Sony is bleeding money - business strategy discussion

[patsu]

I hate that people are calling this a terrorist attack. They got hacked. That's it.

US government think it's a state sponsored attack. That's quite big a deal. And will have implications w.r.t. the role of cyberattacks in politics and governance (more than just nuisance).

In the long run, it is unclear even if a Google, Apple or MS outpost would be able to stand a carefully planned, persistent assault.

 

[Scott_Arm]

US government think it's a state sponsored attack. That's quite big a deal. And will have implications w.r.t. the role of cyberattacks in politics and governance (more than just nuisance).

In the long run, it is unclear even if a Google, Apple or MS outpost would be able to stand a carefully planned, persistent assault.

I'm not saying it isn't serious. I'm saying it's not a terrorist attack. They got hacked and lost a bunch of movies and data that can be damaging to their company. That's it. To call it a terrorist attack is insane.

The threats of terrorist attacks don't seem to be considered credible. Obama said they should have released the movie.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Right but what insurance company will cover Sony itself pulling the film ? The film is complete and ready to release at any time they want so an insurance company will argue that there is nothing to cover the film is complete.

If there's no market to release to because none of the theatre franchises want it, Sony's release is damaged due to circumstances beyond their control. So even with a complete film, 'terrorism' could stop the film making any money.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

If there's no market to release to because none of the theatre franchises want it, Sony's release is damaged due to circumstances beyond their control. So even with a complete film, 'terrorism' could stop the film making any money.

And I said above, they don't need a clause specifically citing terrorism or hacking, just compensation in the event a film's release is prevented to circumstances outside of the producers control. This would be cover unforeseen events like this, catastrophic events, leads actors dying mid-movie and anything else that was demonstrably outside their control.

Next twist: Sony hack their own film. News at 11!

 

[London Geezer]

So now North Korea are saying it definitely wasn't them - not that they should be believed - and my theory (3 kids making a big f'k up) still stands!

Silly US/Sony panic attack.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

If they find kids responsible, they should send them to N. Korea to answer for their crime...

 

[Jwm]

And I said above, they don't need a clause specifically citing terrorism or hacking, just compensation in the event a film's release is prevented to circumstances outside of the producers control. This would be cover unforeseen events like this, catastrophic events, leads actors dying mid-movie and anything else that was demonstrably outside their control.

Next twist: Sony hack their own film. News at 11!

Part of me thought, wow great marketing Sony! Then as more news kept leaking it was obvious it was not Sony marketing.

 

[Nesh]

So now North Korea are saying it definitely wasn't them - not that they should be believed - and my theory (3 kids making a big f'k up) still stands!

Silly US/Sony panic attack.

Politically speaking? The government looks out for excuses to talk about "terrorists" and "enemies" regardless of whether the accusation is valid or not. So even if there is no evidence at all that its North Korea (or some muslim group, or China, or Russia or whatever), the opportunity will not be left unexploited to refer to them as high suspects/culptits in order to stimulate public opinion accordingly,
So I wouldnt be surprised at all if its just some kids at the end. I mean....a folder named sdrwossap?

 

[Silent_Buddha]

No one knows. Sony pulled the movie because basically the biggest theatres weren't going to show it. Sony is probably trying decide what to do going forward. It has several options. A delayed release, straight to DVD/VOD or cancelling it outright. Its not a decision that has to be made right now.

It's looking like it may be unlikely. According to e-mails from Kaz Hirai (http://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...-sony-japan-ceo-interview-20141220-story.html ), it appears like the CEO of Sony was looking for a reason to cancel the movie.

With tensions between Japan and North Korea and their proximity to each other, I can imagine it made him extremely nervous. If it somehow provoked attacks/kidnappings against Japanese citizens by North Korea (has happened in the past and likely still happens occasionally, especially on some of the smaller islands closer to N. Korea), he could stand to lose massive "face" in the eyes of Japanese citizens. And potentially face a situation where he'd have no choice but to step down as CEO of Sony. At a time when a little bit of headway has finally started to happen in Japan - N. Korean relations, it was a rather large risk he was taking in releasing a film that could in theory jeopardize that.

