New Super 8 cartridge - and Ektachrome 100D from Kodak?

[reflex]

I'm really pleased that Wittner has stepped up to the plate with a $50,000 order. I suspect his company will be handsomely rewarded with a significant discount. Still, one has to wonder about the state of the Super 8 film market, because $50,000 is a mere drop in the bucket for Kodak - it wouldn't even cover the cost of a single professional salary for a year.

I hope we hear good news about 100D soon, and I'm looking forward to placing a bulk order with Wittner in return for his efforts.

[wado1942]

Well you have to realize that it costs Kodak virtually nothing to manufacture any stock for super-8. They're already making the stock. They already have the slitters and perf machines. They already have everything they need to go ahead with 100D reversal but they need to make sure it's worth their while to load a roll onto the super-8 slitter and put another entry into the database. Seriously, it wouldn't cost more than a few hundred $$ to set up the shop for any currently available stock to be marketed in super-8. Certainly less than what it cost to set up the worthless 64T because they're making that formulation specifically for super-8.

[Blue Audio Visual]

They already have everything they need to go ahead with 100D reversal but they need to make sure it's worth their while to load a roll onto the super-8 slitter and put another entry into the database. Seriously, it wouldn't cost more than a few hundred $$ to set up the shop for any currently available stock to be marketed in super-8.

I spoke to one of the senior staff at Kodak UK recently about seeing whether they would stock a non-UK inventory item here, and he was wary about doing so as he said that it would cost £100 a year just to keep it on the system. If that is true for all territories and subsidiaries, it would cost many thousands of $$$ worldwide to roll-out 100D in Super 8.

Certainly less than what it cost to set up the worthless 64T because they're making that formulation specifically for super-8.

64T was developed as a stills stock, not specifically formulated for Super 8.

Bart

[wado1942]

Ah, that makes sense considering I've never seen it in the motion picture market. But still, a T-grain film would be a MUST in super-8 color film.

[T-Scan]

All kodak needs to do is run a batch of 100D and see how fast it sells. I'd order a case to start. If 64T flops in the mean time, then oh well...

[Carlos 8mm]

What I don't understand is why they came up with a non T-grain 64T in the first place particularly since I heard it from a Kodak engineer herself that they didn't want to produce a super-8 stock that wasn't going to be available in 16mm and 35mm as well. So they invented a stock that's useless across the board that's only available in super-8. I'd much rather have a T-grain 100T so I could shoot indoors and outdoors rather than 100D which is only good outdoors or 64T that's not good anywhere.

Anyways, new carts would be good. Let's see if they'll be more stable.

I agree.

EKT100 D is a potential rival for Ektachome 64T in sales. E64T is OK in daylight, but still grainy and too slow for indoors. I think that Kodak must to update their tungsten-balanced slide films as Fuji did with Fujichrome T64.

A new T-grain Ektachrome 100T could satisfy the Kodak´s concept af an only one color reversal film for super 8 (and to sastisfy the necessities of filmmakers).

[wado1942]

Exactly! If they had a 100T T-grain reversal film, I'd probably shoot nothing else for super-8.

[T-Scan]

Exactly! If they had a 100T T-grain reversal film, I'd probably shoot nothing else for super-8.

A 160T would be more ideal, 64D with 85B filter. It could be designed even finer grain than 100D. John P was saying the V2 stocks are more advanced than T-grain. But the fact is that Kodak isn't dropping a dime into reversal film R&D. For now it seems that 7285 is where the road stops in MP reversal.

[reflex]

Well you have to realize that it costs Kodak virtually nothing to manufacture any stock for super-8. They're already making the stock. They already have the slitters and perf machines. They already have everything they need to go ahead with 100D reversal but they need to make sure it's worth their while to load a roll onto the super-8 slitter and put another entry into the database.

It will cost them tens of thousands of dollars at the bare minimum (before you disagree, realize that the salary and benefit costs alone for several people working on this product for three months would easily exceed $30,000)

They need to:

1. Test the stock (probably just sending rolls to serious users for feedback and qualitative checks)
2. Design and print packaging (print costs, layout costs, review meetings, etc.)
3. Updates their Super 8 marketing material (product shots, brochures, web site) and communicate with their sales staff (communication seems like nothing, but it will involve a few hours of meetings in the USA, Europe and other markets - that time gets billed against the product)
4. Inform processing labs
5. Provide technical support to end users
6. Pay staff to cut and load the film
7. Pay the carrying costs of warehousing another product until it sells. They manufacture film in large batches and it must be stored alongside existing products. This is reflected on the division's balance sheet as unsold inventory

and so on.

At the end of the day, the question that Kodak management will ask is: "Will we make more money by introducing this new stock, or will it just take sales away from our existing products?"

If they don't see increased sales from their effort, then it doesn't make sense for them to invest time and money. This is no different than any other business, and it is a particularly sensitive issue at Kodak, where the photochemical film business is in rapid decline. Hence, it is critically important that Wittner is willing to make a fairly significant initial purchase to help defray expenses.

[wado1942]

Reflex, your disposition makes sense. I guess I didn't really think they have to make test runs because there's really no difference between that and the existing stocks.

