2020 Elections - Trump FIRED

[CU77]

Shelved digital?? My first digital camera was a Kodak, it was quite good. My impression was that Kodak did its best to adapt but too many other players could compete in digital. Fuji I know nothing about, but the Japan gubmint is much more pro-active about saving businesses that the US, did that play a role?

[Cooter]

Looking like recounts in GA, PA, MI. WI.

Apparently also evidence of voting machines switching Trump votes to Biden votes.

https://youtu.be/Hsh-aJBsasI

[Typical Lax Dad]

Looking like recounts in GA, PA, MI. WI.

Apparently also evidence of voting machines switching Trump votes to Biden votes.

https://youtu.be/Hsh-aJBsasI

And Hunter thought he had won the election.

[old salt]

... just not much of a market for buggy whips any more. Film companies could have made the transition, Fuji did. Kodak was stupid and greedy. Executives just wanted to ride it down because their compensation packages made that the smart play for them personally.

It was a Kodak engineer that developed the first working digital camera way back in 1976. He developed it at the old hawkeye research building. Kodak in all their wisdom never believed the technology was practical and they shelved it and eventually sold it for next to nothing. The guy who designed still lives in Hilton, NY. Every once in awhile different news outlets will interview him. Those Kodak folks sure had vision.

Will this help Rochester ?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business ... gredients/

Kodak to produce pharmaceutical ingredients with U.S. government loan

The deal is part of the Trump administration’s effort to reduce U.S. reliance on China and other overseas suppliers

July 28, 2020

In a deal aimed at reducing U.S. reliance on China, the federal government announced Tuesday that it plans to give Eastman Kodak a $765 million loan to start producing the chemical ingredients needed to make pharmaceuticals.

The company plans to establish a new division, Kodak Pharmaceuticals, that will focus on the building blocks used to produce generic drugs, according to a joint statement from Kodak and the lending agency, the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation, or DFC.

The planned investment, reported earlier by the Wall Street Journal, will create about 350 jobs at Kodak’s home base in Rochester, N.Y., and in St. Paul, Minn., the company said.

DFC normally funds infrastructure and other projects in the developing world. But in an executive order signed in May, President Trump gave DFC new powers under the Defense Production Act to finance domestic health-care manufacturing needed to respond to the coronavirus crisis.

The aim is “to re-shore critical industries so if we ever end up in a situation like this again we are not relying on China or others,” DFC chief executive Adam Boehler said in an interview.

“It’s a breakthrough in bringing pharmaceutical manufacturing back to the United States,” Trump said of the deal during a coronavirus briefing, calling it his administration’s 33rd use of the Defense Production Act.

Boehler signed a preliminary agreement with Kodak Executive Chairman Jim Continenza on Tuesday to provide the loan, which is still subject to final DFC due diligence, a Kodak spokeswoman said.

In an interview, Continenza said Kodak has more than 130 years of experience manufacturing chemicals, which the company has used to make film and other products. “We are truly doing this to help tighten and fix the supply chain of pharmaceuticals in America,” Continenza said, adding that U.S. reliance on imported ingredients is worrying. “I have kids, and they’re going to have kids. … We cannot have this,” he said.

Kodak plans to produce two types of chemicals used to make pills and tablets: the initial building blocks, known as key starting materials and more refined substances called active pharmaceutical ingredients, known as API.

In recent years, Kodak has been making key starting materials for a few pharmaceutical companies upon request, Continenza said. Kodak plans to repurpose and expand some of its manufacturing lines to carry out the work, he said.

Susan Capie, managing director of PharmaVantage, a consultancy in Babylon, N.Y., said she sees several challenges.

When drug companies ask the Food and Drug Administration for permission to sell a new medicine in the United States, they must specify which API suppliers they plan to use. It can take 10 months or more for the FDA to approve a new supplier, meaning Kodak might not have immediate API buyers, she said.

Kodak also will face tough price competition from overseas suppliers, she said, although she added that tougher environmental regulation in China in recent years has driven up prices there. U.S. companies might prefer to deal with a domestic supplier, but it “would depend on the price differential,” she said.

Continenza said Kodak would provide “the highest value for the lowest cost.”

Peter Navarro, a White House adviser who has long pushed to boost manufacturing in the United States, was involved in the Kodak deal and attended the signing ceremony on Tuesday.

