Tempesta di Fuoco
Banned
Yeah, Sony will not survive the decade and Kaz is pretty fucked. No one wants their products, yet they keep forcing themselves into every market.
Yeah, Sony will not survive the decade and Kaz is pretty fucked. No one wants their products, yet they keep forcing themselves into every market.
All Japanese companies survive, they just move onto something else, like love hotels or sewing machines.
Then they can use their sewing machines to stitch their company back together.
I think a lot of people believe the gaming division is doing extremely well when it's not. It's doing fine, mind you, but the market PS4 has placed itself in is very low margin and thus the gaming division hasn't made a profit since the PS4 launched. Again, this doesn't mean the gaming division is a huge failure, it just means it isn't this smashing success in a sea of failures. If you want that division inside Sony, you're looking for their financial divisions. Their life insurance division is what's keeping the business afloat.
True, but their gaming division is the one place where their brand name hasn't taken such a huge hit. It's their shining beacon in the public eye.
It's really disappointing seeing these continued losses. On the gaming side of the business Sony hit an absolute home run and have been doing fantastic but the rest of the company is pretty much being run into the ground.
At this point I believe insurance and gaming are their only profitable divisions correct?
It's really disappointing seeing these continued losses. On the gaming side of the business Sony hit an absolute home run and have been doing fantastic but the rest of the company is pretty much being run into the ground.
At this point I believe insurance and gaming are their only profitable divisions correct?
Sony's Gaming Division hasn't been hitting a home run and doing fantastic since the PS2 days.
Perhaps calling it a home run was too kind but the Playstation brand is plenty healthy.Sony's Gaming Division hasn't been hitting a home run and doing fantastic since the PS2 days.
Perhaps calling it a home run was too kind but the Playstation brand is plenty healthy.
it posted a small profit last quarter at the beginning of the generation when hardware margins are lowest and without any of their major brands such as Uncharted and Gran Turismo releasing.
So maybe fantastic isn't the right word but its doing well.
So I haven't looked into Sonys current market value but honest question how much would it cost MS to buy the Playstation division?
Considering they just dropped 2.5 billion on Mojang its not a stretch to think they would consider such a thing if the price was right. I'm sure its currently still to expensive not to mention I doubt Sony is looking to sell but Im curious.
I think a lot of people believe the gaming division is doing extremely well when it's not. It's doing fine, mind you, but the market PS4 has placed itself in is very low margin and thus the gaming division hasn't made a profit since the PS4 launched. Again, this doesn't mean the gaming division is a huge failure, it just means it isn't this smashing success in a sea of failures. If you want that division inside Sony, you're looking for their financial divisions. Their life insurance division is what's keeping the business afloat.
As another note, according to this article, Sony is writing down the value of its mobile unit by approximately 1.68 Billion dollars. That still leaves a net loss of 470 Million dollars expected in cash flow. By writing down the value of its mobile division, Sony is essentially admitting that they've lost the mobile war and have been pushed out of that market as a major player. Thus, the value of its mobile arm goes from "this is a major player in a fast growing market' down to the value of "this is a small-to-mid level player in a fast growing market."
So at what point does a company decide that breaking even on a division is not worth it anymore? I mean even assuming the gaming division makes profit, from what I'm reading...the profit will never be huge. So why stick around? How does this model benefit stock holders?
^This. Despite what some gamers think, gaming has very thin profit margins. Right now, a company like Sony could could decimate their competitors and vastly outsell their products but the profits by the end of the generation would still be nothing to write home about. There is a reason Google and Amazon don't take hqrdcore gaming very seriously.Well, it's certainly doing better than it was in the early PS3 days. But yes, it's not a "home run" either.
If anyone wanted to know why Nintendo and Microsoft both made these quirky, weird decisions with their hardware that didn't pay off (the Wii U tablet, Kinect mandatory, etc.), this is the reason. The traditional console space is so low margin at this point that even something that "hits a home run" like the PS4 isn't a huge money maker.
me thinks a guy known for some video of people being bored of Ridge Racer isn't a good idea as a CEO.
