Coursedesign wrote on 1/22/2009, 7:46 AM
Sony made a statement in a recent pro magazine article that the Vegas user base had increased 50% over the last year.

Having long experience decoding marketing messages, my interpretation is that even though this was purely in a broadcast pro context, it's not clear if Sony was referring to just Vegas Pro or Vegas including Vegas Move Studio, etc.

JJKizak wrote on 1/22/2009, 8:16 AM
When CEO's cut there is nothing sacred except their position. Then there is the balloon compensation thing if he does get cut.
TheHappyFriar wrote on 1/22/2009, 8:18 AM
the only reason I'm not worried (for at least up to version 9 of pro) is because they're still doing things & trying to address some things. If sony wanted it gone they could close up tomorrow & save all the hassle of dealing with SCS, they're so big some bad PR by a relatively handful of people who used an odd-ball NLE wouldn't phase them a bit.
ScorpioProd wrote on 1/22/2009, 10:43 AM
Plus the SCS booth has been moved right next to the giant Sony booth at NAB, which to me can only mean good things.
Skuzzy wrote on 1/22/2009, 12:57 PM
Sony would not just kill Vegas. You do not kill assets of your company. You sell them off if you no longer feel they fit with your corporate goals.

Vegas does well enough in the market, someone would pick it up if Sony wanted to sell it off.

Just read the earlier losses at $2 billion is now up to $3 billion. Rough times ahead for Sony.
Jeff9329 wrote on 1/22/2009, 2:10 PM
They don't have to kill SCS, but it could be a painful long death by having extremely long periods between releases. If they can still sell Version 8, why kill it?

They already are slow in revising the current product for new cameras and current bugs.

I don't think we can under-estimate the extremely serious position they are in.
BrianStanding wrote on 1/22/2009, 2:40 PM
Unless of course, someone like Adobe bought SCS for the express purpose of killing it off.

Wouldn't be the first time.
Skuzzy wrote on 1/22/2009, 3:03 PM
Jeff9329, when a company is suffering financial stress, it usually will find a way to generate a lot of revenue to make up for the loss. If Sony decided Vegas had to go, it would sell it while the IP is still at its top value. Sony would not wait until the value of Vegas is worthless before breaking it off.

Well, unless the management at Sony is truly debilitated and I doubt that to be the case.

BrianStanding, yes, Adobe could snarf it up and in all likelihood it would kill the Pro version of Vegas, but keep the lower end offering around for a cheap entry platform for joe-consumer. Maybe.
alltheseworlds wrote on 1/22/2009, 3:04 PM
To the OP: This is called "FEAR MONGERING". Damaging, unfounded speculation about doom and gloom. Don't do it.
John_Cline wrote on 1/22/2009, 4:00 PM
"FEAR MONGERING". Damaging, unfounded speculation about doom and gloom. Don't do it.

I agree. NONE of you have any proof for your speculations.
TheHappyFriar wrote on 1/22/2009, 6:41 PM
I have proof: the thread with a chat from a sony person & the one in the DVDA section about DVDA5 not working properly & the poster saying SCS contacted him directly.

Like I said, they're still there.
Skuzzy wrote on 1/22/2009, 7:23 PM
Uhmmm,..not to be a nit John Cline, but isn't the nature of speculation to form an opinion based on fragments of details.

The only thing we know for sure is Sony is going to announce a $3 billion dollar loss for the last fiscal year. They have also announced the company will be restructuring. They have announced there will be layoffs.

How is all this going to effect or impact the software side of the business is anyone's guess. I really do not consider healthy speculation as fear mongering. I speculate about my investments on a daily basis, as an example. Although I do believe there will always be people who are willing to jump off a bridge to prove there is a reason to panic.

However, everyone is entitled to an opinion.
alltheseworlds wrote on 1/22/2009, 7:48 PM
There is not much the average person can do to help the current world financial situation. But staying optimistic and avoiding adding to the gloom by talking everything DOWN is one simple thing that people can do.
ken c wrote on 1/22/2009, 7:59 PM
there's no reason they'd stop selling something that's making money.

instead, they'd just not invest resources in upgrading it's features in a timely manner, nor fixing it's many bugs, nor making it competitive with other NLEs.

woops, then again that's what's been going on for the last 3 years, my bad. lol and not funny.

Wish I'd spent time learning other NLEs too... Vegas is fine, but it's very long in tooth without the vibrant upgrades etc we see in Adobe's approach to software development... anyone know if/when there'll be a V9, and if so, any significant feature improvements?

Steve Mann wrote on 1/22/2009, 9:19 PM
Keep in mind that the $2.9 billion annual operating loss is at Sony Corporate. SCS is only one of many peas in a large pot. There was an article in this week's "Business Weekly" that laid the losses at the devaluation of the dollar and the weakness of the US consumer market in televisions, music and movies. In fact, from Business Weekly: "Goldman Sachs predicted that Sony would lose an additional $1.1 billion on TVs this fiscal year through March." There was in this article a minor mention of Sony software spending money on online distribution. But SCS? Nothing. If SCS is bringing Sony Corp a dollar of profit in this market, then they are probably safe from a spinoff.
Cliff Etzel wrote on 1/22/2009, 9:27 PM
"FEAR MONGERING". Damaging, unfounded speculation about doom and gloom..."

