logoalt Hacker News

elictronicyesterday at 6:50 PM2 repliesview on HN

They resisted the idea because it did kill their legacy business. Kodaks peak was 16 billion in revenue in 1996. The digital camera market will be approaching that level of value inflation adjusted around 2030.

35 years to get back to status quo. Putting a bullet in a golden goose is often considered a bad idea. Everyone is happy they are dead, but if you can't understand why they might try to keep the corpse alive you have never looked at the numbers.


Replies

davkanyesterday at 7:31 PM

Kodak was definitely mismanaged in many ways but you are correct in your analysis. If they had pivoted hard to digital they could have been what today? Nikon? Fujifilm? These are known brands that are bigger than Kodak is today but they are nothing compared to what Kodak was.

At its peak Kodak was one of the (the?) most well known brands on the entire planet. Anywhere in the world if someone snapped a photo Kodak was more than likely taking a cut, coming and going. They employed as many people in Rochester alone as any digital camera company does today internationally.

Sure it could have been managed better but they were always doomed for a fall. They were a chemical company entering a digital age. Does anybody even care who makes the sensors in iPhones?

show 2 replies
senordevnycyesterday at 11:21 PM

The digital camera market will be approaching that level of value inflation adjusted around 2030.

Only if you ignore the digital camera sector responsible for probably 99% of all digital photos taken…

show 1 reply