Microsoft Buyout of Ailing Sony Possible

imashoe writes "BonaFideReviews has published an interesting article stating that a Microsoft buyout of Sony is quite possible sometime in the not-so-far future. From the article: 'All this added up, you have to ask yourself. Will the next Playstation you purchase post-PS3 run a Microsoft operating system and have backwards compatibility for PS1 PS2 PS3 Xbox and Xbox360? Putting your rabid love for Sony aside, this doesn't seem as far fetched as it once did, when the Sony name wasn't covered in enough red tape to fill the Grand Canyon.'"

Comments

Red Ink, not red tape.

[Ohreally_factor]

Idiots! Get your idioms straight. Are the slashdot idiotors native English speakers?

Re:Red Ink, not red tape.

[bigman2003]

I am *not* a grammar Nazi.

But that article was horrible. 'Thrown' instead of 'throne', a bunch of they're/there mistakes. 'Hurtle'?

I am starting to see the advantages of the print media- at least they had editors.

Re:Red Ink, not red tape.

[Ohreally_factor]

My apologies. The idiotor saw fit to merely present an excerpt of the story, so the unhappy turn of phrase wasn't CN's.

Re:Red Ink, not red tape.

[Ohreally_factor]

Red ink? What "english" is this?

Here in England (you know, home of the English language) "Red tape" is a very common term for excessive bureaucratic processes that one sometimes has to go through. I've never heard the term "Red ink" being used to describe this.

Refer to Wikipedia for more information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_tape

And you claim to be a native English speaker? Well, I guess even England has ignorant and uneducated people.

Red ink refers to the accounting practice of recording finacial losses in red ink.

red ink
n.
A financial loss in business.
The condition of showing a fiscal deficit: a firm drowning in red ink.

[From the use of red ink to record debits and losses in financial records.]
(Dictionary.com)

Please see this article for an example of use of the term in English financial journalism.

Re:Red Ink, not red tape.

[Qbertino]

German has a simular term. It's called having or "being in the red numbers" (in den roten Zahlen sein) or "writing red numbers" (rote Zahlen schreiben) which all mean making loss. The same as the english "red ink" used to write 'red numbers'.

Cutting through red tape means having to make a big issue to be able to enter somewhere (as in cutting the red tape across the street of a new bridge).

So it should be "red ink" and not "red tape" when talking about Sonys losses of lately. Though the two idoms sound simular, they bouth mean different things.

Re:Red Ink, not red tape.

[kfg]

On the other hand, depending on your gaming politics, some of the mistakes are deliciously ironic. Take the very first sentence as an example:

"Like many of you, it's hard for me to remember a time when the word "Playstation" was synonymous with gaming."

KFG

Re:Red Ink, not red tape.

[Anonymous Coward]

[My english is better than most other people's german, so please point out mistakes politely. Thank you.]
Though the two idoms sound simular, they bouth mean different things.

<politely>
Dear sir, you made a mistake right there. Best Regards.
</politely>

Re:Red Ink, not red tape.

[KDR_11k]

u might want to consult a dictionary.

Am I the only one who finds it ironic when those too-lazy-to-type-yo fucks try to go grammar/spelling nazi on someone?

Rabid love

[wahgnube]

What "rabid love for Sony" are we talking about here? Don't we all hate Sony?

Or is that different on Saturdays? Hmm.

Re:Rabid love

[Directrix1]

I would describe my attitude towards Sony as rabid love relative to my attitude toward's Microsoft.

Re:Rabid love

[rblancarte]

Is it just me, or outside the horrible grammar and such, is this article making the mistake that Sony is ONLY the Playstation line of game consoles? If I go to Sony's web page, I see a ton of things that have little to do with gaming (directly) - Stereos, Walkmans, TVs, etc. How can these guys say that Sony is "Ailing"?

Sony has been around way too long (60 years this May 7th) for one simple launch will kill these guys. That is like saying that Itanium would kill Intel. Just short sighted reporting.

IMHO, what this is is nothing more than Just Another ailing Tech Site that is trying to bump up their hits by posting some crazy article that speculates some crazy stuff and then get it on a site that will generate some traffic. Hell, the name of the guy who reported this is a freaking LINK to that crappy sites front page.

Now that I see this - this is bogus, nothing but what I said, trying to boost readership at the expense of slashdoters.

RonB

Re:Rabid love

[Anonymous Coward]

If I go to Sony's web page, I see a ton of things that have little to do with gaming (directly) - Stereos, Walkmans, TVs, etc. How can these guys say that Sony is "Ailing"?

