Interesting note. Kodak is shedding it's digital camera business but has retained film sales for commercial purposes, and, under a separate division, for consumers. If film was a money loser, this would be the time to discontinue it.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-09/kodak-phasing-out-digital-camera-picture-frame-division-under-bankruptcy.html

and

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-11/struggling-kodak-disbands-film-group2c-shares-soar/3767134

From the article:
"The commercial segment will include the graphic communications group and take on the entertainment imaging and commercial film businesses.
The consumer business will include the consumer digital imaging group as well as businesses from the old film and photofinishing unit."

The news of the death of film has been greatly exaggerated.

Timo

timo_puhakka wrote:

>
> Interesting note. Kodak is shedding it's digital camera business but
> has retained film sales for commercial purposes, and, under a
> separate division, for consumers. If film was a money loser, this
> would be the time to discontinue it.

Kodak hasn't made its own (still) cameras in a long time. Recently it
has been reselling third-party cameras with Kodak branding.

The film division at Kodak has always been profitable. The digital
groups have survived by living off the profits from the film
division.

One of the recent business articles about Kodak's bankruptcy filing
had a graph based on data from Kodak's financial filings showing that
even as total number of film sales has declined film has been
consistently profitable. (The gross revenue and net profit lines were
parallel.)

> "The commercial segment will include the graphic communications
> group and take on the entertainment imaging and commercial film
> businesses. The consumer business will include the consumer digital
> imaging group as well as businesses from the old film and
> photofinishing unit."

The reorganization of film division into subsidiaries of two other
divisions isn't recent. It happened before the bankruptcy filing.

I don't think it's a good idea. I (and a lot of other film users)
would have rather seen them spin off (or sell) the film division as a
stand alone company. If that wasn't to happen, I think the film
division should have gone to the professional division.

The consumer division is the one who is going to make inkjet printers.
I expect the inkjet printers to be a spectacular failure.

> The news of the death of film has been greatly exaggerated.

Fujifilm, and Harman Technology (aka Ilford Photo) both report that
their film and paper groups are profitable.

Freestyle Photographic Supplies talks about the current status of the
film industry in their February newsletter.

<http://www.freestylephoto.biz/industry-updates/february-2012/snapshot.html>

--
Brian Reynolds | "It's just like flying a spaceship.
reynolds@panix.com | You push some buttons and see
http://www.panix.com/~reynolds/ | what happens." -- Zapp Brannigan
NAR# 54438 |