Lognor
Banned
They could have successful home and portable consoles again!
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Sony: The Unbuyable Company?
- Thread starter Mibu no ookami
- Start date
BattleScar
Member
Microsoft doesn't have $2.3 Trillion in cash to do an acquisition. They had about $200 billion, but they spent $80-odd billion on Zenimax, Actiblizz and others.
Where are the rest of the 2.1 Trillion dollars coming from?
Market capitalisation is representative of the market value of a business, it is not a measure of how much money they have.
Tesla is a perfect example of this. They are worth around about a trillion dollars. But they're barely profitable. They barely have any liquid cash, if any at all. Could they too, buy Sony because they're worth the magic Trillion?
yurinka
Member
Market cap, revenue and profit are only a part of the whole story. It doesn't make sense at all comparing only revenue and profit of sony and ABK.
One is a platform holder who just released a console, is about to release a VR headset and key player (very likely market leader) in areas like (non-mobile) game susbcriptions or cloud streaming. Not only that: console/AAA gaming market is mostly about selling games/dlc/IAP game revenue and their platform is a market leader. And also has more AAA teams under development plus 2nd party and 3rd party deals.
I mean, ABK is 'only' a game publisher and developer. Sony's game division has way more value and assets than the ones from being a publisher and developer, and some of these other things have big costs that later return as big revenues + extra profit. Plus even if with lower profit margin it's better to have a steady, beefier monster revenue that later could be reinvested in many other things if needed.
Laws make impossible to sell Sony to foreigners, Sony doesn't want or need to sell, they have no reasons to sell because they are killing it specially with their gaming division, a market leader with big growth that obviously won't sell because it would be dumb and is a totally opposite case of Vaio.
Gaming market is growing, console market is growing and PlayStation/Sony game division is growing and expects to increase its market share. PlayStation continues being the clear market leader in consoles, breakes multiple gaming industry records for any console platform holder every year and has a great growth in many gaming areas. In both films and music it's a top 5 company.
They won't sell Sony and they won't sell PlayStation.
Because it takes a lot of time, talent, expertise and knowledge to build top teams, top IPs and build a huge fanbase.
So having a ton of money, they try to shortcut by acquiring already existing successful teams and IPs.
Last edited:
coffinbirth
Member
LOL
Where are you getting these figures?
Sony has a market cap of $140 Billion dollars...93rd most valuable company in the world.
Microsoft has a market cap of $2.2 Trillion dollars... 2nd most valuable company in the world.
Even after buying Activision, Microsoft has nearly enough in cash reserves ALONE to buy at market cap valuation.
I'm not saying they would make it past regulators or that they would even want Sony, let alone Sony wanting to be acquired...but if they were trying to keep Sony out of the hands of Tencent or the like, this deal could certainly be achievable.
lachesis
Member
I'm not saying that they are selling or should sell. I don't think it's good idea for Sony to sell their lifeline too, nor they would want it anyway.
What I'm saying is if - and big "IF" - Sony want to sell off their Playstation brand like they did with Vaio for whatever reason, they CAN. That's all I'm saying.
The law being mentioned here is for the Japan's national security that some 500 chosen companies, including Mitsubishi Heavy Industry (fighter jet), and Toshiba (nuclear reactor), etc.
The law doesn't forbid the foreign investment - it just tightened the government screening/inspection for the national security measure.
Similar law was also enacted back in 2019 for the telecommunication companies too. But that doesn't meant one company cannot invest, nor buy a Japanese company... that's absurd.
If buying party and selling party are in agreement - it will happen. It just needs to go thru the government/legal screening etc.
It's like the law's being interpreted here as that while it's all-okay for Japanese companies to buy foreign companies, but it's not okay a foreign company to buy a Japanese company? Not at all.
It happens all the time, at all different levels. Usually smaller companies get bought, for sure and high profile M&A are not as common - but it happens.
I personally know a president whose Japanese consulting company was bought out by an English firm, etc.
Nissan-Renault-Mitsubishi alliance is another example. Nissan and Mitsubishi both are bigger than Sony. (Not for the Market cap, but actual Fortune 500 ranking)
Technically it's alliance - but Renault owns 43% of Nissan (with voting stake), and Nissan owns 15% of Renault (non-voting stake). Go figure who's in charge here...
I respect Sony as competent company that it has transformed itself from manufacturing company to a service company over past decade or so.
