Slashdot Mirror
Sony Bets Its Future On PlayStation II Console?
max_cool writes "Sony has announced that it is splitting its stock in preparation for a strong PS2 release. This could make many people very wealthy or destroy the company. Daily Radar has a full report on Sony's strategy and why they think it will succeed."
Anyone else think that marketing slogan "it's alive" is kinda silly? As /if/. Does it impliment genetic algos? No. Does it find patterns in things? Nope. Uhhh... can it reproduce? Well, kindof... if you consider the save game cartridges to be "passing it's genes on"...
Okay, I'm done ranting now..
----
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
I'm no financial Genius or anything, BUT...Usually a stock split helps companies even if they're not about to release a new product. Stock splits (as i understand) split the stocks (duh) so that more people can buy in. I think that this is a marketing ploy by sony to make more money (damn capitalist pigs).
-Tim
Twice as many shares worth half as much each have the same value in total. Anyone who thinks otherwise needs a math lesson.
Doesnt seem like a grand idea, eh Ma? Sony owns quite a bit of property, if the PS II flops it wont matter. Given the hype (having to wait 9 FREAKING HOURS FOR SW:EP1 last year) and based on the performance of the original PS, it just might flop. I love games but im not gonna buy a console system unless it has an ethernet adaptor for REAL multiplayer games.
first post!
I don't understand why anyone would possibly think that this is a risky manuver other than because Sony told them it was. Stocks split all the time. Sony is currently weighing in at 270. Stocks constantly split as they approach the 300 range. This is an awesome marketing ploy if they can convince everyone that they are willing to bet the entire company on this new system. In reality however, if the PS2 flops, stock split or not, sony is still going to be in business. They are far too diversified to let one product destroy them.
If the PS2 is a runaway hit, the company will be in its best shape ever. If not...well, Sony's hoping they won't have to deal with that alternative.
If not...then Sony better have one HELL of a backup strategy. The article is saying "Sony is hoping this stock split will be a success." HOPING? What kind of business practice is THAT? Sure, it's good business to take risks, but what if your risk turns into a Bad Move? Are you going to say "Oops" and pull the white sheet over the company's head? Not smart. Sony needs something to be able to recoup it's losses in the event of the PSX-2 being a flop.
Sony, if I may make a suggestion.....Sell off your AIBO dogs at Cost + 20%. That way, you still make a decent profit, and we get AIBO dogs cheap.
(P.S.: Yeah, this looks like a huge move on Sony's part, but there are MANY divisions to that company. If the PSX-2 fails, it will hurt them badly, but it won't kill them.)
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon? :P)
(If you can't figure out how to E-Mail me, Don't.
It's a gutsy move if there ever was one, but the timing is pretty good, not to say perfect. Just take a look at the competitors. Both the X-box and the Nintendo Dolphin are falling behind and won't be out until who knows when. There's a lot of money to be made if they put themselves on the market at the right time.
However, they might meet some resistance from the Dreamcast. If that happens and the resitance is enough to shake Sony up a bit, then they are in
dangerous waters with everything riding on a single product. This will be exiting to watch.
- JoJo
I personally expect them to live quite happily on the playstation 2 for quite some time.
Given the old playstation 1, (which is still selling quite nicely here in the UK despite its age and the advent of the dreamcast), is/was technically inferior to similar models.
This underlines again the old adage that it is the games that makes the console, not the console.
The best killer feature of this console is that it is riding off the success of its back-catalogue of games, by retaining backwards compatability.
Oh, and the DVD thing is kind of good.
I love my PSX, and I can't wait to get my hands on a PSX II. If only to get my bloody son of the PC....
The secret of success is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake those, you've got it made. (Marx)
Sure, it may be risky to be seen as a penny stock, however, Sony Corporation is currently at about 270 USD, and a split at that level can hardly be seen as them betting their future.. I wouldn't even consider it taking a risk.
Actually, 270 USD is quite high, and they might benefit from a stock split, even without further price increases.
Somebody better research more before they make silly claims.
You never forget your first First Post!
I haven't bought a game system since SNES was the thing to have. Just judging from the great reviews I've heard and its specs I'll be buying one though. That and it can run old PS games which will be cheap after this comes out will make it a great buy.
--Ryan
If it's more than $300 it will be a failure.
IMO of course.
From the article:
.18 micron technology is hard to produce, and I've heard reports that Sony is having a hard time churning out enough chips. Tack on the fact that this thing will either be very expensive ($400+) or a HUGE money loser for Sony (which they will then hope to make up for with software profits) and it becomes a very sticky situation either way.
The Stock Market is Strong. After a market slump in the Far East, the time is right for a move like this. In the US and worldwide, tech stocks are generally moving upwards.
Well, they were until today. While you can't base a trend on one or two days, there is legitimate fear (at least in the US) that the Feds will raise intrest rates, and that is affecting the stock market, and we can see that right now, with the NASDAQ falling like crazy today.
Secondly, to know the future we must know history. No market leader in any game console generation has been able to take market lead in the following generation. Playstation 1 leads the current generation, can it lead the next as well? History is not on Sony's side.
Thirdly, price. The
Lastly, programming. Even if the thing sells like hotcakes, you need good games, and word on the street is that this thing is a bitch to program for. Final dev kits aren't even available to most developers, and those that have them site a steep learning curve for programming for multiple processors and the small amount of video memory present on the system. This could hinder game development by the smaller companies out there.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for PSX2 to succeed, as I think it's a phenominal piece of machinery, but for it to do so, Sony definitly has their work cut out for them.
First, I have to admit to a weakness for all things Sony -- just look in my living room (TV, VHS VCR, 8mm VCR, Receiver [2 of 'em], Cassette Deck, CD Player, CD Changer [300!!], Turntable, etc). But . . . I've resisted both the latest game consoles -- still smarting from the unfulfilled promise of the first two Nintendo systems; and DVDs -- had to wait for the DIVX fiasco to play out, among other things. In addition, I've never really figured out why I'd want a phone line next to the TV. But the PSX2 might be the system to push me over the edge. The combination of movies, games, and (more than likely) limited net.access in one box that isn't my PC is pretty appealing. So what's the projected price point?
Slightly disreputable, albeit gregarious
A stock split is an indicator of past success,
not a future gamble.
Whoever wrote this article needs to study the
stock market.
hmm ;P
I suppose it all depends on the PS2 (sounds like a mouse more then a console ;) ) lives up to the hype. I mean, is it REALLY going to put PC's to shame? And are settop boxes really where it's at? There really are very few settops w/ internet access to compare to. And all the talk of it running loops around a $5000 PC just don't sound right.
Maybe they will jump on the Linux Bandwagon (tm) and open source their stuff. ;)
sorry for the double post. moderate one down, or both if you'd like...
Face it. Sony is a company with many feet to stand on, and have been on the leading edge of consumer electronics since I-can't-remember-when. Does anybody think they would risk going totally overboard over just one of several hundredproducts.
This makes me think that Sony also has something else, real big, up their sleeve that the general public is not aware of yet. What that could be? No idea whatsoever.
The PS2, being the dvd-player, game console, webtop box reinvented into one box will for sure have it's impact, but cannot possibly alone be responsible for this move
Just my $.02http://virtuelvis.com/
The Japanese stock market is in the beginning of (hopefully) a boom. Sony is a huge international brand and it is a very widely held stock. They sell a large number of diverse products. Playstation sales are not going to make or break this stock. This looks like a bunch of over dramatic hype to me.
Disclaimer: I own zero shares of Sony.
It's obvious to me that Roblimo has a zero percent understanding of the stockmarket. The reason a stock splits is to lower the price of the stock so that people can afford to buy more shares. This happens approximately EVERY DAY in the stock market. Yahoo! has split about fifty times. Splitting a stock just drives up the price of a stock again by making it more attractive to low budget investors. It's not risky at all, and it certainly can't destroy a company. Notice how the article didn't explain how a split could possibly be risky! It basically raved about Sony. Sony is just making it easier to buy shares, and the hype is giving the split a lot of attention.
I guess Roblimo must've bought into Sony hyper hook, line, and sinker.
