Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

> I base the Muji prediction on their hopeless online presence

Isn't that "A Thing" with Japanese companies? :)

Well, as long as their retail stores don't all disappear, I'm ok - I don't much like shopping for stuff like thay sell online.



sort by: page size:

>I suspect we will lose Muji soon as well though.

why?


> personally I'd sell the business while it's still worth something and move on to bigger and better things.

They're likely trying to do that and spinning off Japan may make that easier.


> I am going to make a bold prediction: In 2018, we will see the first major brand shut down its website.

If that was a bet, I would put $50,000 down on it not happening.


> I get the impression that they have no idea.

I suspect this is the case; I used to really enjoy the FT but think the spark has gone since the Nikkei acquisition.


> IMO, this doesn't look good for sama.

I'll say it: if I were in a position to take his investment, this post would give me serious, serious pause.

To be clear, I'm all about transparency and talking about things like this in the open, but not like this. There's a lot we need to talk about as an industry, but this doesn't help.


> I suspect it costs them ~10,000$ to hand out XX,000$. If nothing else they want some due diligence to avoid harming their brand. On top of that 10,000¥ in 2019 does not go as far.

10,000 yen is only $87.96, so I expect not. :P


> The thing that worries me about this, is it’s a slippery slope to becoming the next GE.

Sony seems to be doing okay, and their Sony Financial Holdings offers online banking services through Sony Bank, life insurance through Sony Life, and insurance through Sony Assurance (albeit only in Japan).


> an old style of business facing obsolescence

Manga is nowhere near obsolete. It's such a huge market that there are entire supporting industries indirectly built around it.

> Why might they not want to do so?

Probably because they're raking in money.


> How is it that this company went from filing for public offering to laying off up to 25% of it's work force...in just a few short weeks?

The wewtf link someone else posted is good, but essentially, it was burning through cash in order to grow. Its private investors (mostly Softbank) were OK with that, but the public markets weren't. They also didn't like management and corporate structure). Not being able to raise cash to continue hypergrowth and having faced a reckoning about the true business prospects and valuation, they have to cut back.

> ...focus on our core business, the fundamentals of which remain strong

I actually buy this line. At the end of the day, they're getting money for a product, so there's a business there. The main risk with We is that there's a recession, occupancy drops to 50%, and they're stuck with the leases. But that's not a unique risk.


> I'm afraid the same fate will come to H&M that has come to Forever 21.

Wasn't looking too good last year [0]. Not sure how they're doing now though.

0: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/27/business/hm-clothes-stock...


> That's not sustainable for the company.

It's not sustainable for a company that doesn't intend to stay in business for more than a generation. But for a multinational corporation the aging of both their consumers and especially of their workers is on the other hand pretty unsustainable. Just look at where Japan was in the late 1980s and where it is now, with no redress in sight.


> shows no signs of ever catching up

Personally I think that company's going, the only question is how long is it going to take...


> What is your point? Japan...

Only a bunch of them are profitable and some are even incurring record losses this year and relying on government money to keep operating.

Can't let them go bankrupt because they're still important. Honestly I explained this in my earlier post, good job cropping that.


> The company is actually extremely popular among younger women.

Maybe not that popular if they're going bankrupt?


> This is troubling.

Isn't this article just speculation vs actual announcements from companies?


>They are losing this market-share quickly

are they really though? or are people complaining but still buying it?


> Unfortunately, too many sales were the root cause of this decision.

I was going to say this was too unrealistic, then I remembered what timeline we're in.


> It's not like Toys 'R' Us stores disappearing in 2018. That happened because big-box toy stores were simply no longer viable as a category.

I thought getting bought and pillaged by private equity was the reason.


>the threat of moving the factory overseas is an overpowering factor for the company.

Probably not for fulfillment and distribution

next

Legal | privacy