Embattled Panasonic eyes 10,000 layoffs to return to health

elwaylite · 11-14-2012, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Speaking to Reuters in an interview published today, Panasonic finance boss Hideaki Kawai said that his company will shed 10,000 more jobs by the end of March. During its last fiscal year, Panasonic has axed 36,000 jobs. The layoffs are designed to bring the company's many ailing divisions back to health, according to Reuters.

That might not be so easy. According to Reuters, Kawai said that 20 percent of Panasonic's 88 business units are actually losing money. Half of all of its units have yet to hit an operating margin target of 5 percent.

Link

tazz3 · 11-15-2012, 10:25 PM

Sad.i hope they recover

DoctorCAD · 11-16-2012, 06:00 AM

You have to wonder if they undercut the prices on their plasma TV's in order to gain market share and it came back to bite them in the ass.

Perhaps the price between LCD and plasma isn't that big!

elwaylite · 11-16-2012, 06:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DoctorCAD

You have to wonder if they undercut the prices on their plasma TV's in order to gain market share and it came back to bite them in the ass.

Perhaps the price between LCD and plasma isn't that big!

No, Samsung and LG were the ones selling way too low to gain market share, then they changed that and got strict on pricing with 2012 models, just like Panasonic has done in the past. Basically, if you want to sell a Panasonic tv, you have to agree to pricing rules, which is why a VT50 is selling pretty close to its launch price still. Those days of 50% drops in pricing after 5-6 months are over with, and I think Samsung learned it wasnt the best practice if you want to make some money. I was able to get my GT30 for about $1000 off, but I bought it 11 months after it was released

I think Panasonic problem is like that of the USPS, and GM. Fat and bloated.

**ImRizzo** · 11-16-2012, 07:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elwaylite

No, Samsung and LG were the ones selling way too low to gain market share, then they changed that and got strict on pricing with 2012 models, just like Panasonic has done in the past. Basically, if you want to sell a Panasonic tv, you have to agree to pricing rules, which is why a VT50 is selling pretty close to its launch price still. Those days of 50% drops in pricing after 5-6 months are over with, and I think Samsung learned it wasnt the best practice if you want to make some money. I was able to get my GT30 for about $1000 off, but I bought it 11 months after it was released

I think Panasonic problem is like that of the USPS, and GM. Fat and bloated.

And I'm sure Sony is not far behind in the layoffs, too!

elwaylite · 11-16-2012, 07:36 AM

Yeah, Sony, Sharp and Panasonic are Chrysler, the USPS and GM right now.

dsskid · 11-16-2012, 11:13 AM

The rule is you cannot advertise it for less than the dictated $$. You can still get a lower than price by haggling with the salesperson.
Case in point, a friend of mine was able to get two Panasonic 65VT50's for $2500 ea last month, which is way under list price.

elwaylite · 11-16-2012, 11:21 AM

I think the goal was to stop some of the net retailers from selling so low compared to retail stores too.

jkkyler · 11-16-2012, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elwaylite

No, Samsung and LG were the ones selling way too low to gain market share, then they changed that and got strict on pricing with 2012 models, just like Panasonic has done in the past. Basically, if you want to sell a Panasonic tv, you have to agree to pricing rules, which is why a VT50 is selling pretty close to its launch price still. Those days of 50% drops in pricing after 5-6 months are over with, and I think Samsung learned it wasnt the best practice if you want to make some money. I was able to get my GT30 for about $1000 off, but I bought it 11 months after it was released

I think Panasonic problem is like that of the USPS, and GM. Fat and bloated.

You should read this article:
http://www.thenation.com/blog/166103...ice-not-broke#

Quote:

The postal service, we are told, is broke.

There’s only one problem with this diagnosis.

It’s wrong.

The postal service is not broke.

At the behest of the Republican-controlled Congress of the Bush-Cheney era, the USPS has been forced since 2006 to pre-fund future retiree health benefits. As the American Postal Workers Union notes, “This mandate is the primary cause of the agency’s financial crisis. No other government agency or private company bears this burden, which costs the USPS approximately $5.5 billion annually.”

DoctorCAD · 11-16-2012, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jkkyler

You should read this article:
http://www.thenation.com/blog/166103...ice-not-broke#

Hardly a news piece, as left-leaning as it possibly could be without actually saluting Chairman Mao.

jkkyler · 11-16-2012, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DoctorCAD

Hardly a news piece, as left-leaning as it possibly could be without actually saluting Chairman Mao.

