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

Forums - Sales Discussion - if you thought SONY's losses were bad.....

smallflyingtaco said:
arsenicazure said:
sigh.. here we go

The Fortune Global 500 is a ranking of the top 500 corporations worldwide as measured by revenue. The list is compiled and published annually by Fortune magazine.


This is the top 10 as published in July 2008. It is based on the companies' fiscal year ended on or before 31 March 2008.[1]

1. Wal Mart - United States (retail)
2. ExxonMobil Corporation - United States (oil)
3. Royal Dutch Shell - Netherlands [2] (oil)
4. BP - United Kingdom (oil)
5. Toyota Motor - Japan (automobiles)
6. Chevron - United States (oil)
7. ING Group - Netherlands (banking)
8. Total - France (oil)
9. General Motors - United States (automobiles)
10. ConocoPhillips - United States (oil)

The top ten includes six oil companies, two automobile manufacturers, one retailer, and one banking corporation. The complete list is available online.

Now i dont see microsoft on this list.. So while microsoft is worth more (asset wise,than toyota), its barely 1/4th in terms of REVENUE (60 billion vs 262 billion USD)..2008 figure.

And if microsoft is so big n so profitable.. then why the hell did it lay off 5000 ppl in a phased manner?

Simple point is, all the japanese companies are bleeding, especially the electronic divisions.. but compared to the billions that panasonic and Hitachi has squandered.. SONY's loss of 1.5 billion doesnt look so bad. Especially since we all know how horrible the ps3 has been for them.

Horrible, out of date list.  You picked a time in the middle of last summer which is why it has all those oil companies.  Toyota is in the list at that time and probably had been bigger than MS since about 2006 but it is not today, it was not during the 90s and a lot of the first half of 2000.  It picked up in the later half of the 2000s as the Japanese economy started to pickup but it is back down to about 2/3 the size of MS today.

 

here is the 2009 list.. this list is limited to corporations based IN AMERICA so toyota,naturally, doesnt have a ranking:

 

 

Fortune 1000
Current view: 1-100 101-200 201-300 301-400 401-500 501-600 601-700 701-800 801-900 901-1000
Rank Company Revenues
($ millions)
Profits
($ millions)
1 Exxon Mobil 442,851.0 45,220.0
2 Wal-Mart Stores 405,607.0 13,400.0
3 Chevron 263,159.0 23,931.0
4 ConocoPhillips 230,764.0 -16,998.0
5 General Electric 183,207.0 17,410.0
6 General Motors 148,979.0 -30,860.0
7 Ford Motor 146,277.0 -14,672.0
8 AT&T 124,028.0 12,867.0
9 Hewlett-Packard 118,364.0 8,329.0
10 Valero Energy 118,298.0 -1,131.0
11 Bank of America Corp. 113,106.0 4,008.0
12 Citigroup 112,372.0 -27,684.0
13 Berkshire Hathaway 107,786.0 4,994.0
14 International Business Machines 103,630.0 12,334.0
15 McKesson 101,703.0 990.0
16 J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. 101,491.0 5,605.0
17 Verizon Communications 97,354.0 6,428.0
18 Cardinal Health 91,091.4 1,300.6
19 CVS Caremark 87,471.9 3,212.1
20 Procter & Gamble 83,503.0 12,075.0
21 UnitedHealth Group 81,186.0 2,977.0
22 Kroger 76,000.0 1,249.4
23 Marathon Oil 73,504.0 3,528.0
24 Costco Wholesale 72,483.0 1,282.7
25 Home Depot 71,288.0 2,260.0
26 AmerisourceBergen 70,593.5 250.6
27 Archer Daniels Midland 69,816.0 1,802.0
28 Target 64,948.0 2,214.0
29 Johnson & Johnson 63,747.0 12,949.0
30 Morgan Stanley 62,262.0 1,707.0
31 State Farm Insurance Cos. 61,343.4 -541.8
32 WellPoint 61,251.1 2,490.7
33 Dell 61,101.0 2,478.0
34 Boeing 60,909.0 2,672.0
35 Microsoft 60,420.0 17,681.0
36 Walgreen 59,034.0 2,157.0
37 United Technologies 58,681.0 4,689.0
38 Dow Chemical 57,514.0 579.0
39 MetLife 55,085.0 3,209.0
40 Goldman Sachs Group 53,579.0 2,322.0
41 Sunoco 51,652.0 776.0
41 Wells Fargo 51,652.0 2,655.0
43 United Parcel Service 51,486.0 3,003.0
44 Caterpillar 51,324.0 3,557.0
45 Medco Health Solutions 51,258.0 1,102.9
46 Pfizer 48,296.0 8,104.0
47 Lowe's 48,230.0 2,195.0
48 Time Warner 46,984.0 -13,402.0
49 Sears Holdings 46,770.0 53.0
50 Safeway 44,104.0 965.3
51 Supervalu 44,048.0 593.0
52 PepsiCo 43,251.0 5,142.0
53 Kraft Foods 42,867.0 2,901.0
54 Lockheed Martin 42,731.0 3,217.0
55 Hess 41,094.0 2,360.0
56 Best Buy 40,023.0 1,407.0
57 Cisco Systems 39,540.0 8,052.0
58 Johnson Controls 38,062.0 979.0
59 FedEx 37,953.0 1,125.0
60 Walt Disney 37,843.0 4,427.0
61 Intel 37,586.0 5,292.0
62 Sysco 37,522.1 1,106.2
63 Honeywell International 36,556.0 2,792.0
64 Sprint Nextel 35,635.0 -2,796.0
65 Enterprise GP Holdings 35,469.6 164.1
66 GMAC 35,445.0 1,868.0
67 Ingram Micro 34,362.2 -394.9
68 Comcast 34,256.0 2,547.0
69 Northrop Grumman 33,940.0 -1,262.0
70 News Corp. 32,996.0 5,387.0
71 Apple 32,479.0 4,834.0
72 CHS 32,167.5 803.0
73 Coca-Cola 31,944.0 5,807.0
74 American Express 31,877.0 2,699.0
75 DuPont 31,836.0 2,007.0
76 New York Life Insurance 31,416.2 -949.7
77 Aetna 30,950.7 1,384.1
78 Motorola 30,146.0 -4,244.0
79 Plains All American Pipeline 30,061.0 437.0
80 Abbott Laboratories 29,527.6 4,880.7
81 Allstate 29,394.0 -1,679.0
82 TIAA-CREF 29,362.5 -3,344.9
83 General Dynamics 29,302.0 2,459.0
84 Prudential Financial 29,275.0 -1,073.0
85 Humana 28,946.4 647.2
86 Liberty Mutual Insurance Group 28,855.0 1,140.0
87 Deere 28,437.6 2,052.8
88 HCA 28,374.0 673.0
89 Tyson Foods 28,130.0 86.0
90 Alcoa 28,119.0 -74.0
91 Tesoro 28,031.0 278.0
92 Murphy Oil 27,512.5 1,740.0
93 Philip Morris International 25,705.0 6,890.0
94 Emerson Electric 25,281.0 2,412.0
95 3M 25,269.0 3,460.0
96 Macy's 24,892.0 -4,803.0
97 International Paper 24,829.0 -1,282.0
98 Occidental Petroleum 24,480.0 6,857.0
99 Travelers Cos. 24,477.0 2,924.0
100 Rite Aid 24,417.7 -1,079.0
Current view: 1-100 101-200 201-300 301-400 401-500 501-600 601-700 701-800 801-900 901-1000

