kowenicki said:
theprof00 said:
kowenicki said:
ok so now knock of the tv losses of about 1bn per year and you are in a loss situation, before any other losses they incurred... believe me there are some.
If you really believe the only problem sony had this last year was the tsunami there really isnt any point talking to you. No tsunami this next financial quarter, lets see how they do, then the quarter after... and the quarter after.
Suffice to say not a single analyst agrees with you, nobody in charge of sony agrees with you and the government of Japan dont agree with you.
|
Also, I never said it was their only problem.
"Your whole tone is that Sony is sounding its death rattle and is going to need massive overhaul to stay alive, right? You offered suggestions as to what to change but really, the only reason they are posting losses is because of the tsunami."
You agree with the economists who say that Sony needs to fix some things so that DESPITE (given your dismissal of the tsunami) any potential disasters, they'd still be making money. That is sound advice. The problem with your post is simple. That is the most general, bland sound advice that you could give to any company. You take nothing into consideration, just that there are areas that are struggling, and should be removed.
YET, your tone is of such desperate nature, and overexaggeration that it really just looks like you're ringing the death bell for Sony. Maybe that's not what you're doing at all. My point, (which you've dismissed by saying it's my only argument) is that Sony would have profitted without a tsunami, and in that context, my previous post "you post articles like this and still believe that Sony is somehow fucked in the business department", should make more sense. Sony isn't as fucked as you make them out to be.
Imagining a context where Sony hasn't had a tsunami, your article should have read something like, "sony struggling in X, needs to fix Y. They're doing pretty average, but missing a lot of opportunity". That headline, that I wrote just now <------ is what their actual situation is right now, except with a tsunami on top of it. They are not fucked. They are missing some opportunity, and doing some things wrong, but they are not desperate enough to become "first and foremost, media suppliers" (your words).
Also, you are a crude and disgusting person for saying that there isn't a Tsunami next quarter. You are seriously messed up. Seek therapy.
|
You sir are totally out of order with that. Very very low blow.
It is you that is sick and disgusting, dragging a pefectly civil debate to a low level and trying to score points of a tragedy.
|
This is not a civil debate kowen, this is you trolling. You made your desires clear that they should become a media company in the OP and yet just above you say it's the tv division. Your point has shifted so much since the OP in order to sidestep your logical failures, and obvious trolling.
Again, you treat the tsunami as if it's just a statistic.
That's like saying "America is so fu***ed up. why? it's not like even like they've had a 9/11 every year"
You still can't counter that they would have made money this year. You can't counter it. You haven't said one thing that says without the tsunami they would have lost money. I don't need to bring a debate to a "low level", because you don't even understand the gravity of what happened. Hundreds of factories destroyed, irradiation, nuclear meltdown on the brink.
If I make milk, and a flood kills half my cows, I'll be in the red. Next quarter I will also be in the red because now I will either have to buy fully develiped cows, or use the cows I have, trying to raise the young ones, and mortgage my house so that I can pay my overhead.
Your point makes little sense mate. I don't NEED to drag anything down. Your points are invalid in the first place.
