Canon Profits Drop 16% in Second Quarter

[MarkII]

The company is making a healthy profit. They actually did slightly better than outside analysts projected. And, in addition, while the overall market dropped, Canon stock actually beat the market.

I recognize that people who are buying Sony cameras want to feel good about their purchases. Confirmation bias is everywhere. But, it is self-delusional to twist a $552 million quarterly profit into a negative.

The only delusional bull here is your spinning the Reuters report. The headline title I quoted is the newsworthy part of the earnings release. Canon only beat expectations because they lowered them previously. And they have lowered them again. While it is positive that Canon are making a profit, do you really think that Canon believes that lowering its profits forcecast is a good thing?

As to the comment about "feeling good about buying Sony", I think that it explains why you making such insulting and distorted posts. These are camera companies, not football teams. If you own sense of self worth is based on how profitable the companies are that you buy from, I think you have a problem. I choose my equipment based on what what works photographically, not based on what label it has or how much profit the company makes. Nothing lasts forever.

 

[privatebydesign]

The company is making a healthy profit. They actually did slightly better than outside analysts projected. And, in addition, while the overall market dropped, Canon stock actually beat the market.

I recognize that people who are buying Sony cameras want to feel good about their purchases. Confirmation bias is everywhere. But, it is self-delusional to twist a $552 million quarterly profit into a negative.

The only delusional bull here is your spinning the Reuters report. The headline title I quoted is the newsworthy part of the earnings release. Canon only beat expectations because they lowered them previously. And they have lowered them again. While it is positive that Canon are making a profit, do you really think that Canon believes that lowering its profits forcecast is a good thing?

As to the comment about "feeling good about buying Sony", I think that it explains why you making such insulting and distorted posts. These are camera companies, not football teams. If you own sense of self worth is based on how profitable the companies are that you buy from, I think you have a problem. I choose my equipment based on what what works photographically, not based on what label it has or how much profit the company makes. Nothing lasts forever.

Exactly, and as a professional image creator I can't imagine not using the camera company that takes the time and trouble to make an 11-24, that I use extensively, or a 17TS-E that I also use extensively, or a company that has a radio based flash (that I also use) as well as plenty of third party support from companies like Profoto (the B1 and B2 are ETTL game changers) to Yongnuo who supply enthusiasts with feature rich yet bargain priced Canon and Nikon compatible accessories.

 

[Ozarker]

Off topic, but why do I keep seeing people use:
"Canon have" instead of "Canon has"
"Canon were" instead of "Canon was"
"Canon are" instead of "Canon is" etc.

Just seems like strange usage to me. I never see people write:
"Ford Motor Company have announced three new models for 2017."
or "Kraft Cheese are spinning off the XYZ unit this quarter."
or "The man were upset by recent happenings."

I only see this on this forum. I've never seen this anywhere else. Some people here do it very consistently.

Maybe I am (are?)confused?

The Reuters news story at the beginning of this thread doesn't do this.

Dilbert, you do it (Not just you). I am just curious as to why.

Just wondering.

 

[zim]

Off topic, but why do I keep seeing people use:
"Canon have" instead of "Canon has"
"Canon were" instead of "Canon was"
"Canon are" instead of "Canon is" etc.

Just seems like strange usage to me. I never see people write:
"Ford Motor Company have announced three new models for 2017."
or "Kraft Cheese are spinning off the XYZ unit this quarter."
or "The man were upset by recent happenings."

I only see this on this forum. I've never seen this anywhere else. Some people here do it very consistently.

Maybe I am (are?)confused?

The Reuters news story at the beginning of this thread doesn't do this.

Dilbert, you do it (Not just you). I am just curious as to why.

Just wondering.

Ah, English as she is spoke!
I think it might be something Canon done

Don't know about the pacific people your talk about but I think it's reasonable to cut a lot of slack to non naïve English speakers on the interweb

 

[Ozarker]

...
Dilbert, you do it (Not just you). I am just curious as to why.
...

(FWIWI would never say "Ford Motor Company" at the start of a sentence, I'd put "The" at the start because "Company" has been included. Which company is it? The Ford Motor Company.)

Depends on whether Canon is thought of as a singular entity or multiple. Or politeness.

If many non-English languages, the polite way to speak to those you don't know would be to use 2nd person plural. For example in French, to tell a girl/woman (stranger that you meet at a bar) that she has beautiful eyes, you would say "vous avez de beaux yeux" and not "tu as de beaux yeux." Do this with enough different languages and you start getting mixed up in your heard about grammar.

Whilst "Canon" is a company in Japan, there is a "Canon" in the USA, "Canon" in Germany and so on. Is Canon a single entity or not?

