CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!

Thank you.

Honestly, I think there are people who, because they have invested in a certain brand, see advances in technology and sales by Sony and other companies as both a repudiation of their decision AND a direct threat to their chosen manufacturer. The reactions we see are often irrational and always both visceral and predictable.

(Like the Muscle car wars of the late '60s and early '70s; it wasn't enough to praise your own make; folk didn't feel good until they put one of the others down.)

There are irrefutable facts in today's DSLR/mirrorless camera industry. Some cameras, sensors, and lenses perform better than others in specific categories. Some are better specialists, others are better all-around. Sony keeps pushing the bar UP while keeping prices competitive and we keep hearing people reflexively criticize every announcement in the same old predictable ways.

It's how things seem to work around here.

CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!

IF I were one of those psychology types, I'm sure I could find some Latin phrase for the emboldened text above.

Since I'm just a simple country boy, I'll ask you to please cite an example of overly strong evangelistic rhetoric that needs substantive evidence for support.

Take your time; I'll wait. But make sure it's not something subjective that'll leave you out on an Island all alone......

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

Cholly, I have cited references. You are the one that is lacking and on the defensive here. I'm glad you have a buddy and a wingman to support your little odyssey, but I am not on an island all alone, it is you that is adrift and underpowered.

To put it plainly, I'm not putting Sony down, I have said many times that the company is doing good things and may be a game changer, but your overly enthusiastic rhetoric is probably doing Sony more harm than good. It is you that is in Sony la la land and making subjective claims that you do not and can not substantiate. Also, don't try to fall back on the being 'a simple country boy' stance, that is a cheap trick and a long way beneath you.

The ball is firmly in your court to support your bloviated rhetoric. Objective reasoning requires defensible support and you appear to be somewhat lacking in that department.

What makes you so insecure? I've already confirmed that I think Sony is doing a good job here, it's just that the end game is a long way in the future.

CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!

OK... AGAIN with the accusations, this time utilizing adjectives like overly enthusiastic and bloviated.

You were asked to demonstrate ONE example of my alleged extemporization where something is either exaggerated or false.

Here's another opportunity...

P.S: I grew up between the woods and a farm in the middle of nowhere; that makes me a simple country boy a heart.

Desert Gecko Loc: desert southwest, USA

Good morning Cholly. Just let this go. Some people like to argue for sake of arguing.

The off-topic debate started over whether Konica-Minolta's imaging division's history is now part of Sony's history. This point can be considered either way: that KM's immutable history is still KM's history, or that Sony acquired KM's history along with everything else it acquired, tangible or otherwise. The two perspectives are not mutually exclusive, as seems to think our pugnacious friend. You ended that debate with your astute observation that there was no argument over Konica and Minolta's entwined history, which is no different than merging KM and Sony's history -- that the real argument was over labeling. I believe the proper term for this is "goose/gander."

Notice our antagonist then shifted the argument to an attack on you. Throughout this, I recognize half a dozen or so gross fallacies with our truculent friend's arguments; indeed, I recall better, more robust and cogent arguments from freshmen on my high school's debate team. So just let it go, my friend, for the debate would never end. It is not possible to reason with the unreasonable, especially when he is lacking necessary skills for a proper debate.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

Here is one example as requested:

"Nikon is losing cash AND market position at a record pace. Canon continues it's S.O.P. of offering ONE new feature, slapping on another "I" or "10" and charging 15% more for the SAME OLD TECHNOLOGY.

Eventually Canon consumers wise up, pull the wool from over their eyes and snatch that bag off their heads... EVENTUALLY. And when that day comes they will DEMAND more from their company of choice. They will DEMAND from Canon what SONY HAS BEEN GIVING IT'S CUSTOMERS FOR YEARS and if big "C" doesn't respond... well; it will go the way of the Dodo bird..................
Self Confessed Sony Fan! "

Another is: "Sony has been in the photography business since 1928..."

Sony did not exist in 1928, it did not exist as a legal entity until 1958. Your statement is false in every respect.

Your comments are frequently pure opinion, heavily biased and overstated in Sony's favor and clearly derogatory towards Nikon and Canon. Have a look at Alan Myers' data for the actual market situation from a financial perspective.

Canon's Imaging division is about two thirds bigger than Sony's from a revenue perspective and over ten times bigger from a profit perspective. Nikon's imaging revenue is not quite half that of Canon's, and four fifths of Sony's. From profit perspective Nikon has two fifths of Canon's imaging profit but nearly five times Sony's profit.

