Kodak Goes Under

nearlynew

They may not have gone under but they have certainly lost their focus and it will be interesting to see how this develops.

CRASH_BANG_WALLOP

Sibley wrote: »

You are barking up the wrong tree.

dude i doubt it. ree's sockies thank you ree's sockies thank him then ree posts and man you jump in and its a sockie-fest

Graham_Devon

spadoosh wrote: »

Whos going to put 900 mill in a bail out when they know it will fail, ahem no one.

These people might...


Guy on the left appears to think it aint that great an idea however.

Mistral001

I heard a reporter on the lunchtime news concluding that they did not change with the times. They have actually changed. They have been concentrating on digital cameras and diversifying for years.

Miss_Havisham

nearlynew wrote: »

They may not have gone under but they have certainly lost their focus and it will be interesting to see how this develops.

I think it's just a flash in the pan. The press is bound to be negative because they love to expose bad management.

More seriously, let's hope the protection will give them the chance and motivation to sort themselves out and carry on trading.


Miss H

System

CRASH_BANG_WALLOP wrote: »

dude i doubt it. ree's sockies thank you ree's sockies thank him then ree posts and man you jump in and its a sockie-fest

Said it before but, always amuses me when a sockie accuses someone of being a sockie.

Why has this CBW alter-ego suddenly decided to change it's posting style anyway?

Road_Hog

I doubt Kodak will survive as 'Kodak'. They never looked like recovering from the digital takeover from camera film. From the article it looks like they're going to be selling off the profitable parts (the crown jewels of the company) and that will leave a rump company, whose only real value will be the brand name.

Chapter 11 is just giving them time to extract wealth before it goes under.

spadoosh

CRASH_BANG_WALLOP wrote: »

and how many patents have Kodak go dude.sell them off bailers get money back. no point just letting an iconic american company bite the dust just like that man

The patents are the problem, theyve got poor asset management. they have massive debts and not enough assets to cover this (assets include the patents which are probably overvalued.)

The 900 mil will go to wiping off their existing debts to put off bankruptcy and the rest will have to come from selling off their patents this is before they go down the pan next time (not saying they will just noting the 900 mil investors will have very little to fall back on)

Niv

Mistral001 wrote: »

I heard a reporter on the lunchtime news concluding that they did not change with the times. They have actually changed. They have been concentrating on digital cameras and diversifying for years.

I was listening to the radio this morning. They played a clip from an interview with their ex CEO (or similar level) from a few years ago (early 1990's) where he had tried to get them to launch the first digital camera (which thay had designed maybe even prototyped. so quite far on) ... they refused as it conflicted with their film business... oh dear, they didnt change with the times fast enough, I fear this is like doing a U turn with the titanic.

Niv