| TheSource said: It's true that Sony is losing a lot of money, but don't be overdramatic with these figures. A company that brings in tens of billions of dollars per year and makes everything / provides nearly everything under the sun could simply sell off its fatty worthless parts to sustain the elements of the company that continue to provide useful goods and services. Sony also has another advantage, if a big war were to come to East Asia, you'd better believe that Sony would be thrust into a General Motors like roll, as they can make just about anything the Japanese government would want from them. That's probably a long way off but all the currency bullshit going on globally typically comes before really big wars since it prevents people from making enough money to live happily en masse. In theory its actually easier to defeat a company like Microsoft or Nintendo because they really only do one or two things well. If everyone started using phone OS and office software that wasn't made by Microsoft they'd be disrupted pretty severely, and if people stop liking Nintendo software, they'd be disruptable too. Problem is people like Windows, Office, Mario & Pokemon and no one has really figured out how to stop people from liking those things. |
Unfortunately one of the biggest problems with "do it all" companies, is that they are good at a lot of things, but great at none of them, and in some cases, absolutely stink at others. You state this yourself, in your first paragraph by saying Sony "could simply sell off its fatty worthless parts.".
Microsoft and Nintendo on the other hand have fewer, "fatty worhtless parts": they are more efficient companies IN THIS RESPECT as they have a tighter focus on what they want to deliver. However, this does not make them weaker or easier to defeat, on the contrary it makes them the stronger competitor in a hostile environment.
For real world examples of how this plays out, you need look no further then thier latest balance sheets: the more divirsified company is bleeding losses while the other two are in compartively, much better positions. I would also argue that most business analyst would recommend to Sony that they tighten their focus on the things that they can become great on, and shed the rest. NOT because this makes them easier to defeat, as you suggest, but because it makes them stronger.
That doesn't mean I agree that Sony is "doomed" or will be unable to turn this around, and I can dig you trying to re-frame the discussion in a way that isn't overly dramatic - I just don't agree with the reasoning you used to try to illustrate that.
