Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/09/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]That's true. Look at it this way--the Pennsylvania RR was once one of the mightiest companies in the US. Around WWI they could have purchased General Motors, but instead thought that railroads would remain more profitable. DuPont made the investment instead, and to this day continues as a major shareholder. Like Kodak, the Pennsy paid dividends year after year--it was the quintessential "widows and orphans" stock--until they went hooves-up in the late 1960s. In the early 1920s the Victor Talking Machine Company, which was the most successful phonograph manufacturer in the country, could easily have purchased any number of radio manufacturers. They ran some tests in house on experimental sets, but concluded that radio was a fad. By 1924 the company nearly went bankrupt, a result of their stubbornness. The public wanted radios, not phonographs, for home entertainment. Radio provided free music every night, while new songs for the phonograph required the purchase of new records. The introduction of an improved new technology--electrical recording--saved the company for a while, but the future was clear: RCA purchased Victor in 1929 mainly for its factories--RCA wanted to produce radio sets in the Victor plants. The record business was merely an afterthought. In 1939 CBS was offered for sale to Curtis Publishing, which owned The Saturday Evening Post, then one of the most successful magazines in the county (if not THE most successful). Curtis turned them down, noting that they were in the magazine business, not broadcasting. What is surprising is when a company, such as Microsoft, can adapt to very rapid changes in a marketplace and still come out ahead. It's something that few organizations can do effectively. Very few companies can survive a major shift in technology. For more than a century Kodak has been a film company. They have also produced other products--some really wonderful--that complement its main source of revenue. I recently had the pleasure of using a Cine-Special II outfit, one of the most beautiful 16mm cameras ever made. The lenses, the interchangeable magazines, everything about it is just splendid and overdone to a fare-thee-well. I've also used the later 1950s Cine-Kodak K-100, which has TWO footage counters: one for exposed footage, and one for the remaining footage that can be driven from wind on the spring motor! To get this back on topic, I would strongly recommend any impecunious Leicaphile to consider a german-made Kodak Retina IIIc/C camera, which (if you can live with just a 50mm lens) produces some really incredible images with a camera that can truly fit inside an overcoat pocket. I have some 20x30 Retina enlargements that outshine anything I've ever shot with a Leica. These days the Retina IIIc/C cameras are selling for under two hundred bucks in really nice shape. Try finding a decent 50mm Summicron for that money! What I won't miss is Kodak's remarkable arrogance. I've been through several rounds with them as they fowled up Kodachrome processing, and when they gave my local camera club the cold shoulder. In the latter case, Big Green more than accommodated our needs, and I was able to shoot 4x5 Velvia as a trial. I've been a loyal Fuji customer ever since. Now, if only Fuji would produce some K-14 films..... Jim Shulman Bryn Mawr, PA - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Afterswift@aol.com Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 9:31 PM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: Re: [Leica] Kodak Focus now ROFLOL In a message dated 9/25/03 4:46:30 PM, dorysrus@mindspring.com writes: << After the 96 Olympics when I worked with Kodak and saw first hand how the very top most management was clueless, impotent to act, and utterly without the ability to change course came to the conclusion that this company was the walking dead. >> - -------------------------- Does anyone remember when Kodak clipped Polaroid patents and had to pay a huge penalty to Polaroid? The money didn't help Polaroid because they also messed up on keeping up with digital technology, which replaced the Land process. It's odd, because these larger old inertial tech companies initially had the capital to gamble on new technology -- they had nothing to lose by investing. But short term profits meant more than astute and imaginative and innovative management. br - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html