ElGranCabeza said:
Solid_Snake4RD said:
ElGranCabeza said:
Rpruett said:
Sony has a lot more money than Nintendo and it's not even close. Nintendo might have more active cash at a given moment but that really means virtually nothing on an overall sense.
Every asset that Sony has could be liquidated for a ridiculous amount of money and trump anything Nintendo could ever want. Game Studios, Movie studios, Music Studios, Technology, Buildings, Product lines, etc, etc ,etc.
|
In that sense yes, but I think the other folks were talking about money in the bank, which I always thought Nintendo had more money in the bank than Sony. Is that information divulged in the FY financials? If so, can someone tell me how much Sony and Nintendo have each?
|
Nobody knows the exact cash and other tangible assets.Companies only give out overall figures of all assets whether it is liquid cash of or other assets.
Also many people are arguing on the basis that just because Sony lost so much with PS3 its bankrupt.it made alot more with PS and also other electronics
|
To be fair, AFAIK, they lost pretty much all their Playstation money with the PS3. Plus Sony is a huge company, with more assets than Samsung or Apple even, but on their best years their net profits were U$4 billion whereas Samsung and Apple do U$10 billion, Nintendo gets close to that net profit and they only have a gaming division.
My point is, AFAIK, Sony has always been great in generating revenue, but having way too much expenses and stuff, means they don't have as much revenue. This is all my limited opinion on the matter of course.
|
Sony's profits have been higher.Its just that Sony always has alot in R&d.like If you look at Sony's profit in in PS2's era,they were actually alot more but they had alot in R&D so their profits showed to the public were alot less.Blu-ray and Cell cost a bomb in R&d and still sony was able to make profit in PS2 era.
If you look at samsung,they barely invet anything.even LG,they just sell and do little R&D
