Year End Results for Kodak
Old 04-02-2019   #1
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 850
Year End Results for Kodak

Yesterday Kodak reported their end of year fiscal results.


The news was disappointing to investors and the stock is being hammered hard, down 8% so far in today's trade.


For 2018 Kodak had a net loss of 16 million dollars, compared to earning 94 million dollars in 2017.



Yearly revenue shrank by 61 million dollars. Cash flow is negative with a draw down of 94 million dollars. Kodak hopes to be cash positive in 2019 but gave no indication how it would achieve this.


The Consumer Film division's losses increased last year. 19 million dollars lost in 2018 vs 18 million lost in 2017. Revenue dropped 9 million dollars.



Kodak still has very large debts to pay off soon and has not yet found a funding source to re-finance this debt.



Kodak hopes to sell off their Flexigraphic division to help retire this debt.


As in past years, Kodak continues to shrink as a company.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-02-2019   #2
seany65
Registered User
 
seany65 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,093
Shame, Looks like kodak "aren't long for this world".
__________________
An ever-growing amount of photo-stuff and a never-growing amount of photo-talent.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-02-2019   #3
lynnb
Registered User
 
lynnb's Avatar
 
lynnb is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 8,508
Outwardly disappointing result but what is the complete picture.. e.g. if they've made a big investment in Ektachrome but the sales don't cover most of the financial year, and if sales are strong and on an upward path then it might be a different story next year. I hope so. Would be a shame to lose Tri-X if they go under. I like the new E100 but too expensive for me.
__________________
Lynn
happiest when shooting 35mm and 120 film
RFF Gallery
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-02-2019   #4
philosli
Registered User
 
philosli is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 85
My worry is that the days of Kodak films are numbered.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2019   #5
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 850
Quote:
Originally Posted by lynnb View Post
Outwardly disappointing result but what is the complete picture.. e.g. if they've made a big investment in Ektachrome but the sales don't cover most of the financial year, and if sales are strong and on an upward path then it might be a different story next year. I hope so. Would be a shame to lose Tri-X if they go under. I like the new E100 but too expensive for me.

To the extent that film moves Kodak's numbers, it's motion picture film. Still film is an extremely tiny amount of volume for Kodak an has a proportionally smaller effect on their business. It's not even mentioned in Kodak's report to investors.


Edit: Also remember, it's Kodak's commercial printing business that will determine the fate of the company, as that is its core product line. If they can succeed at commercial printing, then they have a future.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2019   #6
Karlovak
Registered User
 
Karlovak's Avatar
 
Karlovak is offline
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 72
It's hard for such a huge company to down-size themselves. If they go down as a whole, so be it. But it would be a PR disaster to individually cut the film production line completely.

I wonder why such losses compared to 2017.
__________________
blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2019   #7
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 850
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karlovak View Post

I wonder why such losses compared to 2017.

Revenue is down and so there are not enough profits to cover their fixed costs. Kodak has been unable to grow revenue for many, many years. They cannot shrink their costs forever. Many costs are fixed and so if revenue can't grow, then losses appear.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2019   #8
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
The Consumer Film division's losses increased last year. 19 million dollars lost in 2018 vs 18 million lost in 2017. Revenue dropped 9 million dollars.
No such division in Kodak's financials till now. Consumer AND Film?
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2019   #9
maigo
Registered User
 
maigo is offline
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Burnaby, BC, Canada
Posts: 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karlovak View Post
It's hard for such a huge company to down-size themselves. If they go down as a whole, so be it. But it would be a PR disaster to individually cut the film production line completely.