I know this is going OT but I have seen that reported elsewhere as well and have verified that it is factually correct - I am a conservative but when a liberal outlet gets something right I can acknowledge it - the hanging it on Busch Cheney was piled on a bit thick. I have also talked with local postmaster - several are patients and while business is down - pre-funding the retirement benefits of which they are the only organization bound to do so is killing them.
another take

Quote:

UNPROFITABLE. So what? When has the Pentagon ever made a profit? Never, nor does anyone suggest it should. Neither has the FBI, Centers for Disease Control, FDA, State Department, FEMA, Park Service, etc. Producing a profit is not the purpose of government -- its purpose is service. And for two centuries -- from 1775, when the Continental Congress chose Benjamin Franklin to be our fledgling nation's first Postmaster General -- until 1971, when Richard Nixon's Postal Reorganization Act took effect -- America's nationwide network of post offices was fully appreciated as a government service.

In fact, the Post Office Department was considered such an important function of public affairs that it was explicitly authorized by the founding document of our nation's government (Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution). The founders would've laughed their wigs off had anyone proposed that the existence of such an essential civic agency be dependent on its profitability. Be efficient and fiscally responsible, yes, but the bottom line for the Post Office was delivering a public service for the good of all the people.

TAXPAYERS. The anti-government ideologues have had to concede that profit's not the point, but still they groan that USPS is losing billions of dollars a year. Why should hard-pressed taxpayers be expected to keep shoveling money from the public treasury into this loser of a government agency?

They're not.

IMPORTANT FACTOID NUMBER 1: Since 1971, the postal service has not taken a dime from taxpayers. All of its operations -- including the remarkable convenience of 32,000 local post offices (more service outlets than Walmart, Starbucks, and McDonald's combined) -- are paid for by peddling stamps and other products.

But wait, what about those annual losses? Good grief, squawk the Chicken Littles, USPS has gone some $13 billion in the hole during the past four years -- a private corporation would go broke with that record! (Actually, private corporations tend to go to Washington rather than go broke, getting taxpayer bailouts to cover their losses.)

IMPORTANT FACTOID NUMBER 2: The Postal Service is NOT broke. Indeed, in those four years of loudly deplored "losses," the Service actually produced a $700 million operational profit (despite the worst economy since the Great Depression).What's going on here? In 2006, the Bush White House and Congress whacked the post office with the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act -- an incredible piece of ugliness requiring the agency to PRE-PAY the health care benefits not only of current employees, but also of all employees who'll retire during the next 75 years. Yes, that includes employees who're not yet born! No other agency and no corporation has to do this. Worse, this ridiculous law demands that USPS fully fund this seven-decade burden by 2016. Imagine the shrieks of outrage if Congress tried to slap FedEx or other private firms with such an onerous requirement. This politically motivated mandate is costing the Postal Service $5.5 billion a year -- money taken right out of postage revenue that could be going to services. That's the real source of the "financial crisis" squeezing America's post offices.

Facts are facts and that shit just ain't right
Here are some ideas to fix things as well

Quote:

The biggest lie of all is that USPS is an antiquated, unnecessary, failing civic institution that simply must give way to electronic technology and corpo-rate efficiency. This is nothing but ideological hogwash spewed by private profiteers and political quislings. Obviously, the Postal Service is no longer the only player making the rounds, and it must make some major adjustments to find its proper fit and new opportunities in the marketing and public service mix. But this requires top management and polit-ical overseers to be a bit more creative and business- like than constantly cutting, closing, outsourcing, eliminating--and giving in to the bashers and slashers.

This is the time to innovate, offer new services and products -- don't shrink, expand! Start with three phenomenal assets that USPS has: (1) that network of 32,000 retail outlets (many of them historic and even works of art) that form the most extensive local presence of any business or government in America, drawing more than seven million people into them each day; (2) an experienced, smart, skilled, and dedicated workforce of nearly 600,000 middle-class Americans who live in the communities they serve and are brimming with ideas and energy to move the Postal Service forward -- if only those at the top would listen and turn them loose; and (3) the general good will of the public, which sees their local post office and its employees as "theirs," providing useful services and standing as one of their core civic institutions (in a 2009 Gallup Poll, 95 percent of Americans said it was personally important to them that the Postal Service be continued).

Let's build on those big pluses. This is one government program that really works for the people, but it can work better and do more. Here are just a few ideas:

•Go digital. John Nichols reports in that USPS already has the world's third-largest computer infrastructure, including 5,000 remote locations with satellite internet service. Expand that into a handy consumer service offering high-speed broadband all across the country. Rather than bemoan the loss of postal business to the internet, become an internet hot spot in town after town for universal email, digital scanning and forwarding of documents, etc.

•Expand the store. Sen. Bernie Sanders wants to let post offices sell products and services that they're now barred from offering (thanks to corporate opposition and congressional meddling). Sanders suggests allowing sales of cell phones, delivery of wine, selling fishing licenses, notarizing documents, etc. This would be a boon to the people in poor neighborhoods and rural areas who don't have convenient access to such services.

•Seven days. Instead of reducing service, be the only entity that offers reliable delivery service to every community in the country, seven days a week.