No comment at this time
I'm no expert but this article sounds pretty stupid to me. First of all, a stock split does not change anything. It is an accounting change. All other effects are purely in the heads of the investors. Secondly, AFAIK, Sony is a large company with many different products. They are not going to live or die on the success of the playstation2.
Just my 1.3 Canadian cents.
$270 per share is generally considered "high", so the stock is split. Theoretically a split has no effect on the company's value (2*135 == 1*270); in practice this tactic increases the volume of trading and usually creates the illusion of increased value.
Drinking will help us plan!
I've gotta think this is no problem. As I hear it, dreamcast isn't doing that great, nintendo 64 sales have basically stopped, and the playstation 2 has some very nice features. It uses DVD disks, but can play older playstation 1 cd's, is internet ready, and can play DVD movies too. All this, plus a huge number of games for playstation 1 that will almost certainly be improved for playstation 2, and I think you've got a hit on your hands. What I want to know is why will the Japanese get their version in March and the US won't until September or so?
Personally its not God I dislike, its his fan club I cant stand (bash.org)
Considering sony's current position, and the continued success of an out-dated system (the PSX being dwarfed in the technology sector by dreamcast and nintendo), it is a very intelligent bet that sony is making. When you consider that the PSX continually fills (on average) half of the ten titles on the weeks best selling list. Add this to best selling developers like Square, amazing sales and a loyal fan base, it doesn't take genious to see that the PSX 2 will sell. It may not sell as well as the PSX, but it will sell. And *if* Sony is able to interest even more top developers (ie: if it could grab RARE away from nintendo), the PSX 2 will sell big.
Finally, Sony has another thing going for it -- nintendo's mistakes. For all of my life i have been a nintendo loyal (owning every system, save the virtual-boy that they have made). As you might expect i purchased the N64 when it first came out and was sadly dissapointed: one controller, no games, no memory packs; this wasn't the Nintendo i grew up with.
Don't get me wrong, the 64 has great games...just not enough of them. The 64 has been, for me, enough of a dissapointment to cause me to consider switching to the PSX 2 when it comes out (having not seen a single *good* rpg on the 64 -- Zelda was good, but still -- it simply isn't enough)!
I can say, finances affording, i plan to buy sony stock.
I've been holding off on a DVD purchase so I could get it all at once -- Sony home theatre system, big ass tv, and even a new VCR. There was an article in wired magazine about the Sony strategy a while ago. Maybe this is the start of the convergence we hear so much about. Screw Webtv... Oh and for the kiddies, they develop on Linux.
To say that the split is happening because of the PS2 is quite a leap, that's completely unsupported by the article text, which basically reads "The PS2 is important. Sony is splitting its stock. The PS2 is important." -- not too surprising coming from a gaming magazine.
I wouldn't assume Sony's splitting because of the PS2--though it may be important, new products are an extremely strange reason to split a stock. (Spinoffs are, of course, another topic entirely.)
There is a definate demand for the PS2, and I must admit the specs do look pretty impressive . In comparison to other consoles on the market at present, this one certainly has an advantage.
Sony rocks man. The Playstation was the BEST. They can't screw up! Heck, I even like my discman. Except the headphones.
How could one product make or break such a huge company? Sony owns consumer electronics. There would hardly be a dent if they didn't sell a single PS2
Splitting the stock isn't really such a big deal with the value in the high 200's, but I would certainly seriously consider buying in to Sony at the moment. Don't be fooled for a moment in to thinking that the Playstation 2 could bring down the entire Sony Corporation, but I do appreciate it will play a significant factor in their stock value of the next year or so.
:-) Oh, and get my broker to book me some Sony stock
Many consoles seem to have come and gone from the old Atari's to the Dreamcast, but Sony seem to have managed to convince enough people that Games Console = Playstation. You only have to take a look at the shops just before Christmas where the original Playstation was outselling even the Dreamcast in the UK!! Sony have got the best market position in this area at the moment, mostly because the Playstation Brand is recognized, even (and particularly) by non-gamers.
With the market profile the Playstations has at the moment, I believe many people will subconciously wander in to the "Buy Sony" ethos, in much the same way your average boss used to think "Buy IBM" or your end user "Buy the latest version of Windows". Sure, PS2 is going to appeal to the serious hardcore gamer, but it's going to be instantly recognizable to the occasional user, and the buy,play,forget market who are undoubtedly going to represent the vast majority of sales.
As for me, should be perfect timing - I'll have just about completed all 4 Tombraiders on my trusted old Playstation just in time to upgrade it
I wouldn't join any club that would have me as a member
Philosopher (n) - a wise person who is calm and rational; someone who lives a life of reason with equanimity
I can't wait to get the playstation 2, know alot of other people that feel the same way. I think they're on the right track splitting
Regardless of the article's view of Sony's stock split as a 'risk,' it's gonna be interesting to see whether PS2 sees the success Sony is hoping for. Despite the fact it's laden with features, the thing is expensive. And while backward compatibility is a good thing, there's always that risk of people being content with what they already have. Will the kid who got Playstation this Christmas be ready to move on so soon? More appropriately, will his parents?)
:)
I envision a slow start at best, although I intend to pick up mine first chance I get.
-hal-
Can anyone explain how this move may jeopardize Sony? I am not very familiar with how the stock market works
I'm no stock analyst by any stretch of the imagination, but I'd say that this move isn't as "bold" a bet as the article predicts. First off, Sony already has a huge base of support in the original playstation from folx like myself, who are waiting for the PS2 rather than jump the gun on the likes of a dreamcast. Secondly, Sony is a huge multinational conglomerate with interests all over the map. While the move to console type-systems and more integrated components is a step forward, it's not going to keep my discman from working. And finally, the PS2 is really gonna rock, imho. I think that this is a Good Thing. Sony doesn't make the very best components in the world, but they do have a tendency to serve the upper crust of the hoi poloi. I just hope and pray that they STANDARDIZE on something, so that all of these information "consoles" of the future can communicate.
My other computer is your Windows box
Playstation II is far from the only product SONY is betting on. Their presence in the home entertainment industry is pretty solid. I also doubt that the PSX2 will be a failure, as it should be backwards compatable, double as a DVD player, etc... This type of integration may prove to be the future of consumer electronics.
Stocks are split when they get too expensive, so that smaller players can buy in more easily
At $270 it costs $27,000 to buy a hundred shares - the "round lot" quantum on the markets, below which you are typically penalized with higher transaction fees. Splitting, say, 3-for-1 brings the stock price down to 90 and the ante down to $9,000. Many more players can buy in. Typically they do, and bid the price up a bit, which is why stocks typically climb just after a split. (And larger players take advantage of that by buying on news that the stock is going to split - which also bids the stock up a little before the split.)
$270 is way high, so a split is overdue. The split will almost certainly result in the stock going up. If the marketing droids can convince some fools that there is some risk to this and doing it is "daring", said fools will interpret the rise as a success for Sony.
As for any real risk from the move, the only one I can see is a psychological hit if the stock ends up trading at a very low number. But if they don't split it beyond 3-for-1 they'd have to lose half their value after the split to drop below even 45. If the stock value drops by 50% they have some other problem - big time.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Historically, the makers of game consoles lose a lot of money at first as the hardware is often more expensive then they charge for it. Console companies usually make their money in the following years selling games.
The PlayStation 2 is theoretically more powerful than the SGI workstations that created the original Toy Story! The custom chip in the console costs about $260 alone, and the console is expected to retail at $300 or so. They would likely have to sell it for $400 or even $500 to break even! So, it seems a bit weird that they would risk everything when they know that they were going to lose money. Or am I stupid and wrong?
David
When you choke a smurf what color does it turn?
Now if they could get it to run Linux... BTW, first post!!
Wooo
It's alive and thinking
:)
Finkployd
Take the C64 for example.. It enjoyed long-lived success because it had some neat commercial software, and the hackers made it into a great machine. Almost everybody and their cat had one. There are still some in service today.
I think this is Microsoft's plan for their "X-Box", except you'd be tied down with Microsoft compilers and, of course, Windows.
If someone like Sony, Sega, or Nintendo released a programmable console, it'd be awesome, crush the competition, and live forever.
Dreamcast tidbits
Give me a break!