At the same time, I also am rather cautious of the deep pockets & seemingly unlimited $$$ of the future competitions too, as we all witnessed just a few days ago.
MS is already pulling all stops out, Google, Amazon, Apple and Netflix - they are all eyeing the market, and will likely compete against each other for that domain in the future.
The gaming market, as you said - is growing and console market also is growing. If things stayed status quo - Sony wouldn't have any issues staying on top.
However, the market's evolving too. Physical consoles may be thing of the past in 7 years, only with subscription model.
(Yes, I am old school gamer, so I like buying my own game/music/video than subscription too - but it didn't stop music market or home video market go completely digital and all subscription)
Last edited:
So you are saying only a few companies COULD buy Sony? Yep thats riight
…but these ”few” conpanies HAPPEN to be JUST the tech companies that compete with Microsoft in pretty every area, that is Amazon, Apple and Google
And then you use this as an argument to say Sony is impossible to buy?
Im sorry but this sounds like denial and/or wishfil thinking
Sony will get bought imo
…but these ”few” conpanies HAPPEN to be JUST the tech companies that compete with Microsoft in pretty every area, that is Amazon, Apple and Google
And then you use this as an argument to say Sony is impossible to buy?
Im sorry but this sounds like denial and/or wishfil thinking
Sony will get bought imo
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
Re-read what I wrote, you clearly missed some key parts particularly that the Japanese government isn't going to let any of these western companies buy Sony.
So if Sony was going to be purchased it would have to be by a Japanese company. The only Japanese company bigger than Sony is Toyota.
coffinbirth
Member
Incorrect all around here.
Sony is a publicly traded company, literally anyone from anywhere can buy them, given the obvious criteria is met...mostly the desire to be acquired. Something like 35% of Japanese companies have or have had foreign ownership.
Also, Sony is the 11th most valuable company in Japan, not 2nd.
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
I didn't say they couldn't have foreign ownership or even that they can't be foreign-owned. What I said was that Japan wouldn't let Sony be purchased by a foreign company. Big difference in buying 5 percent of a company and buying controlling or whole stock in a company.
https://companiesmarketcap.com/japan/largest-companies-in-japan-by-market-cap/
Here's my source. Let me know if you have something different.
porkchopexpress
Member
While you are correct that market cap is just outstanding shares x market price, it is also indicative of several things, one of which is the ability for a company to raise funds for corporate actions. The fact is that the firms in the trillion dollar club, AAPL, MSFT, AMZN, GOOG...have for all intents and purposes, an unlimited ability to raise money.
Again, this is moot because Sony is never getting taken out, nor would MSFT never take out Sony; but Microsoft could finance a $140Billion dollar acquisition easily, without so much as a second thought.
But the key point is, the Japanese government will never ever never never ever ever never let Sony get acquired by a foreign company.
Last edited:
yurinka
Member
The law doesn't forbid foreign investment, it forbids to sell certain Japanese companies that are strategical for Japan to foreign companies or people. Their idea is to protect their national security plus some some strategical areas from other countries.
This 2019 thing for telecommunication companies was a different thing and more specific (this time telcoms only). This case isn't about the goverment forbiding to sell Japanese companies to foreigners, in this case the goverment review and approve or deny each case where foreign companies or people buy over 10% of a telecomunication company. I assume that for the same reason, to protect themselves from other countries.
The government allow Japanese companies or people to buy or invest in whatever foreign stuff they want, obviously following regulations that apply on each case.
Japanese companies can be bought by foreigners if aren't one of these few top strategical Japanese companies.
MS already had deep pockets 20 years ago and Sony kept outselling them every generation. To have mony doesn't mean to succed in gaming, or specifically on consoles. Google has deep pockets but failed hard with Stadia.
Amazon did some fails, now had a first successful game with New World and their stores in mobile or PC are basically nothing. Luna sounds nice but as of now it's still US only and still is in beta so who knows. Netflix's bet on games as of now is a joke, but on the app had an image of a Dual Sense and another of Ghost of Tsushima, so they may have some upcoming partnership with Sony.
Apple makes a shit ton of money with gaming, but they don't make games and until now are focusing their business on mobile and tablets, which they could easily release as a console SKU to run mobile games from their ecosystem that are playable with a controller and are doing something like that.