Anyway, how much money can a company lose.
Sure this happened after he became president but you can't put that on him.
Sony will hpefullyvsell their TV division and become a leaner company. I believe that's kaz's vision. This is likely the blast year Sony will post a net loss so WSJ is just hyping it for clicks.
I actually didn't know this. What type of insurance?
It's completely fine for Sony given their market position. Microsoft is the one who is more likely to pull out, if anything.
Stockholders for Microsoft have reason to believe that MS can do something better with that investment. MS' standard is Windows, Office, and now Azure, all which have very high profit margins. From their perspective, a segment that is treading water would be a real disappointment. By contrast, most of Sony's businesses are struggling, so from that perspective a unit that is treading water with strong brand awareness is just fine. This concept is referred to as opportunity cost; Microsoft's opportunity cost is higher than Sony's.
It's completely fine for Sony given their market position. Microsoft is the one who is more likely to pull out, if anything.
Stockholders for Microsoft have reason to believe that MS can do something better with that investment. MS' standard is Windows, Office, and now Azure, all which have very high profit margins. From their perspective, a segment that is treading water would be a real disappointment. By contrast, most of Sony's businesses are struggling, so from that perspective a unit that is treading water with strong brand awareness is just fine. This concept is referred to as opportunity cost; Microsoft's opportunity cost is higher than Sony's.
So at what point does a company decide that breaking even on a division is not worth it anymore? I mean even assuming the gaming division makes profit, from what I'm reading...the profit will never be huge. So why stick around? How does this model benefit stock holders?
I guess I just don't understand the point. If Sony wasn't doing games, then all the billions they invest in it, go back to the company. Right now they throw out billions, and only barely make it back w/ little to no profit. So how does that benefit a stock holder, to basically have your company spend money, only to get the same amount back with no gains?
So basically, because their other divisions are doing poorly, a division that makes no money but breaks even is worth keeping around? Wouldn't the best option be to, I dunno...get rid of the failing division, as well as the divisions that only break even? And only focus on divisions that do make profit? I guess I don't understand business.
All Japanese companies survive, they just move onto something else, like love hotels or sewing machines.
Because at least the money being invested there is coming back. Literally no other division is doing that besides Insurance and films to a degee.
if they invest that cash else where it may never come back. Their gaming division isnt a shining example of profits but it currently is at least a safe bet.
I guess I just don't understand the point. If Sony wasn't doing games, then all the billions they invest in it, go back to the company. Right now they throw out billions, and only barely make it back w/ little to no profit. So how does that benefit a stock holder, to basically have your company spend money, only to get the same amount back with no gains?
So basically, because their other divisions are doing poorly, a division that makes no money but breaks even is worth keeping around? Wouldn't the best option be to, I dunno...get rid of the failing division, as well as the divisions that only break even? And only focus on divisions that do make profit? I guess I don't understand business.
EDIT: Sorry, it's not your responsibility to educate me on this sort of thing. Didn't mean to bombard you with questions.
Honestly one of the most obvious moves they can make is selling the Spider Man rights back to Marvel.
Their last film underperformed both financially and critically and I don't see that trajectory changing much if at all with a Sinister Six film. The deal would essentially be pure profit and its better for them to sell now than if future films further decrease the value of the series.
I hated ASM2, but it was still profitable. Spider-Man is an asset that could earn them money for decades to come, so one film performing below their desires/receiving poor reviews likely won't change their thought process.
They can reboot again and again if needed so a quality decline seems more like a temporary glitch than a long term problem (see the jump in quality from Cap 1 to Cap 2 as an example of how to right the ship).
I guess I just don't understand the point. If Sony wasn't doing games, then all the billions they invest in it, go back to the company. Right now they throw out billions, and only barely make it back w/ little to no profit. So how does that benefit a stock holder, to basically have your company spend money, only to get the same amount back with no gains?
