Future of Kodak Photographic Papers?

Ron Baird wrote:

Hi Dave,

Let me first assure you that Kodak is not going to discontinue film or paper
anytime soon, and surely not in 5 years. There is a giant market out there
for such products and you will see that option around for a long time. Rest
assured that Kodak will continue to make film for your cameras for a long
time.

Talk to you soon,

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company


Ron,

Here's an idea: Every box of Kodak film and paper sold after June 1 2005 should
contain a bond in it worth 33% of the suggsted retail price of the film or
paper. The bond would be redeemable for cash if Kodak ceases making that
product line prior to the bond expiry.

The bond in the box will contain the packaging date of the film/paper product
and the date 5 years + ~2 months hence when the bond expires and becomes worthless.

Then when Kodak officially announce the 'cut' dates for film they will have to
give a 5 year lead time for that type of film, or choose to reimburse the
bondholders if they exit early. (I don't mean variants, but major lines like
Kodachrome, Ektachrome, Portra, etc.)

In this way, a serious film shooter can maintain his film equipment as long as
the bonds are issued without too much fear for his investment. If Kodak want an
early out, then they can evaluate the financial benefit of paying off the
bondholders or maintaining that major film line for another 5 years. (from the
decision date, the issued bonds would have ever decreasing validity periods).

Benefit to Kodak: Those who prefer film will prefer Kodak risk protected
product, keeping the lucrative sales up in that product portfolio as less
photogs will jump to digital (given the "insurance" represented by the bond).
Of course the bean counters will not like keeping the reserve that a bond would
require, but there may be insurance that can be bought in lieu and passed on to
the consumer (or simply removed from the fat margins).

Don't like a 5 year bond? Okay, make it 2 years, but 100% of the MRSP.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

Ron Baird wrote:

Hi Dave,

Let me first assure you that Kodak is not going to discontinue film or paper
anytime soon, and surely not in 5 years. There is a giant market out there
for such products and you will see that option around for a long time. Rest
assured that Kodak will continue to make film for your cameras for a long
time.

Talk to you soon,

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company


Ron,

Here's an idea: Every box of Kodak film and paper sold after June 1 2005 should
contain a bond in it worth 33% of the suggsted retail price of the film or
paper. The bond would be redeemable for cash if Kodak ceases making that
product line prior to the bond expiry.

The bond in the box will contain the packaging date of the film/paper product
and the date 5 years + ~2 months hence when the bond expires and becomes worthless.

Then when Kodak officially announce the 'cut' dates for film they will have to
give a 5 year lead time for that type of film, or choose to reimburse the
bondholders if they exit early. (I don't mean variants, but major lines like
Kodachrome, Ektachrome, Portra, etc.)

In this way, a serious film shooter can maintain his film equipment as long as
the bonds are issued without too much fear for his investment. If Kodak want an
early out, then they can evaluate the financial benefit of paying off the
bondholders or maintaining that major film line for another 5 years. (from the
decision date, the issued bonds would have ever decreasing validity periods).

Benefit to Kodak: Those who prefer film will prefer Kodak risk protected
product, keeping the lucrative sales up in that product portfolio as less
photogs will jump to digital (given the "insurance" represented by the bond).
Of course the bean counters will not like keeping the reserve that a bond would
require, but there may be insurance that can be bought in lieu and passed on to
the consumer (or simply removed from the fat margins).

Don't like a 5 year bond? Okay, make it 2 years, but 100% of the MRSP.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

Hi Alan,

If that would drive the sales of film, I suspect Kodak would do it along
with all other film makers. Actually, you are much better off buying your
film as you need it. Might cost a bit more but for the general shooter and
many pros, the film would be as fresh as possible. Personally, I don't
believe that the change to digital imaging is related to the cost or
availability of film but to technology and what you can do with it. For
those that want to use digital it is a technology choice and the cost or
contract that might be included with film will not keep them as a film
shooter. Rather, more than likely the added cost of following your
suggestion would increase the transition.