Yes, the market is evolving: the gaming market grows, the console market grows and Sony expects their console market share to grow. I assume because they see PS5 outselling launch aligned PS4 and Switch, MS moving their focus from being exclusive to a console to go full multiplatform and focus on a subscription instead, and Switch having passed its yearly sales peak (which means year after year its yearly sales will decrease until getting replaced by its successor).
Sure, this generation we'll see game subscriptions, cloud gaming and AAA VR grow. And we'll see Sony leading the pack, Spartacus (if it really exist and isn't another Bloomberg lie about Sony) will start with the double of the subs that Gamepass has.
PS4, Switch and PS5 are breaking gaming history records for consoles. There's a PS6 and Switch successor officially confirmed to be coming. Sony has 2x the subs in game subscriptions than MS and this market is a tiny part of the pie, and cloud gaming even more.
Cloud gaming will grow this generation but will continue being a very small market compared to consoles in the next gen. One of the reasons being most people (I mean, over 4/5) in the world don't have a decent internet connection and won't have decent fiber or 5G coverage in 10 years from now, plus many countries have data caps. Plus wifi 6 or 7 will be need to be more mainstream on phones, routers and consoles.
Ms saw they weren't able to compete selling games and selling games for it. So tried instead to swap their focus to subs instead, and going full multiplatform instead of focusing in their console only to see if they can compete in this way.
Sony has 2x the game subs than MS and that's a small part of their business, like Nintendo their main business is to sell consoles and specially both 1st and 3rd party games/dlc/season passes/mtx for them, and both Nintendo and Sony are killing it so they won't move their focus from there, even if as secondary business they keep growing in other areas.
yurinka
Member
MS, Amazon, Apple or Google can't buy Sony because the Japanese government forbids to sell certain strategical companies from different key areas to foreigners, being Sony one of them. And even if they could, Sony doesn't want, need or have any reason to sell the company.
Last edited:
coffinbirth
Member
Again, it's a large number of Japanese companies that have been bought outright by foreign entities. Sharp comes to mind as being a recognizable brand. They are now owned outright by a Taiwanese holding company. Japan restricting foreign investments is aimed at China and Korea, NOT America...as it is considered a national security risk, it's not a blanket law, hence the necessity of a screening process.
That link you provided uses marketcap as valuation, not actual revenue. Sony is a heavily bloated company, but their annual revenue is much lower than some other Japanese companies, so therefore much lower down the totem pole of potential lost taxes for the Japanese government.
I don't have a sub to Fortune to link the breakdown of valuated assets vs operating costs and net income, but Sony isn't even in the top ten. They have a AA rating, whereas Toyota has a AAA rating, for reference.
This all goes without saying that Sony is a conglomerate and given this discussion being skewered towards gaming...a company like Microsoft could swoop in and offer to simply buy the Playstation division with a cash and stock offer that would make investors blush without batting an eye. It's all down to what Sony and it's shareholders want at that point. If they don't want to be acquired, then a forceful buyout would likely be halted by the Japanese government, but if they wanted to sell it off, they certainly could. Not saying they do or would, just saying it's possible.
Rurhanograthul02
Banned
According to the literature which is what I'll listen to here, doesn't matter what the books say if you're valued at what the wealthiest country in the world was is market value merely a decade before. You instantly recoup your losses when you are juggling the wealth of an economy to make purchases and while books will say you can't afford to, those earning statistics are based on the common sensibilities of people that have never come close to counting to close to a billion let alone figuring out the intricacies of a Country Sized Economy Valued at 2 Trillion Dollars Microsoft is sitting pretty at. When your market cap is the size of a very wealthy country, you might have concerns about what you purchase and when. When your Market Valuation is literally the size of the Wealthiest Economies however, all previous theory on this goes out the window.
Microsoft Is Currently Valued Above India, Italy, Brazil and Canada's Economies in Market Cap.. and are juggling the wealth of an Economy the Size of Several of the Wealthiest Countries just a decade ago.
This changes the Topology in your buying policies at base level, and many purchases a company will make at this size never even show up on the radar. All financial Experts Agree those smaller purchases would be fully recouped within 3-6 months. All financial literature also agrees it is perfectly conceivable to instantly if you were to spend it, recoup a 2 Trillion Dollar Purchase literally instantly if you have the Masterful Economic Council that Microsoft surely now has and made purchases wisely because at that level it is the same as one Country buying another Country or one Economy buying and Then Merging with Another Economy!!
