Kodak Bankruptcy - The times they are a changing!

[markis10]

While not strictly travel, photos have always been a part of my travels, so its somewhat sad to hear the news that Kodak are on their way out as a name so associated with photography. I wonder what other travel technology companies/products we use will go the same way over the next decade?



THEY say a photograph captures a moment in time. For Kodak, whose iconic yellow-and-red logo has been synonymous with photography since the company was founded by George Eastman in 1888, that moment may have passed. Shares in the Rochester, New York-based company fell to an all-time low of 47c on Wednesday following reports it was preparing to file for bankruptcy in the coming weeks.
Kodak announced on Tuesday the New York Stock Exchange had warned it would be delisted if its share price remained below $1 for the next six months.

Read more: Kodak's moment over as bankruptcy looms | News.com.au
​

 

[casanovawa]

I suspect the travel agency industry's biggest and best days might be behind it... But yes, sad when old icons and historic companies bite the big one, but that is change i suppose and any company reaching its centennary has beaten the odds... Although at 47c per share it might be time to buy in and wait for a big rally... Or maybe not...

 

[SeatBackForward]

Its the age of the information revolution, and Kodak have failed to adapt to the new environment. Aussie Retailers will be next if they don't deal with the elephant in the room - profit margins they used to live with..

Interestingly..Corporations live and die. Out of the top 100 companies during the 1920's depression, I think in the US only 7 exist today?

 

[medhead]

Kodak have adapted, they have kodak digital cameras, home photo printers and memory media. However, very few places seem to have consumer photo printing from kodak. Mostly seems to be Fiji at harvey Norman and officeworks. So perhaps they've lost the battle to get broad market penetration.

The other thing is medical film, which used to be massive for kodak. That moved electronic and digital over the last 10 to 15 years as compared to digit cameras, which have only boomed over the last 5 to 10 years. Unfortunately, there is no place for a film company in digital medical systems that is solely the domain of the equipment manufacturers.


Sent from my iPhone using Aust Freq Fly app so please excuse the lack of links.

 

[Travel Guru]

I suspect the travel agency industry's biggest and best days might be behind it... But yes, sad when old icons and historic companies bite the big one, but that is change i suppose and any company reaching its centennary has beaten the odds... Although at 47c per share it might be time to buy in and wait for a big rally... Or maybe not...

Actually, you might be surprised, leisure travellers using the internet to book in the US fell by 6% in 2011 versus 2010 figures.

I agree that those who offer a mere transactional service will likely continue to go the way of Kodak, but there's growing demand for quality TA's who add value to their clients and assist in the professional capacity rather than just performing transactions is definitely growing especially amongst time poor professionals.

TG

 

[drron]

Not surprising.The last CBS business newsletter for 2011 gave thge number 1 spot for worst performance to Kodak.RIMM came in second.If interested heres the link-
10 biggest market losers of 2011 - CBS News

 

[codash1099]

Kodak peaked when they introduced the Box Brownie. All else since then has been meh!

(Ducks for cover)

 

[MrHyde]

Kodak have adapted, they have kodak digital cameras, home photo printers and memory media. However, very few places seem to have consumer photo printing from kodak. Mostly seems to be Fiji at harvey Norman and officeworks. So perhaps they've lost the battle to get broad market penetration.

The other thing is medical film, which used to be massive for kodak. That moved electronic and digital over the last 10 to 15 years as compared to digit cameras, which have only boomed over the last 5 to 10 years. Unfortunately, there is no place for a film company in digital medical systems that is solely the domain of the equipment manufacturers.


Sent from my iPhone using Aust Freq Fly app so please excuse the lack of links.

I would argue that Kodak failed to adapt. I think they were the first ones to develop the digital camera way back in 1975, but because it would have cannibalised their film sales, they didn't pursue it. It wasn't till 2000, that it released its first digital camera into the marketplace. By then, it was far too late as other companies (Canon, Sony, etc) had already grabbed a large marketshare and Kodak was always behind the 8-ball. I read a report somewhere that Kodak was making a $60 loss per camera in 2002. Even till recently, they have concentrated on their film and printing side with products like that instant printer (trying to revive the Polaroid), but have not succeeded in gaining any foothold.

The issue is one that faces each company - innovate or die. Many companies make the mistake of sitting on their laurel and instead of innovating (at the risk of cannibalising other parts of the business), they try their best to stop new technologies from entering the marketplace by for eg: litigating. Unfortunately, that is what might happen in this case. The most valuable thing Kodak has is its portfolio of patents, which will be sold to the highest bidder and then used to sue all the losing bidders.

Gandhi once said, "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win". That same saying is so apt in business as well. Look at the whole music/movie business vs the internet (new technology companies) battle going on.

 

[elbarto]

Kodak have adapted, they have kodak digital cameras, home photo printers and memory media. However, very few places seem to have consumer photo printing from kodak. Mostly seems to be Fiji at harvey Norman and officeworks. So perhaps they've lost the battle to get broad market penetration.

The other thing is medical film, which used to be massive for kodak. That moved electronic and digital over the last 10 to 15 years as compared to digit cameras, which have only boomed over the last 5 to 10 years. Unfortunately, there is no place for a film company in digital medical systems that is solely the domain of the equipment manufacturers.


Sent from my iPhone using Aust Freq Fly app so please excuse the lack of links.

They adapted, but I'm hard pressed to see a Kodak product that's been innovative in the past decade. Nokia should take note.

 

[markis10]

It wasn't till 2000, that it released its first digital camera into the marketplace. .

I had a DCS by Kodak in 98, so it was last century.

 

[MrHyde]

I had a DCS by Kodak in 98, so it was last century.

I stand corrected. The first consumer digital camera by Kodak was released in 1996 and the first professional camera in 1994.

 

[medhead]

You know I'd call the mid to late 90s a period of early adopters. I got my film SLR then. My daughter got a Kodak digital camera in about 2005, the first in our house, and it was good for a child to use with help from dad. We got our family canon in 2007. Both kids got Samsung digitals for their last birthdays. I'd stick with the film SLR if I thought film would still be available and a secondary reason is the ease to shoot and delete with digital.

I really think the way Kodak could have survived is by helping people convert digital to print. I've tried this at home and I just can't get the quality of what is available even at Harvey Norman. Maybe I need a new printer.
:idea:

Anyway, a sad day.

 

[markis10]

I remember now it was the first camera to break the $1000 mark with a mega pixel sensor!

 

[nlagalle]

I stand corrected. The first consumer digital camera by Kodak was released in 1996 and the first professional camera in 1994.

We used that camera in 1994 for an AFL Pre season final at Waverly Park. It was massive! i can't remember what size image it shot but I think it was only around 2mb.

Canon and Kodak had joint SLR cameras around 2000 with the DC520/D2000 before they went there separate ways.

Kodak have only just recently dropped off as Olympic partner too. Beijing was their last one.

 

[nlagalle]

THis was the camera we used at the AFL game!

 

[Flying Fox]

I would argue that Kodak failed to adapt. I think they were the first ones to develop the digital camera way back in 1975, but because it would have cannibalised their film sales, they didn't pursue it. It wasn't till 2000, that it released its first digital camera into the marketplace. By then, it was far too late as other companies (Canon, Sony, etc) had already grabbed a large marketshare and Kodak was always behind the 8-ball. I read a report somewhere that Kodak was making a $60 loss per camera in 2002. Even till recently, they have concentrated on their film and printing side with products like that instant printer (trying to revive the Polaroid), but have not succeeded in gaining any foothold.

The issue is one that faces each company - innovate or die. Many companies make the mistake of sitting on their laurel and instead of innovating (at the risk of cannibalising other parts of the business), they try their best to stop new technologies from entering the marketplace by for eg: litigating. Unfortunately, that is what might happen in this case. The most valuable thing Kodak has is its portfolio of patents, which will be sold to the highest bidder and then used to sue all the losing bidders.

Gandhi once said, "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win". That same saying is so apt in business as well. Look at the whole music/movie business vs the internet (new technology companies) battle going on.

This reminds me of a book called 'Who moved my cheese?' which is all about adaptation.

 

[Hvr]

We used that camera in 1994 for an AFL Pre season final at Waverly Park. It was massive! i can't remember what size image it shot but I think it was only around 2mb.

Canon and Kodak had joint SLR cameras around 2000 with the DC520/D2000 before they went there separate ways.

Kodak have only just recently dropped off as Olympic partner too. Beijing was their last one.

Waverley park is long gone and now Kodak is almost gone.

I take a lot of photos as I travel. I cannot think of the last time I used a Kodak product.

One wonders why they didn't look for alternative products to continue the brand. Maybe they should have commenced making memory cards? That would be a perfect substitute for their film business.

They have been gone from Australia for many years since their factory in Coburg (VIC) closed.

 

[Simo]

This is not a surprise the Kodak have gone into bankruptcy.

Digital cameras have changed the market.

We don't have many photo's in boxes anymore.

They are all on hard drives now.

 

[SeatBackForward]

I really think the way Kodak could have survived is by helping people convert digital to print. I've tried this at home and I just can't get the quality of what is available even at Harvey Norman. Maybe I need a new printer.
:idea:

Speaking of more businesses that will fail to adapt...

 

[UP4014]

This is not a surprise the Kodak have gone into bankruptcy.

Digital cameras have changed the market.

We don't have many photo's in boxes anymore.

They are all on hard drives now.

And having everything on hard drives has its risks for longevity. I stow my memory cards and buy a new one before each trip. (after copies made and prints go in a box)