Remember, there are literally billions of people that still shoot film and
that do not have digital cameras. Not everyone can afford a digital camera.
Still, time stands still for no one, including film makers. Technology will
take us to a new world of imaging soon enough, and I am sure film will still
be part of it for a long time.

Talk to you soon, Alan,

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company



Ron Baird wrote:

Hi Dave,

Let me first assure you that Kodak is not going to discontinue film or
paper
anytime soon, and surely not in 5 years. There is a giant market out
there
for such products and you will see that option around for a long time.
Rest
assured that Kodak will continue to make film for your cameras for a
long
time.

Talk to you soon,

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company


Ron,

Here's an idea: Every box of Kodak film and paper sold after June 1 2005
should
contain a bond in it worth 33% of the suggsted retail price of the film
or
paper. The bond would be redeemable for cash if Kodak ceases making that
product line prior to the bond expiry.

The bond in the box will contain the packaging date of the film/paper
product
and the date 5 years + ~2 months hence when the bond expires and becomes
worthless.

Then when Kodak officially announce the 'cut' dates for film they will
have to
give a 5 year lead time for that type of film, or choose to reimburse the
bondholders if they exit early. (I don't mean variants, but major lines
like
Kodachrome, Ektachrome, Portra, etc.)

In this way, a serious film shooter can maintain his film equipment as
long as
the bonds are issued without too much fear for his investment. If Kodak
want an
early out, then they can evaluate the financial benefit of paying off the
bondholders or maintaining that major film line for another 5 years.
(from the
decision date, the issued bonds would have ever decreasing validity
periods).

Ron Baird wrote:

Hi Alan,

If that would drive the sales of film, I suspect Kodak would do it along
with all other film makers. Actually, you are much better off buying your
film as you need it. Might cost a bit more but for the general shooter and
many pros, the film would be as fresh as possible. Personally, I don't

Oh! Don't be mistaken. The idea is not that people buy 5 years worth of film,
but that at any given point in time when he does buy film Kodak would in effect
be guaranteeing that the same film will be made and be available for another 5
years (until they make notice that they are winding down). Bonds are about
confidence. If there is more confidence, there will be more buyers for the film
and less folks running for digital exits.

believe that the change to digital imaging is related to the cost or
availability of film but to technology and what you can do with it. For
those that want to use digital it is a technology choice and the cost or
contract that might be included with film will not keep them as a film
shooter. Rather, more than likely the added cost of following your
suggestion would increase the transition.

Printing up little certificates won't cost Kodak vert much at all... it can even
be part of the packaging.


Remember, there are literally billions of people that still shoot film and
that do not have digital cameras. Not everyone can afford a digital camera.
Still, time stands still for no one, including film makers. Technology will
take us to a new world of imaging soon enough, and I am sure film will still
be part of it for a long time.

Regarding confidence again, it would be nice to see an official statement from
Kodak with definite terms for how long they will support film.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

Ron Baird wrote:

Hi Alan,

If that would drive the sales of film, I suspect Kodak would do it along
with all other film makers. Actually, you are much better off buying your
film as you need it. Might cost a bit more but for the general shooter and
many pros, the film would be as fresh as possible. Personally, I don't

Oh! Don't be mistaken. The idea is not that people buy 5 years worth of film,
but that at any given point in time when he does buy film Kodak would in effect
be guaranteeing that the same film will be made and be available for another 5
years (until they make notice that they are winding down). Bonds are about
confidence. If there is more confidence, there will be more buyers for the film
and less folks running for digital exits.

believe that the change to digital imaging is related to the cost or
availability of film but to technology and what you can do with it. For
those that want to use digital it is a technology choice and the cost or
contract that might be included with film will not keep them as a film
shooter. Rather, more than likely the added cost of following your
suggestion would increase the transition.

Printing up little certificates won't cost Kodak vert much at all... it can even
be part of the packaging.


Remember, there are literally billions of people that still shoot film and
that do not have digital cameras. Not everyone can afford a digital camera.
Still, time stands still for no one, including film makers. Technology will
take us to a new world of imaging soon enough, and I am sure film will still
be part of it for a long time.

