
 
Accordingly to my friend who was the lab manager for the King Kong movie, the prevalent approach is to shoot on film, digitalize it, edit on computer and then re-expose back onto film.
--
John
Thom Hogan said:
Ross said:
Thom Hogan said:
-Kodak's traditional film business will be shut down or sold
Click to expand...
Does that mean there wont be any more movies?
Click to expand...
Many movies these days are shot using video technology. Almost all
are edited electronically.

--
Thom Hogan
author, Nikon Field Guide & Nikon Flash Guide
editor, Nikon DSLR Report
author, Complete Guides: D50, D70, D100, D200, D1 series, D2h, D2x,
S2 Pro
http://www.bythom.com
Click to expand...
--
John
 
John Yu said:
Accordingly to my friend who was the lab manager for the King Kong
movie, the prevalent approach is to shoot on film, digitalize it,
edit on computer and then re-expose back onto film.
--
Click to expand...
You have the production work-flow exactly right for the majority of theatrical films! Even if a film is released in digital format to some theatres, there are still hundreds (if not thousands) of film prints also released. Otherwise the film could not be exhibited world-wide. Also, some few films that are shot digitally, are released on film! in addition to digital media. Even some movies and productions intended only for television are shot on film still. Film is quite alive.

McCluney Commercial Photography
 
Ok. I meant their "other" chemicals.

They had a division developing pharmaceuticals, plastics etc, that has been dead for some time now...
 
Gene E. McCluney said:
John Yu said:
Accordingly to my friend who was the lab manager for the King Kong
movie, the prevalent approach is to shoot on film, digitalize it,
edit on computer and then re-expose back onto film.
--
Click to expand...
You have the production work-flow exactly right for the majority of
theatrical films! Even if a film is released in digital format to
some theatres, there are still hundreds (if not thousands) of film
prints also released. Otherwise the film could not be exhibited
world-wide. Also, some few films that are shot digitally, are
released on film! in addition to digital media. Even some movies
and productions intended only for television are shot on film
still. Film is quite alive.
Click to expand...
Digital theater projectors are not yet common in the US although the switch has begun. There was a lot of argument over who should absorb the cost of digital projection. The majority of cost savings are experienced by the distribution companies and theater owners wanted them to pay.

Interestingly the move to digital projection is happening much quicker in India than in the US.

There was an initial reluctance to shoot using digital, but that is disappearing. There are exceptional cost savings with digital that will win the day in the long term.

We're in the transition phase. I would expect the changeover to be complete in less than ten years.

--
bob

The Blind Pig Guild
A photo/travel club looking for members
http://www.jeber.com/Clubs/Blind-Pig/

Flowers of Asia
A photo club for appreciators of Asian flowers - looking for members
http://www.jeber.com/Clubs/Flowers-of--Asia/

Travel Galleries
http://www.pbase.com/bobtrips
 
Gene E. McCluney said:
John Yu said:
Accordingly to my friend who was the lab manager for the King Kong
movie, the prevalent approach is to shoot on film, digitalize it,
edit on computer and then re-expose back onto film.
--
Click to expand...
You have the production work-flow exactly right for the majority of
theatrical films! Even if a film is released in digital format to
some theatres, there are still hundreds (if not thousands) of film
prints also released. Otherwise the film could not be exhibited
world-wide. Also, some few films that are shot digitally, are
released on film! in addition to digital media. Even some movies
and productions intended only for television are shot on film
still. Film is quite alive.
Click to expand...
Here's an article about where things currently stand with digital/film capture....

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/24/technology/24digital.html?ex=1311393600&en=619a4fb938c350d5&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

A cut from the article that tells you where moves are headed...

"Robert L. Beitcher, Panavision’s chief executive, estimates that even though renting his company’s Genesis digital camera at a typical rate of about $3,000 a day is nearly twice as expensive as renting a film camera, they can help save about $600,000 on film costs and processing in a big-budget feature."

And the last bit of the article...

"But camera companies like Panavision, which was founded in 1953 and supplied lenses for films like “Lawrence of Arabia” and “Ben-Hur,” may have no choice but to wade into the swift waters of digital competition.

“We don’t envision developing or building a new film camera,” Mr. Beitcher said."

--
bob

The Blind Pig Guild
A photo/travel club looking for members
http://www.jeber.com/Clubs/Blind-Pig/

Flowers of Asia
A photo club for appreciators of Asian flowers - looking for members
http://www.jeber.com/Clubs/Flowers-of--Asia/

Travel Galleries
http://www.pbase.com/bobtrips
 
Wrong again. They sold Texas and Tennessee Eastman, both of which are still going strong. Sold the pharmaceutical company they had bought too. gc
 
Thom Hogan said:
Ross said:
Thom Hogan said:
-Kodak's traditional film business will be shut down or sold
Click to expand...
Does that mean there wont be any more movies?
Click to expand...
Many movies these days are shot using video technology. Almost all
are edited electronically.

--
Click to expand...
Hi Thom,

My comment was made tongue in cheek, but a look at Kodak's financials will give an idea of their involvement in the global motion picture industry, which may go digital eventually. The last time I looked at their FYE financials was 2004 and the bright spots were Entertaiment and Military (photo recon film). Others have pointed out the cinema workflows and as long as the public wants to go to the movies the financial returns will support this side of Kodak. The industrial-scientific sides of Kodak (or HP or Nikon, Oly, Pentax...) seem to get ignored with our consumer focused appraisals.
--
Bob Ross
http://www.pbase.com/rossrtx
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top