Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Kodak to Kill Off Its Camera Business
PETAPIXEL ^ | Feb 10, 2012 | swampsniper

Posted on 02/09/2012 10:22:06 PM PST by SWAMPSNIPER

Shocking news: Kodak, the company that invented the first digital camera back in 1975, announced today that it is pulling out of the camera market entirely. The phasing out of digital cameras, pocket video cameras, and digital picture frames will likely happen by the end of June. Instead, the company will be focusing on licensing out its patents and brand name

(Excerpt) Read more at petapixel.com ...


TOPICS: Arts/Photography; Hobbies
KEYWORDS: camera; kodak
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 next last
Not surprising. Kodak camera quality hasn't been competitive and they stopped innovating a long time ago.
1 posted on 02/09/2012 10:22:13 PM PST by SWAMPSNIPER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

Well, if you have nothing left to sell...


2 posted on 02/09/2012 10:30:13 PM PST by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

The market has been there, Kodak just didn’t read it right. They labeled enough junk to get a bad quality rep and then it was too late to recover. They marketed some really pitiful stuff.


3 posted on 02/09/2012 10:37:29 PM PST by SWAMPSNIPER (The Second Amendment, a Matter of Fact, Not a Matter of Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER
You have to admit, that first digital camera was probably a nightmare for the people in the marketing department...


4 posted on 02/09/2012 10:38:50 PM PST by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

Even if Kodak didn’t have all the other problems they have they would be smart to do this since they only sell low and mid range cameras.

That market is dead, thanks to cameras being standard equipment in most phones these days.


5 posted on 02/09/2012 10:40:45 PM PST by Nik Naym (It's not my fault... I have compulsive smartass disorder.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

There are things they could probably still do.

Not everybody wants to spend a lifetime on Photoshop, for example, going over every single detail in photographs to get things right.

Kodak could probably offer after-photo services that many people would probably pay for.


6 posted on 02/09/2012 10:46:02 PM PST by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Nik Naym

It will be a long time before the phone cameras replace a serious DSLR, or even a good “bridge” camera, if great photos are your goal.


7 posted on 02/09/2012 10:48:30 PM PST by SWAMPSNIPER (The Second Amendment, a Matter of Fact, Not a Matter of Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Nik Naym

“That market is dead, thanks to cameras being standard equipment in most phones these days.”
________________________________________________

I had no idea that Kodak even made a camera since my
old box camera of the early 50s.

It is amazing how digital photography has become so common.
We take pics with the cellphone every day, and they have fantastic resolution.


8 posted on 02/09/2012 11:05:30 PM PST by AlexW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER
Didn't they start off as a chemical company? And the camera stuff was a way to sell chemicals?

It's been 40 years since I read their story in some 60s magazine.

/johnny

9 posted on 02/09/2012 11:11:29 PM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER
Typical company that got so big it spent most of its time running the enterprise and they forgot what they did for a living.

Xerox, IBM, Sears, etc. The company took over the business and it's products.

They couldn't transition from the old style management and products as fast as new blood. It's literally teaching an old dog new tricks.

Xerox gave away what is now Windows and Apple. Gave it away because their old thinking couldn't see the application and thus thought it was a tool they couldn't use. No insight to the future.

You'd think men that grew up before air flight and space flight could see the potential for the computer. But, alas, many like Xerox only saw giant machines for single purposes and couldn't really envision one on your desk or in your hand.

10 posted on 02/09/2012 11:23:08 PM PST by Fledermaus (I can't fiddle so I'll just open a cold beer as I watch America burn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

This is what happens to corporations that are managed to maximize “stock value” instead of striving to gain and keep customers through service and innovation.

They cut costs, outsource, sell crappy products and then wonder why nobody buys their crap and the stock value plummets anyway.

Cart. Before. Horse.


11 posted on 02/09/2012 11:25:29 PM PST by Valpal1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

Yeah, a lot of chemicals are used in film developing. The cameras were just the cheap hardware, the money was always in developing and printing the pictures off the film.

If you can’t see your business model dying, you aren’t going to continue.

Spent most of my career in luxury hotel accounting. We used to make good money off phone calls through rooms and pay phones and long distance service charges. Business travelers didn’t care how much it was back then. Now with cell phones etc. that revenue stream dried up.


