(Reuters) - The third director in a week has resigned from Kodak Co as the former film giant struggles to cope with the dominance of digital photography.Laura Tyson, a professor and former White House
lady luck
: zw. 23.01. und anfang feber wird Q4 veröffentlicht
spätestens dann wird man auch erkennen können, wie erfolgreich 2012 wird und ob die aussagen vom "Red Sofa Interview" von Antonio Perez zutreffend sind. das letzte quartal aber war i.d. vergangenheit fast immer das stärkste. was ev. davor noch mit div. trials bzgl. patentrechte sowie monetisierung von anderen intellectual properities passieren wird, bleibt spekulation.
Jane is a member of The Motley Fool Blog Network -- entries represent the personal opinions of our bloggers and are not formally edited.
More out of distressed company Kodak. And what it might mean is wide open for speculation.
Iconic Kodak (NYSE: EK) has been closly watched since last September when it hired powerhouse law firm Jones Day, which specializes in Chapter 11, along with other options for insolvency. Eyes popped when that firm was assigned to other duties and law firm Sullivan & Cromwell hired. Hunches included the possibility that Jones Day advised Chapter 11, Kodak balked. But we don't know that. The less we know the more rumors fly.
Since then, the rumor mill has not been disappointed. The next big development was news that Kodak was trying to sell 1100 digital patents and obtain about $900 million from funds Cerberus Capital Management LP and Highbridge Capital Hedge Fund. Likely, it was reported, the funding would fall short of the $900 million.
Last week, two Kodak board members, who represent private equity fund Kohlberg Kravis Roberts (NYSE: KKR), resigned without explanation, not from them, not from Kodak. They are Herald Chen and Adam Clammer who joined the board in 2009. About the possible reasons why, Reuters interviewed Bill Brandt, chief executive officer of turnaround firm Development Specialists and chair of Illinois Finance Authority. Brandt posits there could be either of two explanations. One is that Kodak might be filing Chapter 11. These two members want to be out before it does and also there is the danger of lawsuits about liability. Board members are increasingly sued. That's why it's increasingly difficult to recruit them. The second reason could be that KKR is trying to bid on the digital patents and having employees on the board might represent a conflict of interest.
Kodak stock is at .66. The 52-week range has been .54 to $5.85.
thekey
: Eastman Kodak: Past The Point Of A Turnaround
Eastman Kodak: Past The Point Of A Turnaround
Recently, we’ve taken a dim view of Eastman Kodak’s (EK) prospects. As we wrote here and here, we believe the company is most likely past the point where a turnaround outside of bankruptcy is possible. A commenter assuming various names, most recently “Truthseeker”, has expressed his criticism in a most disdainful and discourteous manner. While we object strenuously to his lack of civility, and may delete future comments that do not take a civil tone (though we will never delete comments that merely disagree with us), we thought we would pull up his comment and respond to it. We encourage dissenting opinions and we all benefit from civil debate.
Truthseeker wrote:
Are you aware:
Kodak has received $1B offer in rescue financing from bondholders Kodak has $2B+ in NOLs to offset income derived from patent sales Kodak still has billions in non-core assets to sell if necessary to raise additional cash Kodak has mentioned it can slow its global digital expansion if necessary to minimize cash burn
Didn’t think so..do some research before jumping on the bandwagon bashing a 70 cent stock ..where were you when Kodak was trading $80 and when you could actually add some value? Pathetic.
Unlike his previous comments, this time, Truthseeker actually stated some facts together with his offensive and discourteous tone. Where I was when Kodak was at $80 is irrelevant; I wasn’t publicly advocating either buying or selling. I write infrequently and on topics that resonate with me at the moment. There’s still $.70 more for this to go down, and my initial post was reacting to an unwarranted jump in the share price. Where were you at $80?
As to his claims:
$1B offer in rescue financing from bondholders: Bondholders have no reason to preserve value for equityholders, especially since it means keeping pension liabilities. Any bondholder bailout is likely to be part of a restructuring that wipes out equityholders. $2B in NOLs- You need to profit to take advantage of these and the company’s liabilities are greater than $2B. Billions in non-core assets to sell: What are these magical assets that are worth billions, which are not core to the business and losing money right now? The patents, again? Slow global digital expansion to minimize cash burn: Kodak missed digital. Period. Expansion isn’t happening. What would it mean to slow it? This company has a bloated legacy cost structure it can’t get out from under. Like other legacy manufacturing industries (auto, steel, etc.), it will require restructuring in bankruptcy to rationalize and create a sustainable business.