Regarding confidence again, it would be nice to see an official statement from
Kodak with definite terms for how long they will support film.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

Hi Alan,

I doubt there is going to be some statement to that effect as it is not
necessary. I am quite confident that Kodak will be making film for a very
long time. At least as long as someone wants to buy it. So, if you and I,
along with a few others are around for a while, we will have film to use.

Talk to you soon, Alan,

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company






Hi Alan,

If that would drive the sales of film, I suspect Kodak would do it along
with all other film makers. Actually, you are much better off buying
your
film as you need it. Might cost a bit more but for the general shooter
and
many pros, the film would be as fresh as possible. Personally, I don't

Oh! Don't be mistaken. The idea is not that people buy 5 years worth of
film,
but that at any given point in time when he does buy film Kodak would in
effect
be guaranteeing that the same film will be made and be available for
another 5
years (until they make notice that they are winding down). Bonds are
about
confidence. If there is more confidence, there will be more buyers for
the film
and less folks running for digital exits.

believe that the change to digital imaging is related to the cost or
availability of film but to technology and what you can do with it. For
those that want to use digital it is a technology choice and the cost or
contract that might be included with film will not keep them as a film
shooter. Rather, more than likely the added cost of following your
suggestion would increase the transition.

Hi Alan,

I doubt there is going to be some statement to that effect as it is not
necessary. I am quite confident that Kodak will be making film for a very
long time. At least as long as someone wants to buy it. So, if you and I,
along with a few others are around for a while, we will have film to use.

Talk to you soon, Alan,

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company






Hi Alan,

If that would drive the sales of film, I suspect Kodak would do it along
with all other film makers. Actually, you are much better off buying
your
film as you need it. Might cost a bit more but for the general shooter
and
many pros, the film would be as fresh as possible. Personally, I don't

Oh! Don't be mistaken. The idea is not that people buy 5 years worth of
film,
but that at any given point in time when he does buy film Kodak would in
effect
be guaranteeing that the same film will be made and be available for
another 5
years (until they make notice that they are winding down). Bonds are
about
confidence. If there is more confidence, there will be more buyers for
the film
and less folks running for digital exits.

believe that the change to digital imaging is related to the cost or
availability of film but to technology and what you can do with it. For
those that want to use digital it is a technology choice and the cost or
contract that might be included with film will not keep them as a film
shooter. Rather, more than likely the added cost of following your
suggestion would increase the transition.

"DaveHodge" wrote in message
...

If Kodak is going to discontinue film within 5 years, are they going to
discontinue printing papers, too?

Contrary to popular opinion, film is far from dead. It is true that many
consumer and business applications are moving to digital, because of economy
and convenience, but there will always be film available--even if film
amateur photography becomes a niche market.

As for paper, have you not noticed that Kodak has been making a major push
for "real" photo prints from digital images, through their Ofoto subsidiary?
Remember the ads they ran during the Olympics, "Where are all the prints?"

Silver halide prints are going strong. Someone has to keep on making the
paper for prints . . .

"DaveHodge" wrote in message
...

If Kodak is going to discontinue film within 5 years, are they going to
discontinue printing papers, too?

Contrary to popular opinion, film is far from dead. It is true that many
consumer and business applications are moving to digital, because of economy
and convenience, but there will always be film available--even if film
amateur photography becomes a niche market.

As for paper, have you not noticed that Kodak has been making a major push
for "real" photo prints from digital images, through their Ofoto subsidiary?
Remember the ads they ran during the Olympics, "Where are all the prints?"

Silver halide prints are going strong. Someone has to keep on making the
paper for prints . . .

"DaveHodge" wrote in message
...

If Kodak is going to discontinue film within 5 years, are they going to
discontinue printing papers, too?

Contrary to popular opinion, film is far from dead. It is true that many
consumer and business applications are moving to digital, because of economy
and convenience, but there will always be film available--even if film
amateur photography becomes a niche market.

As for paper, have you not noticed that Kodak has been making a major push
for "real" photo prints from digital images, through their Ofoto subsidiary?
Remember the ads they ran during the Olympics, "Where are all the prints?"

Silver halide prints are going strong. Someone has to keep on making the
paper for prints . . .