By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo - Big revision of the organizational structure of Nintendo

XanderXT on 16 September 2015
Teeqoz said:
XanderXT said:
Teeqoz said:
The_Sony_Girl1 said:
97alexk said:
The_Sony_Girl1 said:
Hmmmm. I sure hope they don't do any bad decisions. I know some companies who did restructuring when their president died, and it hurt them severely.

can you name one?

Scott Paper. It was the world's largest manufacturer and marketer of sanitary tissue products with operations in 22 countries. It fell because of its restructuring.

 

Seems to me like he did a pretty good job...


"In his first nine months as CEO, Dunlap divested over $2 billion worth of assets. Scott’s share price rose from $37.35 to $84.62—an increase of 225 percent in 18 months. Scott reported a $200 million profit in 1994, compared to the net loss of $277 million recorded in 1993."

Source: the internet. Just because a corporation becomes smaller doesn't mean it becomes "worse".

You realize he literally cut the company in half in order to sell it?


You realize that he made it so that the company made half a billion more per year?

I'd rather have a company half the size making twice as much money (and this was more than just twice as much money...) Than a company twice the size making half as much money.... Also, he divested 2 billion, and the company was sold for 7 billion. Last I checked, 2 wasn't half of 9.

The company fell on it's feet because of it's restructuring. And the company wasn't making half a billion more per year, because they had lots of debt and were almost bankrupt.



Around the Network
XanderXT on 16 September 2015
Miyamotoo said:
XanderXT said:
Miyamotoo said:
The_Sony_Girl1 said:
Hmmmm. I sure hope they don't do any bad decisions. I know some companies who did restructuring when their president died, and it hurt them severely.

Actually all this was Iwata plan, also like NX, mobile phone games, Amiibo, using IP in toys, cartoons, movies..

Restructuring was Iwata's plan?

OfCourse, Iwata mentioned merging divisions few years ago that will go side along with merging platforms.

Huh. I should really read more.



PAOerfulone on 16 September 2015

All this restucturing and unifications of their studios just screams more and more, that the rumored "Fusion" concept for NX may actually be true.



Hardware Comparison Threads:

Current Thread

Switch 1 '25 vs DS '11, 3DS '17, and Wii '12

Older Threads:

PlayStation/Xbox/Switch: 2022 Edition

PlayStation/Xbox/Switch Hardware Battle: 2021 Edition!
PlayStation 4/Xbox One/Nintendo Switch: 2019 vs. 2020
PlayStation 4/Xbox One/Nintendo Switch: 2018 vs. 2019
PlayStation 4/Xbox One/Nintendo Switch: 2017 vs. 2018
PlayStation 4: 2015 vs. 2016 vs. 2017

The_Sony_Girl1 on 16 September 2015
XanderXT said:
Miyamotoo said:
XanderXT said:
Miyamotoo said:
The_Sony_Girl1 said:
Hmmmm. I sure hope they don't do any bad decisions. I know some companies who did restructuring when their president died, and it hurt them severely.

Actually all this was Iwata plan, also like NX, mobile phone games, Amiibo, using IP in toys, cartoons, movies..

Restructuring was Iwata's plan?

OfCourse, Iwata mentioned merging divisions few years ago that will go side along with merging platforms.

Huh. I should really read more.

Or maybe less. You spend way too much time on the internet.



Bet with Xander XT: 

I can beat more games on his 3DS than he can on my PSVita in a month. Loser has to buy the winner a game on his/her handheld Guess who won? http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=193531

Me!

The_Sony_Girl1 on 16 September 2015
Teeqoz said:
The_Sony_Girl1 said:
97alexk said:
The_Sony_Girl1 said:
Hmmmm. I sure hope they don't do any bad decisions. I know some companies who did restructuring when their president died, and it hurt them severely.

can you name one?

Scott Paper. It was the world's largest manufacturer and marketer of sanitary tissue products with operations in 22 countries. It fell because of its restructuring.

 

Seems to me like he did a pretty good job...


"In his first nine months as CEO, Dunlap divested over $2 billion worth of assets. Scott’s share price rose from $37.35 to $84.62—an increase of 225 percent in 18 months. Scott reported a $200 million profit in 1994, compared to the net loss of $277 million recorded in 1993."

Source: the internet. Just because a corporation becomes smaller doesn't mean it becomes "worse".

My source is Jim Collins, a respected buisness analysist. Sorry if I trust him more than the internet.



Bet with Xander XT: 

I can beat more games on his 3DS than he can on my PSVita in a month. Loser has to buy the winner a game on his/her handheld Guess who won? http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=193531

Me!

Around the Network
Teeqoz on 16 September 2015
The_Sony_Girl1 said:
Teeqoz said:

Seems to me like he did a pretty good job...


"In his first nine months as CEO, Dunlap divested over $2 billion worth of assets. Scott’s share price rose from $37.35 to $84.62—an increase of 225 percent in 18 months. Scott reported a $200 million profit in 1994, compared to the net loss of $277 million recorded in 1993."

Source: the internet. Just because a corporation becomes smaller doesn't mean it becomes "worse".

My source is Jim Collins, a respected buisness analysist. Sorry if I trust him more than the internet.


Pachter is also a respected business analyst.

If you'd trust an analyst that says a CEO that made the share price increase of 225% in 18 months did a bad job, then you should revise who you trust. I'm pretty sure every single stakeholder in the company was pretty darn happy with his performance as a CEO.



XanderXT on 16 September 2015
Teeqoz said:
The_Sony_Girl1 said:
Teeqoz said:

Seems to me like he did a pretty good job...