Disclosure: The author has no position in any stock mentioned
VION Food Group takes over Eastman Gel from Eastman Kodak Company 2 | Jan | 2012
On December 30 2011, VION has acquired Eastman Gel from the Eastman Kodak Company. Eastman Gel is based in Peabody (Mass. USA).
Eastman Gel will be part of VION Ingredients activity Rousselot. It is considered as an opportunity to strengthen Rousselots’ position in both growing pharma-markets and its current position in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
The acquisition contributes to Rousselots’ strategy of worldwide presence in gelatine and proximity to customers and will add to their leading position in gelatine manufacturing worldwide.
Eastman Gel manufactures gelatine for the photographic, pharmaceutical, edible protein and food/confectionery market sectors. Eastman Gel employs 95 people and produces 5500 tonnes of gelatine, yearly.
VION N.V. VION N.V. is an internationally operating food company with two core activities Food and Ingredients. The company produces high-quality foods and ingredients for humans and animals. VION has an annual turnover of € 8.9 billion and employs 26.500 staff worldwide. VION is a non-listed company and has a single agricultural shareholder: the Zuidelijke Land- en tuinbouworganisatie ZLTO [Dutch Southern Farmers and Market Gardeners Union] which has 18,000 members. VION’s head office is located in Eindhoven, the Netherlands.
Kodak: Board Members Beware By Jane Genova - January 1, 2012 | Tickers: EK, GGP, KKR | 0 Comments
Jane is a member of The Motley Fool Blog Network -- entries represent the personal opinions of our bloggers and are not formally edited.
If a public company is approaching or is in the "zone of insolvency," the game changes - big time - for board members. Recently, three members of the board have left Kodak (NYSE: EK) without explanation from them or the company. Given that development, we have to wonder if Kodak will be entering a zone of insolvency. That's the phrase used to indicate that either a company's liabilities outweigh assets (balance sheet insolvency) or its cash position is inadequate to pay the bills (cash flow insolvency). The three who exited were Laura Tyson, professor at the University of California, Berkeley's School of Business, and Adam Clammer and Herald Chen of private equity fund Kohlberg Kravis Roberts (NYSE: KKR).
When the corporation is in or near insolvency, board members become a whole lot more vulnerable to lawsuits and actions by regulatory bodies such as the SEC. That's because their job is expanded from watching out for shareholder interests to responsibility to creditors, secured and unsecured. Examples range from shareholder lawsuit against all General Growth Properties (NYSE: GGP) board members for not accepting a buyout offer to the SEC action against several Syntax-Brillian Corp (NASDAQ: BRLC.DL) board members for alleged fraud. The suits happened years after troubles began and Chapter 11 was filed. So, parachuting out provides no overall legal protection. What X board member decided three months before departing could be an item in the complaint. Exiting might only prevent additional items from being listed in the lawsuit. Also in insolvency board members can be sued not only collectively but as individuals. Obviously, negative publicity is inevitable and that can deliver a hit to a board member's professional brandname and credibility.
As many know, even among companies not distressed, the number of lawsuits keeps increasing for breach of fiduciary duty. In "Walt Disney Co. Derivative Litigation," the Delaware court found board members inattentive, including terms of employment, termination, and severance for Hollywood agent Michael Ovitz. That's exactly why it's difficult to recruit board members.
Sure, companies try to make it financially worth their while to serve and do provide Directors and Officers (D&O) liability insurance. However, both in the worst and best of times being a director entails - or should entail - continually doing a kind of due diligence on proposals, how systems such as accounting and executive compensation operate, performance, and emerging threats. Accepting management statements at face value can be construed as violating the so-called "business judgment rule," which presumes directors perform their duties in good faith. In a lawsuit, plaintiffs have the burden of proof to show that wasn't so.
Thread abonnieren