Since when does preforming a stock split when the stock is trading for 200$ plus set a company up for ruin? All they have done is doubled the number of stocks out there.
I day trade. It make no differenct to me if I have 200 shares of a 100$ company or 100 shares of a 200$ company. I have invested 20000$ into each of them and I will make the same amount of money when the stock doubles.
This is all FUD.
Quack
This article makes the stock split seem like a big deal. It's not. Throwing all your R&D and marketing budget at the Playstation2 is a more serious matter.
They closed today at 270. Splitting to 135 (or whatever it ends up being) doesn't seem such a risk for a company as diverse as Sony. It's not like they don't make stereos or tvs or anything else to bring in revenue.
I would believe this horsecrap about Sony having so much at risk with PSX2 if we were talking about any other company.
Sony has long, well-established, profitable product lines in many different markets.
Sony's brand is among the best in the world in nearly every market it is in.
Sony is stable, with a long history of success, vision, and innovation.
If PSX2 fails, it will hurt. But there will be profits from Walkmen, camcorders, PCs, industrial products, televisions, and stereos to fill the gap.
Worst case, Sony misses an opportunity to be the first one through the door in home electronics convergence. Big f$%^@# deal. They'll have more than enough money to do it right thee second time.
If I could put money on Sony's bet, I would. Sounds pretty safe to me. Now, as to whether I want a game console as the center of my home nervous system...
-cwk.
I don't see how the psx2 can get any better than psx =) cept the fact they took off the i/o port on new psx , I called sony and asked why and they said "people were making 'non-licensed' things for the psx and that it can screw up the psx" now is it me or has anyone else had trouble with "pro action reply" with burnt games ? =)
Has anyone else seen that that article makes almost no criticism if the split? It seems to be taken for given that the P2 wil lbe a runaway success, etc. IMO, the P two will be an interesting platform, but it will have to have the support of the gamemakers for it to do anything at all. Will the independant guys support this platform? It's a given that the technology is there, but considering the quality of many games produced, I'm not sure if it will provide a vast improvement over existing games. (Then again, many people are open-jawed, GrApHiCz RuLeZ idiots, so I'm buying stock.)
"Evil company X is threatening to restrict our rights! Let's all get together to stop--OOOH! SHINEY!!!" -- AC
Give me a break. Sony has so many products
and technologies (including licensing on the
CD format, lots of other electronic gadgets,
etc.) plus they have a very large and
successful record label and a successful
theater chain, do you honestly think that
something with the comparitively low sales
volume is going to destroy them?
Give me a break. Sony has so many products and technologies (including licensing on the CD format, lots of other electronic gadgets, etc.) plus they have a very large and successful record label and a successful theater chain, do you honestly think that something with the comparitively low sales volume is going to destroy them?
I don't see the connection alluded to by this article between a stock split and the success of the PSII.
If I have 100 shares of Sony @$100 each, and it splits 2-for-1, I then have 200 shares@$50 each.
Both before and after I have the exact same equity in the company, and the only difference is how investors view a $50 stock as opposed to a $100 stock.
I can see that given this investor mindset a $50 stock is more likely to be dramatically affected by the success/failure of PSII.
But in either case, the publicly owned shares of Sony are already owned by someone other than Sony, so how does it help/hurt the company? Anyone care to explain?
A stock split is not done in anticipation of a product launch. A stock split is done for the reason of inviting more investment capital into the fray of the company. (It's entirely Sony's decision what to put in their press release - but they should not entirely assume that their stock price will gain due to a product that could possibly not have the rosy release they predict)
For instance, let's say a company's stock costs $500 USD. So, I'd have to pay $500 to get one share of the company.
Now scratch that and say that the company split the stock at $500 with a 2 for 1 split. The stock halves, and everyone gets twice their shares. Now let's say I buy the stock - two shares at $250 a share. It was easier for me to buy the latter way rather than the former way because I had more options as to how much I want to invest in this company.
The point is that you can't buy 1/2 of a share of a company. A split makes it easier for people to invest in a company.
Now, on to my second point. Sony announced that it would center its business around the Playstation long ago - July, 1999. The idea is that with the huge boom that Playstation experienced, Sony realized that there is a market in "set-top boxes." However, the set-top boxes have to do more than surf the web - they have to be able to entertain and be usable by all types of people.
Hence, Sony actually restructured the company to be centered around the idea that the future's money will be made through connectivity. Sony appliances will be able to talk to each other, and be easier to use. Imagine just hitting the "web" button on a Playstation console and your TV automatically switches to the proper mode, video resolution, etc.
That's what Sony is talking about and they've already made numerous claims as to making Playstation the console that everyone will use.
You should never take life too seriously - You'll never get out of it alive.
that guy must hit reset every 5 seconds looking to get first post of just pasting some shit from the article and getting a score 3.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
Well,the original wasn't bad (as far as consoles go),and from what ive heard the PS2 will be sporting some pretty mean hardware.Of course,you cant do anything on a console compared to a computer,gaming included,but noone wants to take the time to learn a computer,so everybody gets consolitis,and the few people that know computers are looked down upon.I wouldn't trade my computer for any console,ever.Sure,you can play some games,but if you ever want to do anything else,your screwed.
Sick thing to bet the future of a pan-global enterprise on. How long until console games are entirely obsolete? Already hotels deliver game content through their local PPV networks (at exorbitant rates). 'Course that's a few years, or even a few decades, in the making, as are PCs powerful and affordable enough to completely demolish the console market.
Oh well. They'll probably succeed in this split. My chief concern is whether or not the PS2 is going to *SUCK* as much as PS1 does. Something besides single-player rail games and movie sequences, please! 650MB is more than enough for a killer-app game; DO IT ALREADY, SONY! Get Rare on your team or something.
Look it up here: finance.yahoo.com/q?s=sne&d=b
Look at their recent performance. It makes sense for them to split.
FIRST POST!
Oh yeah got it again!
Your haikus suck ass /. drone
Do Rob and Hemos pay you?
Fucking
This won't be the first time Sony bit the big one if they are wrong. Betamax?
So what if sonys stock is split(maybe in half). It just means that the prices for a piece of sony are more affordable. No this does not free any stock for people to buy it just doubles the amount of sony's stock while maintaining the same total value. What's the difference between selling 10000 shares for half the price or 5000 for normal. Absolutely nothing.
More likely the split will be a boost for sonys share-value. People generally have a tendency of being reluctant to buy stuff at high prices. After the split sony seems cheaper and traders will have an easier time offering higher prices for it(not that they don't base their decisions on the big picture anyway).
And this article actually goes to mention yahoo and amazon as examples of when to split stock. Those are the companies with the most "air" in their stock prices anyway. Most of the value for yahoo or amazon is based on future expectations and nothing concrete such as sonys production facilities etc. Stock price should, after all, mostly be based on the actual value of company.
The site hosting the article will be in my proxys access control list to save bandwith from bullshit.
Ken Kutaragi is tha man!! In all my youthful fantasies I could never have imagined that video games would carrying as much clout as this in 2ooo! yes yes yes! Playstation2 is so perfectly poised for a us launch its all a bit frightning.
"the company put its future almost entirely in the hands of the PlayStation2"
wtf? Isnt Sony a powerhouse in other consumer electronics areas?
I would think so.
Isn't saying that a stock split might destroy a company going a little to far? Sure, it might cause some harm, but a big fish like Sony isn't dying anytime soon.
Besides, Playstation2 isn't a bad thing to take a risk on. I've been slobering over the specs for some time now. Going to pick one up for myself once its released.
I really don't get this report. It is well known that (logically) stock splits have little real impact, but keep stock prices at a psychologically attractive level. The perpetual hype over stock splits adds a "momentum" angle but it hardly seems that the added volatility would take down Sony. It isn't like this is petfood.com, or something.
I'm not sure we should be reading financial reporting from a gaming site. What is next? "Alan Greenspans get fragged, Clan Fed fights back with an interest rate boost!"
tj
i can't wait until they release a game involving me pouring lots of hot grits down my pants. b00-ya, first post
I don't get it. The article says:
"Sony is building its entire product line around
the PlayStation2"
It seems to me I see a lot of stuff with SONY
written on it at the store. Is that going away
or something?