12 posted on 02/09/2012 11:27:07 PM PST by Fledermaus (I can't fiddle so I'll just open a cold beer as I watch America burn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

Here’s to the Eastman Kodak company and the thousands of engineers, technicians, etc. who brought joy to our lives. One day our hard drives will all be fried but we’ll still have that old shoebox filled with pictures, and we’ll still kneel down and cry when we look at the handwriting, the date, and that Kodak name on the back.

I do not believe you can keep such people down. Rochester NY has been a hot-bed of industry and innovation in many sectors (some related) as Kodak has lost steam, and there may be hope yet for the company as it reconfigures retirement and benefits packages and jettisons dangerous weight.


13 posted on 02/09/2012 11:29:39 PM PST by golux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

“It will be a long time before the phone cameras replace a serious DSLR, or even a good “bridge” camera, if great photos are your goal.”

Which has absolutely nothing to do with my point which is that Kodak doesn’t MAKE a serious DSLR, so they have nothing to offer that isn’t being killed by cell phone cameras.

Like it or not, cell phones are the new “point-n-shoot” cameras. And “point-n-shoot” cameras are what Kodak has made for decades, regardless of format.

(I’m old school, my phone has a camera and I never even THINK of it, even when I see one of those “gee, I wish I had a camera” scenes. )


14 posted on 02/09/2012 11:49:03 PM PST by Nik Naym (It's not my fault... I have compulsive smartass disorder.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

The camera you have is better than any camera you don’t. I agree that the DSLR’s take wonderful pictures, but for most purposes my iPhone is just as good, and it’s almost never more than three feet away from me.


15 posted on 02/10/2012 12:13:50 AM PST by ccmay (Too much Law; not enough Order.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER
IMO Kodaks' mistake in the digital camera era was making all of their system proprietary. Their stuff was good, not great, but once you bought the camera all the accessories had to be Kodak.
If they had made their docking/transfer stations open to all brands that would have gone a long way in getting their stuff more widely accepted and distributed.
They had some good ideas - just too locked into their brand only.

Just my opinion.
16 posted on 02/10/2012 1:21:58 AM PST by Tainan (Cogito, ergo conservatus sum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tainan
I had a Kodak P850 with the Easy share gimmick. It was only fair, the pics were overprocessed to cope with sensor noise. I would get going on a series of shots and accidentally bump the stupid easy share button. I lost some good shots that way.
17 posted on 02/10/2012 2:45:38 AM PST by SWAMPSNIPER (The Second Amendment, a Matter of Fact, Not a Matter of Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Valpal1

Excellent points.

A deadly, highly infectious business disease often transmitted by MBA programs.

Frequently caused by over-focus on quarterly results. Giving short term thinking priority kills your business in the long run.


18 posted on 02/10/2012 2:52:25 AM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan; Valpal1

This is what happens to corporations that are managed to maximize “stock value” instead of striving to gain and keep customers through service and innovation.

They cut costs, outsource, sell crappy products and then wonder why nobody buys their crap and the stock value plummets anyway.

Cart. Before. Horse.


Excellent points.

A deadly, highly infectious business disease often transmitted by MBA programs.

Frequently caused by over-focus on quarterly results. Giving short term thinking priority kills your business in the long run.


This CANNOT be over-emphasized. In many ways this way of thinking is destroying America because it infects both business and the public sector. Short-term thinking is nearly always detrimental to long-term results.

In business the short-term goal is quarterly profits in Politics it’s votes. And as we see, Obama and company thinks putting as many formerly working people onto the Government teat means an increase in votes for the short-term. The long-term results are a failing economy and soon the inability to pay those new voters to see on the butts collecting the dole extorted from the remaining workers.

The end results from bad management practices concentrating on the short-term to the detriment of the long-term means both will soon be out of business.


19 posted on 02/10/2012 3:47:21 AM PST by The Working Man (The mantra for BO's reign...."No Child Left a Dime")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

So, is the stock a buy right now? Most bankrupt company stocks bounce back up to around $1.00, don’t they? Or not...?


20 posted on 02/10/2012 4:11:03 AM PST by MeneMeneTekelUpharsin (Freedom is the freedom to discipline yourself so others don't have to do it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson