Reflx Lab says their respooled films could be discontinued

[JParker]

You realize you're hoping that a worldwide company that monopolized the film industry for a century including digital sensors ........

Kodak has not monopolized "the film industry for a century including digital sensors". Sorry, but that is absolutely wrong.
Kodak had the biggest market share in lots of countries for quite a long time, but that has nothing to do with a monopoly, very different market situation.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Perhaps Alan meant smart and aggressive in the sense of your definition above i.e. " quick buck" and the short-term approach exploiting the moment rather than reasonable revenue generated looking after colour film's longer term health?

pentaxuser

The company doesn't seem like they're quick buck artists that will dump the company at any moment. They seem to invest for the long term if you look at their other holdings and the amount of business talent in their organization. Only time will tell. In the meanwhile, they will maximize profits as any smart company does.

 

[JParker]

That's why I mentioned that the new company is in LA near Hollywood. I suspect some of the owners have connections with movie producers who use film.

That is pure speculation. AFAIK the investment corporation has not had so far any investments in that industry.

 

[pentaxuser]

From that standpoint, it could only benefit Eastman Kodak to continue selling to resellers. Resellers would generally represent a relatively constant purchase volume on a repeating basis, which would (according to all the arguments so far presented) make for a much more consistent product, with more ready availability all round.

I will never understand why a company who made an agreement with their former employees to maintain their pension program after bankruptcy proceedings (the entire reason for the Alaris agreement, IIRC) is maintaining that agreement after the pension program has sold off the company. That would have been the ideal time to renegotiate any exclusivity agreement, and to take advantage of the sea of resellers/distributors that either Kodak does not have to maintain/control/administer, and thus does not share the cost of.

Yes and therein lies a large debate on business philosophy and the benefits or otherwise of what some may regard as appropriate standards of business behaviour and others as the supremacy of a legal agreement which the new owners to whom I will refer as KA in the absence of knowing who they are, have bought from the former KA

 

[BrianShaw]

It’s no secret…

Kodak Alaris Announces Acquisition by Kingswood Capital Management | Kodak Alaris

www.kodakalaris.com

Kingswood Capital Management, L.P.

Kingswood is a firm that focuses on “win-win” partnerships with strong underlying businesses where we can help drive significant improvement.

www.kingswood-capital.com

 

[mshchem]

All this is just speculation. No one here knows the exact reasons why this decision was made. I suspect that the offering of single 400' reels of cine film by EKCo might have coincided with the Covid mess, needing a cash infusion.

Kodak always took care of their dealer network, until Fujifilm and modern times made it difficult.

If there's a market for true, Remjet backed color negative film with Ecn2 processing someone will fill it.

Maybe Kodak will open up a new lab, maybe in Vancouver, to offer film with processing included, slides, negatives and prints! I would buy that in a minute. No consumer lab ever matched Kodak's processing labs!!

 

[MattKing]

What I do know, from the most recent related update I have, is that Eastman Kodak was dealing constantly with multiple increases to their input costs, while trying to keep the price they were charging under control. I have no visibility on what price increases Kodak Alaris was dealing with, but the motion picture film catalogue certainly has revealed significant increases over a relatively short period of time.
And motion picture film is not as vulnerable to the increased costs associated with the finishing stages.
Nor is it as vulnerable to the increased costs at the distribution stage - at least with respect to film sold in relatively large lots to motion picture productions.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

That is pure speculation. AFAIK the investment corporation has not had so far any investments in that industry.

Well, it was pure speculation when someone here said that the new owners are going to suck Alaris dry and throw it away because the new owners raised prices. That didn't seem fair to me.

 

[pentaxuser]

It’s no secret…

Kodak Alaris Announces Acquisition by Kingswood Capital Management | Kodak Alaris

www.kodakalaris.com

Kingswood Capital Management, L.P.

Kingswood is a firm that focuses on “win-win” partnerships with strong underlying businesses where we can help drive significant improvement.

www.kingswood-capital.com

Thanks Brian I knew we could rely on you I shall try and refer to it as such from now on. Just a thought but it might be helpful if we adopted this title as the "new" KA rather than referring to it as KA

Just a thought on my part of course

pentaxuser

 

[Don_ih]

Just a thought but it might be helpful if we adopted this title as the "new" KA rather than referring to it as KA

No no- no one needs yet another Kodak....

 

[BrianShaw]

But is it really “new” or KA 2.0? There are acquisitions where hatchet-men clear out the old management, bring in their yes men, and run the business. Then there are acquisitions that are funding infusion and handled at arms-length by the new owners. Does anyone have anything more than wild speculation to suggest which model beat fits?

 

[cmacd123]

There was a rumour about new Kodak cine emulsion a while back. It's hard to imagine it would be anything other than ISO 400-800 daylight balanced.

beofre Fuji existed the Movie Film Business they did make a 500D. { Fuji Reala 500D 8692 } (which would make sense now that studios tend to have "daylight" LED lighting.

