RVDondaPC said:
And if you bought Sony 11 years ago before the stock skyrocketed you'd be seeing a better return than your 111% with Nintendo. And if you bought it a year ago you'd be up 50%. What you posted doesn't mean anything other than 10 years ago happen to be a period of time where Sony's stock skyrocketed into being overvalued. It happens. It doesn't mean the company is going to go bankrupt and fail. |
I didnt say they would go bankrupt but right now they are in deep trouble. This is well known and if they cant turn things around they will need to shave about 30k workers just to break even. They need something big and they need it soon.
As for your numbers, no, you are wrong. If you bought those stocks 11 years ago you would see:
SNE: 117% gain (dividends included)
NTDOY: 196% gain (dividends included)
MSFT: 282% gain (dividends included)
6% CD's: 89% Gain
As you can clearly see, SNE has been underperforming its sector for a very long time. I use 10 years because its a common metric. I was not trying to pick on Sony specifically. The point isnt that sony lost 40% its that they have been consistently underperforming for more than 11 years now even during their greatest peak. Want to know why? I worked for them and I know for a fact that their management is horrible and they dont give a crap about their workers.
The hardest workers get abused and the laziest workers get promoted because they are buddy buddy with high management. I know its true for most companies but its also true that companies that allow this behavior to fester become stagnant and eventually fail. GM is a great example and they did indeed go bankrupt. That is exactly how it was during my time as an engineer at Sony. I left as soon as I got an offer from Lockheed... they were almost just as bad but at least they paid very well and they gave me a ton of freedom and didnt work me to the bone. Sony paid peanuts but they had a much nicer breakroom and great coffee, but I guess they needed it because they liked us all to work 10-12 hours without OT pay. They actually fired people who wouldnt work free overtime and they got sued for it and then they changed all their workers to salary or contracted them out to temp agencies. They remain a filthy company.
2009 was an abnormality in the market. The only reason SNE seems to perform well is because they lost more than every one else. This is actually a very bad sign. The volitility means the market has less faith in sony than in the other companies. But you know what? I will play your game. If you bought stocks in 2009 here is your results:
SNE: 24% Gain
NTDOY: 12% Loss
MSFT: 50% Gain
The only reason Nintendo looks bad is because they didnt lose as much as Sony or MS through the prior year. If you look at the 2 year metric you see that Sony lost 60% of its value during the dip. Ninny only lost 32% of its value. MSFT lost 40% of its value. Sony saw a bigger gain because they lost more than anyone else... But again 2009 is a bad comparison due to what happened to the market. Seriously, I had a 980% gain in 2009... its doesnt mean anything because it was a hiccup in the market.
To put salt in the wound, Sony actually performed worse than the entire Dow and Nasdaq indicies... that is pathetic. Want to cry even more? I compared Sony to the Nasdaq as far back as my brokers records can go. They have actually underperformed the Nasdaq since 1978 by about 900%! Nintendo has actually beat the Nasdaq by about 90% since 1999(I dont have more data on them unfortunatly but I assume they were doing great back in the late 80s and early 90's). MSFT of course has, of course, out performed the index by nearly 27,000% but thats MS.