"In his first nine months as CEO, Dunlap divested over $2 billion worth of assets. Scott’s share price rose from $37.35 to $84.62—an increase of 225 percent in 18 months. Scott reported a $200 million profit in 1994, compared to the net loss of $277 million recorded in 1993."

Source: the internet. Just because a corporation becomes smaller doesn't mean it becomes "worse".

My source is Jim Collins, a respected buisness analysist. Sorry if I trust him more than the internet.


Pachter is also a respected business analyst.

If you'd trust an analyst that says a CEO that made the share price increase of 225% in 18 months did a bad job, then you should revise who you trust. I'm pretty sure every single stakeholder in the company was pretty darn happy with his performance as a CEO.



Are you seriously comparing Patcher to Collins? They aren't even close to being comparable! She's also not saying that the CEO did a bad job. He did what he was brought into do. How about you check the restructuring before this?

Teeqoz on 16 September 2015
XanderXT said:
Teeqoz said:


Pachter is also a respected business analyst.

If you'd trust an analyst that says a CEO that made the share price increase of 225% in 18 months did a bad job, then you should revise who you trust. I'm pretty sure every single stakeholder in the company was pretty darn happy with his performance as a CEO.


Are you seriously comparing Patcher to Collins? They aren't even close to being comparable! She's also not saying that the CEO did a bad job. He did what he was brought into do. How about you check the restructuring before this?


She's just saying that the company fell because of its restructuring, led by the new CEO... That totally doesn't imply that the CEO did a bad job with the restructuring...

When, firstly, it didn't fall because of the restructuring, it had already fallen, before the restructuring. The restructucturing brought them back up and made them an attracvtive company to buy. Being bought out is not neccesarily a failure, and in this case, when it led to a whole lot more cash in shareholder's pockets how in the world can she say it fell because of the restructuring? Lol

There are of course examples of companies that were ruined due to restructuring, but Scott Paper wasn't one of them....

Besides, you are sourcing Jim Collins, but you aren't giving me anything about Scott Paper that Jim Collins has said, and I can't find any quote where Jim Collins says the Scott Paper restructuring lead to its fall (which doesn't make any sense whatsoever regardless). One could argue that after having turned Scott Paper to a profitable company, it would've been better long term to continue as its own company, without being merged with Kimberly, but you can't really argue that restructuring led to Scott Paper's fall....



XanderXT on 16 September 2015
Teeqoz said:
XanderXT said:


Are you seriously comparing Patcher to Collins? They aren't even close to being comparable! She's also not saying that the CEO did a bad job. He did what he was brought into do. How about you check the restructuring before this?

She's just saying that the company fell because of its restructuring, led by the new CEO... That totally doesn't imply that the CEO did a bad job with the restructuring...

When, firstly, it didn't fall because of the restructuring, it had already fallen, before the restructuring. The restructucturing brought them back up and made them an attracvtive company to buy. Being bought out is not neccesarily a failure, and in this case, when it led to a whole lot more cash in shareholder's pockets how in the world can she say it fell because of the restructuring? Lol

There are of course examples of companies that were ruined due to restructuring, but Scott Paper wasn't one of them....

Besides, you are sourcing Jim Collins, but you aren't giving me anything about Scott Paper that Jim Collins has said, and I can't find any quote where Jim Collins says the Scott Paper restructuring lead to its fall (which doesn't make any sense whatsoever regardless). One could argue that after having turned Scott Paper to a profitable company, it would've been better long term to continue as its own company, without being merged with Kimberly, but you can't really argue that restructuring led to Scott Paper's fall....

What she was saying was that the restructuring killed the company. It was supposed to kill the company. She just cited a bad example of a restructuring killing a company.. For the Jim Collins source, it was in How The Mighty Fall, or How Some Companies never give in.



Teeqoz on 16 September 2015
XanderXT said:
Teeqoz said:
XanderXT said:


Are you seriously comparing Patcher to Collins? They aren't even close to being comparable! She's also not saying that the CEO did a bad job. He did what he was brought into do. How about you check the restructuring before this?

She's just saying that the company fell because of its restructuring, led by the new CEO... That totally doesn't imply that the CEO did a bad job with the restructuring...

When, firstly, it didn't fall because of the restructuring, it had already fallen, before the restructuring. The restructucturing brought them back up and made them an attracvtive company to buy. Being bought out is not neccesarily a failure, and in this case, when it led to a whole lot more cash in shareholder's pockets how in the world can she say it fell because of the restructuring? Lol

There are of course examples of companies that were ruined due to restructuring, but Scott Paper wasn't one of them....

Besides, you are sourcing Jim Collins, but you aren't giving me anything about Scott Paper that Jim Collins has said, and I can't find any quote where Jim Collins says the Scott Paper restructuring lead to its fall (which doesn't make any sense whatsoever regardless). One could argue that after having turned Scott Paper to a profitable company, it would've been better long term to continue as its own company, without being merged with Kimberly, but you can't really argue that restructuring led to Scott Paper's fall....

What she was saying was that the restructuring killed the company. It was supposed to kill the company. She just cited a bad example of a restructuring killing a company.. For the Jim Collins source, it was in How The Mighty Fall, or How Some Companies never give in.


Well, I've only been arguing that the Scott Paper restructuring didn't lead to its fall, contrary to what TheSonyGirl said.... I've not been arguing that restructures can't be horrible for a company, because they certainly can...

Aka, I pointed out how Scott Paper was a bad example, which you now also admit that it was, so I'm glad we could agree