 

[cmacd123]

I will never understand why a company who made an agreement with their former employees to maintain their pension program after bankruptcy proceedings (the entire reason for the Alaris agreement, IIRC) is maintaining that agreement after the pension program has sold off the company.

the distribution company was and is a Business that was suposed to pay the frieght as an asset of the Pension Plan. when the british government bailed out the Pension Plan, that asset was sold to the bidder who offered the best return to the Board that Bailed out the pension Plan. It was originally owned by the Pension Plan and not by the pensioners..

 

[cmacd123]

Labs set up to process cine film with remjet aren't setup to process 5 foot lengths of film.

back when there were small Labs repacking Short ends, they just spliced all those 5 foot rolls together, whith either a Heat Splicer like some large photofinishing labs use to make rolls ofC-41 film, (brown Paper splices that work simalar to slide mounts) or just used splicing tape of various kinds. (some even used a plain cement splice, But that wuld be only 75% safe.)

major difference with ECN2 is that if they used Twin Checks they had to go on the emusion side, as they would wash off with the rem jet. that Thremal spicer would have a twin check number on the splice itself.

And back in those days a "rush" or "work print" was normally made of every roll of Negative, (at least the "circled Takes") so the labs were set up to make a print. the negs often came back with a notch used to set the printer lights depending of the Still Photographer followed advice and used an 85 filter, or not. (I always found that the shots looked much better when I used the 85)

 

[benderscameracorner]

I'm a fan of Reflx mostly - they make some neat products and I've got a few rolls of 800T on the way in the mail - but I think they might be drawing a long bow here.

That said, most of the issue would go away if Kodak (presumably K-Alaris, though I don't care who) would just sell 100ft bulk load rolls of their colour films - photography and motion films ideally - to retail customers for those who are wanting and willing to bulk roll. Clearly there's a market for it. Ilford have after all sold bulk rolls of basically everything they make since when the dinosaurs roamed, and it doesn't seem to have prevented them from making a quid.

Kodak do seem to have a pathological ability to not give their customers what they actually want a good couple of decades now. Rapidly shrinking availability of reliable Super 8 cameras on the secondhand market? Ohh let's take eight years to produce an utterly overkill camera that costs US$5000 that'll sell maybe hundred or so *facepalm* Jeez, just make a modern plastic M2 replica with a less crap viewfinder and a C-mount lens for a few hundred and actually make some money guys...

(rant over)

 

[mshchem]

back when there were small Labs repacking Short ends, they just spliced all those 5 foot rolls together, whith either a Heat Splicer like some large photofinishing labs use to make rolls ofC-41 film, (brown Paper splices that work simalar to slide mounts) or just used splicing tape of various kinds. (some even used a plain cement splice, But that wuld be only 75% safe.)

major difference with ECN2 is that if they used Twin Checks they had to go on the emusion side, as they would wash off with the rem jet. that Thremal spicer would have a twin check number on the splice itself.

And back in those days a "rush" or "work print" was normally made of every roll of Negative, (at least the "circled Takes") so the labs were set up to make a print. the negs often came back with a notch used to set the printer lights depending of the Still Photographer followed advice and used an 85 filter, or not. (I always found that the shots looked much better when I used the 85)

IIRC some labs, Kodak??? used some sort of fancy punch to punch codes in the film ends. I maybe am just imaging this

 

[mshchem]

I'm a fan of Reflx mostly - they make some neat products and I've got a few rolls of 800T on the way in the mail - but I think they might be drawing a long bow here.

That said, most of the issue would go away if Kodak (presumably K-Alaris, though I don't care who) would just sell 100ft bulk load rolls of their colour films - photography and motion films ideally - to retail customers for those who are wanting and willing to bulk roll. Clearly there's a market for it. Ilford have after all sold bulk rolls of basically everything they make since when the dinosaurs roamed, and it doesn't seem to have prevented them from making a quid.

Kodak do seem to have a pathological ability to not give their customers what they actually want a good couple of decades now. Rapidly shrinking availability of reliable Super 8 cameras on the secondhand market? Ohh let's take eight years to produce an utterly overkill camera that costs US$5000 that'll sell maybe hundred or so *facepalm* Jeez, just make a modern plastic M2 replica with a less crap viewfinder and a C-mount lens for a few hundred and actually make some money guys...

(rant over)

Not sure bulk rolls are feasible for Kodak. Just like 220 film.

 

[MattKing]

Kodak can and do make the 100 foot bulk rolls.
It is just that the left over finishing and packaging line/machinery for them is pretty well their oldest and most inefficient and most labour intensive of anything they use - which means high cost/roll, leading to high prices for the consumer. That historical remnant dates back to the days when those film loads were used by high volume users who employed them in ID photo systems and school photography, and who bought the rolls in quantities that resembled the quantities that motion picture productions used. When that market disappeared, most of the manufacturing capacity dedicated to it was scrapped.
For that cost/price reason, colour film hasn't been considered practical for the 100 foot loads, and the expensive black and white 100 foot loads are probably only made infrequently.
It would cost a lot of money to modernize that line - even if only to the vintage that Harman is using - and any such expenditure needs to be extensively justified before such decisions are made. This is the reality of the modern film business, with its tight controls on available capital.