Correcting you:
"a stock split puts twice as many shares on the market. Each share will be worth half as much, but the shareholders will own twice as many shares in the company."
Sorry - but there is a difference.
The article mentions a DVD player as well as the now-standard Web browser. I have held off on buying a DVD player, and this might be a good excuse for me to make the jump. I have ignored the console market since my Nintendo (still have it) but they seem to be doing more and more neat stuff. I am a sucker for multi-function devices. Give me a toaster that answers the phone and I will probobaly buy that, too.
The other problem with them "betting the company" is the console market is just not *that big*. I don't think they could do that if they wanted to. So if somehow, this console thing screws up, all their other divisions (cameras, laptops, home audio equipment, dvd players, and dozens of other things) are not going to be able to support the company?
This is simply the company trying to make money.
I am looking forward to the psx2 however.:)
Sony is a very diverse and mind-boggling-sized company. It's a little sensational to say its future is based solely on the sucess of a game console.
csd
sounds good
What will happen is that game companies will make
games in the OLD playstation format and never take
advantage of new features - because the PS
installed base is so large.
They should instead have made an upgrade or
something for the old PlayStations.
Look back and learn from the Atari 7200... those
who ignore the past are condemned to repeat it.
Mark
31337
Well, if it worked for Disney with Snow White... there have been bigger gambles, and although Daily Radar seems somewhat afraid to criticize them and happy to say why they'll succeed the question IS there, especially if Nintendo manages to steal their thunder.
BTW, First Post.
How on earth could splitting stock destroy a company?
> This could make many people very wealthy or destroy the company.
What? As far as I know, a stock split does nothing to change the actual value of the stock, it merely changes the amount of fine-grainedness with which you can sell it. Am I missing something?
In my opinion, Sega Dreamcast won't have a chance. I don't think it does already, with what Nintendo coming out with a better system after Sony does.
Sega's 32x and add-ons flopped, and so will the Dreamcast. I don't think it will like the 64 is doing right now (I use to like it, back in the Goldeneye release), but maybe it will kick up a bit with its online gaming. The 64 is something I lost interest in awhile ago, the library of games is small.
The new Playstation will succeed.
- The Elephant Borf
(buh buh buh buttered bacon wrapped cheese whistle doodle strudle, uggggh YEA!! eat fat)
Any particular reason why this has been sitting unanswered, and my own post disappeared?
Methinks something's wrong with Slashdot.
I'll be interested to see how distribution of PS/2 units handles DVD region encoding. Most people I know where I live (South Africa) disable or upgrade their DVD player firmware and then order from Amazon like the rest of the world. If consumers in other regions are thinking about using the PS2 as a combination games/DVD player, they might need to think twice about the region issues. Anyone know any more details?
Is it because Sony quite a number of months ago now announced that they would be using Linux not Microsoft for playstation development? How much of that work is going to come back to the Linux community? Are they still shipping Vaios with UCB mice that we can't use?
I just hope graphics are better on PS2 than they are on the first generation Playstation.
I feel that either there is something about stock splits that I've misunderstood, or stock traders are more stupid than I think (maybe the author of the article is the one that is stupid?). To me, a stock split is just a change in form; instead of having 1 share worth 100 money units, you get n shares, each worth 100/n money units. It's like saying you have two half-apples instead of one apple. How can this possibly mean: "[...] the risky move will result in greater company value."?
I can understand if people like my mother, who was never much into mathematics, can fall for something like this, thinking that more shares will mean that a rise will have a larger impact, but surely large institutions (which I assume make up most of the volume) don't fall for things like this? Maybe if the price movements were reported as percentages instead of absolute values, this phenomenon would disappear.
After going through some research, I would personally not buy any Sony stock. The price has jumped a tremendous amount over the last year from 65 to a high of nearly 300 and is currently near that high. Granted, some consumer electronic stocks has gone nuts, but Sony's sales and income growth were miserable this last year. The price to earnings ratio of 90 puts it up there with some of the more wacked internet stocks. The stock split is definately an attempt to gain more capital, not unreasonable.
I did find out that Playstation by itself accounted for about 10% of Sony's income. That's pretty damn impressive. And Sony is betting the farm on PS2 to succeed. The next hurdle is seeing what happens in March 2000, when it's released in Japan.
Is Sony stock worth the money? Probably not. I can find other companies to invest money into with better, more solid future returns. Just my opinion. Please don't pelt me with stones if Sony stock goes crazy this next year.
-S. Louie
"I may be Love's bitch, but at least I'm man enough to admit it."
I think people underestimate Sony's ambition. The PSX2 is the leading edge of a whole line of technology aimed at killing the PC and Microsoft's monopoly. They are pitting themselves against this giant presence in an attempt to replace it with something that really is a home appliance - something that people really can use at home for their multimedia needs and that isn't hobbled by legacy.
-- SIGFPE
I'll wait before I get a Dreamcast :)
-- when the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail
Good for Sony, i only hope the system can live up to the hype surrounding it.
One of the main PR points that I have seen for the PS2 is that it will be backwards compatable with the original PSX. I don't know about Nitendo but I remember that Sega's Megadrive System (I believe in the US it was called Genisus) had the ability through a special adapter cartridge of playing all the previous Master System games. AFAIK these adapters were a flop.
For the launch of the PS2 most developers are not going to release PS2 versions of their new games, focusing on the PSX standard so as to capture both markets. This reminds me almost of the Commodore C=64 and C=128D (Remember these things before the Amigas). Consumers thought why buy the 128 when everything is written for the 64?
Will the new PS suffer the same fate?
The MyTh - I am a figment of the Imagination - [Im Probably even not here]
Obviously, there's a lot riding on this- the big brass must be very confident that the console will be a huge success.
I'm sure it will work in their favour.
I believe that this reporting might be a little overzealous in anticipation. Sony won't fold if PS2 fails, it just won't be as profitable. Then again, anything not zooming to infinity in 'the market' is just a figment of 'history', right?
Hrmm. What happens when Qualcomm adds Tetris and networked Mah Jong to their cell phones?
Things just don't look so certain . . . anymore.
woohoo
Interesting that Sony is going all out on this one. I wonder though, what will they do when PC based set-tops come out? Microsoft is supposedly working on the "X-Box", a PC based console style system. A device that will merge the the various entertainment devices into one PC based machine. DVD player+game system+TV+internet=$$$. So the question is, can Sony beat the PC based systems to the market and gain enough marketshare to stay competitive or will M$ (or others) get their system out in time to compete in which case I believe the PC based system will most likely beat the PS2. In the long-term I think it is inevitable for PC based systems to take over this market so either way Sony is dead. The question is, do they die immediatly or do we see them gasping for the next year or so? Assuming they don't get killed they will probably design their next system based on PC components. Strange stuff.
Posted by Roblimo on Tuesday January 04, @07:39PM
from the high-rollers dept.
Pot-Head writes "DUDES!!! Whatz up!!!! I just smoked a bowl of some bodacious bud. I mean, this was some primo shit! Real bomb-ass reefer!! Hey man, is anyone hungry for donuts?! NATALIE PORTMAN!!!" Personally, I'm partial to heroin. What do the rest of you use to kill the boredom of your useless and pathetic lives?
Sony has a shot at not only console gamers, but anyone who is on the fence between webtv or a PC. They all now have all the reasons I listed above for going the PSX2 route instead of PC or WebTV.
And don't kid yourselves, people. If Sony thought a stock split put them in a weaker position, they wouldn't have done it. Think Seven Samurai. They're totally committed to this move because they're totally convinced that this one swing of the blade will net them the heads of Nintendo and Sega!
Very Zen...
If appearance and essence were the same thing, there would be no need for science -- Dr. Michio Kaku
What if people don't buy playstation because of the enormous price? and the fact that dreamcast cut out a chunk of potential ps2 owners who aren't going to buy yet another game console. This could screw the company over.
we'll probably crowd, push, and hoard. sony has a hell of a system on their hands, especially with dvd capability and backwards compatibility. but they have left few questions unanswered.
with all the incredible features, why only 2 control ports? stronger emphasis as an entertainment system? on playing online?
so why not include a modem?
finally, they are leaving game makers much to their own to create games and use the hardware to its fullest extent. will their program of sharing elements such as engines between companies help companies get their feet on the ground, or just mass produce really weak games?
oh well, looks cool and plays dvds for about 300 or less. sign me up!
lol
I snagged the first post?