In an interview, Navarro said the federal government will help bolster Kodak’s business by buying some API for a strategic stockpile. Navarro and Boehler also said some drug companies plan to sign advance purchase orders for Kodak’s ingredients.

Kodak’s stock more than tripled after news of the deal broke Tuesday.

Deputy Defense Secretary David Norquist also attended the signing ceremony. Because DFC is lending the money under the Defense Production Act, the Defense Department bears the cost of the loan, DFC said.

DFC said it has invited other companies to apply for financing under the Defense Production Act for projects supporting domestic production of drugs, personal protective equipment and other medical supplies such as vaccines or virus testing materials.

[ggait]

Looking like recounts in GA, PA, MI. WI.

Apparently also evidence of voting machines switching Trump votes to Biden votes.

https://youtu.be/Hsh-aJBsasI

Go ahead and recount all 50 states. Joe still wins.

And there's not such evidence. It is bull shirt. The Trump administration itself said so yesterday:

There is NO EVIDENCE that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.

https://www.cisa.gov/news/2020/11/12/jo ... l-election

Sheesh.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-domi ... ccusation/

[jhu72]

... just not much of a market for buggy whips any more. Film companies could have made the transition, Fuji did. Kodak was stupid and greedy. Executives just wanted to ride it down because their compensation packages made that the smart play for them personally.

It was a Kodak engineer that developed the first working digital camera way back in 1976. He developed it at the old hawkeye research building. Kodak in all their wisdom never believed the technology was practical and they shelved it and eventually sold it for next to nothing. The guy who designed still lives in Hilton, NY. Every once in awhile different news outlets will interview him. Those Kodak folks sure had vision.

Film was a lot more profitable than cameras. Camera's were never going to make Kodak as much money as the consumables. Film and chemicals and processing services were how they made their money. All of that disappeared. They needed to expand majorly into application areas where film was being used but going away being replaced by CCD detectors. Being a camera company was never going to replace their film income stream. They needed to invest in multiple applications where the digital cameras would be used. The way Fuji did. They tried a little but were too arrogant in my opinion to do the work, learn. I was very close to Kodak in the late 80's early 90's when they were making their mistakes. They (management) were fat dumb and happy not having to work too hard to make huge profits in film. It was easier to just keep downsizing to maintain profits in the market that was left, until the market went away.

[a fan]

Looking like recounts in GA, PA, MI. WI.

Apparently also evidence of voting machines switching Trump votes to Biden votes.

https://youtu.be/Hsh-aJBsasI

We're in such a bad, bad place as a country. Sigh. There's no turning back now from the damage Trump and his fans have done.

[Kismet]

... just not much of a market for buggy whips any more. Film companies could have made the transition, Fuji did. Kodak was stupid and greedy. Executives just wanted to ride it down because their compensation packages made that the smart play for them personally.

It was a Kodak engineer that developed the first working digital camera way back in 1976. He developed it at the old hawkeye research building. Kodak in all their wisdom never believed the technology was practical and they shelved it and eventually sold it for next to nothing. The guy who designed still lives in Hilton, NY. Every once in awhile different news outlets will interview him. Those Kodak folks sure had vision.

Film was a lot more profitable than cameras. Camera's were never going to make Kodak as much money as the consumables. Film and chemicals and processing services were how they made their money. All of that disappeared. They needed to expand majorly into application areas where film was being used but going away being replaced by CCD detectors. Being a camera company was never going to replace their film income stream. They needed to invest in multiple applications where the digital cameras would be used. The way Fuji did. They tried a little but were too arrogant in my opinion to do the work, learn. I was very close to Kodak in the late 80's early 90's when they were making their mistakes. They (management) were fat dumb and happy not having to work too hard to make huge profits in film. It was easier to just keep downsizing to maintain profits in the market that was left, until the market went away.

You hit the nail on the head. Film was where all the money was...in not only photography but printing/graphic arts and medical as well. It was relatively cheap to make and consumable so customers had to keep buying it. Quality was an advantage and they did it better than anyone and got paid for it. Will say this for Kodak, they had brilliant people and made great stuff but they had no brains and/or concept or VISION for the stuff their people were developing - they were #1 and never bothered to consider how they got to #1 let alone how to stay there once technology they developed made all of their film products passe'. It's what an overabundance of Hubris gets you.