Now.. there  are oil companies, car companies, insurance comapnies, retail, PC hardware, banking, communications.. microsoft ranks in at 35, thats only including the US, So I'd expect its ranking to be a lot lower in the global chart. It is most definitely one of the most profitable corps out there, ranked at 3.

oh, and its the 2009 list. :)



Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd.

owner of : atari 2600, commodore 64, NES,gameboy,atari lynx, genesis, saturn,neogeo,DC,PS2,GC,X360, Wii

5 THINGS I'd like to see before i knock out:

a. a AAA 3D sonic title

b. a nintendo developed game that has a "M rating"

c. redesgined PS controller

d. SEGA back in the console business

e. M$ out of the OS business

Around the Network

damn - fuck me blind! That is a HUGE BITCH ....... loss



Ok, I was wrong 34 american companies are bigger than Microsoft.



Dolla Dolla said:
All aren't losing money. Nintendo and Microsoft as companies made a profit. Only corporations that are being run badly are losing money.

All the Japanese consumer electronics giants are losing money big time. Sony's losses are relatively minor compared to rivals.

Toshiba for example lost 4 Billion USD.

Hitachi said it would slash up to 7,000 jobs as it braces to post a 700 billion yen (7.83 billion dollars) loss in the current financial year to March.

They performed even worse than anticipated, an 8.1 Billion USD loss... Sony actually performed better than anticipated!

 

 



Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

PS3 vs 360 sales

that is bad all around, but remember sony sold a lot of assets this year. So in reality their losses could of been bigger.

But, i the end it doesn't matter, it just shows how the economy has affected everyone big.



 

 

Around the Network

Jesus christ.... General motors LOST $30 BILLION in the last year.



smallflyingtaco said:
darconi said:

 

I don't think you understand the term "largest company". There are a lot of ways to measure how big a company is.

Some comparisons:

 

Revenue - Toyota at $214B vs MS at $61B

Enterprise Value - Toyota at $224B vs MS at $156B

Market Cap - Toyota at $116B MS at $180B

# Employees - Toyota at 320k people, MS at 91k people

So by 3 of those 4 measures, Toyota is MUCH bigger than MS. And FYI, most places consider "size" primarily based on revenue 1st (i.e. Fortune 500 rankings always based on revenue).