I don't think 160T would be a good idea. Anything over 100T I think would be too grainy even in a reversal stock. Never-the-less, they won't do it. I heard through the grapevine that the film R&D department is no more so we're not going to get any NEW new stocks.

[Patrick]

Overall very good points but in regards to 'the photochemical film business' being in 'rapid decline', this only relates to their still film products. Kodak's motion picture film products (particularly 16mm and 35mm) are thriving. I keep hearing that Kodak are making more money now with their 35mm movie film sales compared to a few years ago. Ive also heard according to another source that Kodak make a stack of money from release prints.

[freddiesykes]

Overall very good points but in regards to 'the photochemical film business' being in 'rapid decline', this only relates to their still film products. Kodak's motion picture film products (particularly 16mm and 35mm) are thriving. I keep hearing that Kodak are making more money now with their 35mm movie film sales compared to a few years ago. Ive also heard according to another source that Kodak make a stack of money from release prints.

Bah, just when I'm getting back into still photography. Looks like I'll stick with Fuji for now..

[reflex]

Overall very good points but in regards to 'the photochemical film business' being in 'rapid decline', this only relates to their still film products. Kodak's motion picture film products (particularly 16mm and 35mm) are thriving. I keep hearing that Kodak are making more money now with their 35mm movie film sales compared to a few years ago.

Kodak's overall film sales were down by 8% in the last quarter compared to the same period a year ago. That was less than expected because Entertainment Imaging saw "stronger than expected performance" because of the group's "success in getting cost down faster than revenues decline." (these comments made by Antonio Perez during their latest quarterly earnings call).

[Blue Audio Visual]

It's interesting to read Antonio Perez's (Kodak's CEO) and Frank S. Sklarsky's (Kodak's Chief Financial Officer) comments in full as some points raised are pertinent to this thread:

Perez -"Traditional revenues were better than planned, declining 13% year over year, which is lower than recent historical trends and is lower than expected. This was led by a stronger-than-expected performance in our entertainment imaging films, which grew high single digits year over year.

The film products group’s success in getting costs down faster than revenues decline proves that it will continue to be a very valuable business for Kodak moving forward."

"We had....strong earnings from FPG as they continue to maintain strong gross profits on declining sales.

Sklarsky - "We continue to see strong operating margins from the film products group, as a result of restructuring savings and growth in entertainment imaging color print films. As a result, FPG posted earnings from operations of $74 million, or 16% of revenue for the first quarter, versus $51 million or 10% in the year-ago quarter, despite overall revenue declines of 8%."

If you want to read the complete text of their dispositions to members of the board and financial consultants, click on this link.

The emphasis is on the fact that Entertainment Imaging have been successful not because they have increased gross sales (they have probably been decreasing overall), but because they have lowered costs, leading to a net revenue increase.

The seemingly obvious logical conclusion is that they have probably achieved this in part by cutting down on the availability of similar inventory items.

Sklarsky -"Inventories were, however, down by over $275 million as compared to the end of last year’s first quarter. This demonstrates our continued commitment around improving supply chain efficiency and a leaner, go-to-market model." Note that he is not talking exclusively about motion picture products in this instance.

I know that this is the case for Kodak UK, who will not supply 100D in 100ft 16mm loads, only supplying 7285 in 400ft to the UK market. When I queried this with the sales planner, he told me that the decision was based on a purely financial analysis. Pretty much verbatim he said to me "The thing is, if we choose to supply it in 100ft lengths, will we make less money than if we offer it only as 400ft? We've got to consider our financial position first and foremost."

People may not like this sort of baldly financial position being taken to justify marketing decisions, but the facts are that if Entertainment Imaging had experienced anything significantly lower than the "high single digit" growth which Perez mentions, the whole division would probably have already been sent to the metaphorical knacker's yard. So for the conceivable near to mid-term future, cost-cutting has to be the paramount article of faith for those who make the decisions at Entertainment Imaging offices worldwide.

As to 100D being introduced in Super 8 cartridge form, it seems highly unlikely to me. I sell thousands of carts of Super 8 film a year to the general public and professional users here in the UK, and it is my impression that most users out there don't really care what film they're using. They just want some (colour) Cine film which is "like it used to look in the 70s". The opinions of people who post on this forum are those of niche obsessives (I'm not trying to be rude, just making the point - I probably fit into this category myself!) and are not representative of the vast majority of actual users.

The sum of $50,000 mentioned strikes me as a deliberately high figure that has been plucked out of thin air by someone at Kodak in order to discourage Wittner from even considering it. I'm sure we've all had people asking us to do jobs that we don't want to do, you quote really high, and then they say "yes please!". It wouldn't surprise if Kodak move the goalposts and say to Wittner "sorry, we meant $100,000 minimum" - I'm sure that they don't really want to do it.

Like Juergen said at the beginning of the thread, it's a fairytale, and fairytales don't come true (very often!).

Bart

[Muckymuck]

If twenty years ago someone said that Kodak would be making five types of Super 8 film in 2007, everyone would have thought that was a fairytale too...