PROFIT != REVENUE.

It's not uncommon for profits to see significant fluctuation.

Especially in this market.

I mean, yeah sure, it's like this other reply below:

> Profit is down 95%, not net revenue. If they made $1,000,000,001 in revenue on $1,000,000,000 in expenses last year, and had identical expenses but made 95¢ less this year, then their profits would be down 95%.

The absolute numbers are still striking: profit last year was $2.2 billion, dropping to $115 million. That's huge, not $1.

It is but there can be so many factors that go into something like that. Because of the economy many companies (And I can't say Sony has done this) are writing down some huge acquisition and infrastructure costs this year while expectations are low which can artificially affect this number.

Wait, 95%? ... as in, making $100 profit one quarter and then $5 a year later?

How is that possible? I can accept the economic slowdown being a contributor–but not to the tune of 95%.

Profit is down 95%, not net revenue. If they made $1,000,000,001 in revenue on $1,000,000,000 in expenses last year, and had identical expenses but made 95¢ less this year, then their profits would be down 95%. It's not uncommon, and does not necessarily mean that the economy's crashed--though it does always indicate corporate incompetence.

What is so surprising about that? Some companies make a profit in one year and have a loss in the next; more than 100% decrease.

Already posted (cnn link): http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=456303

Yeah, please wake up everybody. (The generic and superficial american optimism doesn't help here and now, and is actually part of the problem.)

We had the year 1929. Sure, quite none of us lived it, but we don't seem to have learned the lesson, we did even worse with our new and sophisticated economic systems...