YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollectionsPanavision Inc

Panavision Inc

During the filming of "Backdraft," the 1991 movie about Chicago firefighters, cinematographer Mikael Salomon donned fire-retardant clothing and carried a camera through burning buildings. Then he poured flammable glue over the camera--which was encased in protective housing--and left it running as the inferno closed in around it. Later, the film crew dug through the ashes and rubble and removed the camera. It was undamaged.
September 3, 1987 | AL DELUGACH, Times Staff Writer
Frederick W. (Ted) Field, a film producer and an heir to the Marshall Field department store fortune, has agreed to sell the movie industry's prestigious camera supplier, Panavision, to a British firm for $147 million, it was announced Wednesday. The price for the Tarzana firm includes $100 million cash, with purchaser Lee International of London assuming $47 million of debt, the parties said. Field has controlled Panavision since 1985 through his 100%-owned Interscope Communications.
August 30, 1988 | BARRY STAVRO, Times Staff Writer
Last Oct. 13, former film lighting electricians John and Benny Lee seemed to be on top of the world. The British brothers had just bought Panavision, the Tarzana company that supplies 35-millimeter cameras and accessories to cinematographers in the movie and TV industry. That same day, the Lees bought out the public shareholders of Lee International, their London entertainment services conglomerate. The two deals cost $327 million.
April 12, 2002 | Bloomberg News
Panavision Inc., a movie camera maker controlled by billionaire Ronald Perelman, canceled a $200-million bond sale because it couldn't find enough buyers for the debt. The Woodland Hills-based company also said it put off a plan to replace its existing bank-credit agreement. Panavision had planned to use proceeds from the note sale and funds from the new bank line to pay off existing bank debt and its 9.63% notes maturing in 2006.
February 20, 2001
Panavision Inc. of Woodland Hills reported a net loss of $2.3 million for the fourth quarter that ended Dec. 31, compared with a net loss of $85,000 for the same period the year before. Revenue was $56.3 million, compared with $55 million. For the year, the company reported a net loss of $23.6 million, compared with $16 million, and revenue of $204.6 million, compared with $202.8 million.
Los Angeles Times Articles