Re: OT, was (Re: Kodak B&W Paper Discontinued? Good Ridence.)

  I agree-gotta stop and be decent!
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: "Robert Newcomb" <newcombr@uga.edu>
  To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
  Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 5:24 AM
  Subject: Re: OT, was (Re: Kodak B&W Paper Discontinued? Good Ridence.)

> Lets just wave the flag...
> .more people making less money, having a hard time paying the utility
> bills, more expensive health care available to fewer people, wages not
> even keeping up with inflation, and America hated around the world.
> Capitalism makes the rich people richer and their is less chance for
> people to move up the latter then almost any time in US history. To
> try and support a failing capitalist society this government ignores
> the fact of global warming and the effects of our oil based capitalist
> economy on the environment.
> I didn't start this topic but the flag waving makes me want to loose
> my breakfast.
> Robert Newcomb
>
> On Jul 12, 2005, at 10:45 PM, Dave Rose wrote:
>
> > Dear Susan,
> >
> > This kind of political commentary is off topic but not unexpected for
> > this
> > list. I've endured so much far left liberal nonsense on
> > alt-photo-process.
> > What about alternative photography attracts such wacky thinking
> > individuals?
> > I must respond.
> >
> > What evidence do you offer to support your statement that "Capitalism
> > does
> > not work for poeple nor for the environment!" ???
> >
> > Here in the United States, stronghold of capitalism, we have some of
> > the
> > strictest laws protecting the environment. Not perfect and there's
> > always
> > room for improvement, but it's a damn sight better than most
> > countries. I'd
> > argue that capitalism most definitely "works" for the people. We're
> > blessed
> > with a very high standard of living, great wealth, a productive and
> > robust
> > economy and possibly the best personal rights and freedoms available
> > anywhere.
> >
> > If capitalism doesn't work (as you assert), then lets look at Cuba,
> > North
> > Korea, the former Soviet Union, etc..... How many people are starving
> > in
> > North Korea? Are you aware of the environmental disasters in the
> > former
> > Soviet Union? I'll take capitalism anyday.
> >
> > What kind of work do you do Susan? I've been involved in sales for
> > the past
> > 16 years. My career has been financially rewarding, but more
> > importantly,
> > I've helped many small business owners grow their businesses. That's
> > led to
> > more people being hired, more people living the American dream,
> > providing a
> > good life for themselves and their families. Capitalism is great!
> > It's not
> > perfect, but what in this life is? It beats the hell out of starving
> > in
> > North Korea or living under the thumb of a tyrant in Cuba.
> >
> > As for Kodak discontinuing B&W paper, it's a wise and prudent business
> > decision. Kodak needs to either remain profitable, or face financial
> > ruin.
> > Not to worry, if there's sufficient demand, a small manufacturer will
> > step
> > in and capture the market that Kodak has abandoned.
> >
> > There is no "slide of big business", the very nature of capitalism
> > ensures
> > that that won't happen. IMO, you're indulging in a fantasy.
> >
> > Dave Rose
> > Powell, Wyoming
> >
> >> Hi John,
> >> Late noteas I just got back from holiday- I agree with you but;
> >> unlike
> > you
> >> I have been upset with Kodak for a long time and refuse all their
> >> products
> >> except AZO paper which is made here in Canada.
> >> I lost all fith in those people when they yanked the POP off the
> >> shelf-
> >> although the POP is much better now!
> >> Hope we can halt the slide of big business but know it is
> >> impossible.
> >> Capitalism does not work for poeple nor for the environment!
> >> Always,
> >> Susan
> >> www.susanhuber.com
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "John Cremati" <johnjohnc@core.com>
> >> To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
> >> Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 9:03 AM
> >> Subject: Kodak B&W Paper Discontinued? Good Ridence.
> >>
> >>
> >>> These companies make the huge mistake that because a item is
> > not
> >>> selling a billion dollars worth of every product they make a year
> >> they
> >>> should get rid of it seeking only the most profitable
> >> items.............They
> >>> do not realize that if they were still selling a lot of the
chemicals
> >> and
> >>> other discontinued items that I would not only be buying paper from
> >> them
> >>> but chemicals as well and other supplies as well..........
> >>> Then they move much of their manufacturing to third world
> >> countries
> >>> and now they expect me to buy my film from them when they cut off my
> >>> paper..... To top it off they have made it extremely difficult
for
> >>> dealers to buy their product placing huge yearly minimal quotas on
> >>> them....... The small dealer can not meet these quotas........Again,
> >> they
> >>> are only seeking huge profits............
> >>> When I see this sort of mentality, all though I have rooted
for
> >> them
> >>> in the past as I am a die hard Kodak Fan, I say good riddance.....
> >>> Hopefully a company will emerge that has a service attitude toward
> > their
> >>> customers.... Some things you sell at a break even point, or even a
> > loss
> >> to
> >>> keep your customer base strong on other items you manufacture not
> >>> just
> >>> discontinue them............. Also Maybe selling one box of 50
> > sheets
> >> 8x10
> >>> Ectachrome for over "$400"???? has something to do with it as well
> >>> ......You can not convince me that they can not do small production
> > runs
> >> and
> >>> streamline thier marketing toward the small dealer and end user it
> >> increase
> >>> thier market share ..........
> >>> They have been living on easy street for to long.... The
> > way
> >> I
> >>> see it , their heads are in their asses.....
> >>> They still do not realize that there will always be the die hard
> >>> Photographers in the world that will continue to buy these products
> > no
> >>> matter what and they need to gear their operation toward them before
> >> they
> >>> completely loose them as well..................... Do they really
> > care??
> >>> Probably not....
> >
> >
>

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

----