\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 http://www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/p...1/-1/SPECIALS01 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 http://www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/p...1/-1/SPECIALS01 386513[/snapback] >>>>>“This really is a statement about globalization and equalization,” said Donna Fonda, of Webster who works in the company’s information systems department. “It’s going to happen to all businesses.” But, she said she believes the local economy is improving enough that “if people are willing to work hard, and for a different company, and for a lower salary, there will be things available.”<<<<< Sounds like a plan. Thanks to both parties for exporting our jobs, and importing illegal aliens to take many of the jobs that remain. Sad state of affairs. My sympathy goes out to the displaced workers and their families. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkady Renko Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 It's all about pumping up the stock price and freaking out over momentary dips in revenue. They have been cutting R&D jobs so this is not just about the transition away from regular film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin in Va Beach Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 Screw the employees, the important question is: Will this affect the CEO's multi-million dollar salary and incentive package? Won't anyone think of the poor CEO's?!?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 But, she said she believes the local economy is improving enough that “if people are willing to work hard, and for a different company, and for a lower salary, there will be things available.”<<<<< 386532[/snapback] I'm sure that the local economy will improve enough to lower the tax rate, which is as big a reason for globalization as anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 I'm sure that the local economy will improve enough to lower the tax rate, which is as big a reason for globalization as anything. 386551[/snapback] Time out....Are you TRULY sure that the tax rates will be lowered? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jad1 Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 I'm sure that the local economy will improve enough to lower the tax rate, which is as big a reason for globalization as anything. 386551[/snapback] Yeah, that and out-of-control health care costs. Of course taxation and healthcare costs certainly haven't hurt executive salaries or dampened the stock market over the last 15 years. Too bad nobody's compensated with stock options, right? They'd make out like bandits. Wait a minute.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todd Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 It's all about pumping up the stock price and freaking out over momentary dips in revenue. They have been cutting R&D jobs so this is not just about the transition away from regular film. 386535[/snapback] No, it's not only about that. This isn't a momentary dip in revenue. This is a slow decline that is now an unstoppable avalanche. Kodak will continue to decline because there are too many people there who have no idea about innovation and what it takes to save a sinking ship. This is about about Kodak - 15 years ago - not having the ability to start a wholesale investment in digital. It's Kodak - only 8 years ago - not having the ability to make a comittment to the switch to digital. When I worked there - even as recently as 3 years ago - there was still talk of "expanding the benefits of film." I saw it with my own eyes. It was amazingly retarded. Finally, it's about Kodak still not facing the music about the switch to digital. Kodak is still a follower in the digital world. They aren't innovating, and they are still playing catch- up. I remember my last year there - 2003 - when all of the camera phones were coming out. People asked the then CEO Dan Carp about why Kodak wasn't ahead of the curve in that technology and Carp said "Well, we're not sure that this camera-phone technology is here to stay, so we're approaching it cautiously and we'll see how it shakes out." Serously. That's what he said. It was then that I knew Kodak would never really change. There is a serious retardation in innovation at that company. They will never innovate. Ever. You can have the best R&D department in the world, but if the company doesn't point them in the right direction it doesn't matter. And at Kodak, the management direction is so piss poor it's too late. This has nothing to do about outsourcing to India, it has to do with poor management decisions. Paying too much for unskilled labor and employee sloth played a part, but not as much as you'd think. Can't say I'm not sad to see this happen to Kodak. I can say I'm glad I'm not there to see it and be a part of it myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 No, it's not only about that. This isn't a momentary dip in revenue. This is a slow decline that is now an unstoppable avalanche. Kodak will continue to decline because there are too many people there who have no idea about innovation and what it takes to save a sinking ship. This is about about Kodak - 15 years ago - not having the ability to start a wholesale investment in digital. It's Kodak - only 8 years ago - not having the ability to make a comittment to the switch to digital. When I worked there - even as recently as 3 years ago - there was still talk of "expanding the benefits of film." I saw it with my own eyes. It was amazingly retarded. Finally, it's about Kodak still not facing the music about the switch to digital. Kodak is still a follower in the digital world. They aren't innovating, and they are still playing catch- up. I remember my last year there - 2003 - when all of the camera phones were coming out. People asked the then CEO Dan Carp about why Kodak wasn't ahead of the curve in that technology and Carp said "Well, we're not sure that this camera-phone technology is here to stay, so we're approaching it cautiously and we'll see how it shakes out." Serously. That's what he said. It was then that I knew Kodak would never really change. There is a serious retardation in innovation at that company. They will never innovate. Ever. You can have the best R&D department in the world, but if the company doesn't point them in the right direction it doesn't matter. And at Kodak, the management direction is so piss poor it's too late. This has nothing to do about outsourcing to India, it has to do with poor management decisions. Paying too much for unskilled labor and employee sloth played a part, but not as much as you'd think. Can't say I'm not sad to see this happen to Kodak. I can say I'm glad I'm not there to see it and be a part of it myself. 