Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] rumors of Olympus closing camera division?

Subject: Re: [OM] rumors of Olympus closing camera division?
From: "Piers Hemy" <piers@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2019 09:11:23 -0000
Well put, Moose - and in your previous posting " Anyone who knows for sure
isn't talking.  Many who know nothing for sure are talking. "

Allocation of "overheads" is an art, an expression of the goals of
management, which can change over time. What we know from the past is that
Olympus is a world-class producer of optics with applications in many more
areas than amateur (or even professional) photography, and the concept of
pulling one marketing division because of poor results is idiotic, because
it would simply shift the overheads borne by that division onto all the
others.

Piers

PS First time I have seen you mention your former employer by name, Moose.
Not that we hadn't worked it out anyway.

-----Original Message-----
From: olympus <olympus-bounces+piers.hemy=gmail.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On
Behalf Of Moose
Sent: 12 November 2019 22:51
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [OM] rumors of Olympus closing camera division?

On 11/12/2019 1:51 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
> A company that loses kajillions of Yen every year....year after year
> after year after year... is bound to examine "why" keep going with an
> entire division that just costs the stockholders serious money.
>
> I think the answer is obvious when you consider the non-obvious:
> Accounting trickery. You bury R&D and Engineering costs for other
> divisions into the one division that is "forgivable" for losing money.
> The whole company benefits from having one loser division.
>
> While technically illegal and/or unethical, there are a myriad ways to
> do this without conflict with the regulators.

The art of allocating costs between areas of a company that's vertically
integrated is a subtle one, with no hard and 
fast answers.

For decades, Safeway considered their Supply Divisions, which sourced our
private label brands, and especially the 
plants that manufactured many of them, to be major profit centers.

Then we went through an LBO. The minions of our new owners went through all
parts of the company, to determine what was 
OK, what needed repair and what should be sold.

These new consultants came with different assumptions and came to different
conclusions. Many of the plants that had 
been profitable were now financial drags and were sold. Most to new owners
who continued to supply our private label 
brands and other needs.

So sure, Oly's camera division may be being saddled with costs that may not
be appropriate, for whatever business, 
political or philosophical reasons. Almost certainly not illegal, as it's
all one entity. Unethical? Probably depends on 
point of view.

Nuanced Moose

-- 
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz