>>>The goodwill and public
image that Kodak could generate with a "specialty spinoff" producing
high quality B&W products would be tremendous. And folks, please
don't think that it would have to make a profit - no "bottom line"
stuff please; they could run it at a loss. Many large corporations
give huge sums of money away on a regular basis in order to shore up
their public image.>>>
Do not confuse corporate charitable contributions with running a division at a loss to pacify a few die-hard paper users. If I am a stockholder, I want corporate profits.
You mention their "public image" but how do you know the public wants paper? I seriously doubt most people actually want B/W paper and care one bit the material has been discontinued.
On the other hand, I love Harley-Davidson and I would jump for joy if they reintroduced a few bikes I dearly love. Like the Flat-Heads, for example. I would not care if the reintroduction cost the company some profits and stockholders complained. I would love Ford even more if they reintroduced the Model "A" or "B."
Part of the problem is our love of Kodak papers and we do not like that, they are gone. I wish Kodak would reintroduce their 126 reflex Instamatics and the lenses; not to mention, the wide variety of films in 126. I want the Retina IIIC to reappear and the Cirkit cameras.
Not every stock holder cares one bit about paper and how Kodak once was; they want profits and higher stock prices. I can easily provide a list of Kodak products once widely available and then removed from the Kodak product line. Actually, we could have this same discussion at almost any point in Kodak's history. We could have the same discussion about most corporations, for that matter.
All we can do is buy paper from the remaining manufacturers and keep silver alive. If we do not buy, the papers will disappear.
Bob
… Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
Received on Thu Jul 14 14:38:41 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 08/25/05-05:31:51 PM Z CST