Kodak Warns It May Go Out of Business (usatoday.com)
- Reference: 0178668782
- News link: https://slashdot.org/story/25/08/13/2322248/kodak-warns-it-may-go-out-of-business
- Source link: https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2025/08/12/kodak-may-go-out-of-business-stock-down/85626375007/
> The Rochester, New York-based Eastman Kodak Co. offered a bleak picture of its financials in earnings reports and filings, tracking a second quarter loss and sending shares tumbling in early trading Tuesday, Aug. 12. The iconic brand said in Monday, Aug. 11 [2]government filings that there is "substantial doubt" about the company's ability to continue, as it faces more than $470 million in debt and slashes its pension plan in an attempt to remain afloat.
>
> "Kodak has debt coming due within twelve months and does not have committed financing or available liquidity to meet such debt obligations if they were to become due in accordance with their current terms," the company said in its filings to the Securities and Exchange Commission. [...] In its most recent earnings report, Kodak said its consolidated revenues were $263 million at the end of the quarter on June 30, a decrease of $4 million since the same period last year. Gross profit decreased 12% compared to last year's second quarter end, Kodak disclosed, and its cash balance sits at $155 million, marking a loss of just under 23% since the end of December.
>
> Jim Continenza, Kodak's Executive Chairman and CEO, said tariffs have not had a "material impact" on its businesses, noting the domestic production of many of its products such as printing plates, film, inkjet presses and inks and pharmaceutical ingredients. Kodak's chief financial officer David Bullwinkle said in the company's Aug. 11 statement it plans to focus on its advanced chemicals and materials sector moving forward, and said the cut to its retirement program is going toward paying down its debt. He said the company expects to "have a clear understanding" by Friday, Aug. 15 of how it will meet its debt obligations. "For the second half of the year, we will continue to focus on reducing costs today and converting our investments into long-term growth," Bullwinkle said.
[1] https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2025/08/12/kodak-may-go-out-of-business-stock-down/85626375007/
[2] https://www.sec.gov/edgar/browse/?CIK=31235&owner=exclude
Why pension plans suck (Score:4, Insightful)
> Kodak's chief financial officer David Bullwinkle said in the company's Aug. 11 statement it plans to focus on its advanced chemicals and materials sector moving forward, and said the cut to its retirement program is going toward paying down its debt.
Kids, this is why pension plans are bad and you should instead have IRAs/401Ks. By established court precedent, pension plans have no legal protection, so the company can raid them for anything, including paying down debt. That money isn't going back - ever.
Re: (Score:2)
> ... elected representatives.
They have other ways of making money. Plus, when they retire, any business funds becomes personal wealth.
I suspect, this is why Ocasio-Cortez was denied the committee chair: The oligarchy came first. Terminally ill Connolly got the job so he could die rich, fuck the damage caused to the Democratic Party re-election.
Re: (Score:3)
American kids. Be specific. In most of the world pension plans are legally highly protected.
Re: (Score:2)
Most of the world is pay-as-you-go, so at best you have a promise of a protection by politicians who will be long gone when protection becomes really necessary.
So, not much of a difference, really.
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pension_systems_by_country#Funded_and_pay-as-you-go_shares_by_country
Re: (Score:2)
> ... pension plans are bad ...
This should be lesson 2 of a saving money, retirement planning and also appear somewhere in 'getting a US job' advice.
> ... 401Ks.
While they were designed to be self-managed pensions, they rarely grow like a pension. They are bad for the working and middle classes. (A moderate rate of return means most pension/self-managed schemes are under-funded.) Currently, mutual index funds and US IRAs are the only easy, high-growth, long-term investments. Also, stock-market portfolios based on market indexes do well. (The DJ
Pharmaceuticals (Score:2)
I heard yesterday that if China and India sanction the US on pharmaceuticals up to ten million additional Americans would die within a year. Trump might just push them that far.
Kodak should seriously be pitching FDA to be the chemical engineering lifeboat for onshoring pharmaceutical manufacturing.
Save Kodak, save most of Congress.
(I know, I know)
Re: (Score:3)
You really should stop watching propaganda.
Re: (Score:2)
I certainly don't think the United States, or any other country besides China, should set policy based on what is good for the people of China. If the people of China want to be "free", they need to fight their govt, just like people in other nations did. Maybe that means a bunch of those people die....just like a lot of people in other nations did.
As a U.S. taxpayer, I can't say I care much about Philippine boats either and yes, I understand the transit through international waters issue, thanks. It's j
Re: (Score:1)
To benefit the most a greater number of citizens you import only raw materials , machine tools and enough ( 5% ?) consumer goods to allow your national 2nd-rate entrepreneurs to steal/reverse-engineer trade secrets and software. Is medicine an exception? Probably.