FIRST!!!!!!!
This is a pointless article by someone who doesn't have a clue about the market. Example:
There are 500 shares of sony stock @ $10.
If the stock splits then there are 1000 shares @ $5.
Either way, there is $5000 worth of sony stock in the market. If the first goes up by $2 to $12, then the second would go up to $6 - same percentage change - that's all the market cares about.
Obviously, this guy has never heard of market capitalization... (the total value of all the stock (not all stocks, just all the stock of a company) in the market at market price)
On a less mathematical level, but more relevant to reality:
Announcing a stock split usually indicates that a company expects large growth in the future - often people buy into stocks that split for this reason. (Please note that I do not own any sony stock, nor do I intend to purchase any in the near future) But announcing a split and not going anywhere is equally possible, if only to allow people to buy smaller amounts of your stock - if minimum purchase is 100 shares and the stock is at $300, a split might be wise to help out small investors.
Cyano
Don't like my sig? I don't either.
There's so much wrong with this article it's hard to know where to start:
This financial maneuver is a risky move that's generally taken by companies with massive upward momentum such as Yahoo.com, Amazon.com and, more recently, Qualcomm. A stock split is a responsible move which almost every successful publicially traded company makes. It is practically mandatory for a company with rising stock prices. The only exception would be Berkshires Hathaway, which has never split and now costs over $50,000 for a single share of stock. As Sony jumps into this stock split, its financial momentum is not as strong as the others, While I haven't looked over any filings for Sony, Yahoo, Amazon or Qualcomm, I can guarantee you that Sony has better "financial momentum" than all of those companies put together. They might have bright future prospects and stock price momentum, but Sony is a proven, succesfull, profitable, diversified company unlike the others. Perhaps the most important reason that Sony has chosen to split its stock is that it has little alternative. Well sure, it has to split, but that has nothing to do with a product launch. The stock is simply too expensive. The rest of the article talks about why the PlayStation 2 will be successful, but that's not really relevant to the issue of a stock split. I'm not familiar with Daily Radar, but they should stick to stuff they understand or learn a little about equity markets before posting garbage like this.
The Math Maestro Tutoring Services in Seattle
I am a stock expert... and this is a totally good decision that can cause NO harm to Sony or its shareholders. Trust me.
who the fuck cares. Slashdot seems to be a little to concerned with the market.
The PS2 looks like a good product to me, however I wonder if it will foster a whole new breed of ignorant users who will find their way to Usenet. (Actually my news server hasn't given me any new messages for a week, so I can't complain right now!)
It seems that every time we get accustomed to a new lowest common denominator on the Internet, we manage to have a "improved" one.
I think that the online PS2 community will be the largest community of wannabe hackers, warez fiends and crossposters ever. The PS2 is designed to appeal to an age group which is rapidly losing its ability to communicate intelligently or have a attention span longer than 30 seconds.
thanks to /. to alerting www.fox.com to why having a front page accessible to all browsers is important -- they changed! (probably old news - but new news for me)
I can't imagine that the average PS2 user could be any more ignorant and inept than the flood that AOL, WebTV, etc. brought us.
The idea is to convince all the adoring playstation fans awaiting the psx2 that they should buy stocks. the split lowers the price for them and since we all know the psx2 is gonna be succesful the idea that Sony is betting their future on it puts the idea of "hey, I should buy some Sony stocks" into the minds of everyone who reads the article.
Long Live Linux!!
I was dissapointed in the 64/Nintendo when they came out with simply one controller and no games, because, for every other system they had made, they came out with 2 controllers and one game. Even when the gennessis was shipping with one controller, the SNES had 2. All in all, Nintendo had stood above their competitiors with things like these (including two controllers, when they could include only one). With the 64, Nintendo 'sunk' to their comptetitors level, and so i am dissapointed in them.
please don't make fun of me.
The spec's looked great at the game developers con 1999. The demo platform was looking good at E3 99. (they were using laptops with RH to monitor and reset the development platforms on the show floor.)
(FYI - word was that they didn't have enough physicists and programmers to fully take advantage of the specs sony published...I wonder how close the end PS II will be to the first published specs)
I wonder if they are still charging royalties per each GAME made. (normally console makers sell the cousoles near cost (maybe even a loss?) and make it up on the royalties. (est $8-9 USD per CD, or $23-25 USD per N64 Cartridge.) hmmm - how would they handle royalties on a Java VM CD? (assuming you could then download play tons of non-graphic intensive java games without paying additional royalties.)
Let's say, strategy-game style, that there are four resources you want a game system to have:
Dreamcast
PlayStation2
Result: Good start for Sony. Dreamcast holds firm.
Now let's skip forward a year to Christmas 2001 and include Nintendo's next system (ignoring any Microsoft entry):
Dreamcast
PlayStation2
Dolphin
Result: Wild-and-crazy three-way brawl. The Dolphin has a debut that takes the luster off of the PS2. The PS2 establishes itself. Dreamcast could end up either on top or on the bottom based on how well Sega puts together its software portfolio in this time.
Anyone else out there want to venture their guess?
Is this guy for real? Does this poor, deluded video dweeb actually think that Sony even makes a tiny percentage of its gross income from the PlayStation console? Clearly this is naive, armchair financial analysis from someone who has probably never purchased a share of stock, much less read Sony's balance sheet. The vast bulk of Sony's revenue comes from consumer electronics, corporate, and industrial sales. The video game business is a nice sideline, but it isn't what moves their stock and it isn't what makes or breaks their bottom line. Companies split their stock because they want to keep the price in a certain range to make it attractive to investors, not because of any financial "risk taking" as this article rambles about. Slashdot is falling below its usual standards by pointing to this dreck.
Shut up and eat your vegetables!!!
IMHO, the article doesn't make much sense - stock splits are a routine occurence, their purpose is to keep the price for single stocks at a reasonable level, so that investors can buy the chunks they want without rounding artifacts.
The Sony stocks are currently valued around $260, which means that you have to spend a multiple of this amount to buy their stock. The split is done to make transactions more flexible.
The total valuation of the company doesn't change in a stock split (for a 1:2 split, you have twice the number of stocks of half the current value), and the current stock holders automatically own the correct number, so that their investment stays the same (ignoring market fluctuations).
I really don't see any relation between the split and any risks or opportunities related to buying Sony stocks. Playstations aren't really the issue either.
Enjoy the irony! And please note that many Slashdot readers have debunked that hype for those who *don't* know that a stock split is a ho-hum financial maneuver for companies whose share prices have put round lots (100 shares) out of reach of the very small-time investors who are most susceptible to hype.
More and more, before posting a story like the one above, instead of adding my own words to it I find myself thinking, "Fifty others will say exactly what I would anyway, so why not let them?"
Slashdot has some amazingly bright readers. The debunking always gets done, one way or another, whether by me or by you.
- Robin
PS - remember the Jesux "Christian Linux" hoax that took in ZDNet and Wired a while back, but got exposed here? I had a pleasant IRC conversation with Pudge, the perpetrator, earlier today. Real nice guy.
(I'm often on #slashdot at irc.slashnet.org if you want to continue this discussion, BTW.)
yo boss, fix yer sig. Didja mean forty? ?.
Yeah it's nice when a few people in charge of thousands of people's jobs and careers decides that they want a few extra million, so why not risk the whole company? Seriously though, who am I to talk about this subject. But really, I think it was a bad idea for sony to gamble on the PS/2 being a big hit as a game console. Sure, it has a built in monitor, but the technology for the games just isn't there. First of all, all the games need to run off floppies, but the games are like, Space Quest 3, SimCity, BattleTech.... OH WAIT, PLAYSTATION2! Never mind then. That represents a major paradigm shift in the console industry, from closed, removable ReadOnly media with properietary hardware to closed, removable Readonly media with proprietary hardware. "Why isn't it Open Source?" Well, it's complicated. Let me give you an example. Suppose I was walking home one night, when someone stops me -- with a weapon, let's say, a knife, or a gun, or something weird, you make something up -- and they want my money. Naturally I am not inclined to give this to them, but being as they are threatening violence I have little choice. "But, you have a gun!" So I do. What should I do? Seriously. Maybe you still don't understand, maybe you never will, maybe you were never meant to. But that's just the way it is, things will never be the same. Not EVER. And you can bet the whole company on it.
