Kodak to layoff another 10,000. Declining film sales cited.

Discussion in 'Kodak' started by Jeremy, Jul 20, 2005.

  1. Jeremy

    s44 Guest


    That shows what these dummies think of women. Kodak realized at some point
    that women make most pictures, certainly most 6x4 prints they want to sell.

    They went all the way after that market and started advertising Kodak
    moments and family fuzz, switching from men-oriented advertising focused on
    technology, curves and gadgets. They know that women's heads are not capable
    of comprehending ISO speed and they don't retain well numbers in general.
    However, women respond well to simple short words such as "bright", "fast",
    "clear", "sharp", "share", "sun" and "fun".

    c23
     
    s44, Jul 29, 2005
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. Jeremy

    Justin Thyme Guest

    It's fine presenting things for the non-savvy, but you still have to have
    the info clearly available for the savvy also - There's nothing wrong with
    putting "Bright Sun" on the pack, but what's wrong with also putting "100"
    on it for the people who buy on specification? One area where I think Kodak
    has gone wrong is that it has only targetted the lowest common denominator,
    and just assumed that they'd still be able to sell to other people.
    Women (and many other non-techos) might not understand what all the numbers
    mean, but they do understand what looks good, something Kodak seems to have
    forgotten. The general public is fast realising that Fuji film + Fuji
    printing = Better looking than Kodak. In the digital printing arena it is
    even more pronounced where Fuji Frontier blows away Kodak Dye-Sub Kiosks.
    It seems Kodak put all their eggs into the "Easyshare" system, assuming that
    people would switch from film to taking digital photos and printing them at
    home on their easyshare printers. In doing so, Kodak has left all their film
    technology in the 80's, including their minilabs. Now, those who are still
    using film aren't using Kodak film or printing because it isn't as good.
    Those who want to print their photos get it done at Fuji/Agfa/Konica digital
    labs because both the quality and price is better. Meanwhile in Kodak's
    little world people are still someday going to start printing all their
    photos at home on their Kodak Easyshare printers, paying a premium price for
    an inferior quality print so they can have the convenience of instant. Hang
    on, didn't polaroid have an expensive, lower quality product that was
    instant? Doesn't the fact that the world stayed using regular film instead
    of switching to Polaroid tell Kodak that the bulk of the marketplace prefers
    quality over speed?
     
    Justin Thyme, Jul 29, 2005
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. Jeremy

    Tony Polson Guest


    When did they axe Kodachrome? I am still buying it ...

    ;-)
     
    Tony Polson, Jul 29, 2005
    #23
  4. Jeremy

    Justin Thyme Guest

    It was discontinued late last year. AFAIK production has stopped, but there
    is still a lot floating around in retail/wholesale channels. I don't know if
    the movie film versions were also discontinued. Kind of academic for me
    anyway, as there hasn't been anyone in Australia to process it for about 3
    years.
     
    Justin Thyme, Jul 29, 2005
    #24
  5. Jeremy

    Jeremy Guest

    Kodachrome 25 was discontinued, but Kodak still claims to produce
    Kodachrome 64 and 200. There are 3 labs that process it.

    Did Kodak ever announce officially that they were discontinuing
    Kodachrome's remaining emulsions? Might they have discontinued it in
    only certain parts of the world?
     
    Jeremy, Jul 29, 2005
    #25
  6. Australia used to have a lab. That was closed a couple of years ago.
    Distribution of Kodachrome in Australia was discontinued as well.
    Kodachrome is alive and well in the rest of Christendom....
     
    uraniumcommittee, Jul 29, 2005
    #26
  7. Jeremy

    Tony Polson Guest


    Kodachrome 64 is still being produced. 25 went several years ago.

    I'm not sure about 200.
     
    Tony Polson, Jul 29, 2005
    #27
  8. Yup, alive and kicking! PKL and KL!
     
    uraniumcommittee, Jul 29, 2005
    #28
  9. uraniumcommittee, Jul 29, 2005
    #29
  10. Jeremy

    Scott W Guest

    Scott W, Jul 29, 2005
    #30
  11. uraniumcommittee, Jul 29, 2005
    #31
  12. Jeremy

    Bret Ludwig Guest

    Perhaps the corporate implosion of Kodak might be the best thing,
    because there are physical plant and trained workers in Rochester who
    might be reorganized to produce film on a lean basis.
     
    Bret Ludwig, Jul 31, 2005
    #32
  13. Jeremy

    Michael Guest


    Yes, Kodak will reorganize and produce film on a lean basis, but it sadly will
    be in China and not in Rochester. And those thousands of Rochester trained
    workers will now be operating a Fuji mini lab at their new WalMart store. Or
    maybe only about 10 of them.

    Michael
     
    Michael, Aug 1, 2005
    #33
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.