Well, I've thought of this a little. Even you don't do it all the time. I looked back through a few of your posts (to see whether there was some joke I missed involved and several were privy, but not I) and in #52 and #53 you have a different usage... more traditional to my ear. Then I asked myself whether you or others may be just using a different dialect of English. Here in the United States word usage can change in different parts of the country, just like it does in Mexico and probably many other places.

I wondered if maybe this usage is sort of like a Royal referring to themselves in third person. I honestly do not know. I just enjoy running into different dialects.

I have a co-worker from southern England who traveled to North Carolina on a job one week and asked a checkout girl whether she was from England or not (He hadn't been in the USA for long). To his ear her country dialect sounded like what he grew up with. She was not from England, but a native North Carolinian.

On the subject of whether Canon is a single entity or not: I would think the parent company in Japan owns the divisions representing Canon all over the world. So like the Trinity (three in one), yes, I think so.

My asking was not a criticism. My English is far from perfect. Just wondering about it all. As I read posts I understand there are people from all over the world on this forum. Sometimes I can tell by usage what region of the USA a person may be from because I am a fan of dialects. This one was stumping me and sounded quite odd to my mind's ear. I was thinking maybe it was an English dialect from the asian continent, but someone who speaks and writes a lot of English.

Someone commented about my usage of "Ford Motor Company". You are right. I neglected to use "The". That would be my normal usage. On the other hand, Ford tends to refer to itself as "Ford Motor Company" all over their corporate website. So I guess either way is fine. That is far different than what I pick up when I hear (read) the usages around Canon.

Y'all have a nice day! ;D

 

[Ozarker]

Off topic, but why do I keep seeing people use:
"Canon have" instead of "Canon has"
"Canon were" instead of "Canon was"
"Canon are" instead of "Canon is" etc.

Just seems like strange usage to me. I never see people write:
"Ford Motor Company have announced three new models for 2017."
or "Kraft Cheese are spinning off the XYZ unit this quarter."
or "The man were upset by recent happenings."

I only see this on this forum. I've never seen this anywhere else. Some people here do it very consistently.

Maybe I am (are?)confused?

The Reuters news story at the beginning of this thread doesn't do this.

Dilbert, you do it (Not just you). I am just curious as to why.

Just wondering.

Ah, English as she is spoke!
I think it might be something Canon done

Don't know about the pacific people your talk about but I think it's reasonable to cut a lot of slack to non naïve English speakers on the interweb

It wasn't meant as a criticism. I think the person I mentioned and asked is a native speaker. Just curiosity.

 

[Valvebounce]

Hi CanonFanBoy.
Not only the website, they also don't or didn't use 'The' when they cast FoMoCo in to their parts or print their packaging. For spoken or written use it is probably more correct to use 'The' than to not.
As for your main question, some of it is due to the many other nationalities that speak English confusing the grammar, which should be excused. Then the rest is down to the widespread misuse of the English language which slowly becomes the norm and then causes the language to evolve, most languages are living, and therefore they must change and adapt, much to the horror of those of us taught grammar at school! ;D
Before anyone picks holes in my grammar, I know it is not always correct but I try!

Cheers, Graham.

Someone commented about my usage of "Ford Motor Company". You are right. I neglected to use "The". That would be my normal usage. On the other hand, Ford tends to refer to itself as "Ford Motor Company" all over their corporate website. So I guess either way is fine. That is far different than what I pick up when I hear (read) the usages around Canon.

Y'all have a nice day! ;D

 

[AlanF]

Off topic, but why do I keep seeing people use:
"Canon have" instead of "Canon has"
"Canon were" instead of "Canon was"
"Canon are" instead of "Canon is" etc.

Just seems like strange usage to me. I never see people write:
"Ford Motor Company have announced three new models for 2017."
or "Kraft Cheese are spinning off the XYZ unit this quarter."
or "The man were upset by recent happenings."

I only see this on this forum. I've never seen this anywhere else. Some people here do it very consistently.

Maybe I am (are?)confused?

The Reuters news story at the beginning of this thread doesn't do this.

Dilbert, you do it (Not just you). I am just curious as to why.

Just wondering.

Ah, English as she is spoke!
I think it might be something Canon done

Don't know about the pacific people your talk about but I think it's reasonable to cut a lot of slack to non naïve English speakers on the interweb

It wasn't meant as a criticism. I think the person I mentioned and asked is a native speaker. Just curiosity.

Collective nouns, names of companies etc should indeed take the singular of verbs. The Americans are much more careful about the correct grammar than the Brits. Our ill-educated politicians are among the worst culprits and usually say the "Government are.." instead of the correct the "Government is" etc.