•Bank here. From 1910 until bank lobbyists killed it in 1966, a Postal Banking System operated successfully through local post offices all across the land. It offered simple, low-cost, federally insured savings accounts to millions of "unbanked" Americans who couldn't meet the minimum deposit requirements of commercial bankers or afford their fees. Today, banks are even less interested in servicing the steadily rising number of poor people, leaving them to the un-tender mercies of payday lenders and check-cashing chains. So let's bring this small-deposit banking system back into our easily accessible and familiar neighborhood post offices to serve these people and create loan funds for investments in local communities.

elwaylite · 11-16-2012, 06:21 PM

Perhaps USPS was a bad example, because you are right on the prefunding BS. I just hate the USPS, everytime I have to go in there

**ImRizzo** · 11-16-2012, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elwaylite

Perhaps USPS was a bad example, because you are right on the prefunding BS. I just hate the USPS, everytime I have to go in there

Just like the post office in MIB II a strange bunch, indeed !

DoctorCAD · 11-17-2012, 05:23 AM

According to a story I read today, without pre-funding, USPS would have ONLY lost $5 billion last yeay.

jkkyler · 11-17-2012, 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DoctorCAD

According to a story I read today, without pre-funding, USPS would have ONLY lost $5 billion last yeay.

The data I had was from 2006-2010 - You are indeed correct the Last 2 years have shown an operating loss of 2.4 billion and ~5billion but the killer still is pre-funding which more than triples losses and needs fixed. Don't get me wrong the post office needs help and I like some of the proposed Ideas I have heard but most people see it as a fat, lazy bloated organization which I don't feel it is. Also as pointed out it is a PUBLIC SERVICE organization and not many govt public service organization ever turn a profit. People often mistakenly think theoir tax dollars are being 'wasted' on the post office which isn't the case either.

... In other news - I hope Panasonic recovers.

11-16-2012, 06:00 AM	#3
DoctorCAD Direct TV Fresh Meat Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 2,214	You have to wonder if they undercut the prices on their plasma TV's in order to gain market share and it came back to bite them in the ass. Perhaps the price between LCD and plasma isn't that big! __________________ This post is not to be construed as a slam on plasma TV's nor an endorsement of any other TV technology.

11-16-2012, 07:36 AM	#6
elwaylite You know who you are... Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Lower Alabama Posts: 1,260	Yeah, Sony, Sharp and Panasonic are Chrysler, the USPS and GM right now. __________________ Video: TC-P65GT30 / BDP-103 Audio: TX-NR809 / RF-82 II (2) / RC-62 II / VTF-15H HDTV: Dish / Hopper & Joey

11-16-2012, 11:13 AM	#7
dsskid ISF Calibrator Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Long Island, NY Age: 49 Posts: 4,957	The rule is you cannot advertise it for less than the dictated $$. You can still get a lower than price by haggling with the salesperson. Case in point, a friend of mine was able to get two Panasonic 65VT50's for $2500 ea last month, which is way under list price. __________________ Displays are like 100% cotton t-shirts. Always buy a size larger than you think you'll need, because they tend to shrink over time. Professional reviews of displays are an excellent tool, but the final decision should come from using your own eyes. Living Room - Panasonic TH58PZ700U, Panasonic DMP-BDT215, Denon AVR-1911 Man-Cave - Pioneer Kuro Elite Pro-111FD, Pioneer Kuro BDP-320, Denon AVR-591BA, PS3 RIP L2W, PFC5 & Kosty

11-16-2012, 11:21 AM	#8
elwaylite You know who you are... Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Lower Alabama Posts: 1,260	I think the goal was to stop some of the net retailers from selling so low compared to retail stores too. __________________ Video: TC-P65GT30 / BDP-103 Audio: TX-NR809 / RF-82 II (2) / RC-62 II / VTF-15H HDTV: Dish / Hopper & Joey

11-16-2012, 06:21 PM	#12
elwaylite You know who you are... Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Lower Alabama Posts: 1,260	Perhaps USPS was a bad example, because you are right on the prefunding BS. I just hate the USPS, everytime I have to go in there __________________ Video: TC-P65GT30 / BDP-103 Audio: TX-NR809 / RF-82 II (2) / RC-62 II / VTF-15H HDTV: Dish / Hopper & Joey Last edited by ImRizzo; 11-16-2012 at 08:16 PM.

11-15-2012, 10:25 PM	#2
tazz3 High Definition is the definition of life. Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 141	Sad.i hope they recover

11-17-2012, 05:23 AM	#14
DoctorCAD Direct TV Fresh Meat Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 2,214	According to a story I read today, without pre-funding, USPS would have ONLY lost $5 billion last yeay. __________________ This post is not to be construed as a slam on plasma TV's nor an endorsement of any other TV technology.