Nikkei: “For Ricoh, it’s a sink-or-swim moment”


In case you missed the Nikkei articleFor Ricoh, it’s a sink-or-swim moment” I shared earlier today on Facebook and Twitter, here are a few quotes:

“Ricoh is staring at huge losses as the market for multifunctional printers, Ricoh’s cash cow, evaporates and its global sales network racks up high costs.”

“The Imaging and Solutions division, which primarily handles multifunctional printers, contributes 90% of Ricoh’s consolidated sales. For the fiscal year that ended in March, the division’s profit plunged, lowering Ricoh’s operating profit to sales ratio to 4.6%. This is less than half the ratio at Canon, which suffered a setback in the same segment.”

“Today, Ricoh cannot improve earnings without drastically cutting costs at its sales force, but the division holds an awful lot of sway inside the company.”

 

This entry was posted in Financial reports. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • TinusVerdino

    Since when is the copier market photographic news? This just serves to spread FUD.

    • It’s the same company, right?

      • TinusVerdino

        The article says nothing about the camera division unless you want to construe that out of it. In my book that’s FUD.

      • ZMWT

        Not the same entity. Few remember that Ricoh, before independent Ricoh Imaging entity was founded with Pentax on board, consistently created loss in their camera sales, and was still developing them. And no one ever bothered to report on that. Now the opposite is true — camera business makes profit and increase of sales — and bloggers report on how Ricoh makes losses in copier business? People are indeed gone bananas.

        • Don’t you think that if the entire Ricoh company is in trouble this may impact their camera business as well?

          • Spy Black

            People here are in denial of what’s going on, and what impact it can have on the company as a whole.

          • Yes, Nikon is in a similar situation – their camera business is doing well but since the company is in trouble, the camera business will be impacted.

          • Spy Black

            Yes, but other than Andrew, no one’s making delusional statements about the situation like you’re seeing here. 🙂

          • TinusVerdino

            But you didn’t report on that like this. In fact you declared it FUD.

          • ZMWT

            It is a totally separate business, with no common market, and totally different dynamics, development and marketing. For example, Ricoh Imaging has increased sales of cameras and optics, in the same time when Ricoh experiences problems in copier business. So how they can be connected?!

          • Raist3d

            Because one is owned by the other, which will impact budgets for R&D, decisions, etc. Also Ricoh’s camera division isn’t exactly strong even if it’s posting a profit.

          • ZMWT

            No. Ricoh helps in nothing in fact. Ricoh bought part of Pentax from Hoya, merged it with own small camera division, and launched them together as a new, separate entity. They mostly use Pentax old buildings in Tokyo, and that is why Ricoh employees had to change daily routine. Ricoh Imaging has own marketing, planning, production, etc. because that business is very different in nature from Ricoh’s. They are so unrelated that Ricoh Imaging made increase of sales when Ricoh suffered in office equipment. It is same situation as with Canon — Canon also suffers in office equipment, while their camera division makes profit even in declining camera market.

          • Raist3d

            Just because companies have subsidiaries with different physical locations and personel doesn’t mean that they don’t (1) own them, and (2) won’t get affected by the financial health of the parent company.

            They key concept here is which company owns which company. Ricoh owns Ricoh Imaging and the decisions that headquarters of Ricoh decides to do, go.

            In fact, this is why a decision like the one speculated in the article below is possible for the company to enact and do (whether they were really going to do it or not is besides the point).

            https://petapixel.com/2017/04/12/bye-bye-pentax-ricoh-may-kill-off-camera-business/

  • ZMWT

    Did you post same for Canon?
    Ricoh’s mainstream business, office equipment, suffers. What that has to do with photography? Ricoh Imaging has nothing to do with Ricoh. It is not the same entity. In fact, according to last annual report from March, Ricoh Imaging delivered increase of sales.

  • ZMWT

    You should remove that red cube photo which you often use because it is incorrect and confusing. Pentax is just a brand name for photographic and optical equipment. Ricoh Imaging is the name of the company that owns the brand name, and makes cameras with that brand name. Ricoh’s business, and Ricoh Imaging’s business, are NOT same nor have anything in common. They are two different legal entities, and not to be mixed together.
    Ricoh Imaging has nothing to do with Ricoh. In fact, according to last annual report from March, Ricoh Imaging delivered increase of sales.

    • Mistral75

      > Ricoh Imaging has nothing to do with Ricoh.

      Ricoh Imaging is a 100% subsidiary of Ricoh.

      • Exactly

      • ZMWT

        Nowhere on that cube is written “Ricoh Imaging”. So what was your point again?

        • Mistral75

          Answering your alternative facts such as “Ricoh Imaging has nothing to do with Ricoh.

          • ZMWT

            In practical reality, they have nothing in common. They have own product cycles, own marketing, development, etc. They are forced, though, to share common accounting books, so that Ricoh may juggle with profits, costs, pour from one bottle into an other, etc.

    • I did not create this logo, Ricoh did. I just took a picture of it.

      • ZMWT

        That is very old picture, that does not reflect state of reality now. It was made when Pentax was acquired. Now it is Ricoh Imaging, new entity, and Pentax is just a line of cameras and optics.

  • Ron Hendriks

    Ricoh-Imaging is a money loosing business for Ricoh. In the last yearly report they took an impairment and a write-off of 9,4 billion yen. Ricoh bought Pentax for 10 billion yen in 2011. The camera business never made so much profit in the last 6 years, so leaving Ricoh with a loss on the current camera business in Ricoh-Imaging.

    Last quarter was for Ricoh-Imaging the one with the lowest quarterly sales since the ownership of Pentax since 2011.

    The current quarter may be even lower. For the financial books it is going to see grim! This first quarter of the new financial year starting april 1th 2017 will be compared with the quarter one year ago. That was the one with the introduction of the K-1. It could well be that sales will be cut in half! Not something that investors like to see.

    We will see soon how that works out with presentation of fugures early august.

    • TinusVerdino

      This is not about the Camera division you are obsessed with doomsayer Ron.

    • Rob S

      Pentax has nothing to do with the part of the business that is losing money. Pentax is profitable (barely) for Ricoh.

      • Mistral75

        Ricoh’s Imaging and Solutions division is not losing money -yet. The operating profit of this division is as follows:

        – FY2016 (April 2015 – March 2016): ¥147.7bn
        – FY2017: ¥82.8bn

        to be compared to the operating profit of the whole Ricoh group:

        – FY2016: ¥102.3bn
        – FY2017: ¥33.9bn
        – FY2018 (forecast): ¥18bn.

        It’s the trend which is worrying, more than the current profit level. Hence the restructuring plan.

        • Kunzite

          Indeed; Ricoh is trying to prevent making a loss in the FY2019 – ending March, 2020. There is a lot of fat to be trimmed out – in their Imaging & Solutions mostly; but it’s not only about cost cutting. They’re planning for the future.

          They’re describing the situation and their new strategy quite well (much, much better than Nikkei’s alarmist articles) in the documents published on their Investor Relations website.

  • Back to top