|
The article of New York Times is mainly focused on Kodak costumes, license named Kodak in South Korea Photo: Codak Apparel |
An article in New York Times The way the Kodak brand is being used attracts attention to it, now the company itself has left the consumer photo market. It gives an interesting insight into the value of the heritage photo brand names at a time when online retail is closely liked and appears to be filled with almanac branding.
Eastman Kodak, these days mainly brands an industrial printing business, classic Kodak name and 44 different companies. Its name is now used on clothing to glasses lenses (via rabon maker, essilaxotica), from solar panels to camera straps, TV and paint everything.
In camera space alone, its name is used by JK Imaging, which forms the Kodak-branded picspro digital cameras (first using ‘GE’ branding). Princeics and C + A Global, which create Kodak-branded instant cameras for various markets, meta imaging, which makes 35mm film compact and reto production, which makes Kodak Ekter-branded half-frame film cameras.
Risk of license
And while it may seem that the company is only lending its name to anyone with a checkbook, there is a risk of choosing wrong partners. As it is identified in the ‘Risk’ section of its annual report, any damage to its brand or reputation can damage the lower line of the company. As it suggests: “Consumers and public can see the products and activities of brand licenses as Kodak’s products and activities.”
 |
|
The Kodak Thrust UAV riot sport drone was launched in association with an education company, even Kodak’s most sick-judge license practice of 2018. Photo: Kodak |
This is far away when the company of course Name should be used very widelyIncluding a Kodak-branded Photography-IP blockchain And related cryptocin, and a separate bitcoin mining plan, that The company rapidly removes itselfConversely, some codak apparel seems very interesting and keeping in mind the legacy of the brand.
How to contribute licensing
Look at the company’s figures and it seems to understand why Eastman Kodak made his net so wide. In terms of revenue, Eastman Kodak’s ‘brand’ division seems small, small for license. This produced $ 20m in 2024, causing just 1.9% sales for a company with a revenue of approximately $ 1bn. However, since this income is lower costs connected, the brands contributed $ 17m to the company’s earnings, before interest, taxes, depreciation and earlier: 65%of its annual income related to various divisions.
 |
|
Recently released $ 99 compact with the recently released Kodak Pixprose C1, Type 1/3 (4.8 x 3.6mm) and a fixed 26 mm equivity lens. Companies such as JK Imaging, the name license, produces more income for Eastman Kodak than the construction photo film. Picture: Kodak / JK Imaging |
And, although it is not possible to exclude accurate figures, it is worth noting that Kodak Alaris, which is the owner of the former Eastman Kodak photo film business, to create about 34% of the revenue of ‘advanced content and chemicals’ division, which contributes $ 17m to Ebitda. In other words, the USB drive and digital camera produces almost three times more income than the film film film for Eastman Kodak.
Heritage, Missfire and Zombie Brand
To us, Codak apparel It seems a thoughtful way to use the brand without reducing its heritage, which is not always the case. Therefore, we are planning to see some other grand (and not-to-to——–lyas) names from photo history that are still being used today. Tell us whether you have seen any particularly sick-judge bits of branding, or examples of zombie brand names that are still revived.
