----- Original Message ----- From: "John Jensen" <jwjensen356@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 3:36 PM Subject: [rollei_list] Re: 'Kodak, Don't Take My Kodachrome' > Richard, it was in the early 50s (1954?, 1955?) that > the courts ruled that the monopoly Kodak had on > processing Kodachrome had to stop. As a result of > that ruling, independent labs could get into the > business of processing Kodachrome. If Kodak wanted to > stop processing Kodachrome they could have/should have > stopped then. But they didn't. > > John > I'm not sure what issues the court decided. The main one was that Kodak was including the price of processing in the price of the film. I think by that time Kodak had already licensed some independent labs to process Kodachrome to take the load off Rochester, but I am not sure. I think its likely that Kodak never made much money from processing. The film was sold as a system, much like Kodak's original box camera which was returned to the factory for processing and printing and returned loaded with fresh film. I think Kodachrome is a victim of the shrinking market for film. Remember, that Kodak and Agfa are very large companies who made enormous volumes of photographic products. When the market for something shrinks there are a lot of operating costs that don't shrink, I think this is what all of the photo products companies are fighting. Kodak, at least, seems to be trying to keep some aspect of their original business but the pressures of having to return a reasonable profit to investors pretty much limits what management can do. Some management is simply ruthless about loosing parts of a company, sell them off for what can be gotten or simply eliminate them, take a one time charge, and be finished with it. Where there is a stable or expanding market there is reason to try to fix poorly performing businesses but where there is simply not much of a market, or it is shrinking, the problem is not a broken business that could expand its share but a simple lack of a place to sell the products no matter how well they are made or how well the company is run. This is a completely different thing in my mind from the disastrous and reprehensible mis-management of companies like General Motors or the big steel companies in the U.S. who just decided to shut down whole cities and move elsewhere. Those moves were made in an attempt to substantially reduce operating costs by eliminating well paid labor, this is something else. I wish Kodak luck in preserving their traditional business. Actually I also wish Ilford and Agfa well, but even if one or all survive they will do so in a different form than existed in the past. --- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles, CA, USA dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx --- Rollei List - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org - Online, searchable archives are available at //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list