That said, read up on Ferrania at the link above - they have essentially reinvented film at the high end especially for cinema. They made great stuff way back when (even better than Kodak but not at scale) and have re-created that in a very narrow and high end use market.

[jhu72]

... just not much of a market for buggy whips any more. Film companies could have made the transition, Fuji did. Kodak was stupid and greedy. Executives just wanted to ride it down because their compensation packages made that the smart play for them personally.

It was a Kodak engineer that developed the first working digital camera way back in 1976. He developed it at the old hawkeye research building. Kodak in all their wisdom never believed the technology was practical and they shelved it and eventually sold it for next to nothing. The guy who designed still lives in Hilton, NY. Every once in awhile different news outlets will interview him. Those Kodak folks sure had vision.

Will this help Rochester ?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business ... gredients/

Kodak to produce pharmaceutical ingredients with U.S. government loan

The deal is part of the Trump administration’s effort to reduce U.S. reliance on China and other overseas suppliers

July 28, 2020

In a deal aimed at reducing U.S. reliance on China, the federal government announced Tuesday that it plans to give Eastman Kodak a $765 million loan to start producing the chemical ingredients needed to make pharmaceuticals.

The company plans to establish a new division, Kodak Pharmaceuticals, that will focus on the building blocks used to produce generic drugs, according to a joint statement from Kodak and the lending agency, the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation, or DFC.

The planned investment, reported earlier by the Wall Street Journal, will create about 350 jobs at Kodak’s home base in Rochester, N.Y., and in St. Paul, Minn., the company said.

DFC normally funds infrastructure and other projects in the developing world. But in an executive order signed in May, President Trump gave DFC new powers under the Defense Production Act to finance domestic health-care manufacturing needed to respond to the coronavirus crisis.

The aim is “to re-shore critical industries so if we ever end up in a situation like this again we are not relying on China or others,” DFC chief executive Adam Boehler said in an interview.

“It’s a breakthrough in bringing pharmaceutical manufacturing back to the United States,” Trump said of the deal during a coronavirus briefing, calling it his administration’s 33rd use of the Defense Production Act.

Boehler signed a preliminary agreement with Kodak Executive Chairman Jim Continenza on Tuesday to provide the loan, which is still subject to final DFC due diligence, a Kodak spokeswoman said.

In an interview, Continenza said Kodak has more than 130 years of experience manufacturing chemicals, which the company has used to make film and other products. “We are truly doing this to help tighten and fix the supply chain of pharmaceuticals in America,” Continenza said, adding that U.S. reliance on imported ingredients is worrying. “I have kids, and they’re going to have kids. … We cannot have this,” he said.

Kodak plans to produce two types of chemicals used to make pills and tablets: the initial building blocks, known as key starting materials and more refined substances called active pharmaceutical ingredients, known as API.

In recent years, Kodak has been making key starting materials for a few pharmaceutical companies upon request, Continenza said. Kodak plans to repurpose and expand some of its manufacturing lines to carry out the work, he said.

Susan Capie, managing director of PharmaVantage, a consultancy in Babylon, N.Y., said she sees several challenges.

When drug companies ask the Food and Drug Administration for permission to sell a new medicine in the United States, they must specify which API suppliers they plan to use. It can take 10 months or more for the FDA to approve a new supplier, meaning Kodak might not have immediate API buyers, she said.

Kodak also will face tough price competition from overseas suppliers, she said, although she added that tougher environmental regulation in China in recent years has driven up prices there. U.S. companies might prefer to deal with a domestic supplier, but it “would depend on the price differential,” she said.

Continenza said Kodak would provide “the highest value for the lowest cost.”

Peter Navarro, a White House adviser who has long pushed to boost manufacturing in the United States, was involved in the Kodak deal and attended the signing ceremony on Tuesday.

In an interview, Navarro said the federal government will help bolster Kodak’s business by buying some API for a strategic stockpile. Navarro and Boehler also said some drug companies plan to sign advance purchase orders for Kodak’s ingredients.

Kodak’s stock more than tripled after news of the deal broke Tuesday.

Deputy Defense Secretary David Norquist also attended the signing ceremony. Because DFC is lending the money under the Defense Production Act, the Defense Department bears the cost of the loan, DFC said.

