TP120- followup

RSD99 wrote:
"Nick Zentena" posted:
"...
2) Thier batch size is so huge they have to make one batch
representing
several years of demand?
..."

Bingo ...

That's "the nature of the beast."

Picture a 'sheet' of plastic, something like 12" to 36" wide
and several MILES long. That is coated with the 'emulsion'
layer(s), slit to the specified width, cut to the specified
length, and packaged to become that little roll of film you
purchase at the drug store.

It is only economical to manufacture this kind of product in
batches of several million rolls ...


Didn't Konica used make it's IR film once a year? I'd guess an IR film
wouldn't exactly be a big seller either.

Nick

What I find interesting is that it appears that it's more of an issue of
inconvienience that profits for Kodak. Go ahead and make it on a different
base with different gels. It might turn out to be an improvement.

Neil Gould wrote:

Recently, posted:

I didn't get that. They haven't actually manufactured the product in
years? Why didn't they announce this when they actually stopped
manufacturing the product. Something's rotten in Denmark! (or is it
Rochester)

What might that be? Isn't it more telling that they can shut down
production for years without running out of inventory? From this, it seems
clear that the market has abandoned TP, not the other way around.

Neil

What I find interesting is that it appears that it's more of an issue of
inconvienience that profits for Kodak. Go ahead and make it on a different
base with different gels. It might turn out to be an improvement.

Neil Gould wrote:

Recently, posted:

I didn't get that. They haven't actually manufactured the product in
years? Why didn't they announce this when they actually stopped
manufacturing the product. Something's rotten in Denmark! (or is it
Rochester)

What might that be? Isn't it more telling that they can shut down
production for years without running out of inventory? From this, it seems
clear that the market has abandoned TP, not the other way around.

Neil

What I find interesting is that it appears that it's more of an issue of
inconvienience that profits for Kodak. Go ahead and make it on a different
base with different gels. It might turn out to be an improvement.

Neil Gould wrote:

Recently, posted:

I didn't get that. They haven't actually manufactured the product in
years? Why didn't they announce this when they actually stopped
manufacturing the product. Something's rotten in Denmark! (or is it
Rochester)

What might that be? Isn't it more telling that they can shut down
production for years without running out of inventory? From this, it seems
clear that the market has abandoned TP, not the other way around.

Neil

wrote:

What I find interesting is that it appears that it's more of an issue of
inconvienience that profits for Kodak. Go ahead and make it on a
different
base with different gels. It might turn out to be an improvement.

.... which still noone wil buy.

It's an issue of not producing things only to keep them in stock until
shelf-life expires and they become waste that needs to be disposed of
carefully.

wrote:

What I find interesting is that it appears that it's more of an issue of
inconvienience that profits for Kodak. Go ahead and make it on a
different
base with different gels. It might turn out to be an improvement.

.... which still noone wil buy.

It's an issue of not producing things only to keep them in stock until
shelf-life expires and they become waste that needs to be disposed of
carefully.

wrote:

What I find interesting is that it appears that it's more of an issue of
inconvienience that profits for Kodak. Go ahead and make it on a
different
base with different gels. It might turn out to be an improvement.

.... which still noone wil buy.

It's an issue of not producing things only to keep them in stock until
shelf-life expires and they become waste that needs to be disposed of
carefully.

I know quite a few people that use this film. Kodak's just got to work out a
different way of selling this stuff. Maybe sell it in ten roll packages and
force the users to mop up the inventory. Or maybe set up something on
amazon.com where users can buy the product in advance of production and when
enough buyers have signed up, start coating the base. If the issue is simply
one of inconvenience, then it's a management issue. If film is going survive,
Kodak's got to look at alternative ways of marketing the product.

"Q.G. de Bakker" wrote:

wrote:

What I find interesting is that it appears that it's more of an issue of
inconvienience that profits for Kodak. Go ahead and make it on a
different
base with different gels. It might turn out to be an improvement.

... which still noone wil buy.

It's an issue of not producing things only to keep them in stock until
shelf-life expires and they become waste that needs to be disposed of
carefully.

I know quite a few people that use this film. Kodak's just got to work out a
different way of selling this stuff. Maybe sell it in ten roll packages and
force the users to mop up the inventory. Or maybe set up something on
amazon.com where users can buy the product in advance of production and when
enough buyers have signed up, start coating the base. If the issue is simply
one of inconvenience, then it's a management issue. If film is going survive,
Kodak's got to look at alternative ways of marketing the product.

"Q.G. de Bakker" wrote:

wrote:

What I find interesting is that it appears that it's more of an issue of
inconvienience that profits for Kodak. Go ahead and make it on a
different
base with different gels. It might turn out to be an improvement.

... which still noone wil buy.

It's an issue of not producing things only to keep them in stock until
shelf-life expires and they become waste that needs to be disposed of
carefully.

I know quite a few people that use this film. Kodak's just got to work out a
different way of selling this stuff. Maybe sell it in ten roll packages and
force the users to mop up the inventory. Or maybe set up something on
amazon.com where users can buy the product in advance of production and when
enough buyers have signed up, start coating the base. If the issue is simply
one of inconvenience, then it's a management issue. If film is going survive,
Kodak's got to look at alternative ways of marketing the product.

"Q.G. de Bakker" wrote:

wrote:

What I find interesting is that it appears that it's more of an issue of
inconvienience that profits for Kodak. Go ahead and make it on a
different
base with different gels. It might turn out to be an improvement.

... which still noone wil buy.

It's an issue of not producing things only to keep them in stock until
shelf-life expires and they become waste that needs to be disposed of
carefully.