In Business 101, despite the nay saying. You always make purchase offer as soon as possible if there's a merger or company you really want. It opens the door to negotiations,
may get you laughed out of the park but only serves to strengthen your relationship in trade and business dealing long term. I imagine we'll see a large Microsoft Segment on how
happy Microsoft is about Nintendo Crossovers and Franchises soon enough. And all of this stems back to Microsofts Software Deving relationship on PC back in the early days, and
one laughable purchasing attempt by Microsoft to take over Nintendo. And this purchase attempt was still the right move from a business perspective. Business 101, Break the Ice and
open the Doors to Trade, Purchases and Company buyouts or mergers as soon as possible!
MasterCornholio
Member
That’s because he was making a reference to the time to triangle not how long it takes to make games.
MrFunSocks
Banned
Now you're really taking the piss. Sony are at the bottom of the market for those.
yurinka
Member
No, Sony is way bigger than Nintendo. Sony has a market cap of $139.49B and Nintendo a market cap of $55.96B. As reference, Sony's game division made $25B in revenue last fiscal year.
Nah, we know MS has half of than Sony. I think we don't have numbers for Stadia, but pretty likely are way smaller because if not they would have shown numbers and wouldn't have shut down their game studios. Luna is still on Beta and US only so I assume should be pretty small.
And then we have the 3rd party company specific ones like the EA Play or Ubisoft ones, I don't know their size but pretty likely are smaller than the Sony and MS ones.
If some other of these game subs with AAA games would be the market leader they would brag about it or at least to share their subs count.
Rurhanograthul02
Banned
When you are valued at the levels of wealth Apple and Microsoft have accumulated, all financial constant's advise you treat your company as if it is a Private Equity Firm juggling the buying power of National Economies, and that at 2 Trillion Dollars you control 2/3rds of the Global Economy during any given moment.
Previously during the Billion Dollar Era of Company Sized Wealth Making, they began working on this concept during but all companies comparatively then... were far too undervalued to actually bring levity to this concept. Now, at 2 Trillion, not only do the companies at this epoch literally have 2/3's of the global economy sifting through their fingertips, they are considered to have unlimited cash flow and literally infinite money as all major purchases are recouped and returned instantly and even the smaller purchases within 3 months - while the books and financial records struggle to keep up and reflect this.
Technical Analysis of the Financial Markets: A Comprehensive Guide to Trading Methods and Applications
The Two Trillion Dollar Meltdown
The Trillion Dollar Revolution
Previously during the Billion Dollar Era of Company Sized Wealth Making, they began working on this concept during but all companies comparatively then... were far too undervalued to actually bring levity to this concept. Now, at 2 Trillion, not only do the companies at this epoch literally have 2/3's of the global economy sifting through their fingertips, they are considered to have unlimited cash flow and literally infinite money as all major purchases are recouped and returned instantly and even the smaller purchases within 3 months - while the books and financial records struggle to keep up and reflect this.
Technical Analysis of the Financial Markets: A Comprehensive Guide to Trading Methods and Applications
The Two Trillion Dollar Meltdown
The Trillion Dollar Revolution
BattleScar
Member
The sum total of the value of your shares being trillions is not the same as having trillions of dollars at hand. Market Capital is not the same as Gross Domestic Product. Equating those two things is ridiculous.
You can cite literature all you like, but answer me this. What could Microsoft buy with their Market Cap, and where would the money come from?
You say that Microsoft is worth more than India. Could Microsoft therefore just buy India?
Rurhanograthul02
Banned
I will continue then to cite the Expert advice delegated across vast financial curriculums by Master's of Finance such as Warren Buffet and Ronald L. Olson, Berkshire Hathaway ect while others say ignore standard Business 101 tactics, and continue on by encouraging people to ignore the fact that Microsoft's liquidity is larger than yes India while citing it's a terrible business strategy for now Microsoft which dwarf's both Sony and Nintendo in terms of Market value to make low ball offer on entering the Console Market As a doorway strategy to long term negotations!! Yes think I will listen to business strategy 101 opposed to the thousands of fandom laughing at such proposition particularly when Microsoft was worth a mere 780 billion when making that first offer considering they are now larger then yes the Economy of India, Canada, Brazil and Italy!! Agree with the experts, categorically all of them in this instance or just ignore sound curriculum I suppose!!
Last edited:
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
Everyone uses market cap to determine the value of a company. Literally, no one uses revenue as a benchmark for value. Revenue doesn't even mean profitability. That's one of the silliest things I've ever seen.