I wonder why such losses compared to 2017.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/425...all-transcript




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
---------------------------------
My Flickr Photostream
My Flickr Albums
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2019   #10
olifaunt
Registered User
 
olifaunt is offline
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 269
Quote:
Originally Posted by lynnb View Post
Would be a shame to lose Tri-X if they go under.
Wait, are we talking about (Eastman) Kodak or Kodak Alaris? Kodak Alaris makes Tri-X, and I thought Alaris was a separate entity from Kodak.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2019   #11
dave lackey
Registered User
 
dave lackey's Avatar
 
dave lackey is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 8,905
Ted Striker and his Kodak obsession is back. Why is that?
__________________


Dave
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2019   #12
p.giannakis
Pan Giannakis
 
p.giannakis's Avatar
 
p.giannakis is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Stafford - UK
Posts: 2,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by olifaunt View Post
Wait, are we talking about (Eastman) Kodak or Kodak Alaris? Kodak Alaris makes Tri-X, and I thought Alaris was a separate entity from Kodak.
Good question. Do we know the answer?
__________________
Regards,
Pan


The Monochrome Archives
Instagram



  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2019   #13
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 966
Quote:
Originally Posted by olifaunt View Post
Wait, are we talking about (Eastman) Kodak or Kodak Alaris? Kodak Alaris makes Tri-X, and I thought Alaris was a separate entity from Kodak.
We are talking about Eastman Kodak. They are the manufacturer of all Kodak films!! Nothing has changed in this field since their chapter 11 insolvency.
Kodak Alaris is the distributor of all Kodak photo films (not motion picture films).
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2019   #14
Archlich
Registered User
 
Archlich is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,307
All the film renaissance talk and sky rocketing price of used cameras, then this.

It's the true color of the hype...
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2019   #15
Bill Clark
Registered User
 
Bill Clark's Avatar
 
Bill Clark is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Minnetonka, Minnesota
Age: 71
Posts: 2,554
Information:

https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/kodk/f...=balance-sheet

https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/kodk/financials

What can you draw from this?
__________________
I make photographs as a return ticket to a moment otherwise gone.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2019   #16
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by lynnb View Post
Outwardly disappointing result but what is the complete picture.. e.g. if they've made a big investment in Ektachrome but the sales don't cover most of the financial year, and if sales are strong and on an upward path then it might be a different story next year. I hope so. Would be a shame to lose Tri-X if they go under. I like the new E100 but too expensive for me.
Ektachrome is not going to turn around Kodak. It is a rounding error in their financials.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2019   #17
DanskDynamit
Registered User
 
DanskDynamit's Avatar
 
DanskDynamit is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 427
it would be interesting to know how the film division performed
__________________
DanskDynamit
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2019   #18
CharlesDAMorgan
Registered User
 
CharlesDAMorgan is online now
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: South East UK
Posts: 1,046
I looked through the 10k (takes me back to my investment banking days) and consumer film is within a larger division including circuit board film. It's a tiny part of the whole and there is no information at all about what we are interested in.
__________________
Film amateur with a few rangefinders - Leica III, M2/M3, Werra 3 and Zeiss Super Ikonta 534/16 medium format.

Apart from that have a Rolleiflex 3.5F, the odd Minolta XD7, Hasselblad 500cm, a Topcon Super D and an Intrepid 5x4 large format (not the half of it but I am clearing them out, honest).

I do all my own black and white developing at home.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2019   #19
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 850
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave lackey View Post
Ted Striker and his Kodak obsession is back. Why is that?

Who here is not interested in the future of Kodak?
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2019   #20
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 850
Quote:
Originally Posted by olifaunt View Post
Wait, are we talking about (Eastman) Kodak or Kodak Alaris? Kodak Alaris makes Tri-X, and I thought Alaris was a separate entity from Kodak.

Kodak Alaris is a British company that does not report quarterly financials, nor does it trade on any stock market.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2019   #21
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 850
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesDAMorgan View Post
It's a tiny part of the whole and there is no information at all about what we are interested in.

Incorrect. We are all interested in the future of Kodak. The entire report gives shareholders and analysis a state of how healthy the company is. I have zero interest in commercial printing but I sincerely hope that Kodak has tremendous success with that core product line because it will determine its stability and future.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2019   #22
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 850
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Clark View Post

What can you draw from this?

