Finally some good news about the Financial situation: The company posted net income of 26.8 billion yen ($261 million) in the three months ended June, compared with 3.5 billion yen a year earlier (Source: Bloomberg). And if we look at the Imaging Division there are some good news too. While the overall sales decreased because of the global shrinking compact camera market the income increased. This means Sony is selling less compact cameras but more high end (and profitable) system cameras.
This is what Sony writes about the Imaging Division:
Sales:
decreased 9.0% year-on-year (a 10% decrease on a constant currency basis) to 164.6 billion yen (1,630 million U.S. dollars). This decrease was primarily due to a significant decrease in unit sales of compact digital cameras reflecting a contraction of this market.
Operating income:
increased 8.3 billion yen year-on-year to 17.4 billion yen (172 million U.S. dollars). This increase was mainly due to a reduction in selling, general and administrative expenses in the current quarter, partially offset by the above-mentioned decrease in sales.
Foecast:
Sales are expected to be below the May forecast primarily due to anticipated lower sales in emerging market countries. Operating income is expected to remain unchanged from the May forecast due to the above-mentioned decrease in sales being offset primarily by cost reductions.
0 Responses
Nice stuff. Well done.
Great news. Now they just need to keep the momentum.
Proud to be an owner of many great Sony products. All speed ahead !!!!
“Sales are expected to be below the May forecast…” Typically coming in below your forecast sales isn’t “good news,” though it usually is a “surprise” to analysts and investors.
Well-done, Sony.
well deserved
At least they aren’t bleeding money. I wonder if the system camera segment is profitable without compact cameras, given that R&D is spread across both
Just remember, IP&S includes many things besides still cameras. Moreover, Sony’s current forecast is for a continuing decline in still cameras. As I wrote when Sony moved still cameras into the merged grouping, this allows them to bury bad news in with things that have been consistently profitable (broadcast equipment, for example).
Sony’s current forecast is about 16% of the current overall camera sales forecast (I think both are optimistic, by the way). For many years Sony held 20-25% of the overall camera market, with more competitors in place. Smaller share in a declining market is not good news. On the other hand, having a profitable group means you have time to address issues.
Thom,
You’re sounding desperate. Here is what’s included in the IP&S division per today’s financials as well as the forecasts: In the IP&S segment, “Digital Imaging Products includes compact digital cameras, interchangeable single-lens cameras and video cameras”. I don’t know what you think is being hidden. Your blog, essays and articles all try to prop up Nikon and underdog mirrorless companies. You always have something derogatory to say about Sony to appease your fan base.
This Thom is obviously an anti-Sony troll.
Right. Which is why I own and use several Sony cameras that I use in professional work.
Thom; I don’t recall seeing constant negativity in your remarks on any of the other message boards, only on this one. Many would interpret this as trolling, but you’re definitely a cut above the average troll. You have a knack for wrapping your negativity into a somewhat coherent message in an attempt to obfuscate your true intentions. But we get it, you’re here to shill for other brands and that’s ok just be upfront about it. What’s at risk here is your reputation, and if you want to be taken seriously you’re going about it the wrong way. In fact the damage is already done, and most here just think your an asshol*. But one with good communication skills.
I also includes broadcast and pro video equipment and services.
As for trying to prop up Nikon, you apparently don’t actually read my blog. I’m highly critical of Nikon management and many of their recent decisions and products.
I read it and can back up what he’s saying here. I actually like how he is willing to be critical of all brands equally including the brands he actually uses by his choice.
The profitability/income for broadcast equipment and pro video (professional solutions) was never broken out separately. Previously it was in the Devices segment and moved to the IP&S segment two years ago where it belongs. Your aha/conspiracy movement argument is quite weak. Your fans picked up on this as well feeding the underlying assumption on your part that Sony loses a lot on still cameras vs. professional solutions. Should Sony be reporting unit sales and profitability by each camera type? Do any other companies do this? No.
I never said broadcast/pro was broken out separately. Not sure how that’s relevant.
What I’m pointing out that no one here seems to want to acknowledge is that you can’t say that Sony’s still camera group is doing well (or even profitable) based upon Sony’s presentation of their quarterly numbers. The still camera results are buried. Canon buries theirs, Fujifilm buries theirs, pretty much everyone except Nikon and Olympus bury them. I didn’t even ascribe motive to the fact that they’re buried, though you folk all seem to think it’s to “bash” [sic] Sony. It’s not. It’s to try to keep the Internet world from spreading misinformation based upon assumptions rather than researchable facts. .
Should Sony (and others) be breaking out cameras separately? In the Western world, investors would probably insist on it at this point. The fact that most companies don’t want to should raise folk’s eyebrows. If you have nothing to hide and the news is good, you’d actually say in your presentation “still cameras are profitable.” That would send a very positive message to the investment community.
Hard to believe you have to be an analyst at a large investment firm to get p&l figures on a segment as large as “still cameras.” In fact, since Sony and Canon do business in the US and are listed on the NYSE as ADR’s I think GAAP requires the breakout of a large material sales units such as “stills cameras.” Amounts for sales in material units like “digital camera sales” are probably accounted for in their 10Q reports every quarter and audited every year in the 10K. But I could be wrong, honesty. Just seems funny.
I just looked through Sony’s entire 2013 10K and you’re right Thom. The information has to be found elsewhere– but it’s definitely out there. Hundreds of millions in capital trade annually for these firms based upon the type of information we’re talking about. I’m surprised Canon buries their still camera stats in their quarterly reports, but I’ll trust you on that.
Sony files a 6K report in the US. The only breakout there that isn’t in what they reported via their presentation was:
Digital Imaging Products
114,420
106,135
-7.2
1,050
Professional Solutions
61,464
55,716
-9.4
552
So both digital (still + video products) and broadcast/services were down. Still doesn’t tell us where the profit came from.