Maybe read a bit before saying other people are wrong.

 

The term "largest company" is going to fall into having no real meaning under your argument which if that is the best you have you should probably just go do something else.  If you believe terms have no meaning there is no point to discussion as what your saying could then mean anything.  The above post was a biased attempt to cover up for the fact that Toyota has shrunk since last March.  Either hedge your statement or pick the most recent relevant data point and use a real metric or you should be called on it.  If your going to insist on this entire line of argument that nothing means anything I will just assume you agree with me as there is not point in arguing the entire line of thought that words have no meaning and you can say whatever you want and it means whatever you want and reality agrees with you.  Exact meaning may not be possible but I think a better attempt than this can be made and that we do actually exchange real ideas and information.

 

Of your metrics I think you found a good one to measure the size of Toyota as larger than MS in EV.  I would usually only look at Market Cap but EV is also valid and the most recent measures are in the near term.  I may think it slightly biased in favor of Toyota, as I doubt all of their assets could really be liquidated to the values which accountants list them at but you do make a good point that by that measure they are larger.  Your other measures I find questionable as they are either difficult to quantify or have little interaction with a good idea of company size in terms which are relevant to measures of what makes a company viable.

 

Wow, that was just so completely pointless and completely missing any logic whatsoever.  Fact of the matter is the term "largest" has absolutely no relevance.  You can use the words, most profitable, most employment, etc, but largest is an undefined metric.

Go look up "tallest building" and you'll find half a dozen different lists, same goes with "biggest city" and crap like that.

There IS no definition of largest. 

And OT, the only thing that has shrunk for Toyota has been sales, revenues/profit, all of their assets are still the same as before.  These aren't on paper assets like mortage securities which suffer from the mark to market requirements (or at least they used to), these are physical assets.

 



Why is everyone using revenue to compare Microsoft to Toyota instead of profit? Microsoft sells $150 operating systems and $199 Xbox 360's. Toyota sells $35 000 dollar cars. Of course their revenue will be bigger. Who makes more, and is worth more, though?

The bottom line is that Bill Gates donates more money to charity in a year than Toyota makes profit.



darconi said:
smallflyingtaco said:
darconi said:

 

I don't think you understand the term "largest company". There are a lot of ways to measure how big a company is.

Some comparisons:

 

Revenue - Toyota at $214B vs MS at $61B

Enterprise Value - Toyota at $224B vs MS at $156B

Market Cap - Toyota at $116B MS at $180B

# Employees - Toyota at 320k people, MS at 91k people

So by 3 of those 4 measures, Toyota is MUCH bigger than MS. And FYI, most places consider "size" primarily based on revenue 1st (i.e. Fortune 500 rankings always based on revenue).

Maybe read a bit before saying other people are wrong.

 

The term "largest company" is going to fall into having no real meaning under your argument which if that is the best you have you should probably just go do something else.  If you believe terms have no meaning there is no point to discussion as what your saying could then mean anything.  The above post was a biased attempt to cover up for the fact that Toyota has shrunk since last March.  Either hedge your statement or pick the most recent relevant data point and use a real metric or you should be called on it.  If your going to insist on this entire line of argument that nothing means anything I will just assume you agree with me as there is not point in arguing the entire line of thought that words have no meaning and you can say whatever you want and it means whatever you want and reality agrees with you.  Exact meaning may not be possible but I think a better attempt than this can be made and that we do actually exchange real ideas and information.

 

Of your metrics I think you found a good one to measure the size of Toyota as larger than MS in EV.  I would usually only look at Market Cap but EV is also valid and the most recent measures are in the near term.  I may think it slightly biased in favor of Toyota, as I doubt all of their assets could really be liquidated to the values which accountants list them at but you do make a good point that by that measure they are larger.  Your other measures I find questionable as they are either difficult to quantify or have little interaction with a good idea of company size in terms which are relevant to measures of what makes a company viable.

 

Wow, that was just so completely pointless and completely missing any logic whatsoever.  Fact of the matter is the term "largest" has absolutely no relevance.  You can use the words, most profitable, most employment, etc, but largest is an undefined metric.

Go look up "tallest building" and you'll find half a dozen different lists, same goes with "biggest city" and crap like that.

There IS no definition of largest. 

And OT, the only thing that has shrunk for Toyota has been sales, revenues/profit, all of their assets are still the same as before.  These aren't on paper assets like mortage securities which suffer from the mark to market requirements (or at least they used to), these are physical assets.

 

 

 

They should have paper assets in the form of car loans, Toyota finacial provides financing.  This is probably only a few billion at most but yes they do have paper assets which would be difficult to liquidate today.



Proud member of the Sonic Support Squad

I maybe missing something as I don't follow the Japanese electronic markets but do Panasonic and others that have posted losses have as little cash reserves as Sony? This is what makes the Sony situation so dire is that their cash reserves have been plundered and they're now looking to offload assets for cash flow isn't it?