Re: (Score:1)
ten million extremely unfit and unhealthy people needing offshore pharmy to survive their lifetime of bad choices.
Re: (Score:1)
Bad choices, like living near a refinery or a fracking operation, or a chemical car falls off a railroad track in the same city, or just breathing the air or drinking the water that the FDA doesn't seem at all interested in monitoring any more. Those kind of bad choices?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes.
As one guy said a few years back, "elections have consequences".
Remember him?
Re: Pharmaceuticals (Score:2)
Never gonna happen - at least from India.
Our politicians are too spineless to sanction anyone especially when it comes to anything which might affect employment locally.
China on the other hand could do it.
Re: (Score:2)
An outright ban on medicines are very unlikely.
But if the prices were to rise because of some export tariff or other due to "reciprocal measures", that would create a similar risk.
In that case, would the US government reimburse the group of its citizens caught in the cross-fire?
Impact on Rochester itself? (Score:2)
I have not been in Rochester for ages, but is Kodak still a substantial contributor to the local philanthropic economy there? I would presume if Kodak goes bankrupt (again), there would be a loss of whatever funding they still provide to the community.
Re: (Score:2)
Not nearly as much as it used to be. Kodak Park is mainly a ghost town now.
going concern (Score:4, Informative)
The most surprising aspect of this story is learning that Kodak is somehow still alive and didn't go out of business years ago...
DIgital Camera (Score:3)
Kodak [1]invented the digital camera [weforum.org], but its leadership feared it would cannibalize its film business so it killed it. The company would be in a different place if it had accepted the innovation, refined the digital camera and produced a product.
[1] https://www.weforum.org/stories/2016/06/leading-innovation-through-the-chicanes/
IMAX film availability? (Score:2)
As I understand it, Kodak is one of the main manufacturers of the film used in IMAX cameras. If Kodak goes out of business, what will Christopher Nolan do? Can he purchase Kodak's film manufacturing and developing business? Living within driving distance of a real 70mm IMAX film theater (only 19 in the US, 31 worldwide), I can and do appreciate the difference in the experience. I would like to see it continue to exist and be available.
Dispicable (Score:3)
Wait, so a company that is making a gross profit is saying it can't stay in business? A profit being down 12% is still a profit that is 88% of the previous profit. It looks like a mix between wanting to refinance its loans (fine) and rip off the company's retirees (outrageous).
Re:Dispicable (Score:5, Insightful)
My first guess would be that private equity sunk their greedy little hooks into it.
Re: (Score:2)
What I like best about private equity is that the all you can eat buffet is basically over with all the juicy targets already absorbed so that private equity is now a money loser.
And at that exact moment our magnanimous overlords have deigned to grant us unworthy peasants the right to invest our 401ks and our life savings into private equity funds. Praise be to Wall Street!
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, Kodak already went bankrupt. It emerged from bankruptcy a shell of its former self, and was profitable for a few years but seems doomed again.
The march of technology killed this company, not private equity.
Re: (Score:3)
Listen man, the guys in private equity thought that they'd be smart enough to wring higher profits out of the name they bought. It turns out that they can't, but is it fair to penalize them for it when there are pensioners getting money for free? What did those old farts ever to for Kodak?
Re: (Score:2)
Gross profit means before paying your bills, so it's meaningless when it comes to having cash to stave off creditors.
Re:Dispicable (Score:5, Informative)
Profits indicate money coming in. It does not take into account financing future debts. The point here is that profits are down to the point (and may not even have been sufficient previously) to finance any upcoming debt obligations. That is how most businesses go under, not by making a loss on any given day, but by failing to pay creditors when due.
Today I make a profit of $500 instead of $1000. Hurrah, still profit. That $500 goes into my bank where I have $20500 cash on hand now. If tomorrow I owe a $30000 repayment, then my business is bankrupt and I go under, even if I still made a profit.
Re: (Score:1)
Gross profits, not net You can have profits of 99 trillion dollars a year and still be losing money if you're spending 100 trillion dollars a year.
Re: Dispicable (Score:3)
"Kodak has debt coming due within twelve months and does not have committed financing or available liquidity to meet such debt obligations if they were to become due in accordance with their current terms"
Its right there in TFS
Re: (Score:2)
Unless the lender thinks that by refinancing the loan they will get their money back. If the company goes under they might not.
Re: (Score:2)
Kodak is not making a (net) profit. They are losing money. A "gross" profit is the top line number, but expenses and obligations must be subtracted to determine the net profit (or in their case, net loss).
Re: (Score:2)
Since the employees worked there in consideration of the eventual pension, slashing it should be considered outright financial fraud. In cases of bankruptcy, the pension funding should be first in line for whatever remains.