There's been some buzz in the media suggesting Kodak is shutting down after their latest earnings, but that's not accurate.
The confusion came from Kodak's earnings report, which included a "going concern" note. That simply means their auditors flagged upcoming debt that needs to be refinanced. Some outlets spun that into talk of bankruptcy.
Kodak has since clarified:
• They're not filing for bankruptcy and have no plans to shut down.
• Later this year, they expect a large pension plan payment that will cover a big chunk of the debt.
• They're already arranging refinancing for the rest, which should leave them with very little debt going forward.
So, according to Kodak, they're staying in business. The scary headlines came from misinterpreting accounting language. I'll admit I'm always a bit skeptical of corporate statements, but hopefully what they are saying holds true.
Good, because in my personal, biased opinion, looking for an alternative to TX400 and Portra would frankly suck.
(Hope I'm not missing the point by saying this.)
Fred Miranda wrote:
The confusion came from Kodak's earnings report, which included a "going concern" note. That simply means their auditors flagged upcoming debt that needs to be refinanced. Some outlets spun that into talk of bankruptcy.
Kodak has since clarified:
• Later this year, they *expect*a large pension plan payment that will cover a big chunk of the debt.
• They're already *arranging refinancing* for the rest, which should leave them with very little debt going forward.
I agree that those media reports were hyperbole. However Kodak‘s statement is also a bit misleading.
There is a reason they had to put in that note and it’s hidden in those bullets. They’re „expecting“ money from that pension fund and they’re „re-arranging“ refinancing for the rest. Especially the latter is a process that’s not fully under their control and should it fail, they would be de facto insolvent.
Now it’s probably unlikely that this fails, but there is risk and hence the note in their financial statement.
There is also a confusion what the Kodak name actually entitles:
+ Eastman Kodak: making chemicals including those for film. This might be the part which is not doing too well.
+ Kodak Alaris: the company which actually produces films. Alaris purchased this part of Kodak after Kodak's bankruptcy and is profitable to my knowledge.
Interestingly, the Kodak brand has been sold to a Korean apparel company to sell clothing with Kodak logo. They even opened a store in Shanghai. In Asian, people are very nostalgic to the brand.
gordec wrote:
Interestingly, the Kodak brand has been sold to a Korean apparel company to sell clothing with Kodak logo. They even opened a store in Shanghai. In Asian, people are very nostalgic to the brand.
gordec wrote:
Interestingly, the Kodak brand has been sold to a Korean apparel company to sell clothing with Kodak logo. They even opened a store in Shanghai. In Asian, people are very nostalgic to the brand.
retrofocus wrote:
There is also a confusion what the Kodak name actually entitles:
+ Eastman Kodak: making chemicals including those for film. This might be the part which is not doing too well.
+ Kodak Alaris: the company which actually produces films. Alaris purchased this part of Kodak after Kodak's bankruptcy and is profitable to my knowledge.
Not exactly.
Eastman Kodak produces film. All the film sold with the "kodak" name. Still and motion picture.
Chemistry is subcontracted out, currently to a company in Michigan, I believe.
Kodak Alaris has the exclusive distribution rights to sell consumer still film produced by Eastman Kodak. They do not sell motion picture films - Eastman does that directly.
Oldwino wrote:
Not exactly.
Eastman Kodak produces film. All the film sold with the "kodak" name. Still and motion picture.
Chemistry is subcontracted out, currently to a company in Michigan, I believe.
Kodak Alaris has the exclusive distribution rights to sell consumer still film produced by Eastman Kodak. They do not sell motion picture films - Eastman does that directly.
So that’s why we can’t get 5222 in 36 exposure rolls!
madNbad wrote:
So that’s why we can’t get 5222 in 36 exposure rolls!
We could, if EK decides to package it that way. We could also get these new, remjet-less Vision 3 color films, too, if they choose to package them for still photography.
Oldwino wrote:
We could, if EK decides to package it that way. We could also get these new, remjet-less Vision 3 color films, too, if they choose to package them for still photography.
Still photographers are too small of a market. Kodak wants more directors like Elaine May. She used 1.7 million feet of color stock to make “Mikey and Nicky” in 1973.
I recall reading somewhere a few months back that Kodak was temporarily ceasing some production in order to upgrade plant so that they could expand production to meet rising demand.
Simply the title of this posting will lead some casual viewers to believe that "Kodak" and "bankruptcy" are (once again) synonymous - they are not, and reports of their impending demise were much mistaken (hopefully, much to the embarrassment of those who reported so).
Can we please change the title of the thread to read something a little more realistic such as "Kodak Financial Reporting - clarified"??
