portable kodachrome machine

[matt5791]

Why else would they only process Pro-8mm films for free, why not Kodak?

I didn't see that bit - which explains a lot.

[Alex]

Why else would they only process Pro-8mm films for free, why not Kodak?

I didn't see that bit - which explains a lot.

Does it really matter, it's still a loss leader. But it's an intelligent loss leader because it is directly linked to a further sale involving the same product.

Some enterprises have loss leaders and can actually lose money because frugal customers only buy that one product and then leave.

In this instance the free processing is linked to a transfer service. By Super-8's very design the actual processing of the film is really not built to make huge profits. Transfer services can generate a much larger level of income revenue than processing can.

I'm not even advocating free processing, my original point was even a small loss per cart can be rendered irrelevant if the customer wants transfer services as well.

If a company charges 20 dollars a cart to break even, but only charges 10 dollars a cart if the customer does a video transfer with them, they can more than make up their "loss leader".

Does Kodachrome transfer well to video, yes, if you use a facility that hasn't skimped on all the processing boards needed to properly run a rank transfer facility.

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

Why else would they only process Pro-8mm films for free, why not Kodak?

I didn't see that bit - which explains a lot.

Does it really matter, it's still a loss leader.

It actually does matter. It is not just a loss leader, it is a targeted action against Pro8mm in an attempt to get their clients.

[Alex]

It's still a loss leader.

However, I'm not disagreeing that they want access to some of Pro-8mm clients as well. If they actually take Pro-8mm down, they won't be able to process the films that only Pro-8mm slits.

More likely, they simply want access to negative stocks that only Pro-8mm slits, and since Pro-8mm collects developing money up front, Spectra is also helping Pro-8mm increase profits!

It's really a very intelligent marketing strategy however as it introduces customers to Spectra. It would be really neat if either 100 Vision or 50 ASA negative was introduced by Kodak.

[matt5791]

I see where you are coming from - but your plan involves giving away a service for free.

It is just that, in my opinion, it would be very risky, and bad practice, to make that kind of capital expenditure without knowing it will be profitable alone - ie it would have to show it could break even at month 24, without the need for a related, but not essential, service to attain profitability. A service that is actually quite competitive too.

I would have said that if a Koadchrome processing service, in particular, could not be profitable alone, operating in a virtually competition free marketplace, except one other lab, this says a lot about the potential market for Kodachrome Super8.

Matt

[Alex]

I see where you are coming from - but your plan involves giving away a service for free. Matt

Not exactly for free. My point was volume processing should not be the goal. I'd rather process a hundred carts a day at a 10% loss as long my processing service kept my film transfer to video service busy than process 1000 carts a day at a 10% profit.

It is just that, in my opinion, it would be very risky, and bad practice, to make that kind of capital expenditure without knowing it will be profitable alone - ie it would have to show it could break even at month 24, without the need for a related, but not essential, service to attain profitability. A service that is actually quite competitive too.Matt

That is the position that Kodak was in, either "reinforce" the super-8 Kodachrome plant with a film transfer to video service, a film production studio and possibly a camera repair service, or simply sell it for good cash because the value of the land had increased.

Kodak chose the "safer" approach and sold. It would have been a nice gesture to take some of the profit from the land sale and use it as a seed money incentive to help out a small businesses keep the kodachrome processing going at some other location, but....

I would have said that if a Kodachrome processing service, in particular, could not be profitable alone, operating in a virtually competition free marketplace, except one other lab, this says a lot about the potential market for Kodachrome Super8.

Matt

That sounds logical, but on the other hand Kodachrome's viability was being underutilized. I am pretty confident that if just one television show, just one, had taken advantage of Kodachrome's look, Kodak could have built around that.

An interior studio on the site of the processing location in Switzerland could have been pre-lit for Kodachrome 40, exteriors would have shown off Kodachrome's wild color pallette effectively. Same day processing would have made it a wildly unique adventure.

Reinvesting in the Switzerland location was a possibility once much of the space at the lab was no longer being used, yet ironically this underutilization of the space is what probably helped Kodak make the decision to sell the land.

[audadvnc]

Loss leaders - huh!

Reminds me of my days at Control Data Corporation. We'd just brought out a hot new disk drive and wanted to get it into the market. As the production line manager said,

"We lose a hundred bucks on each unit, but we make up for it in volume."

And where is CDC now?

[Alex]

The difference is your company needed to sell something that directly tied into the loss leader product, that you did profit from.

For instance, selling a new car and bonusing the customer a really cool upgrade package of accessories, such as a CD player, etc.

I was sold a DVD 5 disc duplicator at cost by my vendor because I buy my blank DVD's from them. Selling a unit at cost is in essence a loss because of the paperwork that is generated.

Nobody really makes money from creating a negative for a client. It's the work that is done downstream that creates the profit.

[DrkAngl]

Concerning Spectra processing Pro8mm film for free:

My feeling is that Spectra only wants to offer an option to a product that Pro8mm attempts to use to corner the market. Nothing more. They are simply willing to absorb the cost for the benefit of the filmmaker. I have spoken to them and truly feel their intentions are good.

No other lab has ever been willing to offer anything like this to my knowledge. I myself have waited for years for labs like Yale to cut me a break if I bring my Pro8mm film to them. Only Spectra has come through for me.

They do not offer free processing for Kodak film because the option is already there (and, probably because it would break them if they did). You can already process and telecine any place you choose. In the case of Pro8 stock, they attach a hitch to every roll they sell: you MUST pay for their processing and bring it back to them. When you do, they try to corner you for overpriced prep and low-grade telecine. Spectra breaks that monopoly and gives me a much needed choice.

No, I believe Spectra is doing us a favor here.

[reflex]

i am thinking of buying this,since kodak will be scrapping it soon...
any thoughts anyone?????

Yes.

1. Dwayne's photo intends to continue processing Super 8 Kodachrome for as long as Kodak keeps making it in 16mm and 35mm. Kinda hard to compete with a company that offers $4.88/roll processing. After that, things will get really quiet in Kodacolour land. It would be financial suicide to buy a machine just in time to watch the film stock disappear.

2. In the same vein... Ektachrome 64T would eat your lunch. If K-40 is no longer available, the Kodachrome shooters will switch to E-6 film.

3. If you can get past the almost complete lack of film and customers, I suspect the biggest challenge would be mixing the various solutions and ensuring that things are processed within tolerance. Not easily done.

[Alex]

Kodachrome can survive, but the viability of Kodachrome should be built around fast processing time, not up to a month go get the processed film back!

We need 5-10 Alan types strategically positioned around the world, who won't need to do a ton of kodachrome processing IF they also offer video transfers as well.

Maybe it will take daring pricing concepts to make kodachrome work in the future. $20 bucks a cartridge for processing, OR 4 Carts and high quality transfer to video, all for $100 bucks.

Or, when you prepay for your video transfer, processing charges are waived.
Of course, where this idea falls apart is if the footage comes out black! 8O

Spectra is actually helping Pro-8mm increase their profit margin since Pro-8mm already collected the processing money whether they developed the film or not. So how can this put Pro-8mm out of business? Answer, it can't, but it can cut into their transfer to video business, which proves that labs actually thrive from their transfer to video business rather than their processing services.

[MovieStuff]

I think the flaw in this plan is linking telecine to processing with an assumption that everyone will want telecine. The big appeal of Kodachrome is that it is a cheap way to get a positive projectable image. Most people shooting S8 don't have the budget to telecine professionally, is my guess. I could be wrong about that, of course, but forcing telecine into the equation certainly changes the economy of S8. Proceeding without some sort of pre-knowledge about the telecine customer base would be very risky, in my opinion, because if the majority of your customers end up not wanting telecine, then you are losing money on every roll of film you process with no way to get it back. If that continues too long, then you have to raise your processing prices suddenly just to survive. Then you'd be subject to claims of greedy monopoly by your constituency that got used to the lower prices. Gee, this all sounds very familiar, doesn't it?

Roger
http://www.moviestuff.tv

[audadvnc]

Of course if Kodak is going to be scrapping this machine anyway you may only have to pay for shipping, or bring the truck and haul it away. But it probably won't come with a warranty, and finding spare parts? You won't need a hobby if you take this on.

[Alex]

Roger, I'm thinking a hybrid approach could work.

Just enough professional users to make the video transfer end prosperous would balance out the processing issues. How many professional users I wouldn't know.

But it's pretty darn certain 99% of the potential professional users market who can't afford long turn around times gave up on Kodachrome for that very reason.

There are very clever uses for Kodachrome 40 that Kodak marketing must not have felt were in their best interests to pursue. It doesn't mean the stock is not viable in some instances, just that if a company pushes negative stocks to all of it's customers than the reversal stocks will get ignored, especially ones with longer turnaround times.

---------------------------------------------

If Kodak wanted to find niche markets for 16mm Kodachrome 40 such markets could include "That 70's show", which should have had at least one episode a year shot on 16mm Kodachrome 40. Any of the Triple Crown Horse Races could have been shot on Kodachrome 40. I think there are clever music video and television commercial applications for 16mm and Super-8 Kodachrome 40 as well. Any studio shot television show can simply be lit flat and shot on 16mm kodachrome film for a look that will probably be noticed by the audience as being different from what they normally see. I'm not saying every show, but there are several shows on television that could easily do on show a year on 16mm Kodachrome 40 simply to give their audiences a different but visually interesting look.

--------------------------------------------------------

As for moving the processing location, apparently the plumbing aspect is "built-in" to the location and if key parts are destroyed in the move then the cost to remake those components could be prohibitive.

I wonder if Refrema is up to the task of making a Super-8 Kodachrome 40 processor at a lower cost than what Kodak thinks it would cost to make one.

[downix]

Anyone *could* make a K14 machine if they wanted to. Kodak supplies documents on the process and it's not exactly rocket science. The thing is, noone has the time nor money to do the work, it's easier to wonder why someone else doesn't do it.