You've about got it, but there are a few other points to consider.
:-) Still, "...the risky move will result in greater company value" is utter bullshit. It's not a risky move at all--it's just business.
As a small investor with $1000 to invest, how many shares can you buy at $300? A whopping three shares. Now drop those shares to $50, and you can buy 20. More to the point, you can buy 5 of Sony, and still have money to buy other companies.
Trading volume tends to taper off once stocks hit ~$100US, and definitely begins to stagnate at $300. Splitting stocks is a good way of increasing the volume of stock traded, and tends to increase more than the split ratio. (i.e. if the stocks split 2:1, then the volume is probably going to be more than twice what it was before the split)
You'll notice a lot of "tends to" in that last paragraph. There are, of course, no hard and fast rules. (if there were, trading wouldn't be a risky venture
Besides--Sony is a ***BIG*** company! The PS2 could vanish off the face of the earth, and Sony wouldn't be hurting much. This article was nothing but silly and unresearched BS.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
With USB, Firewire, DVD & and great graphics
performance. PSX2 could be the best platform
for Linux ever. I've heard that Sony has already
done the port (can anyone confirm this?), but
will they follow the GPL and release the code?
I want a PSX2 running Linux. It could become
the PC of the future. It's not exactly an open
platform, but the price/performance could be
good.
Rick Niles
http://www.gnupooh.org
In spite of what happened recently with high-tech stocks I'm sure this will pay off for sony, because the PII is going to kick ass the same way the first playstation did. Imagine if all the playstations out there could also surf the net? Well, when PII comes out you won't have to imagine much longer. Sony has all the right connections for this to suceed.
Daily Radar seems to think they're putting all their eggs in one basket. I think they're betting on a sure thing. Sega has already bowed out of the hardware market. Nintendo won't even have anything available to show at the Tokyo game show next summer. Microsoft has yet to confirm the existence of the X-Box. With it's DVD playback, backwards compatibility, modularity, and huge developer support, PS2 is not gonna fail. And doesn't Sony make a few other successful products as well?
I am buying two of the ps2's even if im outside usa, i still will get it out of usa into my homeland. Besides it plays dvds in R1, and will be cheeper than ripoff local distributors, and early.
Upgrades don't always work either. Take a look at the failed Sega 32X add-on for the Genesis. That tanked rather quickly. Also, the Game Boy Color is backwards compatable, there are games that take advantage of the new features while still being able to be played on the old, and there are an increasing amount of games that are GBC only. Nintendo plans on keeping the backwards comapatability going in the next-gen GB as well. If handled properly, b/c can be very useful. I think I'm gonna wait for the Dolphin, though. I've heard of few problems with that, whereas the emotion engin in PSXII is glitchy, or so I've heard. But that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
Mess not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.
And it's important.
A stock tends to rise (fairly sharply) during the interval between the announcement of the split and the split itself. After that period, the stock tends to flatten, or even fall. Companies that break this rule tend to either have inadequate revenue or revenue growth to support their stock price in the first place (e.g. Red Hat) or come in with sharp positive earnings surprises in the quarters immediately following their split (e.g. Microsoft after its penultimate split, but not after its most recent split).
Since Sony is a healthy company with reasonable, but not stellar, growth prospects, one would expect it to follow the normal pattern. The PS2 could make a difference if it is dramatically better than anything else out there, but, given the recent success of the Dreamcast console, that does seem somewhat unlikely.
Nintendo. Super Nintendo. stfu.
Is this post not nifty? Sluggy Freelance. Worshi
DC is junk, no DVD and crap games.
NES owned the Market. The SNES had to catch up to and coexist with the Genesis. Sorry, that is NOT keeping your market share.
(Likely fate of the PS2... it'll be popular, but have to share the limelight with everybody else. DC isn't going away and Dolphin still has the Nintendo name and software)
c'mon - the article was pure marketing.
I saw damn cheep N64s with games at shops after xmass, even those cheep prices i thought, nah no way, not even for $49 i would pay for that shit.
i'd like to see something a littme more telling than it uses DVD's. HDTV? component video? digital audio jacks?
Would anyone who has actually seen a Playstation 2 care to comment on how well it looks/performs in comparision to a Sega Dreamcast on an average TV????
Got a dreamcast for xmas and having a blast with it.
Is fun (vs specs) still what counts?
Course my last console was an atari 5200 so my view may be twisted!
Anyway, my understanding is the dreamcast puts out 640X480, far exceeding my 1994 Magnovox 27"s resolution. Don't see how the PS2 could do a ton better given the limits of the display medium......
Also, in comparisons between arcade games and my dreamcast, the dreamcast versions seem dead on, as good or better than the arcade versions. Matter of fact in some way the dreamcast looks better. Howbout that, performance of a $2000 arcade game in a $200 box, who could ask for a better bargain????
Just saw Soul Caliber is coming out for the dreamcast soon. Can't wait as it is the only "Playstation" title I've been lusting after.....
Keep on Gaming On!
The 'poor,deluded video dweeb' is more likely a marketing MBA
As others have said before the market is not necessary logical.
Punters see a stock split as a "Good Thing" even when it is not, and the total capitalised value of the firm may well increase. This increase has no basis....
There have been a number of academic studies on this and related topics. you will be able to find them under papers investigating the efficiency of markets.
Cheers
Life is just a bowl of All Bran - Small Faces
:) :o :O :o :) :o :O :o :) :o :P
if its cheap i will no doubt purchase one. a price tag of $120 sounds pretty fair to me. considering that ps2 is sonys "god prouduct" i think they would be stupid not to make it affordable. if the price is way to hi i will just wait for someone to code a emulator for it.
Wanted a console NOW.
Thought of getting a playstion because of the great game library but went with a Dreamcast instead.
What's the point of buying a playstation when the PS2 I get in a year or so will play all the "clasic" playstation games?
Last thing I need is two consoles that play the same game....
Got a dreamcast, having a blast, if it is only the king of the videogame heap for a year or so and then I thow it away in disgust after seeing the PS2, I'm only out $30 a month or so. That's static........
What is it like being a Karma Whore?
Apparently, my last post was offtopic.
i'M 3l33t, Giv3 m3 Pl4y5t4t10n D00dz!
I am so used to surfing the web, playing games etc WHILE watching TV.
is talking to Tails.....Got a dreamcast (love it) but during the boring cut scenes in Sonic Adventure/Soul Caliber I'm looking around for something to do. Wish I could do PIP and catch the news while Sonic talks to tails....
With the PSX2/DVD player how the heck am I supposed to play Final Fantasy IX while my wife is watching her sense and sensibility DVD.
While I love my Dreamcast, I don't think I'll get a PSX2. My next ultimate gaming machine is and will be my laptop. Most evenings I end up with the laptop on my tummy, playing starcraft or surfing, while the wife and I watch bad movies or whatever "else" is on.
Sure I have a computer room with a kickbut computer. But if I have a choice between QuakeIII alone or starcraft while chatting with my wife, I'll pick the old games on the antiquated P166 laptop any day.....
If your statement that Sony gets a $7 license fee per PlayStation cartridge is true, that's a huge royalty when measured against the retail price of each cartridge. It's even more astounding when measured against the wholesale price of the units, which is the only money that the cartridge developer ever sees.
One question I have about the assertion that Nintendo was a $5 billion company before Pokemon: $5 billion in what, sales or market capitalization? Perhaps they had $5 billion in annual sales. But, according to Marketwatch, Nint endo's market capitalization (another name for the total market value of the company) is only $2.9 billion.
I'd like to own a company that's worth that much, but it's tiny compared to Sony's market cap of over $110 billion.
--
Dave Aiello
-- Dave Aiello
PS2 is close to 'bet the company'
Let me begin by pointing you to the Fundam entals page for Sony on CBS Marketwatch. Sony is currently valued by the market at around $110 billion -- this is the market capitalization. There are, according to this page, 411 million shares outstanding. Over the last 200 trading days, an average of 205,100 shares have been traded each day, or 4/100ths of 1 percent of the shares.