DFC said it has invited other companies to apply for financing under the Defense Production Act for projects supporting domestic production of drugs, personal protective equipment and other medical supplies such as vaccines or virus testing materials.

... will it help Rochester, probably. Will it solve a problem that other companies aren't better suited to solve? I doubt it. Unless Kodak has some proprietary IP, process, etc., it is likely nothing more than a jobs program. It could just as easily be a jobs program somewhere else for some other chemical company. We will see. I think this is going to be challenged by other chemical company competitors. It really smacks of the Federal Government doing the worst kind of "picking winners." Probably going to make lawyers rich.

[jhu72]

Shelved digital?? My first digital camera was a Kodak, it was quite good. My impression was that Kodak did its best to adapt but too many other players could compete in digital. Fuji I know nothing about, but the Japan gubmint is much more pro-active about saving businesses that the US, did that play a role?

Fuji made big investment in digital medical. Their film numbers were also smaller than Kodak's, so it was easier to replace the film numbers.

[jhu72]

... just not much of a market for buggy whips any more. Film companies could have made the transition, Fuji did. Kodak was stupid and greedy. Executives just wanted to ride it down because their compensation packages made that the smart play for them personally.

It was a Kodak engineer that developed the first working digital camera way back in 1976. He developed it at the old hawkeye research building. Kodak in all their wisdom never believed the technology was practical and they shelved it and eventually sold it for next to nothing. The guy who designed still lives in Hilton, NY. Every once in awhile different news outlets will interview him. Those Kodak folks sure had vision.

Film was a lot more profitable than cameras. Camera's were never going to make Kodak as much money as the consumables. Film and chemicals and processing services were how they made their money. All of that disappeared. They needed to expand majorly into application areas where film was being used but going away being replaced by CCD detectors. Being a camera company was never going to replace their film income stream. They needed to invest in multiple applications where the digital cameras would be used. The way Fuji did. They tried a little but were too arrogant in my opinion to do the work, learn. I was very close to Kodak in the late 80's early 90's when they were making their mistakes. They (management) were fat dumb and happy not having to work too hard to make huge profits in film. It was easier to just keep downsizing to maintain profits in the market that was left, until the market went away.

You hit the nail on the head. Film was where all the money was...in not only photography but printing/graphic arts as well. It was relatively cheap to make and consumable so customers had to keep buying it. Quality was an advantage and they did it better than anyone and got paid for it. Will say this for Kodak, they had brilliant people and made great stuff but they had no brains and/or concept or VISION for the stuff their people were developing - they were #1 and never bothered to consider how they got to #1 let alone how to stay there once technology they developed made all of their film products passe'. It's what an overabundance of Hubris gets you.

That said, read up on Ferrania at the link above - they have essentially reinvented film at the high end especially for cinema. They made great stuff way back when (even better than Kodak but not at scale) and have re-created that in a very narrow and high end use market.

... yup. I was close to 3M at this time as well. In my opinion a more innovative company. They also had a bigger stake in specialty film than Kodak did - comparatively.

Hubris is the right word when applied to Kodak. Not just in Rochester! Kodak made great film. In my opinion the best. Better than Fuji, Agfa, etc. They were #1. But they had a lot to learn in other markets, and just would not listen to people who knew better.

[Matnum PI]

Donald J. Trump@realDonaldTrump
Dec 23, 2016
Vladimir Putin said today about Hillary and Dems: "In my opinion, it is humiliating. One must be able to lose with dignity." So true!

[Kismet]

... just not much of a market for buggy whips any more. Film companies could have made the transition, Fuji did. Kodak was stupid and greedy. Executives just wanted to ride it down because their compensation packages made that the smart play for them personally.

It was a Kodak engineer that developed the first working digital camera way back in 1976. He developed it at the old hawkeye research building. Kodak in all their wisdom never believed the technology was practical and they shelved it and eventually sold it for next to nothing. The guy who designed still lives in Hilton, NY. Every once in awhile different news outlets will interview him. Those Kodak folks sure had vision.