And that's just the hardware side of the business. Don't forget that as well as Sony Electronics there's Sony Music and Sony Pictures.

To quote from Sony Corporation Of America's website (not Sony Japan, not Sony Europe, etc.)

Revenue for last fiscal (ending March 31, 2005):

Sony Corporation: $67b
Music Group: $2.3b
Pictures Group: $6.9b
United States $18.4b

Microsoft, in contrast, had a total annual revenue for the period of $36.8b (roughly half if Sony's).

The article talks about $2b a year utterly bankrupting Sony (assuming they simply sell consoles at a loss and don't recoup from game licensing, accessories, additional HD TV sales, gaining ownership of next gen DVDs through market share, etc.)

I'm not quite sure how a loss that barely makes it in to the couple of percent range will cripple a company so badly that it gets bought up by one with half the total revenue and no interest in the majority of the larger company's business.

Microsoft is a software and very specific hardware firm. They would be incredibly badly served by trying to take over an electronics, movies and music giant that's a far bigger company than they are. They're doing very well with the controlled growth they have right now.

The only way it would make sense for Microsoft would be if they could take Sony Computer Entertainment and leave the rest of Sony. Sony, however, gains a huge amount beyond direct console sales. A bankrupt Sony would be forced to sell off pieces. An intact Sony would likely have no interest in destroying its future TVs (cell), its future DVD players (blu-ray), its movie business (also blu-ray) and its appeal to the massively profitable 18-35 demographic that spills over from gaming to those big TVs, car stereos, etc.

Since Sir Howard Stringer took over Sony, he's made some incredibly tough decisions to get Sony, as a whole, back on track - so much so that he's become a major persona non grata in his own home country of Wales where he made tough choices and cut a huge number of workers. Here is a man who's clearly willing to do what it takes to make Sony profitable and who, more than anyone else on earth, has very detailed figures on the costs of the PS3 - yet he's not chosen to sell off Sony Computer Entertainment.

So, overall, we have a company with double Microsoft's revenues, with areas Microsoft's just not interested in, making them far too big to buy out in the entirety (which the original article appears to have totally missed). Piece-by-piece, SCE might be affordable for Microsoft but that requires Sony wanting/needing to sell - something they've shown absolutely no signs of.

Article

[Wellington Grey]

From the article: Stay tuned for the largest train wreck in console history.

Seems like he's really positive on the idea.

-Grey

Fanboyism at its best

[Gothmolly]

Firstly, Sony makes more products than the PSP. In case you didn't know that.
Secondly, why do we all have a "rabid hate" for Sony? They make excellent midrange CD players, for instance. I have an actual Walkman from back in the day, which still works.

The "news" slant would be something like "Wow, this article says that MS might by Sony".

Apparently the "accept trollish submission text" method is what we have here.

Re:Fanboyism at its best

[Ohreally_factor]

why do we all have a "rabid hate" for Sony?

DRM rootkits.

Where have you been?

Re:Fanboyism at its best

[wfberg]

why do we all have a "rabid hate" for Sony?

DRM rootkits.

Also, The NeverEnding Format Wars (MemoryStick, BlueRay, etc.), PS3 Delays And High Price (Save Up Suckers), MP3 Players That Really Only Play ATRAC, Trying To Get Us To Buy MD Even Though We Told Them A Zillion Times That Tape Sucks Come On Philips Dumped Their Digital Tape Ages Ago, and last but not least Every Kind Of Hardware They Make Except For Playstation Is Being Made By Some Other Taiwanes Or Korean Company For Less Money And Higher Quality.

They're a company in decline.

Rootkit support will be double plus good

[LiquidCoooled]

If MS bought out Sony, the rootkits could become undetectable just like the current US gov ones built into Windows ;)

read TFA with a grain of salt

[Vandil X]

Sony has held the all mighty hardware thrown for an astounding eleven years at the time of writing this.

I'm sorry, but with an error like that in the second sentence, I'm guessing the author is not an informed source and likely not an authority on predicting future console market trends.

Seems unlikely

[metamatic]

Acquisition isn't typically the way Microsoft operates. They prefer to license the key pieces of technology that they want, and they only do that when they think they won't get away with simply copying them.

Sony is not PlayStation

[The Ape With No Name]

They make all kinds of stuff, including this new handheld digital recording gizmo our department bought for doing ethnographic interviews. It is totally fly and it fills a niche (midrange price/high quality) that we couldn't do otherwise because its competing devices are 10 grand.