I compared this stock to General Electric, which is another extremely large, established company. In spite of the fact that General Electric is worth about 4 times as much as Sony (comparing market caps), 3 times as many shares in GE as a percentage of its total number of shares outstanding trade each day.
This means that GE is much more liquid (easy to trade) than Sony. That is potentially a good reason to split Sony stock, because the easier it is to buy or sell a stock, the less wildly the price tends to swing. Liquidity is considered a good thing by institutional investors and people who trade stocks for a living. By contrast, lack of liquidity is the reason that Internet companies move up and down fairly violently on a daily basis.
The reason that some stock market newcomers think stock splits are indicators that the company is moving boldly is that recently, many companies that have announced splits have seen their stock prices soar immediately afterward. This initially happened with Internet-related companies like Amazo n.com, but it has gotten really out of hand lately, with companies like Qualc omm.
Stock splits are really market neutral events. If a stock is at 100 the day before the split, and it splits 2-for-1, it's value at the open should be 50. I say "should be" because a stock often does not open at exactly the same price as it closes, so if there is a 2-for-1 split, the stock should open at around half the price of the close the previous day.
This brings us to another fallacy in the article. It says that a stock split is a "financial maneuver that is a risky move". The stock that traded for 100 per share yesterday was not issued by the company yesterday -- it was issued at some time in the past. The trade at 100 that took place yesterday was between two participants in the stock market who (probably) had no relationship to the company.
So, when the stock opens at 50 on the next day, after splitting two for one, not only did the people who traded the stock not lose anything (since they automatically have 2x the number of shares), but the company did not lose anything since they did not own the stock that was traded yesterday. Of course, any stock that the company is holding on its balance sheet (generally called treasury shares) did not increase or decrease in value, since the number of shares doubled while the price was cut in half.
I could go on with this analysis all night, but let me jump to the end of the Daily Radar article. The author makes the statement:
All I can say about this is that he must mean that the company is building its entire video game console product line around PlayStation2. Sony does a lot more than produce game consoles. In addition to its video game console business, it owns 11 different recording labels, a TV and movie production business which produces such insignificant products as the TV series Dawson's Creek, and Sony Electronics which makes everything from chips to Jumbotrons.
That's why the company is worth over $110 billion, and that's just a few reasons why this article is so humorous to people who enjoy analyzing businesses and buying small pieces of them.
--
Dave Aiello
-- Dave Aiello
It looks somewhat cool, looks like the dvd player will be ok (dolby digital, doesn't look like there will be progressive or even component video). BUT THERE HAS TO BE A REMOTE. I didnt see anything about IR ports, am I missing something?
A reduced stock price lowers to barrier for people wishing to buy stock. Thus enticing more people to buy the stock - making existing stockholders more money.
So Sony has an 'opportunity' to make more money if it splits the stock.
On the other hand, there are some negative psychological factors to consider with a reduced stock price. (ie, wow, Sony's only at $30/share but Microsoft is at $120. MS must be doing better - so i'll put my money on that train) Of course, you should never pick stocks that way, but many people do.
Furthermore, depending on which exchange Sony trades on. The stocks are typically traded by whole fractions (in the US anyways) - so 1/8 or 1/16 point increments. If you get too low, those increments make your stock price slightly more volatile.
Tom
Hmmmm, Playstation 2 has firewire? All you need is a firewire hard drive and digital video camera. Nonlinear editing on a game console, now that would be a cool hack!
To make the statement that a failure of the PS2 could mean the fall of one of the largest electronic/music giants in the world is a bit of an overstatement. Sony is sufficiently diversified in its ventures to overcome a downturn in sales of one division. It didn't get to where it is today by doing that.
jordan
That "Full Report" is pure stupidity. Sony is a huge company that makes a thousands of products, I seriously doubt that even a total rejection or its new console game would not really matter (except to the designers and their managers (they'd get fired)).
Exactly what the hell does a stock split have to do with the playstation2 "strategy"? I think the author of it must be a moron who pulled it totally out of his own ass, without checking anything or anyone. Come on, at this rate Slashdot will be pulling articles from the Druge Report, shit!
In order to sell on the "higher-end" system, the content has to be scaled to use up the console's power, or it will look pale compared to games designed for that console. The "engine" (source code) will also have to be changed to take advantage of different available features.
In short, it's not really straight forward, and to be good, porting is usually a complete re-write.
Dan
I have a feeling that whoever wrote that article doesn't really know much about the market. I also find it hard to swallow that the PS2 could be anything but a success, given the backwards compatibility, DVD capabilities, and what is looking like it will be an extremely powerful piece of computing equipment. I haven't bought a console system in almost 10 years, but the PS2 may very well change that.
I think this is just shirking editorial responsibility. Granted, slashdot is unique in that it is an interactive forum, but that is not sufficient reason to drop all editorial control. A few readers may correct it, but many posts with equally high scores frequently purport otherwise. Whom is the naive person to believe? If slashdot says so, it must be true, right?!?! This is not to say that every post must be edited, but those on the primary page should be, as they reasonably appear to fall under the review of the editors. If you're going to exercise no control over it, then atleast make it abundantly clear (to the average reader) and do it evenly (more than to just things that you don't oppose).
Bad Ass Dreamcast isin't shit!!!!
Bad Ass......... Dreamcast isin't shit!!!!
What's all this ballyhoo about PS2 anyways? I have two in the back of my computer right now.
Hehe.
In australia DC is $499, its shit house crap, some distributor is having a field day with 200% markup
How did this lame story about a stock split percolate its way to the /. homepage?
Roblimo, if I understand what you're saying, you understood that this piece was stupid and wrong when you posted it, but you posted it anyway, possibly in the hope of stirring up controversy?
It seems to me that Slashdot quite frequently posts articles with a controversy-inducing spin. The Gnome Napster article was one such case where I was involved. The hydrino one was another. "Crank or earth-shattering science?" How about just another scam artist who is good at exploiting people's desire to believe.
I've noticed that wrong and stupid posts often get a lot more response than well-written, balanced ones. In the former case, people have a great urge to write in and correct the original post. Some of these corrections are sensible, but by Sturgeon's Law, most are themselves pretty bogus. Presto! Instant controversy. After a well written article, people tend to be content.
So I think there is a danger that interesting and important stories are getting lost in the noise. I like the volume and rough-and-tumble nature of slashdot, but I for one would prefer a forum in which accuracy and footwork counted for something.
ObOnTopic: anyone know the status of the Linux port to the PlayStation II?
LILO boot: linux init=/usr/bin/emacs
Seconded, Thirded, and Fourthed. There's no reason to post a completely hyped, corporate propaganda piece masquerading as an "article" just because gamers like the site. The more crap like this I see on slashdot, the less i'll be respecting (or even looking at) the site... don't make us wade through the garbage to find interesting & insightful articles. At least Jesux was *funny*! -AC
Not as such no.
Games developers have a history of developing games that push the limits of hardware and features.
Couple this with the fact that sony have absolute power over what gets written and sold, and what doesn't.
They can atually force developers to write PSXII games if they wanted, instead of PSX1.
Under these circumstances there will be shitloads of PSXII games, as well as new PSX1 titles. And both will co-exist for a long time.
Besides its not always the most tech advanced games that are the most playable...
Remember elite on the zx-spectrum?
The secret of success is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake those, you've got it made. (Marx)
Frankly the author isn't very bright, Sony is one of the largest consumer electronics manufacturers in the world (if not the largest). Sony has a market cap of $111 Billion (yes folks that's even bigger than Red Hat :). It's so big that it's considered the barometer of the Japanese stock market (largely due to Sony's recent performance, Japan is considered to have climbed out of it's recession).
Saying that Sony is absolutely dependent on the success of a game console is ridiculous. The idea that this split is related the PS2's release is preposterous.
Sorry, what can we learn from the 7200 again?
1. As many have already pointed out, this split does of course not risk much for Sony. However, since it lowers the price of each stock it makes it more available to small/private investors. This could lead to an increased stock price (this is likely because of the recent great increase in Sony stock price and because of 2-6, below), especially if momentum builds up after Sony/PSX2 success.
