Sony's "Loss of Technology Leadership" Sees Stock Downgraded to "Junk"

Uncertain times for Japanese corporation.

Posted by
Sony's "Loss of Technology Leadership" Sees Stock Downgraded to "Junk"
Sony's been slapped with a "BB-minus" stock rating by ratings company Fitch, officially labelling the shares as "junk". The rating was given due to high competition, a strong Japanese Yen and the corporation's "loss of technology leadership in key products." Ouch!

The ratings outfit added that a poor economic environment in the domestic market, and increasing strength in competitor products such as those made by Apple and Samsung, means that stock and financial recovery for Sony will not be easy.

"[It] reflects Fitch's belief that meaningful recovery will be slow, given the company's loss of technology leadership in key products, high competition, weak economic conditions in developed markets and the strong yen," the group announced.

Sony's stock has had a rough time lately, with this being the latest in a string of share downgrades. Fitch is the first to formally hand it a rating worthy of "junk" status - referring to companies that have little in the way of short or medium term gains for the future.

With recent quarterly financial results showing a slowdown in the games business, it seems that a lot of work still needs to be done for CEO Kaz Hirai to turn things around.

Via GI
Companies:

Read More Like This


Comments

Ergo 22 Nov 2012 15:00
1/2
Technology leadership?? Hardly. Sony is still (foolishly, IMO) engineer-driven. Tech is not their problem--their problem is making and packaging products that non-engineers want to buy.
Khallejon 30 Nov 2012 00:19
2/2
, that is not always a bad thing. When I was a boy, my faethr owned two handguns, and it never occurred to me to pick one up. If I wanted to shoot, I asked my faethr and we went shooting. But those guns were my faethr's, they could hurt people, and they didn't belong to me. When I was very small they were out of reach, of course. When I was older, my faethr taught me how to use them safely.We live in a very different society now. The only reason I suggest mandatory sentencing for crimes committed with firearms is that the stigma of committing crimes with firearms seems to be quite low nowadays. An ethical framework begins at home, but not very many parents seem concerned with that at present...though I am finding more and more parents who do care about more than their salary or the newest fancy car to drive. Some of the poorest parents (in terms of money) are among the best of parents (in terms of parenting), if you will excuse the world play.I could be wrong, of course. Most posters to websites don't admit to that kind of possibility, but I do. Yet the facts remain. It is certainly true that crimes committed using firearms have increased greatly in number. I am happy to hear other, better solutions."Bobh" makes a great point, and it illustrates why my Libertarian friends don't seem to respect me much. On the one hand, I think it is strange that we require testing and licensure for drivers---along with mandatory insurance in the several states in which I have lived---but not for firearms. On the other hand, there is no mention of automobiles in the Constitution. I am reminded of the old science-fiction story where the motto goes: "The right to buy find weapons is the right to be free."But we don't live in that world, sadly. I am willing to compromise a bit. To me, it all comes down to personal responsibility. If I carry a firearm, I am 100% responsible for it. But most governmental entities do not agree. So they try to institute controls. I am trying to find a compromise (according to Ambrose Bierce, that is defined by a solution which angers everyone).I don't mean to trivialize the firearm issue, but I do tend to see it in light of the automobile issue. It costs money to get "drivers' education," to take the test, and to get the license. Ditto the insurance required most places. Does that discriminate against the poor? How about older people who lose the ability to drive safely. Yup. But notice that most places have "workarounds" for that in many cases.But "Bobh" makes good points. Playing Devil's advocate, I would say that drivers' licensure is not the same as firearm licensure due to safety issues of the license holder, and their ability to protect themselves.Yet, as Larry Niven once wrote: freedom multiplied by security equals a constant. The more freedom, the less security. The more security, the less freedom.Again, just my thoughts and I appreciate the responses. "Eric Blair"
Posting of new comments is now locked for this page.