As for Sharp. Sharp was the largest M&A by a foreign investor in history and note it wasn't a western company that bought them and their price was 6.7 billion and it still came under scrutiny and it was a company that was struggling to stay afloat and was being considered for a break up.
bushwookie
Banned
I've seen you make the claim that Sony has 2x the game subs that MS has. It's almost become your catchphrase really.
My question is what subs are you specifically referring to here? Is it PS Plus subs compared to XBL Gold subs? Or is it all subscriptions combined from all available services?
As to your overall point. I get that some prefer one console over another, but your posts are just dripping with bias here. It can't be healthy to spend so much time, and go to such great lengths just for the purpose of talking up Sony. Like we get it. You like Sony, but your posts are straying further and further from the truth and reality in order to portray Sony as being more than it is, or something it's not. It might be time to pull the reigns in a bit.
coffinbirth
Member
Tax rates aren't based on valuation, they're based on income. That's literally 1/2 the reasoning for the government to get involved, and falls under their "national security" concerns.
You seem really hung up on "western" companies having some sort of stigma to avoid in Japanese holdings...Taiwan and the United States are their biggest allies in the pushback against Chinese influence.
Suggesting that Sony is an "unbuyable company" is ACTUALLY silly...and isn't even a real word, lol. Unpurchasable, however, is.
SSfox
Member
Typical playstation hater wishing all bad things inside his heart and soul for Playstation and then whine whenever somebody do a little criticism about MS.
Yes this thread will be funny in few years when people like you will sad that "as usual" none of your silly speculation won't happen.
Last edited:
BattleScar
Member
I'd like to see some direct citations that say that Microsoft's market capitalisation is equal to their liquid capital.
All I've seen you do is chat shit about "literature" without actually using any citations or quotes. Linking to Amazon pages of books is meaningless. And you haven't actually answered any of my questions.
yurinka
Member
I'm refering the (not mobile games, more AAA/AA/indie focused) game subscripitions from Sony and MS, originally for console but also for PC and soon both will be on mobile too. The ones that will be competing.
The most recent official numbers we had from Sony's game subscriptions are:
-PS Plus -which also includes PS+ Collection- 47.2M subs (in growing trend), as of end of September 2021
-PS Now 3.2M subs (in growing trend), as of end of March 2021
The most recent official numbers we had from MS game subscriptions are:
-Game Pass 25M (in growing trend), as of January 2022
-We don't know how many of these GP subs are GPU subs, we don't know how many Gold subs still didn't use the $1 upgrade to GPU
Plus/Collection and Now will be merged this Spring into the multi tiered service codenamed Spartacus, that will add a new base GP-like tier matching. We don't know the current amount subscribers Gold, but we know Game Pass Ultimate includes gold and that there's always been a $1 upgrade to convert your Gold sub to a GPU sub and considering the insane amount of stuff it adds it's difficult to understand that people wouldn't upgrade. So there may be some active Gold subscribers who didn't upgrade to GPU, but not much.
So even if won't be exactly 1:1 propositions, very soon they will be more similar and comparable than they are now. You may also argue that many people own PS Plus for other reasons than the PS Plus an PS+ Collectiton games, which is true, but month ago we saw a PS Plus survey where players said that games were the top 1 reason of why they have Plus.
Not only but with the (rumored but pretty likely) Spartacus merge and new tier for this spring, as an example smart tv/smartphone/table client for PS Now was announced in 2014 as part of their PS Now announcement as long term plans, a couple of years ago they mentioned their investors that would be part of their next gen PS Now, more recently as corporate FY goal they mentioned to overhaul and push PS Now and other services like anime sub. The Spartacus leak mentioned Spartacus is coming this Spring. We also saw many Sony patents related to game streaming optimizations for 5G, joycon-like Dual shock like controller/attachment for smartphones and tablets, etc. So things like PS Now running on smartphones and tablets is coming and pretty likely will be released in the next months.
Pretty likely there are many users who have Plus and Now, so to get the number of total of Sony subscribers isn't as simple as to add the Plus ones we have from September and the Now we had from March. But it's fair to assume that there are some who has only one of them, and that since both are in a growing trend pretty likely as of now they are pretty likely around 50M or more, or that at least Spartacus would start this Spring with this number or a slightly higher considering what they will grow from now.These 50M+ subs are aprox. the double of GP+GPU (which includes pretty likely a huge majority of previous Gold subs) has.
