You wrote:
>
>Until the issue was brought up, I never realized how few firms there
were
>in the photographic film making/processing business. Nor did I
realize
>how dominant Fuji is in Japan and Kodak in the US. Now I learn that
>the two companies combined greatly dominate the world market. This
>industry didn't strike me as one which would have such economies of
>scale. Maybe someone involved in the industry could answer this: is
it
>that much more difficult to produce quality film than something like
>video tapes?
>
>My point is that although I think Kodak has some valid points against
>Fuji's practices in Japan, it seems that their PR campaign may
backfire.
>They should put more stress on the barriers they face in Japan than on
>their share of the market in the world.
>
>
>Anthony M. Miyake
>
>"I don't believe in nothin' no more. I'm going to law school."
> --Jimbo Jones.
>"No, I'm not going to law school; I still believe in some things--
>truth and light. Remember, justice is blind." --anonymous.
>In Lumine Tuo Videbimus Lumen.
>
Anthony, There is a 3d player in the film market and it is Japanese
film manufacturer Konica. They control approx 17% of that market and
only a minimal amount in the U.S.
My personal opinion in this matter is quality. I was a big fan of
Kodak film until I lived in Japan and used Fuji. I saw and still see a
measurable difference in the quality of the developed product. I am
back in the U.S. and still use Fuji film.
Recently, there was an article in the LA Times asking Japanese camera
shops and photographers theie opinion. One owner had both film offered
next to one another, same price but sold more Fuji because of customer
preference. Some of the owners were not offering the film because it
was not selling. They ALL stated that Kodak B&W film was better in
quality than Fuji.
I feel that this is another situation where if you make a superior
product it will sell. Maybe we should drop a line in the photography
newsgroup and conduct a survey!
Bill Hunt
wh...@ix.netcom.com