Fujifilm's views on Kodak's procedure under the section 301 petition
Fujifilm Files New Evidence Against Kodak's Case with USTR
(Released from Fujifilm New York)
The information in news releases is current at the time of the release. Note that the information shown here may not be latest information (termination of production or sales, changes to specifications or pricing, organizational or contact address changes, etc.), and may be subject to change without prior notice.
ELMSFORD, NY, March 13, 1996 -- Fuji Photo Film today filed with the office of the United States Trade Representative more evidence that proves Kodak's low market share in Japan is the result of consumer preference, not anticompetitive activity. Specifically, the Fujifiilm submission rebuts Kodak's allegations that Fujifilm "controls" its primary distributors, or tokuyakuten, through rebates, guarantee deposits, or influence over bank lending decisions.
"Having been forced to acknowledge that Fujifilm has no direct control over its distributors, Kodak has concocted a conspiracy theory of indirect control that supposedly explains its own poor performance in Japan," said Fujifilm lawyer Bill Barringer. "This submission exposes this theory for what it is -- fantasy. Kodak's allegations are not only false, but irrelevant. Even if Fujifilm did 'control' its distributors, we have shown that Kodak' film already is widely available in most stores throughout Japan.
"Kodak's problem in Japan is not that Fujifilm controls its distributors. Kodak's problem in Japan is that Japanese consumers simply prefer the Fuji brand over Kodak," Barringer said.
This submission represents the third in a four-part rebuttal to Kodak's November 6, 1995 submission. With its final submission in the next few weeks. Fujifilm will have completely refuted Kodak's effort to salvage the credibility of its original, "Privatizing Protection."
Thomas H. Shay
Fuji Photo Film U.S.A., Inc.
Edelman Public Relations