Film was a lot more profitable than cameras. Camera's were never going to make Kodak as much money as the consumables. Film and chemicals and processing services were how they made their money. All of that disappeared. They needed to expand majorly into application areas where film was being used but going away being replaced by CCD detectors. Being a camera company was never going to replace their film income stream. They needed to invest in multiple applications where the digital cameras would be used. The way Fuji did. They tried a little but were too arrogant in my opinion to do the work, learn. I was very close to Kodak in the late 80's early 90's when they were making their mistakes. They (management) were fat dumb and happy not having to work too hard to make huge profits in film. It was easier to just keep downsizing to maintain profits in the market that was left, until the market went away.

You hit the nail on the head. Film was where all the money was...in not only photography but printing/graphic arts as well. It was relatively cheap to make and consumable so customers had to keep buying it. Quality was an advantage and they did it better than anyone and got paid for it. Will say this for Kodak, they had brilliant people and made great stuff but they had no brains and/or concept or VISION for the stuff their people were developing - they were #1 and never bothered to consider how they got to #1 let alone how to stay there once technology they developed made all of their film products passe'. It's what an overabundance of Hubris gets you.

That said, read up on Ferrania at the link above - they have essentially reinvented film at the high end especially for cinema. They made great stuff way back when (even better than Kodak but not at scale) and have re-created that in a very narrow and high end use market.

... yup. I was close to 3M at this time as well. In my opinion a more innovative company. They also had a bigger stake in specialty film than Kodak did - comparatively.

Hubris is the right word when applied to Kodak. Not just in Rochester! Kodak made great film. In my opinion the best. Better than Fuji, Agfa, etc. They were #1. But they had a lot to learn in other markets, and just would not listen to people who knew better.

Quite correct. My dad worked for 3M film in sales. He would be the first to tell you that Dynachrome for the consumer market was garbage but they were much closer on the industrial/medical end and when they acquired Ferrania they were attempting to get into the high end market and compete with Kodak on a very narrow plane (cinema and photography) but they never could pull it off. Dad (and Mom) got more than a few business trips to Italy (Ferrania was HQ'd in Milano).

An example of how screwed up Kodak was even on film - they did not fully discontinue Kodachrome (film and developing) until 2007 many, many years after demand declined to almost nothing. A magnificent product but nobody used it for YEARS.

[CU77]

Trump explains how he is going to win to Byron York at the Examiner:

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opin ... tion-fight

[cradleandshoot]

... just not much of a market for buggy whips any more. Film companies could have made the transition, Fuji did. Kodak was stupid and greedy. Executives just wanted to ride it down because their compensation packages made that the smart play for them personally.

It was a Kodak engineer that developed the first working digital camera way back in 1976. He developed it at the old hawkeye research building. Kodak in all their wisdom never believed the technology was practical and they shelved it and eventually sold it for next to nothing. The guy who designed still lives in Hilton, NY. Every once in awhile different news outlets will interview him. Those Kodak folks sure had vision.

Film was a lot more profitable than cameras. Camera's were never going to make Kodak as much money as the consumables. Film and chemicals and processing services were how they made their money. All of that disappeared. They needed to expand majorly into application areas where film was being used but going away being replaced by CCD detectors. Being a camera company was never going to replace their film income stream. They needed to invest in multiple applications where the digital cameras would be used. The way Fuji did. They tried a little but were too arrogant in my opinion to do the work, learn. I was very close to Kodak in the late 80's early 90's when they were making their mistakes. They (management) were fat dumb and happy not having to work too hard to make huge profits in film. It was easier to just keep downsizing to maintain profits in the market that was left, until the market went away.

I always thought it was ironic they developed the first digital camera and never understood what the market would have been. Kodak was run by some very dumb people at the time. There were 65 thousand people that worked for Kodak in the early 80s today there are a few thousand in Rochester at the most. Kodak also developed and marketed the disc camera, maybe the single dumbest move they ever made.

[ggait]

Looking like recounts in GA, PA, MI. WI.

Cooter -- FYI, the Trumpers are not trying to win these states. Read for yourself the game the Trumpers are playing here. Which is full on Banana Republic conspiracy theory stuff. But since prominent righties (Gov. DeSantis, Don Jr.) are openly advocating for it and since Trump is actually pursuing this, maybe it isn't a conspiracy theory at all?

The goal is to delay certification of the vote (by any bad faith means necessary) in these states until after the December 8 "safe harbor" date. And then you'd start to go down the "failed election" rabbit hole.

