3 ms·

Alternatively it also means Intel's management isn't inspired enough to make use of human and physical assets. As an investor, I'd take it as sign that they thi

Alternatively it also means Intel's management isn't inspired enough to make use of human and physical assets. As an investor, I'd take it as sign that they think they're done, packing up assets and becoming a lower sized structure. Maybe buying some goodwill in the markets for future opportunities. Buy let's face it: TSMC has won that winner-takes-all market.

RC_ITR 3y ago
Eh, the opposite is usually true. Kodak should have laid off every single person working in film development and pivoted hard to digital sensors, but for a variety of reasons, decided that they were done in that market, so they kept paying people to make better disposables. Not saying they would get there, but Sony makes c.$2bn a year in profit there, so realistically Kodak could still be a multi-tens of billions of dollars company if they had done that.
- User23 3y ago
  Kodak had already become an accounting control fraud by that time. It's just that the absolutely insane profit margins on film masked the utterly corrupt senior leadership. It wasn't digital that killed them, it was corruption.
  - RC_ITR 3y ago
    No. Regardless of corruption, the market for film tanked.
    - User23 3y ago
      Did you know that they were the technology leader in digital? A Kodak engineer invented the digital camera[1]. They were first to market with a self-contained digital camera. Kodak had the best inventors in the business and numerous foundational patents on digital photography. You sound like someone repeating a just so story you heard nth hand for some large n. My information comes directly from the participants. It was absolutely managerial corruption and not a lack of technical ability that tanked them. And that's where the real lesson is to be learned. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Sasson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Sasson
      - RC_ITR 3y ago
        Would you believe that they killed the digital camera because they saw themselves as a film business, not a camera business? The cameras were a loss leader to sell the film. Seriously, here's the 1999 10-k self description (cameras is second to last only ahead of projectors!): Kodak manufactures and markets various components of consumer imaging systems. For traditional consumer amateur photography, Kodak supplies films, photographic papers, processing services, photofinishing equipment, photographic chemicals, cameras (including single-use) and projectors. My point is that if Kodak saw the writing on the wall that film was out and sensors (notice I didn't say cameras anywhere in any of my posts) were in, they could be in a position like Sony is right now. It's honestly amazing that all those participants didn't know that very simple fact when Kodak management constantly talked about it at the time. Maybe that's why they blame 'corruption.' EDIT: Maybe to put it another way, Kodak didn't see themselves as rivals to Nikon or Canon (you could put Kodak film in those), they saw themselves as rivals to Fujifilm.
  - therealcamino 3y ago
    That's interesting, I'd never heard that before. Do you have suggestions for what to Google to turn up articles? I'm just turning up more recent issues and some smaller-time stuff.
TylerE 3y ago
Plus Desktop PCs are basically dead.

RC_ITR 3y ago

Eh, the opposite is usually true. Kodak should have laid off every single person working in film development and pivoted hard to digital sensors, but for a variety of reasons, decided that they were done in that market, so they kept paying people to make better disposables. Not saying they would get there, but Sony makes c.$2bn a year in profit there, so realistically Kodak could still be a multi-tens of billions of dollars company if they had done that.

User23 3y ago
Kodak had already become an accounting control fraud by that time. It's just that the absolutely insane profit margins on film masked the utterly corrupt senior leadership. It wasn't digital that killed them, it was corruption.
- RC_ITR 3y ago
  No. Regardless of corruption, the market for film tanked.
  - User23 3y ago
    Did you know that they were the technology leader in digital? A Kodak engineer invented the digital camera[1]. They were first to market with a self-contained digital camera. Kodak had the best inventors in the business and numerous foundational patents on digital photography. You sound like someone repeating a just so story you heard nth hand for some large n. My information comes directly from the participants. It was absolutely managerial corruption and not a lack of technical ability that tanked them. And that's where the real lesson is to be learned. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Sasson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Sasson
    - RC_ITR 3y ago
      Would you believe that they killed the digital camera because they saw themselves as a film business, not a camera business? The cameras were a loss leader to sell the film. Seriously, here's the 1999 10-k self description (cameras is second to last only ahead of projectors!): Kodak manufactures and markets various components of consumer imaging systems. For traditional consumer amateur photography, Kodak supplies films, photographic papers, processing services, photofinishing equipment, photographic chemicals, cameras (including single-use) and projectors. My point is that if Kodak saw the writing on the wall that film was out and sensors (notice I didn't say cameras anywhere in any of my posts) were in, they could be in a position like Sony is right now. It's honestly amazing that all those participants didn't know that very simple fact when Kodak management constantly talked about it at the time. Maybe that's why they blame 'corruption.' EDIT: Maybe to put it another way, Kodak didn't see themselves as rivals to Nikon or Canon (you could put Kodak film in those), they saw themselves as rivals to Fujifilm.
- therealcamino 3y ago
  That's interesting, I'd never heard that before. Do you have suggestions for what to Google to turn up articles? I'm just turning up more recent issues and some smaller-time stuff.

TylerE 3y ago

Plus Desktop PCs are basically dead.