Or you could also compare the revenue they get from the network services (Plus+Now) of Sony's game divisions (the most recent number is Q2 2021, $912M) vs MS numbers if they would detaill them, but for the quarter only shown %s of increase. But even all 25M Gamepass users would pay in the most expensive way (zero base gamepass subs, zero people using the $1 ugrade, zero people getting cheaper cd key store codes, all 25M subs instead paying $15/month during the 3 months of the quarter, and all 25M already being there from July to September instead of being less (which obviously isn't the case at all for all these assumptions), it would give a maximum $375M in revenue from all GP and GPU users for that quarter, and we should add there the active Gold subs who didn't upgrade with $1. That pretty likely even with that would be pretty far from Sony's $912M from game subs.
TLDR: starting this Spring we and the analysts will start comparing Sony and MS game subscriptions comparing Spartacus vs Gamepass subs even they aren't exactly the same, they will be more similar than when people compared GP (which includes GPU numbers) vs Now in the past. And even if we don't have the exact, up to date numbers, we know that as of now Sony with their game subs (which will be merged into Spartacus) has aprox. the double of subs and over double the revenue.
Last edited:
Rurhanograthul02
Banned
Lol, then ignore the curriculum and books I've posted - I'll still keep making very valid statements while you sit around ignoring them I suppose!! Wont change what the experts say here, and neither
will you inferring otherwise!!
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
ultrazilla
Gold Member
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
If you read this you would know it's not just about price.
BattleScar
Member
Do you have any quotes? Any citations? Even screenshots of the texts you're referring to?
Anything?
We all know what happened the last time they went to war.
Rurhanograthul02
Banned
I Have offered several books worth of factual material here!! All which state that as a company you should start treating your Market Cap as your net worth even though at this level it likely wont include the extra Trillion dollar in Assets Microsoft Currently has floating around unaccounted for. The literature even goes as far as to theoretically hit the nail on the head and insist a company like Microsoft when valued at 2.3 Trillion in Theoretical numbers in a book somewhere, is really worth 3.5 Trillion with all existing assets and liquidity!!
There are several, Several... websites derived from this same information - all based on relating Market Cap to the Economic GDP of a Country, as these advisors curriculum have insisted you should when you are a Company like Microsoft. And the case they make to cement this is the fact that at any given moment 2/3rds of the Global economy is juggling about in your accounts, even with unaccounted assets floating about to inflate the 2.3 trillion dollar valuation!!
There are several Websites now based on these pieces of literature, this curriculum - but you will be
apt to hand wave this information away to I'm absolutely positive as it doesn't fit your specific definition
and I haven't given you quotes for you to also hand-wave away. Meanwhile theirs really nothing reputable
out there to counter the literature, and you surely haven't done anything but demand sources when I have
given complete source-ware here.
As I have given now Substantial Literature and evidence of this I am still certain you will surely 100% Hand-wave based on some non-sourced misconception so I am done here!! Completely done!!
But As I stated previously, you may find below from another thread I posted in here... one of now several websites boasting Microsoft's Wealth compared and related to GDP as the consultants have advised you do - there are likely so many as they are derived specifically from the teachings of Warren Buffet and more specifically George Soros, and others considered the Authority on such things!!
Pages atop pages making the comparison, why? Because sound curriculum and literature backs such comparison.
But you'll hand-wave this while offering no sources counter and plainly use your own thoughts to combat this truth, but as I said, I am done here not to return either way!!
The below is an Old, non up-to-date version listing the Largest Countries with GDP that Microsoft is currently Wealthier Than!!
But Last I checked, Microsoft is now valued at 2.3 Trillion making them Wealthier than India, Canada, Brazil and Italy!!
How do the big tech giants compare to entire countries? Here's how Apple, Microsoft, and Amazon's market caps stack up against national GDP.
www.visualcapitalist.com
Last edited:
Swift_Star
Banned
I’m struggling to understand why so much desperation for Sony to sell.
BattleScar
Member
I'm not handwaving anything.I Have offered several books worth of factual material here!! All which state that as a company you should start treating your Market Cap as your net worth even though at this level it likely wont include the extra Trillion dollar in Assets Microsoft Currently has floating around unaccounted for. The literature even goes as far as to theoretically hit the nail on the head and insist a company like Microsoft when valued at 2.3 Trillion in Theoretical numbers in a book somewhere, is really worth 3.5 Trillion with all existing assets and liquidity!!
There are several, Several... websites derived from this same information - all based on relating Market Cap to the Economic GDP of a Country, as these advisors curriculum have insisted you should when you are a Company like Microsoft. And the case they make to cement this is the fact that at any given moment 2/3rds of the Global economy is juggling about in your accounts, even with unaccounted assets floating about to inflate the 2.3 trillion dollar valuation!!
There are several Websites now based on these pieces of literature, this curriculum - but you will be
apt to hand wave this information away to I'm absolutely positive as it doesn't fit your specific definition
and I haven't given you quotes for you to also hand-wave away. Meanwhile theirs really nothing reputable
out there to counter the literature, and you surely haven't done anything but demand sources when I have
given complete source-ware here.
As I have given now Substantial Literature and evidence of this I am still certain you will surely 100% Hand-wave based on some non-sourced misconception so I am done here!! Completely done!!
But As I stated previously, you may find below from another thread I posted in here... one of now several websites boasting Microsoft's Wealth compared and related to GDP as the consultants have advised you do - there are likely so many as they are derived specifically from the teachings of Warren Buffet and more specifically George Soros, and others considered the Authority on such things!!
Pages atop pages making the comparison, why? Because sound curriculum and literature backs such comparison.
But you'll hand-wave this while offering no sources counter and plainly use your own thoughts to combat this truth, but as I said, I am done here not to return either way!!
The below is an Old, non up-to-date version listing the Largest Countries with GDP that Microsoft is currently Wealthier Than!!
But Last I checked, Microsoft is now valued at 2.3 Trillion making them Wealthier than India, Canada, Brazil and Italy!!
How do the big tech giants compare to entire countries? Here's how Apple, Microsoft, and Amazon's market caps stack up against national GDP.
www.visualcapitalist.com
I just don't have the time to buy and read entire books to get your point. If you've read these books, then why don't you pull out some choice quotes or screenshots that demonstrate that a trillion dollar company has a trillion dollars to spend?
Cause they fucking don't. Yeah their market value is immense, greater than some entire economies. Does that mean they can go out and buy entire countries?
Tesla is worth more than every single other car manufacturer combined. Close to a trillion dollars. So why don't they just leverage their nation-scale net worth to just buy Toyota or General Motors or something? Surely Tesla (Market Cap: $941 billion) could easily just walk on over swinging their big ol' market cap and just buy General Motors (Market Cap: $76 Billion)?
And if you're done. Good for you. Less stress I guess. Posting links to entire books with the expectation that people should just read them to be able to understand your arguments is a pretty novel way to argue I guess. Most people would have the capacity to provide quotes and citations and screenshots to support their argument in the body of their text. That is how research papers and literature reviews tend to operate, after all.
So far, you've succeeded in proving nothing to anyone. So I guess you are done.
Sony is worth a lot more than their $140 Billion market cap. They have over $200 billion dollars worth of assets alone, and a further $50 billion in cash. The good will you'd be expected to pay for a company that large with such diverse revenue sources and positions of market strength would be insane. Sony's imaging division alone would fetch a hefty premium given that they are the indomitable leaders in that space.
Which is part of the reason market capitalisation is not a particularly fantastic measure of the real value of a business.
Companies like Tesla and other loss-making companies valued in the tens or hundreds of billions, are massively overvalued. Is Microsoft overvalued? Nah, probably not. They make $18 billion a quarter, so I don't doubt they are probably worth a shit load of money. And I don't doubt they have the capacity to raise a large amount of funds for M&A, but Sony is probably too much for a lot of companies to justify purchasing.
Last edited:
Rurhanograthul02
Banned
I will happily say yes I've provided nearly over 20 pages of websites backing the curriculum, from - literally Forbes to American Capitalist comparing Market Cap to GDP... as the literature and Curriculum advises you to do.
If you and others want to ignore the sources I've provided, while providing nothing but a "Nuh uhhh... not true.. dat's not a source" while providing nothing but your own statement then that's explicitly 100% on you. And it is evident in now every post made by those agreeing with such ilk who offer nothing but their own thoughts which amount to little more than disbelief.
