Economist Kodak Fuji Revelation Rise and Fall
Lead: The latest issue of the British This area stems from Kodak’s complacency, on the other hand is indeed too hard because of changes to.
The following is the text of the article:
fate of the different
legend Lenin ridiculed the capitalists will sell you the rope to hang him. This legend may not be true, but it contains a hint of truth. Capitalists often invest in technology undermine their own business.
Kodak is a perfect example. In 1975 the company developed the first digital camera, take pictures of the technology and the subsequent smartphone business on Kodak’s traditional film caused a huge impact, and the camera manufacturing business has been dying.
many people may not believe, then the Kodak era can be said that Google (microblogging). Kodak was founded in 1880 to pioneer technology and creative marketing is known.
to 1976, Kodak film and camera sales in the United States in the proportion has reached 90% and 85%. Until the 1990s, Kodak has always been one of the top five most valuable brands.
Subsequently, the digital imaging technology began to replace film, smart phones have begun to replace the camera. Kodak’s revenue and profits in 1996 and reached its peak in 1999, were 160 million and $ 2.5 billion. Analysts expected revenue in 2011 to $ 6.2 billion. The company recently announced fiscal 2011 third quarter results, quarter loss of $ 222 million three years to become the ninth quarterly loss. In 1988, Kodak’s worldwide staff of more than 145,000, while the most recent statistical data only one-tenth of the time. Its share price has also plummeted over the past year by nearly 90%.
few weeks, Kodak headquarters in Rochester, has been shrouded in speculation. If they do not proceed with the sale of intellectual property assets, Kodak will be closed down. Kodak on January 10 released two statements: a declaration to be split into two businesses, the other one is announced the indictment of Apple and HTC (microblogging) infringement. It also gives Kodak a glimmer of life, but may be re-filed for bankruptcy protection for the preparation.
numerous Kodak’s predicament, but it’s old rival Fuji have outstanding performance. The two companies have much in common. They occupy in the local market, quasi-monopoly position: Kodak in the United States, Fuji in Japan. US-Japan trade friction between the two countries in the 1990s but also from Kodak for Fuji pressure.
their traditional businesses are also being gradually abandoned. But Kodak has failed to adapt to the changing situation, while Fuji has been transformed into a solid profitable business. Even in a bad experience after 2011, Fuji remains the market value of up to $ 12.6 billion, Kodak’s only $ 220 million. This is why the fate of the two companies differ so much?
they foresee change coming. Kodak’s former executives, the University of Rochester Simon School of Business Professor Larry Matteson (Larry Matesson) remember, he had written in 1979 had a very accurate report forecasts the market will be how the different parts of the film Time to digital era, the first government survey agencies, followed by professional photography, the last is the mainstream market, 2010 will be universal. Only a few years of his error.
Fuji The same is true in the early 1980s, the company foresaw the rise of the digital age, and developed a three-pronged strategy: as much as possible detached from the film business funds for the digital age transformation to prepare and develop new business.
The two companies have realized that digital photography itself can not bring much profit. But the two companies must conform with the trend, Kodak has a step slow.
culture of complacency
Kodak culture has become an obstacle. Despite the advantages still – R & D investment is very large, very strict production process, and a good relationship with local businesses – but Kodak has gradually become complacent monopoly. Fuji won the 1984 Los Angeles Olympic Games sponsorship, and Kodak was hesitant, it also highlights the weakness of Kodak culture. The promotion to help with cheap Fuji film into Kodak’s domestic market.
Kodak consultant who served as the Harvard Business School professor Rosa White Moss Kanter (Rosabeth Moss Kanter) that lead to slow reaction Kodak Another reason is that executives but did not follow the technology industry ‘side launch, while improved’ model. Kantor said that Kodak’s bosses rarely hear much criticism in Rochester. Even when Kodak decided to diversify, we still take years for the first step towards a merger. The company established a highly respected venture capital arm, but never by a large enough bet to create breakthrough technology.
of course, luck is one of the reasons. Originally thought that Kodak, the company’s researchers have developed thousands of film material can be used to develop chemical pharmaceutical business. But the plan did not succeed, and in 1990 sold the department.
Fuji diversification is more successful. Film a bit like the skin: both contain collagen. Because of oxidation and aging skin, so cosmetics companies to promote such a concept: by antioxidants to protect skin. Fuji has developed a total of 200,000 kinds of compounds, of which about 4,000 species and antioxidant related. So the company to Ai Shi Ti (Astalift) brand launched a series of cosmetics, not only in the Asian market, this year will enter Europe.
