darconi said:
smallflyingtaco said:
darconi said:
I don't think you understand the term "largest company". There are a lot of ways to measure how big a company is.
Some comparisons:
Revenue - Toyota at $214B vs MS at $61B
Enterprise Value - Toyota at $224B vs MS at $156B
Market Cap - Toyota at $116B MS at $180B
# Employees - Toyota at 320k people, MS at 91k people
So by 3 of those 4 measures, Toyota is MUCH bigger than MS. And FYI, most places consider "size" primarily based on revenue 1st (i.e. Fortune 500 rankings always based on revenue).
Maybe read a bit before saying other people are wrong.
|
The term "largest company" is going to fall into having no real meaning under your argument which if that is the best you have you should probably just go do something else. If you believe terms have no meaning there is no point to discussion as what your saying could then mean anything. The above post was a biased attempt to cover up for the fact that Toyota has shrunk since last March. Either hedge your statement or pick the most recent relevant data point and use a real metric or you should be called on it. If your going to insist on this entire line of argument that nothing means anything I will just assume you agree with me as there is not point in arguing the entire line of thought that words have no meaning and you can say whatever you want and it means whatever you want and reality agrees with you. Exact meaning may not be possible but I think a better attempt than this can be made and that we do actually exchange real ideas and information.
Of your metrics I think you found a good one to measure the size of Toyota as larger than MS in EV. I would usually only look at Market Cap but EV is also valid and the most recent measures are in the near term. I may think it slightly biased in favor of Toyota, as I doubt all of their assets could really be liquidated to the values which accountants list them at but you do make a good point that by that measure they are larger. Your other measures I find questionable as they are either difficult to quantify or have little interaction with a good idea of company size in terms which are relevant to measures of what makes a company viable.
|
Wow, that was just so completely pointless and completely missing any logic whatsoever. Fact of the matter is the term "largest" has absolutely no relevance. You can use the words, most profitable, most employment, etc, but largest is an undefined metric.
Go look up "tallest building" and you'll find half a dozen different lists, same goes with "biggest city" and crap like that.
There IS no definition of largest.
And OT, the only thing that has shrunk for Toyota has been sales, revenues/profit, all of their assets are still the same as before. These aren't on paper assets like mortage securities which suffer from the mark to market requirements (or at least they used to), these are physical assets.
|
They should have paper assets in the form of car loans, Toyota finacial provides financing. This is probably only a few billion at most but yes they do have paper assets which would be difficult to liquidate today.