President Trump’s last-ditch efforts to reverse the election seem to come down to a far-fetched scenario, one in which Republican-led state legislatures choose the members of the Electoral College, overturning the will of voters.

Could it work? Election law experts are highly skeptical. And leaders of the Republican majorities in legislatures in key states, including Pennsylvania, Michigan, Arizona, Georgia and North Carolina, told The New York Times this week through their offices that they saw no role for themselves in picking electors.

That has not stopped some high-profile supporters of the president, including the talk radio host Mark Levin and Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, from suggesting that Republican-led legislatures should consider ignoring the popular vote in close-fought states won by President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. and handing their electoral votes to Mr. Trump.

https://www.nytimes.com/article/electors-vote.html

[cradleandshoot]

... just not much of a market for buggy whips any more. Film companies could have made the transition, Fuji did. Kodak was stupid and greedy. Executives just wanted to ride it down because their compensation packages made that the smart play for them personally.

It was a Kodak engineer that developed the first working digital camera way back in 1976. He developed it at the old hawkeye research building. Kodak in all their wisdom never believed the technology was practical and they shelved it and eventually sold it for next to nothing. The guy who designed still lives in Hilton, NY. Every once in awhile different news outlets will interview him. Those Kodak folks sure had vision.

Will this help Rochester ?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business ... gredients/

Kodak to produce pharmaceutical ingredients with U.S. government loan

The deal is part of the Trump administration’s effort to reduce U.S. reliance on China and other overseas suppliers

July 28, 2020

In a deal aimed at reducing U.S. reliance on China, the federal government announced Tuesday that it plans to give Eastman Kodak a $765 million loan to start producing the chemical ingredients needed to make pharmaceuticals.

The company plans to establish a new division, Kodak Pharmaceuticals, that will focus on the building blocks used to produce generic drugs, according to a joint statement from Kodak and the lending agency, the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation, or DFC.

The planned investment, reported earlier by the Wall Street Journal, will create about 350 jobs at Kodak’s home base in Rochester, N.Y., and in St. Paul, Minn., the company said.

DFC normally funds infrastructure and other projects in the developing world. But in an executive order signed in May, President Trump gave DFC new powers under the Defense Production Act to finance domestic health-care manufacturing needed to respond to the coronavirus crisis.

The aim is “to re-shore critical industries so if we ever end up in a situation like this again we are not relying on China or others,” DFC chief executive Adam Boehler said in an interview.

“It’s a breakthrough in bringing pharmaceutical manufacturing back to the United States,” Trump said of the deal during a coronavirus briefing, calling it his administration’s 33rd use of the Defense Production Act.

Boehler signed a preliminary agreement with Kodak Executive Chairman Jim Continenza on Tuesday to provide the loan, which is still subject to final DFC due diligence, a Kodak spokeswoman said.

In an interview, Continenza said Kodak has more than 130 years of experience manufacturing chemicals, which the company has used to make film and other products. “We are truly doing this to help tighten and fix the supply chain of pharmaceuticals in America,” Continenza said, adding that U.S. reliance on imported ingredients is worrying. “I have kids, and they’re going to have kids. … We cannot have this,” he said.

Kodak plans to produce two types of chemicals used to make pills and tablets: the initial building blocks, known as key starting materials and more refined substances called active pharmaceutical ingredients, known as API.

In recent years, Kodak has been making key starting materials for a few pharmaceutical companies upon request, Continenza said. Kodak plans to repurpose and expand some of its manufacturing lines to carry out the work, he said.

Susan Capie, managing director of PharmaVantage, a consultancy in Babylon, N.Y., said she sees several challenges.

When drug companies ask the Food and Drug Administration for permission to sell a new medicine in the United States, they must specify which API suppliers they plan to use. It can take 10 months or more for the FDA to approve a new supplier, meaning Kodak might not have immediate API buyers, she said.

Kodak also will face tough price competition from overseas suppliers, she said, although she added that tougher environmental regulation in China in recent years has driven up prices there. U.S. companies might prefer to deal with a domestic supplier, but it “would depend on the price differential,” she said.

Continenza said Kodak would provide “the highest value for the lowest cost.”

Peter Navarro, a White House adviser who has long pushed to boost manufacturing in the United States, was involved in the Kodak deal and attended the signing ceremony on Tuesday.