So Yes Done Here!! Good Day!! Have fun ignoring the sound curriculum and advice of Soros and those Masterful in Economic Advisory while saying I haven't provided proof (and not providing counter sources) when explicitly over 20 pages of google search results plainly say there must be something to comparing Market Cap to GDP, I have a feeling if there wasn't you might find 3 sources and not 20 pages - which is why Soros and others have cited this is the correct and the only correct way to look at your Market Cap as there is no better way to estimate your Value at those Levels. You and other's don't have any reputable sources to counter this and I've provided substantial evidence through very basic comprehension sleuthing if nothing else. Good Day!!
If you and others want to ignore the sources I've provided, while providing nothing but a "Nuh uhhh... not true.. dat's not a source" while providing nothing but your own statement then that's explicitly 100% on you. And it is evident in now every post made by those agreeing with such ilk who offer nothing but their own thoughts which amount to little more than disbelief.
So Yes Done Here!! Good Day!! Have fun ignoring the sound curriculum and advice of Soros and those Masterful in Economic Advisory while saying I haven't provided proof (and not providing counter sources) when explicitly over 20 pages of google search results plainly say there must be something to comparing Market Cap to GDP, I have a feeling if there wasn't you might find 3 sources and not 20 pages - which is why Soros and others have cited this is the correct and the only correct way to look at your Market Cap as there is no better way to estimate your Value at those Levels. You and other's don't have any reputable sources to counter this and I've provided substantial evidence through very basic comprehension sleuthing if nothing else. Good Day!!
Last edited:
Rurhanograthul02
Banned
Also For those curious, there are several source stating Market Cap is the correct Metric to estimate a Companies Value though Microsoft's Enterprise Value is 2.5 Trillion which is Larger than it's Current Market Cap Worth.
Here is a chart that has converted Market Cap to GDP for America Explicitly
This is now out of date but the comparison is here plain as day for all to see!!
"At $3 trillion, Apple's market cap is equal to 14.4% of the U.S.' total 2020 gross domestic product."
In fact Currently Microsoft now Measures their growth by their own Internal "Digital GDP" across all digital products.
www.pymnts.com
People citing this is not the proper measurement when looking at trying to associate Trillion's in value with GDP are basing this on their own understanding of GDP and Market Cap without reading the literature or adhering to curriculum teaching against such poor guidance!!
Explicitly taught in all curriculum and found just in a simple search advising you to ignore revenue and instead focus on Market Cap
economictimes.indiatimes.com
Apple's market cap is more than the GDP of 186 countries. Only US, China, Japan and Germany are ahead of it. India's total GDP is at $2.62 trillion.
The below is out of date, but the comparison and information leading to the such analysis are established.
According to Market Experts Apple's Market Cap is Less than Just Four Nation's GDP.
Read more at:
https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...ofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
But go ahead, keep disagreeing with Market Experts!! I won't be returning!! Good Day!!
Here is a chart that has converted Market Cap to GDP for America Explicitly
This is now out of date but the comparison is here plain as day for all to see!!
"At $3 trillion, Apple's market cap is equal to 14.4% of the U.S.' total 2020 gross domestic product."
In fact Currently Microsoft now Measures their growth by their own Internal "Digital GDP" across all digital products.
From PC Renaissance to Great Workplace Reshuffle, Microsoft Hooks a Ride on Rising Digital GDP | PYMNTS.com
With a market value north of $2 trillion and a stable of nearly two dozen products that generated close to $52 billion in revenue in the past 90 days, the
www.pymnts.com
People citing this is not the proper measurement when looking at trying to associate Trillion's in value with GDP are basing this on their own understanding of GDP and Market Cap without reading the literature or adhering to curriculum teaching against such poor guidance!!
Explicitly taught in all curriculum and found just in a simple search advising you to ignore revenue and instead focus on Market Cap
- At 1 Trillion The scale of their profits takes on a whole new meaning when compared with the GDPs of many of the world's countries.
Apple's m-cap at $3 trillion less than just 4 nations' GDP
According to experts, the $3 trillion market cap is a landmark moment for Apple. Apple scaled the $1 trillion m-cap in August 2018, whereas it hit the $2 trillion mark in August 2020.
Apple's market cap is more than the GDP of 186 countries. Only US, China, Japan and Germany are ahead of it. India's total GDP is at $2.62 trillion.
The below is out of date, but the comparison and information leading to the such analysis are established.
According to Market Experts Apple's Market Cap is Less than Just Four Nation's GDP.
Read more at:
https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...ofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
But go ahead, keep disagreeing with Market Experts!! I won't be returning!! Good Day!!