The hack and subsequent terrorist threats (whether real or not), made it easy for him to make the decision to cancel it.

All this may seem silly sitting in the USA or Europe. But Japan is in a situation where they have dangerous neighbors within quick striking distance of them. N. Korea also just happens to have a leader that is also somewhat unstable.

And all of this coming at a time when the US Pacific Fleet is going to be greatly weakend for some months (http://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Eco...s-over-coming-absence-of-US-aircraft-carriers ) in East Asian waters.

Regards,
SB

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Why did Sony even fund that movie if they're wary of the N.K. relationship??

 

[London Geezer]

^^ that.

If they thought it'd be a bit much, they wouldn't even have spent $50 million on it.

 

[Scott_Arm]

I read somewhere that they spent tens of millions in advertising alone.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Best part is I still saw ads for it after they had pulled it.

 

[dobwal]

I see the Sony hack as a terroristic act. Ultimately the hack has invoke fear out of Sony the parent company and other players in the film market. These guys aren't scared of an 9-11 like event. They are scared of being the target of a hacking group that's potentially part of foreign country's cyber warfare program.

S&!t!

Who wouldn't be, especially these guys?

Its not companies like these have been shown to be resilient to hacks including intrusions that led to major financial damage.

I know people would love to engage in acts of patriotism over 9-11 like threats (which have very little chance of happening) but I doubt the wide release of the film is going to do a good job of shielding these companies if they get hacked and lose a ton of their customers' personal data including things like credit card info.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Why did Sony even fund that movie if they're wary of the N.K. relationship??

There was great pressure from Sony Films to get it through. It has big names (who have big box office drawing power) attached to the film. Hirai wanted to not get too hands on with Sony Films (smart since he's not a film guy), for fear of making the situation worse for the film division.

Basically there were a lot of forces in play that wanted to push the film through. As well due to N. Korea's reputation, it had even more potential drawing power in certain first world markets. It was one of those things. He was uncomfortable with the film, but was leaving it up to the head of Sony films.

The hack + threat gave him enough reason to cancel it, however.

Regards,
SB

 

[patsu]

I'm not saying it isn't serious. I'm saying it's not a terrorist attack. They got hacked and lost a bunch of movies and data that can be damaging to their company. That's it. To call it a terrorist attack is insane.

The threats of terrorist attacks don't seem to be considered credible. Obama said they should have released the movie.

The hackers allegedly threatened to escalate (e.g. Bombing the cinema) if the demand was not made. There are also comments from investigators that the attack was sponsored by NK. That's why the incident was associated with terrorist attack.

Not all terrorist chatters are credible anyway. The cyberterrorist association may stick until they found the culprits.

 

[patsu]

Why did Sony even fund that movie if they're wary of the N.K. relationship??

It's a judgment call.

According to leaked email, NK threatened to go to war over the movie before. Sony asked Seth not to kill Kim Jong Un in the movie, but he declined. They ignored NK's objection and proceeded, and here we are.

Edit: Can't wait to see who's the real culprits. They should make a movie about this incident.

 

[wco81]

There are suspicions of insiders or former Sony employees being involved, isn't there? Like the hack targeted specific resources within Sony.

 

[patsu]

Sony's CES Keynote is on now:
http://blog.us.playstation.com/2015/01/05/ces-2015-watch-sonys-keynote-live-tonight/

 

[wco81]

I'm kind of hoping that UHD gets a little traction and Sony brings out a UHD compatible PS4 revision (need BDXL drive and HDMI 2.0 with latest HDCP) or maybe pushes up the PS5.

But with sales doing well, they may want to milk this generation for awhile.

Or if they're truly making money on each console from the start, maybe they'd be more open to pushing up the next generation. They're still putting out expensive TVs. I believe they announced new UHD models at CES. The UHD Blu Ray spec is near finalization. Sony should have some patents in that.