Once again, Sony is doing some great innovation and is making good still cameras since it acquired Minolta in 2006, but it is still an emerging player. We need to see how things play out, but Sony's imaging division's profit is a significant weakness when compared to either Canon or Nikon.

Given the volatility of the digital camera market, Canon is quite secure with only 32% of revenues coming from imaging. Nikon is very exposed with 68%, and Sony is only dependent on imaging for 9% of its revenue and profit. If Sony hits future market headwinds then its imaging division could be a casualty given its market share and exposure should Canon and Nikon step up their games. Sony will probably do OK with sensors for smart phones, but that may not protect the camera product lines.

From the history perspective, Sony may now own the Beatles catalog, but it certainly does not own the Beatles' history. Publication rights certainly for now, but not the history.

Anyone remember Betamax? Now there is a valid part of Sony's history. Forty-one years of producing a failed technology and one that was sidelined by an inferior technology! That shows excellent business judgement doesn't it? To be fair to Sony, it is reinventing itself from having taken several hits over that last several years, but cameras are not the driving force in the company's recovery. Sensor may be good for the medium to long term according to Sony's own statements, but the slow down on smart phone sales is a drag on growth.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

Gecko, if you wish to debate, then debate rather than just resorting to dismissive statements. I have yet to see anything of substance from you.

CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!

OK.

I will bow to your wisdom and excellent counsel.

I just need to respond to his reply to my previous request... then I'll let it go, because as you so correctly have pointed out, this is nothing but a rabbit hole.

CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!

Point out ONE item in that quote that is not true Peter. Then remember that this is not a court of law, but rather a discussion board where people usually give their opinions mixed in with factual material.

Self Confessed Sony Fan! "



This has already been discussed ad nauseam and the concept is pretty simple; by absorbing Minolta, Sony took on it's history as well. That interpretation of the way things work in the corporate world is both common and widely accepted, your over enthusiastic pedantry not withstanding.



Either you are looking at dated material... or you have misunderstood what you were reading. Here; this will clarify one segment for you:

https://petapixel.com/2017/02/14/nikon-stock-plummets-15-extraordinary-loss-bombshell/

This will clarify a PORTION of another:

http://www.reuters.com/article/canon-results-idUSL3N17T2B7?type=companyNews (I know; it's a year old, but it is STILL relevant to this discussion)




Left-handed compliment? Or are you using positive statements about Sony as cover for your knee-jerk defensive response to Sony gains while canikon flounders?



Have you ever been in a television studio? Been in one recently? Your Betamax argument has NOTHING to do with camera sales and is in fact incorrect because Sony Betamax derived video recorders are predominate as were betacams up to the advent of tapeless HD video cameras.

And SHAME on you Peter for the Beatles analogy. Equating the purchase of a catalog with the acquisition of Minolta to support your conclusion is just plain lazy.

Stay out of mental cul-de-sacs.

You can respond with more pedantic pedantry if you like; I made a promise to DG and I'm a man of my word. And us old Country Boys value keeping our word.

Have a good day sir.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

Cholly, most of what we are both saying are different perspectives on related facts. As for mental cul-de-sacs you are welcome to be king of yours. I'm not sure I could fit into something so small!

Perhaps what you are missing is that I'm trying to be serious. I've acknowledged that Sony is doing great stuff and clearly putting pressure upon Nikon as well as Canon, but the markets don't operate in the way that you suggest. Sony is definitely on the upswing of a turnaround strategy, and clearly pioneering the mirrorless camera market alongside Panasonic, Fujifilm, Olympus and others, but the camera market is a miniscule part of Sony's operations. It needs to be taken in context and references to other parts of the business are relevant in the overall financial perspective. Sony is still a troubled company trying to recover. Look at Samsung. Not only is it embroiled in political turmoil, it damaged itself severely with its exploding smartphone fail, and the market for large screen TVs - where Samsung has eclipsed Sony - is collapsing.

The entire industry - Nikon, Canon, Sony, Samsung, Olympus, Toshiba - and many others are facing troubles and some may not survive in their current form. History will tell, but history cannot be bought, traded, or sold. It can be obscured by clouds of rhetoric for sure, but history is not a commercially traded entity. Sony does not, and cannot own Minolta's history, it can just leverage its legacy from 2006 forwards. Does that matter, maybe not, but I still believe that your somewhat overly enthusiastic support for Sony does more harm than good to the company since it lacks objectivity.