IIRC some labs, Kodak??? used some sort of fancy punch to punch codes in the film ends. I maybe am just imaging this

Yes - Kodachrome and Ektachrome processed by Kodak.
The customer films were all spliced together in one long roll, run through a movie film processing line, and then separated at the end for return to the customer. The holes helped ensure that the right customer got the right film.

 

[mshchem]

Kodak can and do make the 100 foot bulk rolls.
It is just that the left over finishing and packaging line/machinery for them is pretty well their oldest and most inefficient and most labour intensive of anything they use - which means high cost/roll, leading to high prices for the consumer. That historical remnant dates back to the days when those film loads were used by high volume users who employed them in ID photo systems and school photography, and who bought the rolls in quantities that resembled the quantities that motion picture productions used. When that market disappeared, most of the manufacturing capacity dedicated to it was scrapped.
For that cost/price reason, colour film hasn't been considered practical for the 100 foot loads, and the expensive black and white 100 foot loads are probably only made infrequently.
It would cost a lot of money to modernize that line - even if only to the vintage that Harman is using - and any such expenditure needs to be extensively justified before such decisions are made. This is the reality of the modern film business, with its tight controls on available capital.


Yes - Kodachrome and Ektachrome processed by Kodak.
The customer films were all spliced together in one long roll, run through a movie film processing line, and then separated at the end for return to the customer. The holes helped ensure that the right customer got the right film.

So I didn't just dream it! It's a Wonderful Life!!!

Re: Long Roll cameras, these folks used 35mm, 46mm, etc, etc. Long gone days.

I suspect Kodak would sell color film in 100' rolls if there was demand. People who bulk load process their own film, right? You'll need to sacrifice a cassette to send it in, plus the lab will wonder what it is.

 

[Agulliver]

As we already know from the price of 100' rolls of Tri-X Vs HP5+ .....Kodak's highly inefficient and labour intensive manufacturing of 100' rolls is very costly. I don't suppose for a moment that 100' consumer rolls of their C41, E6 or ECN2 material would be cheaper than buying 135 cassettes. And the market must be tiny. Few people actually process their own colour films, or have access to a lab happy to work with hand rolled cassettes and return said cassettes.

For me it still boils down to the fact that I find it hard to reconcile the idea that KA is losing money to these respoolers when the market they serve seems to be very small.

 

[mshchem]

Who knows what the long term plans that KA new owners have? Could be all sorts of fun things.

 

[pentaxuser]

No no- no one needs yet another Kodak....

Yes too many Kodaks can be confusing so inline with Brian's info might we call the new owners Kingswood Capital Management or KCM for short ?

pentaxuser

 

[pentaxuser]

For me it still boils down to the fact that I find it hard to reconcile the idea that KA is losing money to these respoolers when the market they serve seems to be very small.

You are not alone in having the above feeling

pentaxuser

 

[Radost]

I strongly believe the VERY NICE GUYS at CIneStill are driving this!!! I will "NEVER" give them my money!
I wish I can use the actual language but don't want to be in trouble with the mods

 

[Conti11]

As far as I understand (from some official and not so official sources), what is really happening is that Kodak sells their motion picture films in two general ways: people that can prove they are indeed making motion pictures and then for everyone else (like spoolers).

Since Eastman wants to keep their motion picture film business going, they film sell to motion picture producers with some concessions that won't seems like good business practice otherwise (like quantity and lower margins), otherwise those who consume motion picture film for their intended use may be tempted to go digital and crack the motion picture film business.

And there is everyone else, who purchase motion picture for experimental/respooling/you name it purpose. They charge a different price to that market, so they can recover some of what they lose on the film makers market. You can still buy the stuff but at a different price range, which may not be as attractive for business like Reflx.

If you can't prove that you are actually using Eastman film on a motion picture production, you are denied to buy the film at the motion picture price (like Reflx seems to be doing). You need to make an agreement on how much you will be buying and estimate the price (which may be higher quantities and higher prices that respoolers can use and still make a profit). This would definitely impact prices of respooled film and affect prices for business like Reflx.

So, what I think it is really happening is that Reflex is buying their film stock saying it is using for a motion picture project but using it for respooling and making a profit, and Eastman is trying to stop that to keep their business going.

Yeah, it sounds like Kodak is trying to protect their motion picture film market by offering different pricing tiers based on actual production use. They want to make sure the film goes to filmmakers, not just respooled for other uses, which would hurt their margins. Reflex seems to be caught in the middle, buying at the lower price and reselling, so Kodak's probably tightening up the rules to maintain their core business. It's all about keeping the motion picture market alive while still making money off other sales