"John" wrote

Why would Kodak sell its mainstream B&W film to be rebranded?

See Samueslon _Economics_, AKA ECON 101.

Kodak is doing what Ilford stupidly stopped doing - OEM'ing
film. When Ilford stopped selling via Freestyle the flood gates
of off-brand East European films opened and Ilford lost big
time.

The maximum profit is made when the last roll manufactured is
sold at break-even (Freestyle) and the first roll manufactured
is sold at the highest price possible (Keeble & Suchat).

The manufacturing unit cost falls with manufacturing volume, so
gaining market share not only increases total sales it also increases
the profit margin on Yuppie sales.

The problem is getting people to buy the high-priced spread. So
you advertise the branded and kick the marginal roll out the back
door clothed in rags, letting the customer wonder "Is it, or isn't it?".

Is it off-spec or something?
It won't be defective. I doubt if it is cream-of-the-run.

Is Kodak dumping Tri-X?
Only if they are selling _below_ manufacturing cost. In any case,
dumping to gain market share isn't illegal in your home market -
who, after all, pays congress to pass anti-dumping laws in the
first place?

If it is Kodak emulsion, then it is the smartest move I have
seen Kodak make in a quite a while. And Freestyle _isn't_ dumb,
either.

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters
http://www.darkroomautomation.com/index2.htm
n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com