2. They say tech stocks are risky, but when they say that they're talking about .coms that have little or no income. The (western) world economy is continuing to boom - people have money to buy both PSX2s and Sony stock. Sony is likely not to be affected by bursting .com bubbles.
3. The hardware of the PSX2 is nothing short of amazing. It managed to exceed even the huge expectations of the game-developers. The PSX1 was a great success that no one really expected and it made(still makes!) some developers/publishers loads of money - it has a developer base larger than any console has ever seen. Developers and publishers will DIE to make games for the PSX2! Believe me, they will. I used to be a PlayStation developer myself so I know. Sony already have signed many, many great developers. Many PC-only developers are expected to start making games for the PSX2 also - that is something extremely rare.
4. Because of the excellent hardware and the huge interest from game developers the games will be great.
5. Because the hardware and games are/will be good and because the PlayStation brand is so strong when it comes to games Sony has little to risk when they try to market the thing as set-top box also. Gamers won't care - they will just use it for games. Others might not care about the set-top stuff, but that doesn't really matter. (Personally, I think if anything has potential to become a sucessfull set-top type thing the PSX2 is it. I sure will buy one just for the DVD-player).
6. The cost of building the PSX2 is very high, Sony will lose money for each unit. It will (initially) be expensive to consumers. But it worked great the last time - it was just the same with the PSX(1). Also, many of the technologies that Sony use for the PSX2 are very expensive now but are expected to become industry-standard in a few years (.18 micron process, USB, IEEE 1394...) - their cost will go down. It did cost Sony much to develop PSX2 but they had buckloads of money from PlayStation profits to spend.
Ulf Pettersson
What is importants is: When can we see it running Linux!
Hardware wise, you'll need to find a way to attach a FireWire disk. It will support modems out of the box.
Software wise, it should be possible to write one hell of a 3D-accelerated X windows server, in addition to requiring drivers for the FireWire disk etc.
But then... Imagine how lovely it would be if you could buy a Linux PS CD, simply put it into the machine, turn it on, and that's it. You have Linux running.
Use a partition of the disk as cache for important system files, and another for "system configuration" files. Other then that, it should be all user data. So an upgrade would be just throwing one CD away and inserting a new one.
And if someone insists on his own particular set of tools, well, that's what CD writers are for. There might be a market for custom combination "Linux CD" distributions here.
Yes, the integer performance sucks. And this won't be a machine for tinkerers. But it could be a great way to push end-user Linux. Imagine having all the PS market as a Linux user base. That would definitely cause application developers to take notice.
And, of course, it would play such lovely games...
I can see online gaming on the Dreamcast really taking off. (1) It'll take the pain out of getting online -- no more downloading Gamespy, searching for a server that's not too many hops away, patching your game up 'til it works etc etc.
(2) Consoles will attract some more "fun" games. I'm personally a keen console gamer, and I'd far rather play something like Chu Chu Rocket online than an over-serious Quake clone. The chance to take part in a worldwide Bomberman league -- now that would be terrific.
--
So, since it can play audio CDs, DVD Movies and video games, it may be that they intend this to be their ultimate home media player.
All the creatures will die, And all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai. (Jubai, 1605)
It's currently selling in Japan for the yen equivalent of $399.
The Consoles are well placed to become the generic home computing device, where they fall down is that they are not "open" enough to capitalise on the free market (i.e. new graphics cards, new drives -- all the fashionable things that go well with the PC, but unfortunately the PC is scary [under the hood] for most people). The winner in this market will be the product that combines the sleek simplicity and ultra power of the console -- with its games market and all the rest -- with true plug and play for memory, graphics cards, keyboards, joysticks, drives, backup devices, etc. The technologies are there: firewire, USB, Bluetooth, PCMCIA, Memory Stick, Compact Flash, etc. What's missing is the product that takes it all on board.
There seems to be no immediate product at the moment, and not enough peripheral items to allow this new breed of product to enter the market.
Is the PS2 going to be powerful? Sure. Is it faster/better than the Dreamcast? Considering it's technology is 18 months newer, Yes. Is it a quantum leap past what a PC or the Dreamcast is capable of doing, or will it make all other game platforms obsolete? No way.
I've noticed that wrong and stupid posts often get a lot more response than well-written, balanced ones.
There you go. Stupid posts (and articles) get more responses. More responses equal more accesses of slashdot. More accesses tend towards more hits on the advertising. Advertising is how slashdot/andover gets their money.
Slashdot has a finacial incentive to increase traffic here, and if stupid articles do that, that's what they'll do. You're naive if you think they wouldn't do that.
But it's pre-selling at approx. $380 (depending on where the yen is at). It won't actually be available in Japan for another few months.
All three of these companies had HUGE successes (the NES/SNES, Genesis, and 2600), only to completely screw it up with their next-gen consoles (N64, Saturn, and 5200). Past success is no guarantee for future success - especially in an industry as fickle as video games.
That is All
Flames off - Slashdotters are the kings of nitpicking - I'm just trying to fit in.
Didn't IBM try to release the PS2 about 10 years ago, and fail miserably? Why does Sony think they'll do any better?
(for the humour impaired: it's a joke!)
The PSX2 is going to have much stronger copy protection than the PSX - I'm already bracing for all the warez kiddies that will complain because their CD-R games won't work on the PSX2.
When Sony unveiled the specs/design for the original Playstation, one of the big honchos from Sega ran down to the engineering department and almost got physical with them for letting a newcomer (into the gaming industry), create a product so superior to Saturn on their first try. The Sega added another processor to the Saturn in the vain hope that it would be able to keep up. (It didn't). Nintendo didn't release the N64 for at least a year AFTER Sony released the Playstation, and despite it's better video rendering and processing capabilities, the unwise decision to use cartrige-based media crippled it. Sure cartriges load faster than CDs, but they can't hold nearly as much information, and cost whole orders of magnitude more to manufacture. The Playstation was NOT technically inferior to any of the systems it competed against. It's elegance, efficiency, and power were balanced almost magically to make it THE console of the 90s. It was this technical superiority over Saturn and N64 that drew all the developers to Sony. Of course, once the ball was rolling, the games handily sold the system, driving the development of more titles. Backward compatibility in PSX-2 is okay, but I don't think it's that big of a deal. It could prove to be a great thing, and it could hinder development of PSX-2 native titles (early developers can write PSX games with a few PSX-2 enhancements like a high-res mode, hoping to sell to people who still have a PSX). Also, where does backward compatibility place Sony 3 years from now, when they are hard at work developing the already-speculated PSX-3 (I read one optomistic magazine article predicting pixel-sized polygons at 6400 x 4800 at 120 fps)? Will PSX-3 be backward compatible with PSX-2 games? Will it still run the PSX-1 games? There could be a lot of pressure on Sony to keep the ability there. This type of pressure toward backward compatibility is what put Windows where it is today. Sure, it's the industry leader, but we all know what the real story is. It's bloated and sucky. Probably it's a moot point, since I don't think Ken Kutaragi is interested in doing anything sucky, and will probably raise a middle finger to pressure in the sucky direction, but the point is still valid.
Ok.. seeing as how this thread is dead, this is really for the benefit of tc and anyone who might happen to see this some time in the future.
The game segement (including pc and ps) is far less then 50%. In fact it makes up only a little less than 7% of Sony's income. Check out their quarterly report.
I was using Nintendo to point out that video games are a big bussiness. Of course it does not compare to Sony. Second before the whole N64 fiasco, NIN was worth about 5 billion. Although N64 did well in the US, the bulk of its market, in Japan, did not buy it. So thats probably one reason for the lowering of the cap. I also think that the $5 billion revenue, which makes sense. They make about 25$ per cartridge, but because of the expense of the cartridge, only about $4 or $5 is profit. So they have high revenue, but lower profits, and thus a lower market cap. (Another reason Sony uses CDs instead of carts.)
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
I knew this is gone now, I feel I should reply anyway :).
SNES kicked the Genesis' @$$. The SNES had the top market share for 16 bit systems, and held it. You *could* say the PSX had to catch up to the Saturn, but you would have to be on crack. Oh wait, you are.
^$^
Is this post not nifty? Sluggy Freelance. Worshi