Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Kodak says it might have to cease operations [updated]

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 240 posts

Re: Kodak says it might have to cease operations [updated]

#191

Post by brianwawok »

cm2187 wrote: post #135
xenotux wrote: post #66

Not many people remember, but it wasn't that long ago that Kodak was "pivoting to crypto": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KodakCoin At that point, it was pretty clear that they're on borrowed time. I'm surprised they had enough runway / credit to make it to 2025.

My first digital camera was a Kodak camera in 2001. Not saying that crypto was the right decision, but digital cameras definitely were. It seems they were self-conscious, but incapable of executing.

Is that a surprise? A chemical company doesn't have the in house chops to build a tech hardware?

Same things happens all over. Ford (a car company) completely failing to make a reasonable UI / App / Interface for their infotainment systems (something a tech company would do). Pivoting away from what you are good at is hard for a 3 person startup, but nearly impossible for a giant corporation.

Re: Kodak says it might have to cease operations [updated]

#192

Post by ghaff »

mark-r wrote: post #184

To be honest, I thought they were already completely gone. The article mentions them filing for bankruptcy in 2012. They were pretty much doomed from the start. They had built their business by taking a cut from every picture you took, from the rolls of film to the developing to the printing. There was absolutely nothing in the digital camera realm that could duplicate that; their revenue dropped like a rock. If they…

Fujifilm also applied some of their expertise in emulsions to medical applications.

But they were a much smaller company and AFAIK are a pretty niche business today. (X-series cameras are nice but I can imagine that sales amount to a huge number.)

Re: Kodak says it might have to cease operations [updated]

#193

Post by ghaff »

woofcat wrote: post #190
dougdonohoe wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Doomed from the start" for a 133 year old company seems a bit hyperbolic. They have lasted 13 decades and counting. How many other company started in the 1890s are still around today?

I'm presuming they were trying to say "Doomed from the start of the digital revolution"

One can come up with plenty of criticisms of Kodak. But they did sell off their chemical business when the selling was reasonably good and they did do a fair number of things that anticipated digital.

But you can't just yank out the carpet from a massive consumables business that basically underpinned a company's revenue and profits almost overnight and reasonably expect them to deal with it.

Re: Kodak says it might have to cease operations [updated]

#194

Post by Finnucane »

lenkite wrote: post #124
xenotux wrote: post #66

Not many people remember, but it wasn't that long ago that Kodak was "pivoting to crypto": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KodakCoin At that point, it was pretty clear that they're on borrowed time. I'm surprised they had enough runway / credit to make it to 2025.

Why didn't Kodak pivot to making smartphones ? As soon as the iPhone reveal happened, any sane executive would have realized that this is what they would need to do.

The problem was that they were fundamentally a chemical and imaging company, not a consumer electronics company. That would have been a hard shift. When they tried to do consumer electronics, it was crap. Now, if they had merged with an actual consumer electronics company (see: Sony buying Konica) they might have done better.

Re: Kodak says it might have to cease operations [updated]

#195

Post by Finnucane »

mhh__ wrote: post #172
mvgoogler wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kodak film products are (confusingly) handled by Kodak-Alaris, which is a separate company that spun out of Eastman Kodak around 2012-ish and shares the Kodak brand with Eastman Kodak. Despite the similar names they are entirely separate companies, AFAIK. My team did an integration with Kodak-Alaris a few years back and we toured their main office in Rochester. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodak_Alaris

> Based in Hemel Hempstead Huh Hopefully they'd be unscratched if the big Kodak goes down (I assume they still have some equity?)

I don't remember the details now, but my recollection is that spinning off the film business was tied to funding the pension, and the way the pension management was also spun off.

Re: Kodak says it might have to cease operations [updated]

#196

Post by _fat_santa »

mark-r wrote: post #184

To be honest, I thought they were already completely gone. The article mentions them filing for bankruptcy in 2012. They were pretty much doomed from the start. They had built their business by taking a cut from every picture you took, from the rolls of film to the developing to the printing. There was absolutely nothing in the digital camera realm that could duplicate that; their revenue dropped like a rock. If they…

I think where Kodak really missed in recent years is not jumping on the instant camera trend. Fujifilm has their Instax line and there's Polaroid with their "OG" cameras. It would have been easy for Kodak to become a leader in this space just with their brand cache.

Re: Kodak says it might have to cease operations [updated]

#197

Post by [deleted] »

ThaDood wrote: post #80
tombert wrote: post #68

Wait, Kodak is still around? I'm not trying to be a dick or shitpost, but I genuinely thought they collapsed after I heard nothing about KodakCoin after the initial announcement.

I use a lot of Kodak 35MM! They are still kicking around. They are kind of hard to find in my neck of the woods, so I mostly stick with Fuji anymore.

[deleted]

Re: Kodak says it might have to cease operations [updated]

#198

Post by [deleted] »

packetlost wrote: post #77
starik36 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know that they really fumbled anything. They had a pretty good set of digital cameras in the early 2000s. I owned one. It's just the technology that was the underpinning of the entire company has outlived its usefulness. You don't see many companies making horseshoes today - but there were thousands 150 years ago. They didn't fumble anything - just no longer needed.

I agree with this, but as someone who occasionally shoots film I'm still very sad about it. There's still reasonable demand for film, I can walk into my local Target and pick up Fujifilm Fujicolor Superia 200 for $10 a roll. It's just really hard to scale down a business without imploding, but I firmly believe Kodak could have had a future as a boutique film supplier if they wanted to. It just wouldn't be super profi…

[deleted]

Re: Kodak says it might have to cease operations [updated]

#199

Post by Workaccount2 »

_fat_santa wrote: post #196
mark-r wrote: post #184

To be honest, I thought they were already completely gone. The article mentions them filing for bankruptcy in 2012. They were pretty much doomed from the start. They had built their business by taking a cut from every picture you took, from the rolls of film to the developing to the printing. There was absolutely nothing in the digital camera realm that could duplicate that; their revenue dropped like a rock. If they…

I think where Kodak really missed in recent years is not jumping on the instant camera trend. Fujifilm has their Instax line and there's Polaroid with their "OG" cameras. It would have been easy for Kodak to become a leader in this space just with their brand cache.

I cannot imagine the "instant camera" market is too big. The cameras are expensive and the film is too, while the margins are likely terrible.

If you want to make money in the US, stay away from making hardware and cling to making software.

Re: Kodak says it might have to cease operations [updated]

#200

Post by vile_wretch »

kalleboo wrote: post #168
enaaem wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interestingly, Fujifilm has pivoted to a like a dozen other industries successfully and it's now a full blown conglomerate.

And yet right now they’re back to chemical photography film being over 50% of their revenue due to the breakout success of the instax instant cameras. Being able to charge a dollar per photo remains an unbeatable business to be in.

Kodak isn't far off from $1/shot retail for some of their film stocks.
Post reply on HN