Re: Kodak B&W Paper Discontinued? Good Ridence.

From: John ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 06/17/05-05:47:29 AM Z
Message-id: <>

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 13:13:30 -0500, you wrote:

> I don't intend to be an apologist for Kodak, but perhaps you'd want to
> make some second thoughts.
> The responsibility of a corporation is to return the highest profit
> possible to its shareholders. All the other stuff is to support that
> profit machine. So, if n dollars invested in producing y product do not
> return as much profit as n dollars invested in x product, the
> corporation must consider producing x instead of y. Now a part of that
> consideration is how much y product adds to the overall equation, say
> producing y to support sales of z, which does return huge profits.

        Reminds me of Milton Friedman. The gent that was an advisor to Reagan and
is quoted as saying :

""Few trends could so thoroughly undermine the very foundations of our free
society as the acceptance by corporate officials of a social responsibility
other than to make as much money for their stockholders as possible.""

        Yep. Greed for the sake of greed. And this is what is prooving to be the
ruin of our nation. I personally believe that a depression is very likely
in about 20 years by which time the baby-boomers will have emptied the
coffers of the stock markets and other investment channels and taken as
much with them as they can. Yep, if we're lucky by 2025 the economy should
be right back where it was in 1935.
> After all, what would you think of a company that continued to make
> entry point buggy whips in 1930?

        And what would you think if they also made effecient autos, trains, planes
or perhaps motorcycles ? Brand recognition is worth the marketing of lower
margin items. Look at some of the top PC OEMS who sell to consumers even
though that channel isn't profitable for them.

        BTW, it seems that the boomers who can no longer ride horses have
rejuvenated the buggy. - "Buggy whips are not entirely gone. A resurgence of
interest in carriage driving among aging baby-boomers now too old to ride
their horses has allowed a few die-hard buggy whip manufacturers to stay in

> Digital is a fact of life, and even
> Kodak cannot dispute this fact.

        Dispute it ? I don't understand, when did Kodak ever dispute the future of
digital imaging ? I mean they were heavily investing profits from film and
paper sales into digital as early as the '80's. By 1990 they had PhotoCD's
and by 1995 they had digital cameras available for the well-heeled

> Of course, it would be nice if they were
> to sell these products to another manufacturer; but I'd suspect they've
> tried and come up empty.

        Knowing Kodak, they'd ask far too much for the package to make it

PS. This is a repost. Are you aware that your newsreader has your email as
the "reply to" ??

John -
Received on Fri Jun 17 05:47:40 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 07/07/05-11:30:54 AM Z CST