Fuji has also worked for the film’s expertise to find new uses: for example, the company has developed a liquid crystal flat panel display optical films. Since 2000, the business they have invested $ 4 billion. This also received the results: in a liquid crystal display can expand the field of view of the film, Fuji occupy 100% of market share.
worked in 1993-1999 in charge of the helm of Kodak’s George Fisher (George Fisher) decided that the company’s expertise is in imaging, rather than chemical. Under his leadership, Kodak developed the digital camera business, and provides users publish and share photos online features.
an outstanding business owner may be playing this kind of service caused by Facebook, but Fisher was not such a boss. He too failed outsourcing business, which could have let Kodak more flexible and creative. He still insists on the Kodak Kodak sold a cheap camera business, and to rely on consumers to buy a lot of expensive film. Such ideas and Gillette, for which benefit mainly through the blade, rather than the knife. However, this model clearly does not apply to digital cameras. However, Kodak eventually create a huge digital camera business, but only scenery for a few years, camera phones will be destroyed.
Kodak also failed to properly interpret the emerging market trends. It was originally hoped that China’s emerging middle class will buy a lot of film. They really love the film was short, but soon discovered that digital cameras are the cool product. Many people never directly buy camera digital camera.
Kodak’s leadership is also inconsistent: each for several CEO, will be adjusted once strategy. Kodak in 2005 as CEO of Perez (Antonio Perez) has been the company’s business focus to the digital printing applications. This is his old club from Hewlett-Packard (microblogging) where the learned, Kodak has insisted that the move could help them help themselves. He also plans to intellectual property assets of the company’s vast profits and, therefore, sued Apple.
Fuji because of technological change and face the same internal struggle for power. Initially, refusing to face the crisis of the consumer film business the upper hand, but it is the ultimate winner Retief Goosen Shigetaka. He blamed those In 2000-2003 and gradually promoted to the highest leadership of the process, he quickly for a reform of the company.
Fuji experience
Since 2000, he spent about 90 billion acquisition of 40 companies, while reducing costs, and expand job cuts. In 18 months time, he spent 250 billion yen (about $ 3.3 billion) in restructuring costs, remove unnecessary for distributors, laboratories, managers and researchers. However, this pre-emptive measures are rarely seen in Japanese companies. Japan’s mean to deny that he personally promoted the former CEO of the work, which is taboo in Japan. However, Ohmae but that, due to the short-term performance of Japanese companies face less shareholder pressure, corporate shareholders can tolerate large amounts of cash holdings to help Goosen Shigetaka to achieve his goals. U.S. shareholders may be more a lack of patience. But what is surprising is that Kodak but Japanese companies such as legalistic, while Fuji is more like a flexible response of U.S. companies.
Shigetaka Goosen said he respected competitor to Kodak the plight of empathy. But he still believes that Kodak lost in complacency, even if the crisis has been very obvious. He said that Kodak’s own marketing and brand strength of over-confidence, so always try to cut corners.
2000′s, Kodak has been trying to buy an existing business, and not to spend too much time and money developing their own technology, but failed to achieve adequate diversification. Shigetaka Goosen said: christensen) said, From the latter’s defeat in the management of omission, which Kodak is more like
He pointed out that the leading companies in other industries have as small change and extinction. Decades ago, there have been 316 U.S. chain of department stores, but only Dayton – Hudson (Dayton-Hudson) well adapted to the modern trend and set up a new business, Target department stores (Target) . This is the change.
Kodak could have been avoided if the current fate? Some people think that the company had the opportunity in the field of smart phone camera to obtain similar Benefited from the outstanding IP assets, Canon and Sony originally expected to do better in this regard, but without success.
different from everyone else, the company could theoretically eternal life. But in fact, most companies will be This is because with the different social, business competition is a life and death battle. Fuji successfully grasp a new strategy, and survive. Film business in the proportion of its profits from 60% in 2000 down to the present near-zero. At the same time, the company found a new source of income. And had a lot of great companies, Kodak seems to have come to an end. 132 years after the birth, as it will go sour, like old photos. (Book Yu)
share:> Related Topics: Kodak filed for bankruptcy protection Topics> Related: Kodak about a century old status comparable to today’s bankruptcy ended and then throw self Apple Kodak magic: have passed tort v. Kodak Fuji Apple HTC Citigroup plans to prepare the financing for the bankruptcy protection analysis Kodak’s defeat: do not understand the purpose and social needs of the user photographed microblogging recommended | SAN official microblogging