Kodak has been burning cash year on year at a prodigious rate.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2019   #23
olifaunt
Registered User
 
olifaunt is offline
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
We are talking about Eastman Kodak. They are the manufacturer of all Kodak films!! Nothing has changed in this field since their chapter 11 insolvency.
Kodak Alaris is the distributor of all Kodak photo films (not motion picture films).
Ugh, I just read the Alaris annual report to try to figure this out. I forgot how revolting the business of business marketing was. I have to go take a shower now.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2019   #24
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,626
Kodak can go broke and the world will keep turning .. the beat goes on!
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2019   #25
blan01
Registered User
 
blan01 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 43
Fuji has been cutting their film products the last few years, it doesn’t look like Fuji is interested in film anymore, except their instax line
If Kodak goes broke, I’ll just have to shoot hp5 forever lol
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #26
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 850
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanskDynamit View Post
it would be interesting to know how the film division performed

I read the transcripts from the earnings call and there was not one mention of their film products. The company reported on various investments being made to try to grow revenue and earnings and none of these were related to film. The core product line is commercial printing and that is what will make or break the company.


As another poster said, still film's revenue and profits are just a rounding error to their CFO.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2019   #27
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is online now
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,499
I don't care for entire Kodak, except part which makes c-41 film and chemicals.
It is time for ADOX like companies. Not something huge in size. Huge companies doing other things are not sustainable in film market.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #28
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,698
Quote:
Originally Posted by lynnb View Post
Outwardly disappointing result but what is the complete picture.. e.g. if they've made a big investment in Ektachrome but the sales don't cover most of the financial year, and if sales are strong and on an upward path then it might be a different story next year. I hope so.
The problem for us is that in the balance sheet there is only the number of the whole CFD group. That is the group that makes movie film, archival film, still photo film and some other products.
So we don't know with which of the products the losses have been made.
At least the last number I've heard from Kodak at last year's Photokina is that about 20% of the revenue of the CFD group is from still photo film.

What we do know is
- that the demand for Kodak photo film is significantly increasing (they have explained that last Photokina)
- that the profit margins for film generally are tiny and not sustainable for the future: that is the reason why Fujifilm has increased their prices; Kodak and all the others will follow in the next two years.

I expect a adaption process in the short term future: The market will adapt to sustainable prices which allow film manufacturers staying profitable in the long term.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #29
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,698
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archlich View Post
All the film renaissance talk and sky rocketing price of used cameras, then this.

It's the true color of the hype...
There is no contradiction:
The photo film revival is real. We've had a rff member meeting last Photokina and visited all film related companies which were exhibiting there: And all said that they are seeing increasing demand.

The problem in the market are the tiny or often non-existing profit margins for film. Because of that Fujifilm has increased their prices recently, to stay profitable and keep film production running in the long term. The other manufacturers will do the same sooner or later.

Cheers, Jan


P.S.: The CEO of ADOX explained the current margin problem of the film industry very well in his presentation at the Helsinki photo fair:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3bHwFlmBEY

Last edited by HHPhoto : 04-05-2019 at 01:11. Reason: P.S. added
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #30
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 5,084
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
....... It is time for ADOX like companies. Not something huge in size. Huge companies doing other things are not sustainable in film market.
This.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HHPhoto View Post
..... that the profit margins for film generally are tiny and not sustainable for the future: that is the reason why Fujifilm has increased their prices; Kodak and all the others will follow in the next two years....
Yet a company like Ilford is doing just fine. The issue, I suspect, is that once huge companies with big infrastructures like Kodak and Fujifilm cannot sustain themselves with their previous setups. Like Ko.Fe said above, I feel these companies need to split off their film divisions into smaller, less resource hungry companies to sustain their product lines.
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #31
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,698
Quote:
Originally Posted by blan01 View Post
Fuji has been cutting their film products the last few years, it doesn’t look like Fuji is interested in film anymore, except their instax line
Fortunately that is not correct: Last Photokina Fujifilm very clearly explained that they will continue production of photo film. Their recent price increase supports that: Making the necessary step to keep the production profitable and ask long-term sustainable prices.
At the recent WPPI conference in Las Vegas Fujifilm said also very clearly to their customers there that they are prepared / preparing for the long term photo film production: "If needed, we will be the last man standing".

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #32
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,698
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
It is time for ADOX like companies. Not something huge in size. Huge companies doing other things are not sustainable in film market.
It is time for ADOX and companies like Kodak, Fujifilm, Ilford and Foma.
In an increasing market - that we have - that will be possible. We customers just have to pay sustainable prices for our products that make it possible for the manufacturers to be profitable.

And huge, diversified companies with film production are possible: Fujifilm is the best example: They make about 10% of their whole company revenue with silver-halide products, about 1.5 billion $ last year.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #33
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,698
Quote:
Originally Posted by gavinlg View Post
Yet a company like Ilford is doing just fine.
Not really. Their balance sheet is published yearly. They are profitable, but the profit is small. In the long run new investments in machinery are necessary, look at the presentation of the ADOX CEO I have posted. He explains the challenges of the industry very well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gavinlg View Post
The issue, I suspect, is that once huge companies with big infrastructures like Kodak and Fujifilm cannot sustain themselves with their previous setups.
The bigger companies have adapted. Now with increasing demand it will be easier for them to operate. But we have to support them accepting fair and sustainable prices.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #34
Prest_400
Multiformat
 
Prest_400's Avatar
 
Prest_400 is online now
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Sweden/Spain
Posts: 915
Quote:
Originally Posted by HHPhoto View Post
It is time for ADOX and companies like Kodak, Fujifilm, Ilford and Foma.
In an increasing market - that we have - that will be possible. We customers just have to pay sustainable prices for our products that make it possible for the manufacturers to be profitable.

And huge, diversified companies with film production are possible: Fujifilm is the best example: They make about 10% of their whole company revenue with silver-halide products, about 1.5 billion $ last year.

Cheers, Jan
Very much agree. And as Mirko said in his keynote, Kodak and Fuji hold the know how of color film. No one else will get up there now and the leap is huge. Downsizing is a challenge, as Kodak has Building 38. A facility made for the peak of the market. They did manage to downsize production runs, although I bet it's not the optimal set up compared to a small coater operation.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #35
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 850
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prest_400 View Post
Very much agree. And as Mirko said in his keynote, Kodak and Fuji hold the know how of color film. No one else will get up there now and the leap is huge. Downsizing is a challenge, as Kodak has Building 38. A facility made for the peak of the market. They did manage to downsize production runs, although I bet it's not the optimal set up compared to a small coater operation.

A former Kodak engineer stated over at apug.org that Building 39 could coat the entire world's demand for film in a single day if run at full speed. (of course that would be a single emulsion, which is not realistic but for discussion sake ignore that fact).


Think about that for a minute. That's how much over capacity a single company has. Fuji is probably the same. They have enormous infrastructure which has fixed costs but not enough revenue to support them. Nor demand. Fuji continues to drop emulsions, which further idles their plant.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #36
Prest_400
Multiformat
 
Prest_400's Avatar
 
Prest_400 is online now
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Sweden/Spain
Posts: 915
I find ironic on how resilient film is at Eastman Kodak. Been the cash cow for many failed ventures and survived an incredible market onslaught through the digital revolution. And there it is. Haven't looked deeply, but the last words I remember around here is that Motion Picture and Stills film is profitable (the latter indicated by reintroducing TMZ).

If I were one of those billionaires with too much money I'd simply buy out and spin off the film division of Kodak.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
Think about that for a minute. That's how much over capacity a single company has. Fuji is probably the same. They have enormous infrastructure which has fixed costs but not enough revenue to support them. Nor demand. Fuji continues to drop emulsions, which further idles their plant.
Which states how they managed, as they are producing niche film such as TMZ. Of course volumes are mainly from Motion Picture.