So basically, because their other divisions are doing poorly, a division that makes no money but breaks even is worth keeping around? Wouldn't the best option be to, I dunno...get rid of the failing division, as well as the divisions that only break even? And only focus on divisions that do make profit? I guess I don't understand business.
EDIT: Sorry, it's not your responsibility to educate me on this sort of thing. Didn't mean to bombard you with questions.
I hated ASM2, but it was still profitable. Spider-Man is an asset that could earn them money for decades to come, so one film performing below their desires/receiving poor reviews likely won't change their thought process.
They can reboot again and again if needed so a quality decline seems more like a temporary glitch than a long term problem (see the jump in quality from Cap 1 to Cap 2 as an example of how to right the ship).
Honestly one of the most obvious moves they can make is selling the Spider Man rights back to Marvel.
Their last film underperformed both financially and critically and I don't see that trajectory changing much if at all with a Sinister Six film. The deal would essentially be pure profit and its better for them to sell now than if future films further decrease the value of the series.
So let's imagine a simple company that has 10 divisions that are all relatively independent of each other. Of those, about 6 are losing significant money, 1 is treading water, and 3 are making money. Now, that 1 treading water division isn't a good thing in absolute terms. However, it's way, way down the list of priorities to fix. First, they need to not only work on those other 6 units that are losing money, but work on them such that they go from significant money losers and turn them in to money makers. Maybe they scrap one of these divisions and make a whole new, different one in its place. A process like that -- even in our perfect, simple company -- would take years, and more likely decades, for a large firm working on 6 divisions. By the time they're done with that process, the "treading water" division will likely look completely different anyway, as technology moves very fast and who knows what a division will be doing in 15 years. Compared to the rest of the divisions in this particular company, a division which treads water is very low on the problem list.
As a different example, imagine a company which has 7 divisions, 5 of which are making significant profit, 1 of which is treading water, and 1 of which is losing money. Now, that losing money one would be the first on the list, but that "treading water" division would need to be pretty quickly addressed as well. Compared to the rest of the divisions in this particular company, a division which treads water is fairly high on the problem list.
Hope that helps explain the idea.
I think a lot of people believe the gaming division is doing extremely well when it's not. It's doing fine, mind you, but the market PS4 has placed itself in is very low margin and thus the gaming division hasn't made a profit since the PS4 launched. Again, this doesn't mean the gaming division is a huge failure, it just means it isn't this smashing success in a sea of failures. If you want that division inside Sony, you're looking for their financial divisions. Their life insurance division is what's keeping the business afloat.
I hated ASM2, but it was still profitable. Spider-Man is an asset that could earn them money for decades to come, so one film performing below their desires/receiving poor reviews likely won't change their thought process.
They can reboot again and again if needed so a quality decline seems more like a temporary glitch than a long term problem (see the jump in quality from Cap 1 to Cap 2 as an example of how to right the ship).
Even for a huge corp like Sony losing $2 billion still stings unless they're sitting on some massive horde of cash.
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but are they really all that profitable? Modern Spidey films seem to be good for about $700-$750 million worldwide. And falling. Now that's not bad by any means, but it's not what it used to be.
Anyway, after taking out the cut to distributors and theaters, I believe the studios tend to get about half of the worldwide take (again, please correct me if I'm wrong). This puts Sony's gross income from a Spider-Man film at $350-$375 million. Take out marketing (tens of millions) and production budget ($200 million for ASM2), and you're left with $100 million or so in profit. And also bear in mind that Sony no longer gets one red cent from any Spider-Man merchandise.
It seems to me that selling the Spider-Man film rights for a cool billion dollars would generate the same amount of "profit" as ten successful Spider-Man films. And they could probably get even more for it. If my numbers are close to correct (which, again, they may not be), that seems like a cut and dry business decision.