Kodak cuts 23% of workforce (15,000 jobs)...Stock is up 10%...

[phillybri]

This is one of those things that just pisses me off to no end. That a company can axe nearly a quarter of their workers and get a huge bump on the news just kills me...

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040122/ap_on_bi_ge/kodak_jobs

Kodak to Cut Up to 23 Pct. of Work Force

ROCHESTER, N.Y. - Eastman Kodak Co., struggling to find its footing in new digital photography markets as its signature film business fades, said Thursday it will cut 12,000 to 15,000 jobs, or up to 23 percent of its global work force, over the next three years.

The announcement came as the world's biggest photography company posted a fourth-quarter profit of $19 million, or 7 cents a share, down sharply from $113 million, or 39 cents a share, a year ago.

:grr:

[GOPisEvil]

1. This is a prime reason NOT to judge the economy by the stock market.

n/t

[tom_paine]

6. Exactly.

Further, as we travel down the road backwards to Empire and the Two-Clas, One-Party State, the stock market and other indicators (which are all now being manipulated by the Imperials like a Soviet Agriculture Report anyway) become less and less relevant to the actual state of the Imperial Economy.

At times, I just shake my head and ask myself, "Is it possible to run an economy without reference or mention of the bottom 80% of the Empire's citizenry.

Then I remember that virtually all economies prior to the Age of Enlightenment and a majority of economies since then (mostly restricted to the Third World, to which the Amerikan Empire now belongs) were run in just that fashion.

What a bummer.

[JanMichael]

2. I'm sure some jackass here will love the stock gain.

And not give a shit about the lost jobs. It's the status quo lately.

[hippyleftist]

3. profits over people? sounds like a BFEE company

[The Backlash Cometh]

4. Well, we've held onto what we had, but we're not buying any new stocks

There are probably others like us. Give it time. The economic hit of lost jobs will eventually take its toll on the stock market, unless, of course, the new investors are overseas. In which case, maybe it's time to unload Wall Street. ;-)

[boxster]

5. Cost-cutting often results in stock price increases, because it means

higher profits.

And, honestly, it makes sense. If you lower expenses, in theory you are increasing the value of the company to the stockholders.

[LuCifer]

7. HURRAH FOR DOWNSIZING!!!

That sold me! The economy is damn good!

That is...if you are working workers harder and from India...for nothing.

DOWNSIZE THIS!
Lu Cifer

[Skidmore]

8. This gaming of the system should be quantifiable

on a chart of companies who have done similar things--eg jobs lost v. stock gains. It really is like playing the horses. I know it's a complicated scenario but couldn't this somehow be rolled up into a succinct message about the rather humungous game of liar's poker these fat cats are playing with economy? I just have a picture of an ad with a poker game being played on a large table by someone representing CEOs of Benedict Arnold companies with a long line of peope representing the average American worker for that company. The American worker loses every hand and the stake (his job) is handed off to an offscreen person.

It's not my field obviously, but I would think that there would be some way illustrate this gaming of stock market and that its effects on employment aren't necessarily good for the American worker.

[Gulf Coast J]

9. Look at it from Kodak's perspective for a moment

They are in a highly competitive environment and they are facing a dramatically changing market. Nobody buys normal cameras anymore, it's all digital. Their profits have been falling, and they recently have been taking losses. Even taking into account today's gain, their stock is worth as much now as it was in 1960. If Kodak doesn't do everything they can to reduce costs, they very well could be out of business in a couple years. It sucks, but even in the best of time companies have to lay people off.

As for the market response, what would you rather it do? Should the market reward inefficient companies over efficient ones? Are you going to buy stocks in companies that put a higher priority on keeping people employed than on the long-run outlook of the company? Do you know anybody who is?

[phillybri]

12. No shit that's how it goes...

...but what is the message that's being sent?

Fuck the people! Let's get that stock bump!!!

[Gulf Coast J]

13. Then what's the point of whining about it?

What's the alternative to it? Refuse to let companies fire people even if it means they might eventually go out of business? Refuse to let capital flow to where it is most profitable? I just don't see what good comes out of complaining about the system.

Instead let's figure out the best way to get these people back to work doing something productive.

[youngred]

10. As a Rochestarian

There are very few who will be surprised by this move, they've been doing it for years.

In the meantime there are now several thousand more unemployed people in a region of NY with extremely high unemploymenat already and the state does nothing to help out. Rochester is the last part of the state on ALbany's mind.

[phillybri]

11. My wife is from NY and she says Kodak is pretty rough in it's methods...

...for cutting people loose...

[youngred]

14. absolutely

Rochester is a glorfied company town, and the company is kodak