[Paul the Sunman]

Pretty much almost exactly like Samsung. Like Samsung, Sony is primarily just a technology and electronics company. They had little to no history in photography until they purchased Minolta. They have no reason to stay in the business if it becomes unprofitable and, like Samsung, could simply drop all their support on a whim if it becomes so.

Sell it to Ricoh/Pentax?

[Rondec]

The issue is that outside investors are buying stakings in Japanese companies. Rather than being content with the status quo, they are pushing to increase profits, even if it means shuttering existing businesses. Sony will of course, keep making cameras and sensors, but they may shift their focus a bit and not churn out quite as many MILCs as they do right now. It will be easier for investors to see what is turning a profit and what isn't after this reorganization.

[beholder3]

Sony will of course, keep making cameras

This is (beyond the very short term, 1 year horizon) highly debatable and at risk, of course. There is no indicator supporting this.

Well, beyond the alive and kicking A-mount that is... has never been discontinued.

[Mistral75]

The reported move is not a spin-off, as some websites are reporting(1), it's an incorporation of the Electronics Products and Solutions (EP&S) division into a new intermediate holding named Sony Electronics Corporation.

Instead of being direct subsidiaries of Sony Corporation, the various businesses within EP&S will become subsidiaries of Sony Electronics Corporation, itself a subsidiary of Sony Corporation.

Sony did the same with their sensor business a couple of years ago.

(1) A spin-off would mean that the new company, Sony Electronics Corporation, would have been separated from Sony Corporation and its shares distributed to Sony Corporation's shareholders.

[beholder3]

I do not think the legal type is all that important.

They now have to act as full profit center in a way very similar to being an independent entity. This creates visibility, scrutiny, transparency (internally) to exactly measure their performance.

I have seen enough companies do this. In less than 10% the unit stayed in the fold medium term. In most cases they were sold off after making them look sexy short term for investors.

I do not believe they close doors. But I expect they will face a situation where internal cross subsidies will dry out. And this will lead to business practices to shift.
Maybe we get to see more of the meh cosmetic model upgrades to save costs.

[Wasp]

The new company can't really continue using the Sony brand name, now can they? Will we see a relaunch of Minolta?

[Mistral75]

The new company can't really continue using the Sony brand name, now can they? Will we see a relaunch of Minolta?

Considering that the new intermediate holding company, Sony Electronics Corporation, includes the Sony brand name in its name and is a fully-owned subsidiary of Sony Corporation...

[stevebrot]

If you read the PetaPixel link and its background info, it looks very bad for Sony.

Note that this involves their home entertainment and sound products as well...their historic core.


Steve

[stevebrot]

They had little to no history in photography until they purchased Minolta.

Qualify that as "still" photography and you would be more correct.


Steve

[stevebrot]

The reported move is not a spin-off, as some websites are reporting(1), it's an incorporation of the Electronics Products and Solutions (EP&S) division into a new intermediate holding named Sony Electronics Corporation.

Instead of being direct subsidiaries of Sony Corporation, the various businesses within EP&S will become subsidiaries of Sony Electronics Corporation, itself a subsidiary of Sony Corporation.

This ^ ^ ^


Steve

[RGlasel]

The reported move is not a spin-off, as some websites are reporting(1), it's an incorporation of the Electronics Products and Solutions (EP&S) division into a new intermediate holding named Sony Electronics Corporation.

Instead of being direct subsidiaries of Sony Corporation, the various businesses within EP&S will become subsidiaries of Sony Electronics Corporation, itself a subsidiary of Sony Corporation.

Sony did the same with their sensor business a couple of years ago.

(1) A spin-off would mean that the new company, Sony Electronics Corporation, would have been separated from Sony Corporation and its shares distributed to Sony Corporation's shareholders.

It is not a spin-off because the financial transaction to remove EP&S from Sony Corporation has not taken place. A spin-off would be to put money (not cash, but appreciating and relatively liquid assets) in the pockets of Sony shareholders who now hold shares of the spin-off. This case is the exact opposite, it is making it easier to sell off EP&S for cash. Usually this is a signal that a buyer has expressed interest, but the transaction is being held up for financial reasons (either party, only Sony and its suitor will know what those reasons are). Another possibility is that this move buys Sony some time to ditch the least attractive parts of EP&S (cellphones?), take the writedown for losses and then try to sell a trimmed down EP&S company for a better price than if it included guaranteed money losers, which are treated as liabilities that a potential buyer would have to take the loss on.

If the photographic equipment market wasn't shrinking, Sony Camera would end up being owned by a manufacturer that saw the Sony product line as a compliment to its existing business. Sony isn't the only camera manufacturer looking to remove an albatross from its collar, which is why I think the final solution will be a combining of Sony Camera with another camera manufacturing entity. Another consideration is that lens manufacturers need camera manufacturers to sustain their business, so this reborn camera company may be more than a simple binary merger. No matter how this plays out, there will be fewer new models of cameras to buy next year, the year after that and probably for another decade after that.

[Mistral75]

(...) Like Samsung, Sony is primarily just a technology and electronics company. They had little to no history in photography until they purchased Minolta. (...)

• First Sony Mavica: 1981
• First Sony Cyber-shot: 1996
• Acquisition of Konica Minolta's camera business: 2006

[MikeyBugs95]

• First Sony Mavica: 1981
• First Sony Cyber-shot: 1996
• Acquisition of Konica Minolta's camera business: 2006

Oh right... Ok disregard what I said previously...

[clackers]

Note that this involves their home entertainment and sound products as well...their historic core.


Steve

You couldn't sell them by themselves, Steve, whose portfolio would include them as an investment? Sony are selling way less cameras now even draining funding than they did in 2012.

You'd have to bundle them with some performers.

The Sony Vaio was famous too until they sold off their entire computer business in 2014, and may do with their Xperia phones as well. History means less to a big company than the ability to attract capital, and Sony has always tried to be a growth corporation, not a flatliner.

[Rondec]

Just my perspective (which with 50 cents will by you a coke), I think that for awhile Sony has (a) kept cameras around too long and (b) made too many different models of cameras. The issue actually may be more on the sensor creation side of things. The sensor guys are constantly coming up with new, slightly different iterations of a full frame sensor. Some have a little faster frame rate, some have a little better dynamic range, or maybe a little better video, but in the end, they all seem to test pretty similarly, but each one needs its own camera body.

It is potentially confusing for customers. Do you buy a A7, A7 II, A7 III, A7r III, A7r IV, A9, A9 II, or A7s II, all of which are for sale new on B and H (maybe there are more full frame Sony's available, but that was a quick search). My guess is not that anyone is shuttering Sony, but that they will stream line things a bit. Have three full frame models at different price points and discontinue others. Release new models when you have something to offer, not just because there is a tweaked sensor. Basically all the stuff that Nikon is going to be doing over the next year.