In an interview, Navarro said the federal government will help bolster Kodak’s business by buying some API for a strategic stockpile. Navarro and Boehler also said some drug companies plan to sign advance purchase orders for Kodak’s ingredients.

Kodak’s stock more than tripled after news of the deal broke Tuesday.

Deputy Defense Secretary David Norquist also attended the signing ceremony. Because DFC is lending the money under the Defense Production Act, the Defense Department bears the cost of the loan, DFC said.

DFC said it has invited other companies to apply for financing under the Defense Production Act for projects supporting domestic production of drugs, personal protective equipment and other medical supplies such as vaccines or virus testing materials.

OS that deal fell through right after it was announced. It was a huge embarrassment to all of the parties involved. There were rumors of some people that made a lot of money on the stock market the day that it was announced.

[jhu72]

... just not much of a market for buggy whips any more. Film companies could have made the transition, Fuji did. Kodak was stupid and greedy. Executives just wanted to ride it down because their compensation packages made that the smart play for them personally.

It was a Kodak engineer that developed the first working digital camera way back in 1976. He developed it at the old hawkeye research building. Kodak in all their wisdom never believed the technology was practical and they shelved it and eventually sold it for next to nothing. The guy who designed still lives in Hilton, NY. Every once in awhile different news outlets will interview him. Those Kodak folks sure had vision.

Film was a lot more profitable than cameras. Camera's were never going to make Kodak as much money as the consumables. Film and chemicals and processing services were how they made their money. All of that disappeared. They needed to expand majorly into application areas where film was being used but going away being replaced by CCD detectors. Being a camera company was never going to replace their film income stream. They needed to invest in multiple applications where the digital cameras would be used. The way Fuji did. They tried a little but were too arrogant in my opinion to do the work, learn. I was very close to Kodak in the late 80's early 90's when they were making their mistakes. They (management) were fat dumb and happy not having to work too hard to make huge profits in film. It was easier to just keep downsizing to maintain profits in the market that was left, until the market went away.

You hit the nail on the head. Film was where all the money was...in not only photography but printing/graphic arts as well. It was relatively cheap to make and consumable so customers had to keep buying it. Quality was an advantage and they did it better than anyone and got paid for it. Will say this for Kodak, they had brilliant people and made great stuff but they had no brains and/or concept or VISION for the stuff their people were developing - they were #1 and never bothered to consider how they got to #1 let alone how to stay there once technology they developed made all of their film products passe'. It's what an overabundance of Hubris gets you.

That said, read up on Ferrania at the link above - they have essentially reinvented film at the high end especially for cinema. They made great stuff way back when (even better than Kodak but not at scale) and have re-created that in a very narrow and high end use market.

... yup. I was close to 3M at this time as well. In my opinion a more innovative company. They also had a bigger stake in specialty film than Kodak did - comparatively.

Hubris is the right word when applied to Kodak. Not just in Rochester! Kodak made great film. In my opinion the best. Better than Fuji, Agfa, etc. They were #1. But they had a lot to learn in other markets, and just would not listen to people who knew better.

Quite correct. My dad worked for 3M film in sales. He would be the first to tell you that Dynachrome for the consumer market was garbage but they were much closer on the industrial/medical end and when they acquired Ferrania they were attempting to get into the high end market and compete with Kodak on a very narrow plane (cinema and photography) but they never could pull it off. Dad (and Mom) got more than a few business trips to Italy (Ferrania was HQ'd in Milano).

An example of how screwed up Kodak was even on film - they did not fully discontinue Kodachrome (film and developing) until 2007 many, many years after demand declined to almost nothing. A magnificent product but nobody used it for YEARS.

Loved Kodachrome! Nothing came even close.

3M X-ray film did much better. 3M innovated the laser printer and medical grade film for these printers before you began to see laser printers in wide spread use in offices. Working with 3M as a business partner as opposed to Kodak, was night and day. You could tell 3M was much more of a technology company. The engineers had a lot of freedom. Kodak, the engineers were bright, but management could not get out of their own way or the engineer's and handicapped the engineers no end, at least in their medical imaging group. I have only ever seen one other company as constipated as Kodak, Iron Mountain. They missed a chance to make many billions of dollars in medical image storage, because of corporate constipation.

