Forum - View topicNEWS: Nikkei: Sanrio Is Now Debt-Free in Part Due to Crossovers
|
Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
mewpudding101
Industry Insider
 Posts: 2210 Location: Tokyo, Japan |
|
|||
|
The cutest mascot in the world HAD DEBT???
|
||||
|
||||
|
reanimator
|
|
|||
It's the first time hearing about it, but it's not a new thing in the business world. All kinds of business borrow money to keep afloat. |
||||
blaizevincent
 Posts: 407 |
|
|||
|
I'm literally amazed that Sanrio would have been in debt despite having Hello Kitty!?!
I watched a documentary on NHK world about Hello Kitty and there business model of allow companies to edit the Hello Kitty brand seemed successful ,although they were hardly going to show it as otherwise. |
||||
|
||||
Ortensia1980
 Posts: 803 Location: some town near Amsterdam |
|
|||
|
Sanrio was in debt? But they have Hello Kitty!
|
||||
|
||||
Teacakes
 Posts: 3 |
|
|||
|
I don't think it's the debt you're thinking of....
"current liabilities are sometimes referred to as notes payable. They are the most important item under current liabilities section of the balance sheet and most of the time, they represent the payments on a company's bank loans that are due in the next twelve months. Borrowing money in itself is not necessarily a sign of financial weakness; an intelligent department store executive may work out short term loans at Christmas so she can stock up on merchandise before the Holiday rush. If demand is high, the store would sell all of its inventory, pay back the short term loans, and pocket the difference. This is known as utilizing leverage. The department store used borrowed money to make a profit." From: http://beginnersinvest.about.com/od/analyzingabalancesheet/a/current-liabilities.htm I'm assuming if Sanrio wanted to invest in a venture, something bigger than a store, such as a new amusement park or a new work division with a full staff, they would borrow loans from the bank and pay it back over time. It doesn't mean they were losing money. |
||||
|
||||
Mohawk52
 Posts: 8202 Location: England, UK |
|
|||
|
It's got to be the only Japanese company that is.
|
||||
|
||||
enurtsol
 Posts: 14897 |
|
|||
Kinda like bookstores borrow money to get new books to sell, then use portion of the incoming revenue to pay back the loan with interest and keep the remaining as profit. That's what doomed Borders in the end when nobody would lend them money so they couldn't get new books.
Yeah, many big J-companies are in financial trouble. |
||||
|
||||
|
Teacakes
Posts: 3 |
|
|||
|
Except in this case, Sanrio is more confident because the money generated from copyrighted usage of Hello Kitty's face alone pays back loans for any future projects the company undertakes.
|
||||
|
||||
Mr. sickVisionz
 Posts: 2175 |
|
|||
|
Like, Ronald McDonald is a mascot that McDonalds could use to sell some shirt and stuff, but his main purpose is to get you buying hamburgers and stuff. Mickey Mouse is popular on his own, but his point is to get you into Disneyland and interested in buying movies from Disney. Hello Kitty was a mascot, but there wasn't really a product. It was like the mascot was the product. Mario is a mascot, but he originated from games and his point is to get you buying games from a company whose only line of business is making games.
Hello Kitty never felt like that. She was the mascot who just sold mascot branded gear. What's basically bonus stuff for other company was the sole purpose of Hello Kitty. It's not surprising to me that collaborating with companies has proven to be a huge success. It's like the only time she can do the real purpose of a mascot. She's hugely popular so many companies would jump at the change to be partnered with it. |
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group