Corporate Health of Sony, Nintendo and MS

[KLAMarine]

DonFerrari said:

KLAMarine said:

DonFerrari said:

KLAMarine said:

I'm not messing with you. The fact that I bothered to do the math to support my statements will attest to that.Sony has more employees than Nintendo. If we divide "armor" by employee size, we get the following:

Nintendo:

$17.4 billion / 5,000 = $3,480,000 per employee

Sony:

$22.1 billion / 130,000 = $170,000 per employee

What do you make of this? Who do you think might be able to hold onto their workforce for longer during times of crisis?

I certainly know who I'd rather work for.

You assume you have almost no knowledge on the issue but keep doing meaningless math to prove Nintendo is safier or have more armor? If you don't know what you are talking about it's better to just say you don't know.

I've said before that I'm not at all an expert and if any business majors see any faulty reasoning in my logic, I want them to correct me.

With that said, what is meaningless about my math?

You can answer that yourself, what meaning you expect on "assets/employee" calculation?

My "assets/employee" calculation was in response to Eddie_Raja's constant bringing up of Sony being able to survive "disaster" better than Nintendo. In response, I calculated how much each company has in reserve to keep their workforce employed. As one can see, Nintendo can afford to keep each one of their employees longer than Sony in part because they have much less employees on the payroll.

That is if my reasoning is sound: again, I'm no business major.

DonFerrari said:

I would dare say that in fact having more employees would make government more prone to bail out the company making it harder for sony to bankrupt than Nintendo, even more when sony acts in a lot more fields and work in technology evolution instead of only making games.

That's a big if. I don't recall the Japanese government jumping in to help Sony when it sold off its Vaio line or when it reported huge losses in the mobile phone business.