[Kismet]

... just not much of a market for buggy whips any more. Film companies could have made the transition, Fuji did. Kodak was stupid and greedy. Executives just wanted to ride it down because their compensation packages made that the smart play for them personally.

It was a Kodak engineer that developed the first working digital camera way back in 1976. He developed it at the old hawkeye research building. Kodak in all their wisdom never believed the technology was practical and they shelved it and eventually sold it for next to nothing. The guy who designed still lives in Hilton, NY. Every once in awhile different news outlets will interview him. Those Kodak folks sure had vision.

Film was a lot more profitable than cameras. Camera's were never going to make Kodak as much money as the consumables. Film and chemicals and processing services were how they made their money. All of that disappeared. They needed to expand majorly into application areas where film was being used but going away being replaced by CCD detectors. Being a camera company was never going to replace their film income stream. They needed to invest in multiple applications where the digital cameras would be used. The way Fuji did. They tried a little but were too arrogant in my opinion to do the work, learn. I was very close to Kodak in the late 80's early 90's when they were making their mistakes. They (management) were fat dumb and happy not having to work too hard to make huge profits in film. It was easier to just keep downsizing to maintain profits in the market that was left, until the market went away.

You hit the nail on the head. Film was where all the money was...in not only photography but printing/graphic arts as well. It was relatively cheap to make and consumable so customers had to keep buying it. Quality was an advantage and they did it better than anyone and got paid for it. Will say this for Kodak, they had brilliant people and made great stuff but they had no brains and/or concept or VISION for the stuff their people were developing - they were #1 and never bothered to consider how they got to #1 let alone how to stay there once technology they developed made all of their film products passe'. It's what an overabundance of Hubris gets you.

That said, read up on Ferrania at the link above - they have essentially reinvented film at the high end especially for cinema. They made great stuff way back when (even better than Kodak but not at scale) and have re-created that in a very narrow and high end use market.

... yup. I was close to 3M at this time as well. In my opinion a more innovative company. They also had a bigger stake in specialty film than Kodak did - comparatively.

Hubris is the right word when applied to Kodak. Not just in Rochester! Kodak made great film. In my opinion the best. Better than Fuji, Agfa, etc. They were #1. But they had a lot to learn in other markets, and just would not listen to people who knew better.

Quite correct. My dad worked for 3M film in sales. He would be the first to tell you that Dynachrome for the consumer market was garbage but they were much closer on the industrial/medical end and when they acquired Ferrania they were attempting to get into the high end market and compete with Kodak on a very narrow plane (cinema and photography) but they never could pull it off. Dad (and Mom) got more than a few business trips to Italy (Ferrania was HQ'd in Milano).

An example of how screwed up Kodak was even on film - they did not fully discontinue Kodachrome (film and developing) until 2007 many, many years after demand declined to almost nothing. A magnificent product but nobody used it for YEARS.

Loved Kodachrome! Nothing came even close.

3M X-ray film did much better. 3M innovated the laser printer and medical grade film for these printers before you began to see laser printers in wide spread use in offices. Working with 3M as a business partner as opposed to Kodak, was night and day. You could tell 3M was much more of a technology company. The engineers had a lot of freedom. Kodak, the engineers were bright, but management could not get out of their own way or the engineer's and handicapped the engineers no end, at least in their medical imaging group. I have only ever seen one other company as constipated as Kodak, Iron Mountain. They missed a chance to make many billions of dollars in medical image storage, because of corporate constipation.

Quite right. But a dozen photographers at NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC is not a viable market. They served it for YEARS at this level.
Ironic that in Salty's clip that the recent attempt to revive Kodak was supposed to create jobs in Rochester NY (Kodak HQ) and also St Paul MN (3M HQ is located there).

[ggait]

So NC and GA finally get called.

So 2020 EC is 306-232. 2016 EC was 306-232.

In 2016, Trump won a handful of swing states by five figure margins. In 2020, Biden won a handful of swing states by five figure margins.

Hillary called Trump at 3 am on election night to concede. Trump said this on TV on election night: "If you count the legal votes, I easily win. If you count the illegal votes, they can try to steal the election from us."

TL/DR: Hillary has balls. Trump does not.

But, of course, Trump is "within his rights."

Because in America, you have a constitutional right to act like a whiny little beyotch.