3 ms·
That's a surprising take-away for Kodak. As far as I understand, they died mostly because their core competency (film) became obsolete in a huge fragment of th
by throwaway729 10y ago
That's a surprising take-away for Kodak.
As far as I understand, they died mostly because their core competency (film) became obsolete in a huge fragment of the market.
I'm not saying that they could have successfully pivoted to digital, of course. But inability to pick up a new competency doesn't mean that the business won't die anyways... in which case, might as well try.
IBM under-went a similar "try or die" evolution away from various computing technologies (punch card machines, then some number of generations of main frames) over the last century, with more success than Kodak.
AT&T seems to be doing pretty well.
- Tostino 10y agoI think the issue with Kodak was not realizing that the market they were in was "photography" instead of "film".
- ctdonath 10y agoThis - and the fact that button-pushers were the actual customers. I realized the end was nigh when told Kodak wouldn't dive into the digital market because retailers didn't want that move disrupting their film & processing sales. (If Kodak had pivoted fast to digital, retailers threatened to retaliate by dropping Kodak film products entirely, killing the main revenue source).