386559[/snapback] Great post todd. What a friggin shame for the workers and their families. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribo Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 Big time layoffs just push more Western New Yorkers out of the state. That of course means less money will be coming into the local and state governements. That of course means more tax hikes and more service cuts. That of course means more companies will falter. That of course means more layoffs will be needed. Yes, what a wonderful cycle WNY is in. Hey, everyone is hiring in Virginia! Oh nevermind, we already have too many people down here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 Fuji film, Asian digital cameras, Toyotas...for whom the bells toll, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todd Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 Fuji film, Asian digital cameras, Toyotas...for whom the bells toll, eh? 386569[/snapback] Not at all. This has nothing to do with America vs. Japan. Fuji is horrible in the digital world. They haven't adapted at all, and they are doing quite poorly as well. This is about capitalism. Whoever makes the better product for the best price wins. Toyota makes better cars than GM. They win. Canon makes better digital cameras than Kodak. They win. It's really quite simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 Not at all. This has nothing to do with America vs. Japan. Fuji is horrible in the digital world. They haven't adapted at all, and they are doing quite poorly as well. This is about capitalism. Whoever makes the better product for the best price wins. Toyota makes better cars than GM. They win. Canon makes better digital cameras than Kodak. They win. It's really quite simple. 386589[/snapback] Survival of the fittest? Last man standing etc.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todd Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 Survival of the fittest? Last man standing etc.? 386591[/snapback] Generally, that's how capitalism works. Success of the best product at the best price point. That's how I buy things. To do otherwise would be un-American. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 Generally, that's how capitalism works. Success of the best product at the best price point. That's how I buy things. To do otherwise would be un-American. 386594[/snapback] Capitalism - please don't paint me as a pinko - has a dark side. Other folks paying for health benefits for Grandma Todd is poor capitalism. Such seems mighty un-American according to your lights.. And please stop with the patronizing. It's unbecoming of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todd Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 Capitalism - please don't paint me as a pinko - has a dark side. Other folks paying for health benefits for Grandma Todd is poor capitalism. That sounds mighty un-American according to your lights.. And please stop with the patronizing. It's unbecoming of you. 386600[/snapback] Nice try. Don't try to speak for me, or what I feel is right or wrong. I'm speaking about products, and how people choose to buy them. So get to the point, if you have one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 Capitalism - please don't paint me as a pinko - has a dark side. Other folks paying for health benefits for Grandma Todd is poor capitalism. That sounds mighty un-American according to your lights.. 386600[/snapback] That's no capitalism. Nor is government redistribution of wealth. The dark side to free markets is how wealth is distributed and the resulting power and influence given the elite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reuben Gant Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 Not at all. This has nothing to do with America vs. Japan. Fuji is horrible in the digital world. They haven't adapted at all, and they are doing quite poorly as well. This is about capitalism. Whoever makes the better product for the best price wins. Toyota makes better cars than GM. They win. Canon makes better digital cameras than Kodak. They win. It's really quite simple. 386589[/snapback] That is a consumer choice. Capitalism is not about making the best product. It is about making the most money. The organizing principle of capitalism is to maximize profits. Toyota making better cars than GM makes no difference, price makes no difference. Whatever maximizes profits makes the difference. Lay people off to if it maximizes profits. It is ultimately indifferent to the quality of products. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawgg Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 I think Kodak has been doing reasonably well in the digital camera space. Their camera sales have been solid -- solid enough to maintain a sustainable business out of it. Their EasyShare technology was a relatively big hit with novice users and the quality is generally good. Granted they aren't as good as Sony, the quality is good. Where the problem lies is that they grossly underestimated the speed at which film would decline. Whereas they expected film to be out of the picture maybe 5 years from now... film is gone and it is gone now. That is the problem. Nice try. Don't try to speak for me, or what I feel is right or wrong. I'm speaking about products, and how people choose to buy them. So get to the point, if you have one. 386603[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todd Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 You don't actually think that way, do you? The better product doesn't make a difference? That's just retarded. However, there are many things that go into a product, including marketing. Branding, etc. Some lines of Nike products are a great example of this. Is a shirt that has a nike swoosh on it better than an identical shirt that doesnt? No. It isn't. However, Nike is a marketing powerhouse, and branding is an important part of a product. So because of the brand, the Nike shirt is actually percieved as better to the consumer. Therefore, it is the better product. If that's what you are trying to say, I agree. If not, well, I might have a giggle. That is a consumer choice. Capitalism is not about making the best product. It is about making the most money. The organizing principle of capitalism is to maximize profits. Toyota making better cars than GM makes no difference, price makes no difference. Whatever maximizes profits makes the difference. Lay people off to if it maximizes profits. It is ultimately indifferent to the quality of products. 386611[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts