Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

Businesses Media

A Tale of Two Companies 70

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the dying-breed dept.
Rick Zeman writes "They've had the best of times, and now they're living through the worst of times. The Washington Post talks about the dissolution of both Kodak's and Polaroid's business models, what Kodak can learn from Polaroid's earlier mistakes, and the resurrection of some classic Polaroid tech by private entrepreneurs."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

A Tale of Two Companies

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Wrong Example (Score:5, Insightful)

    by geoskd (321194) on Sunday December 02, 2012 @01:31PM (#42161869)

    Pity, so many people lost jobs because of a few retarded managers at the top of their companies.

    There are two classes of people at Polaroid and Kodak who got the axe. The first are the technicians, engineers and related staff. Those people were going to lose their jobs regardless, as the products they made were no longer wanted. The other class of people at Kodak and Polaroid were the managers, supervisors and non-technical staff. Those people can get jobs elsewhere (and most of them have). Very few people lost their jobs who wouldn't have been let go when these companies transitioned to new technologies, except managers, who can hardly be said to be innocent victims.


  • Re:Incidentally... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by gopla (597381) on Sunday December 02, 2012 @02:38PM (#42162255)

    After all, there isn't any reason why a company needs to struggle to perpetuate its existence forever(any more than a company would struggle to perpetuate the existence of a given product line forever).

    That would be equivalent to euthanasia for companies. But there are real reason why it is not universally accepted. For all companies that have died there are enough examples that have struggeld and come out stronger. Nokia and Apple comes to mind immediatly. They diversified and successed beyond immagination.

    The message is: don't quit too easily.

  • Re:Poor management (Score:4, Insightful)

    by symbolset (646467) * on Sunday December 02, 2012 @04:57PM (#42163093) Journal
    I'm sure the argument was that if they promoted the new technology it would "cannibalize" their traditional revenue base. There is a lesson here.

Computers can figure out all kinds of problems, except the things in the world that just don't add up.