Polaroid Finance: A Case Study in Value Destruction
The Polaroid Corporation, synonymous with instant photography for decades, serves as a stark reminder of how even iconic brands can falter. The story of Polaroid Finance, a division created to diversify revenue streams, highlights the dangers of venturing into unfamiliar territory and the devastating consequences of poor financial management.
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, Polaroid faced increasing competition from traditional film and, more ominously, the emerging digital photography market. To combat declining profitability from its core business, management sought diversification through the establishment of Polaroid Finance. This division aimed to provide financial services, including equipment leasing and financing, primarily to businesses in the printing and imaging sectors. The rationale was that Polaroid’s expertise in these fields would give them a competitive edge and allow them to generate profits beyond camera sales.
However, Polaroid Finance quickly encountered several challenges. Firstly, the company lacked the necessary expertise in financial risk management. They underestimated the complexities of credit assessment and loan underwriting, resulting in a portfolio laden with risky loans and leases. Many of the borrowers were themselves struggling businesses within the increasingly challenged printing and imaging industries, making them high-risk clients. Polaroid Finance’s lending practices proved to be far more lax than established financial institutions.
Secondly, Polaroid Finance suffered from inadequate oversight and controls. The division operated largely independently, with insufficient monitoring of its financial performance and risk exposure. This lack of accountability allowed problematic loans to accumulate without early detection or intervention. The parent company’s management, focused on the core photography business, failed to adequately scrutinize the activities of Polaroid Finance, creating a breeding ground for financial mismanagement.
The Asian financial crisis of 1997-1998 exposed the weaknesses of Polaroid Finance. The economic downturn led to widespread defaults on loans and leases within its portfolio, resulting in significant losses. These losses, coupled with ongoing challenges in the core photography business, pushed Polaroid towards financial crisis. The weight of these bad debts severely impacted Polaroid’s balance sheet and ability to invest in crucial research and development needed to compete with digital photography.
The failure of Polaroid Finance accelerated the company’s decline. In 2001, Polaroid filed for bankruptcy protection. While other factors contributed to Polaroid’s downfall, such as slow adaptation to digital technology and poor strategic decisions, the financial losses stemming from Polaroid Finance played a significant role. The case study illustrates the importance of sticking to core competencies, exercising prudent risk management, and maintaining strong internal controls when venturing into new business areas. Diversification, while potentially beneficial, can be disastrous if not executed with the necessary expertise and oversight. Polaroid Finance serves as a cautionary tale for companies tempted to stray too far from their areas of proven strength.