Are there numbers to show the development of the individual parts, compact digital cameras, interchangeable single-lens cameras and video cameras? If not, how do we know that money was made with system cameras? Could be video cameras, too?
“A little nonsense now and then,
Is cherished by the wisest men.”
―
John August
I can’t wait until Nikon tanks, so you’ll be forced to use Sony products.
I’ve written many times about the mistakes Nikon is making, and if they keep making them, Nikon will indeed be in trouble.
I use Sony products. I use Nikon products. I’ll use the best products that are out there for the job I need to do at any time.
Stupid to get rid of all competitors, with the consequence of few or just one company determining the prices. Possibility for higher prices rises, need for innovation and variety of products decreases. If you have a different opinion, put forth some arguments or numbers to prove him wrong. I doubt you are able to do it.
As usual, Thom, you’re again bashing Sony. Anyway, nobody listens to your ridiculous remarks any more, not even Nikon fans!
See the Sony defenders are out in full force. I happen to use and like a lot of Sony cameras, including my A7, my RX100III, and my FS100U.
The definition of “bash” is “strike hard and violently.” The definition is NOT the reporting of fact. The only word you fanboys seem to be objecting to is the word “bury.” But that’s essentially what has happened. Before, we used to get still camera specific results out of Sony. Today, the still camera results are buried in the video cameras and broadcast equipment results.
Those of you who are making so much noise about Sony making a profit in the group have no idea whether that profit was attributable to still cameras.
I doubt anyone reads his anti-sony rhetoric. He’s about as credible as a used car salesmen.
All big companies try and simplify their reporting or try and make the results favourable where possible. I see no problem there.
Thom, What do you think Sony’s overall ILC market share is? I see last year Olympus claimed 5% of the ILC market with their mirrorless cameras. Now Sony is above them the mirrorless cameras must be at least 5% of the market share. While the A mount share has been eaten away by E mount it still looks to be at 6-7%. It looks to me that Sony is finally growing their share again after cannibalising it.
BTW I hope you have a good holiday.
Still trying to figure that out from all the recent data I’ve accumulated. Unfortunately, shipments aren’t sales and vice versa, so it’s a little tough to come up with a solid number, especially since we have one region where the figures are a little vague and questionable.
But let’s do some math. Olympus shipped about 500k units in a period 3.4m mirrorless units were shipped by CIPA members. That’s 6.8% of mirrorless. So there’s no way they came close to 5% of ALL interchangeable lens cameras. I calculate their share at 2.9%. Maybe they rounded up to the nearest 5% ;~).
I calculate Canon/Nikon at 70% of ILC shipments. Sony is definitely in double digits, though I don’t believe they’ve yet hit the 20% they promised back when they bought KonicaMinolta. Sony’s mirrorless cameras have the overall lead in market share over all the other companies, but their DSLR sales are way, way behind in most markets.
The wild card is Samsung. Their shipments aren’t counted by CIPA, and when I look at cash register numbers, they show up significantly above Olympus.
The real question all the analysts are asking is this: how many players can survey if the market continues to contract as it is? The answer when the film SLR market did this was basically two. Pentax was put right to the brink of insolvency, Olympus bailed, and Minolta needed a bailout. Personally, I think there’s room for three, maybe four, but no more. The others would be unprofitable ventures.
As I’ve written many times in the last five years, one of the problems is that the camera companies are still thinking they’re just selling boxes. Workflow is still hideous and mimicking the 80’s.
Actually both the A, and E-Mount’s market share are growing concurrently. They’re actually doing well together, and make a great team. The A-Mount’s revenue is actually growing faster than the E-Mount, and is now responsible for over 30% of the consumer imaging division’s revenue.
Because most of the Sony’s A-Mount owners, are also heavy E-Mount users, and vice versa. I personally own APS-C (A77 and NEX7), and Full Frame (A850, A7) Alphas, and enjoy each, of them.
Which is the greatest strength of the Alpha system.
Hey BRAT. I talked to a Sony rep about these numbers while I was in Germany. The numbers include the camera body, lens, and flash sales. The A-Mount makes a massive amount of cash in lens sales. Its probably because we really forced to buy G-Series, and Zeiss lenses. Its one of the reasons why they ensure alternatives like Sigma are never 100% compatible.
Yeah, and there is a strong HALO effect coming from their recent successes in the mirror-less segment. The A7/A7r weren’t only responsible for driving e-mount sales, they actually helped the A-Mount increase its market share significantly.
So its possible that we’ll see the A-Mount share increase significantly, as new buyers look to adopt EVF equipped DSLRs, which neither Canon, or Nikon produce.
Hmm, odd that the scumbag sites that constantly run around shouting about Sony losses aren;t running with this story. Wonder why…
It must be from all of those lenses they keep rolling out with (cough cough).
Good job Sony
Sony’s has stopped trying to design cameras for every possible segment of the market just to maintain retail space, because that approach didn’t work, and they were loosing money. Now Sony just focusus on building excellent cameras like the RX100III which sell themselves. They’re creating new segments, and the competition is now trying to catch up.
Sony’s managed to pull itself out of segments of the camera market that aren’t profitable. For example the A37 was kicked to the curb last year, and a replacement was never produced, because they lost money on every A37 that was sold.
I bet we’ll see more of this in the near future.
“Operating income:
increased 8.3 billion yen year-on-year to 17.4 billion yen (172 million U.S. dollars). This increase was mainly due to a reduction in selling, general and administrative expenses in the current quarter, partially offset by the above-mentioned decrease in sales.”
Someone please tell me how this means “…the income increased. This means Sony is selling less compact cameras but more high end (and profitable) system cameras.”
Operating income does not equal actual income!