View Single Post
  #5  
Old August 10th 08, 09:46 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.equipment.film+labs
Richard Knoppow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 751
Default New Freestyle Premium film ID?


"Nicholas O. Lindan" wrote in message
m...
"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

If Kodak is doing this is would be breaking a company
policy that has been in effect since the founding of the
company.
While manufacturing cost goes down with volume for many
products there is usually a plateau where the cost remains
steady with increasing volume. I think the main reason
Ilford and AGFA sold bulk materials for custom branding was
that it gave them a garanteed market for a perishable
product. Once the film or paper was delivered to the
rebranding customer it became their property and their
worry. There may also be some advantages in reduction of
marketing and advertising costs but I think these are
minimal. I suspect the sale of seconds are more myth than
real: no one is going to profit by selling a defective
product.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA