I work as financial administrator for a university, and while I'm not familiar with the scale of figures produced in this thread, I can assure you that in my own little domain of finances, I could easily present 'good' or 'bad' or 'very ugly' figures, depending what's desired, even without cheating. It's simply a matter of what to include and what not to include.
Exactly how bad is Kodak's situation? Can we agree on: We don't know? I certainly don't know.
Anyway, there are basically two options: One is that Kodak dumps its film business (or goes bust alogether), in which case the best thing for us would be to keep shooting on what little film is left and hope that this will inspire another company to take over the operation. The other option is that Kodak carries on making film, in which case the best thing for us would be to keep shooting film and convince Kodak (and others) that this is still a viable business.
So let's get that film out of the fridge and into the camera.
This can't be good
Moderator: Andreas Wideroe
- Charlie Blackfield
- Posts: 178
- Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 9:09 pm
- Real name: Klaus Huber
- Location: Bradford-on-Avon / UK
- Contact:
-
- Senior member
- Posts: 1004
- Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 3:44 pm
- Location: victoria, Australia
Re: This can't be good
I was just flicking through the latest copy of kodak's 'in camera' magazine and came across a full page kodak announcement: Comming Soon, 2 new vision 3 stocks - one for your camera, one for your post house'.
I run Nano Lab - Australia's super8 ektachrome processing service
- visit nanolab.com.au
richard@nanolab.com.au
- visit nanolab.com.au
richard@nanolab.com.au