Fuji might not have the same problem as they have Instax keeping the infrastructure running. Integral film also requires film negative, and with that line at full steam it should keep the plant well operative.
I wonder however about how C41 and E6 lines sit or may be crunched, as the incentive might be to produce even more Instax. No direct source, but possibly the peel apart lines were scrapped in favor of Instax finishing equipment.

Fuji is interesting in how they seem to drop simpler lines (Acros should not be as complex as any E6 film) and that we don't really get any retiree insights in it. Hopeful that the price increase is for sustainability, and as a hobbyist, oh well, I'll just bear it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #37
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,698
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
A former Kodak engineer stated over at apug.org that Building 39 could coat the entire world's demand for film in a single day if run at full speed.
No, Ron Mowrey / PE never said that. That is a myth. A misinterpretation which was stated again and again by appugers.

You can easily prove by yourself that this statement is completely wrong: Just have a look at Robert Shanebrooks excellent latest book "Making Kodak Film". There you find the exact numbers for Building 38. And then compare that with the whole global photo film production (25-30 million rolls p.a. for 135 and 120 format, + all sheet films), the instant film production (40-50 million packs p.a.), the movie film production, the industrial film production (X-Ray, which is still a huge market because of increasing demand from Asia served by Agfa, Fujifilm, Carestream and Foma), the aerial film production, the archival film production.
It is absolutely impossible to coat that huge film production in only one day at B38.

Honestly, there is so much nonesense flying around concerning film on the internet. Think twice before you post and share fake news. Lots of this nonsense can be easily identified by a little bit work done by yourself .

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #38
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 850
Quote:
Originally Posted by HHPhoto View Post
No, Ron Mowrey / PE never said that. That is a myth. A misinterpretation which was stated again and again by appugers.

You can easily prove by yourself that this statement is completely wrong: Just have a look at Robert Shanebrooks excellent latest book "Making Kodak Film". There you find the exact numbers for Building 38. And then compare that with the whole global photo film production (25-30 million rolls p.a. for 135 and 120 format, + all sheet films), the instant film production (40-50 million packs p.a.), the movie film production, the industrial film production (X-Ray, which is still a huge market because of increasing demand from Asia served by Agfa, Fujifilm, Carestream and Foma), the aerial film production, the archival film production.
It is absolutely impossible to coat that huge film production in only one day at B38.

Honestly, there is so much nonesense flying around concerning film on the internet. Think twice before you post and share fake news. Lots of this nonsense can be easily identified by a little bit work done by yourself .

Cheers, Jan

You are sadly, again, misinformed.

Ron DID say that and he was referring to simply 35mm, 120, and large format film. It was a hypothetical statement, not one that would be possible given that emulsion changes could not occur in such time.


You are so patently biased it isnt even funny anymore.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #39
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 966
I have both editions of Bob Shanebrooks outstanding book 'Making Kodak Film'. The first, smaller one and the recent, big one.
I've just looked at it, at the production capacity numbers of the remaining film coating machine in Building 38:

It is very clear: The statement that the current global yearly film production can be coated in only one day at B38 is absolutely wrong. Completely far from reality.

Whoever made that statement, he has talked nonsense. Period.
I cannot imagine that R. Mowrey has said that. I also follow him at apug / photrio since start of apug. If he really said that he must have had a bad day, smoked the wrong stuff .

It is neither possible from the coating speed, nor from the emulsion kettle capacity (that is a bigger bottleneck). And the biggest bottleneck is the film finishing capacity: It's 50.000 rolls of 135 film per day at Kodak (one shift operation). So its absolutely impossible to produce millions of finished rolls of film per day there.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2019   #40
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
I

It is very clear: The statement that the current global yearly film production can be coated in only one day at B38 is absolutely wrong. Completely far from reality.
Could you care to "read out loud" the absolutely correct coating capacity of Kodak stated in that book?

Thanks!
__________________

  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:29.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.