Basically the building would be really hard to sell if Sony would leave it.

Basically the common practice is, that you rent the building from the buyer, which means that in reality, you're selling your own money, which usually makes these large offices relatively easy to sell.

What is baffling me, and is causing me a modest amount of concern. Is the fact that Sony built or bought this building in the past two years. When they were already well aware of their financial situation. Look I agree with Sony selling assets to restructure, and I have largely agreed with the restructuring they have been going through for the past six or seven years. This is absolutely not a recent phenomena. I have to wonder if Sony still hasn't come to terms with its own situation.

Look the fact of the matter is this building ought not have existed in the first place for Sony to sell. They wouldn't need to be doing this. If they had leased a building in the first place, and in the mean time they would have had more ready cash available. They might have had more money laying around for strategic acquisitions, or paying back loans, or even getting better terms on loans, or on their bond offerings.

Even if Sony ends up breaking even. Money that could have worked for them ended up not working for them. Anyway this has to be said. The net result of Sony's wheeling and dealing has been losses. I don't honestly know why Sony feels so utterly compelled to spend money they got from selling just to continue buying. It almost feels like a chronic double down. Even when they break even, or take a small win. They always fritter away the gains on another acquisition.

I am interested to see if history is going to repeat itself again. All that usually ends up happening is Sony still lose money, an actually has less stuff to sell off the next year.

LOL and secondly thanks for reporting me if you did LOL!..  I got a warning.. thats so sad man! haha

Learn to read first.. before posting.. even something as bleeding obvious they need the cash.. and not because they need less space.. seriously.

apparently calling someone SDF is trolling now.. I wonder if NDF is also offensive to Nintendo fans? .. ppl here are so sensitive.. lol 

Omggggg this shade is too good 

OT nice one sony 

The building opened 2 years ago, so add another 2 or 3 years at least for planning and building and the investment for this probably dates back at least 5 years or more.

with a good showing at CES last wk, i'd say Sony, is on an impressive up swing, but i hope the situation has improved since the original report. i'd like to see an update.

Maybe it was a typo and he wanted to say "nice one sonny"

*Runs away before getting hurt*

^Likely so. As you'd type "Sony" with capital S.

Sony is selling building because it is in deep financial trouble. This is the same as when a body is starved it is literally forced into eating itself. Sony wanted to build an empire, not based on sound business strategy but out of sheer ego. They felt awesome buying up real estate in NY, owning a piece of Hollywood, while their core businesses were rotting fundamentally.

Had Japan not elected this PM who is hellbent on devaluing Yen, Sony was headed towards insolvency. Sony doesnt generate enough cashflow, nor does it have enough assets on the more liquid end of their balance sheet, that's why they are being forced into liquidating their real assets. Not to fund growth. But to fund restructuring, they want to make it sound like they have operational needs for this cash infusion, but more than likely, it's the monster sitting on the liability end of their balance sheet that grew out of control. Debt eats assets to help grow your equity, when you stop feeding it, it will eat your equity. Nom nom.

My true colors?  Don't be silly, I've poked fun at you many times before!  :D  That's nothing new whatsoever.