If M$ buys the console part of Sony, so be it. But I doubt that even Microsoft can absorb something as big as Sony. Sure, they may have the cash on hand, but that is a really, really large operation.

Continuing PS3 under Microsoft doesn't make sense

[Zweideutig]

In my humble opinion, Microsoft won't be continuing the PlayStation gaming console and the Xbox if they acquire Sony. It makes more sense to combine the merits of both consoles into one that combines the market share to put a serious force against Nintendo. If Microsoft were to buy out Sony, I see a lot of change happening. The Sony VAIO laptop and desktop computer lines would likely be spun off into a different company like IBM did. The Sony name could be used to sell a competitor of the iPod that runs some portable Windows CE-like OS. Sony's music and movie division would be great for helping Microsoft kill Apple's iTunes. Direct control over the label allows Microsoft to charge whatever they want (even free like with Internet Explorer, which would effectively kill iTunes.) I see the buyout of Sony a great move for Microsoft, provided they spin-off some things that aren't pertinent to boosting the value of the shares for us stockholders.

What a load of crap

[Rik Sweeney]

So Microsoft are going to buy Sony, which includes Televisions, DVD Players, Walkmans, their music label, their film label, PlayStation...

Even if this was true, I expect a purchase would be blocked by one or more governments.

Re:Anti-Trust

[bsane]

Its only an illegal monopoly if they use their posistion to stop competition. There's nothing that says they can't be the only one producing consoles...

DON'T RTFA.

[xigxag]

Just don't. You will want your five minutes back. You were warned.

Re:Huh?

[arth1]

Did the writer mean red ink? Is it environmentally a good idea to put red ink in the grand canyon?

Well, that would explain Red River then...

Anyhow, this article is as insightful as my dog's arse. Reading your average penis cream spam is more enlighting than this. Is there a way to moderate down the submitter and approver of this drivel?

--
*Art

Not much of an article...

[Mike1024]

First line:

Like many of you, it's hard for me to remember a time when the word "Playstation" was synonymous with gaming. Sony has held the all mighty hardware thrown for an astounding eleven years at the time of writing this.

I would have said it's hard to remember a time when the word playstation wasn't synonymous with gaming. After all, Sony has held the console throne for a fair time.

I'm not sure I agree that a buyout is on the cards myself. If Sony's only product was the playstation, maybe, but look at their financial highlights; gaming only represents 10% of their income. Would Microsoft want a record label, a film studio or a consumer electronics business?

Sony's market cap is $48 billion. Granted, Microsoft might be able to stretch to this, but why not spend a little more and buy Apple for $59 billion? Apple is in the computer industry, and has the iPod. Seems like a much better purchase to me.

Just my $0.02,

Michael

Re:Anti-Trust

[Hercules Peanut]

Its only an illegal monopoly if they use their posistion to stop competition. There's nothing that says they can't be the only one producing consoles...

Even if MS bought out Sony, they would still have to worry about competition from these guys

Nutty idea

[FishandChips]

Why should Microsoft buy Sony when Sony are doing such a good job of knocking themselves out of their own key markets? The PSP3 and BlueRay sound like classic troubled products. Sony's sprawling consumer electronics arm is up against the likes of Samsung these days. And Sony's public profile has been dragged through the mud by the CD rootkit scandal. Microsoft don't ahve to do much more than stand and watch.

In addition, there would be a serious cultural and probably political offset: the Americanos operating in the heartland of SE Asian electronics. That would go down like a lead balloon in many quarters.

When you've got $40 billion in the bank, anything can sound like a good buy. Quite why Micrsoft should get into manufacturing cameras and alarm clocks is a bit mystifying. There are many other things they could spend more wisely on, unless Sony goes so tits up that it is sold of piecemeal and bits can be bought separately.

Credibility

[vethia]

Completely aside from the subject and content, it's hard to give this article much credibility when it reads like a remedial English paper. If a writer is attempting to express his opinion, especially in such a belligerent fasion, it behooves him to have a strong command of the English language. Reading an article filled with so many errors does not make me inclined to agree with the author; on the contrary, it makes me inclined to question his judgement and intelligence.

If this article had been written more thoughtfully, I might have said he had some points worth considering, but as it is I find them easy to dismiss. If the author doesn't care enough to check over his own work or isn't bright enough to see the numerous glaring mistakes, I can't help but think that his analysis is equally careless.