Seems as though there are some who feel the need to purposely create additional FUD for no apparent reason other than because they have nothing else better to do with their time - like making a living with Vegas. John Cline is once again on the mark as usual .

Just because the economy isn't doing well for some, doesn't mean others aren't doing what it takes to keep themselves moving forward with making an income with Vegas - like myself.

If you have nothing positive to say, than don't say it at all.

Cliff Etzel - Solo Video Journalist
bluprojekt | solo video journalism blog
GlennChan wrote on 1/22/2009, 10:57 PM
1- If a company is going to lose a lot of money, it will sometimes play accounting games to stuff all their losses into that one quarter or year. And then in subsequent quarters/years, management will look good.

Considering that everybody is overly paranoid about the economy, this is a great time for managements to play accounting games and to take a terrible quarter. And then in subsequent quarters, they can play accounting games and smooth out their earnings... and beat analyst earnings expectations quarter after quarter.
(EDIT: Maybe not... one would have to carefully examine their filings once they come out.)

2- SCS is probably way healthier than some of their publicly-traded peers.

Avid and Digital Vision for example are companies with sizable (and shrinking) market share, and these are companies that are actually losing money. SCS, as far as I can tell, is making a profit. I wouldn't worry about being a Vegas customer... I would worry about being an Avid or Digital Vision customer. (Though Avid has plenty of cash and will take at least a few years to die off at their current rate.)
farss wrote on 1/23/2009, 12:05 AM
Although this is all idle speculation here's some of what I see.

1) It's been a long time since I've had any reason to give SCS any of my hard earned.

2) The product line has been in more dire straights than this before. Sonic Foundry were pretty close to chapter 11 before Sony bought the current product line.

3) Even if Maddison was shallowed up by some natural disaster our software still keeps working, be thankful you're not running an app that wants to call home every hour to authenticate.

4) Current economic conditions might favour SCS. Sony inherited a relatively large amount of debt when they bought the product. This is not an uncommon problem. Almost all our TV networks are in this pickle. They make a good operating profit but really struggle to service their debt. For them tough economic times are a disaster due to falling revenue. SCS on the other hand could see revenue improve or at least hold steady and cost of servicing debt decline due to falling interest rates.

5) To the best of my knowledge Sony owns only two software companies. Sonox is one, SCS the other.

6) The software business is always a tough business to be in. It's very hard to generate an ongoing income stream. The team at SCS go back a long way, probably one of the most stable software companies I know of. Even if they did get sold off I think the management would keep the team and the spirit alive. They've survived being part of Sony and that'd have to be pretty tough.

7) All this talk is about Vegas. It isn't the only product and probably not the most profitable anyway. I'd hazard a guess Acid and the loop business generates a lot of income.

John_Cline wrote on 1/23/2009, 12:28 AM
I'll say it again, NO ONE here has any idea what they're talking about, including me. There have been a lot of classic nonsense threads on this forum and this one is near the top of the list.
mekelly wrote on 1/23/2009, 5:18 PM

I don't understand what your problem is. Nobody here is jumping off a bridge or slitting their wrists. In my opinion, this has been a throughtful, nonemotional (other than you) discussion about a product and company that many depend on to make a living.

And I would beg to differ than no one has any idea what they're talking about. It's a fact that Sony just announced their largest operating loss ever. It's a fact that it's their first loss in 14 years. It's also a fact that SCS is a VERY small portion of their business. When companies are doing poorly and the economy shows no sign of getting better any time soon you can't just assume that if something is making money it will stay around. I haven't dug through Sony's financials but I can tell you that its such a small piece of the pie that you probably don't have much executive time spent at all on it. There's also the issue of company focus. It's a fact that one of the things companies do in tough times is focus on their core businesses and SCS doesn't quality. They tend to either sell or shut down non core businesses. Either scenario could have a profound effect on the users in this forum.

So to your point, does anyone KNOW what Sony may due? Of course not. But in my mind there's enough potential here to warrant one discussion thread out of 50,000. If you don't think it's worth your time, don't read it and don't respond.
blink3times wrote on 1/23/2009, 5:56 PM

It's not just John's problem.
I've been avoiding this thread.... until now anyway, because it's just plain stupid.

Sony may or may not sell/kill Vegas. An asteroid may or may not hit us. The lottery I may or may not win....

Give me a friggin break.
Coursedesign wrote on 1/23/2009, 6:47 PM
Sales being up by half over the last year is not usually an indication that somebody is about to fold up the tent.

And if the 100-year perfect storm should strike, will your copy of Vegas stop functioning? No.

You will still be saving time over any other NLE (as long as you can live within the parameters of what Vegas can do, which for the vast majority of users on this forum is definitely the case).

So take a Xanax, Prozac, or whatever is the chill pill of the day, and just get back to your editing, knowing that all is well in the world of Vegas.

farss wrote on 1/23/2009, 6:50 PM
I think it's called human nature.
It's perfectly natural when we feel there's a threat to come together to feel safer. .
Does anyone here know what might or might not really happen, of course not. Can we singularly or in concert stop an asteroid crashing into us, of course not. That's not what this is about.

Either this is a community that has concerns about its future or no one gives a damn. I sincerely hope the former is the case. There'd be way more cause for concern if there weren't threads like this at the moment.

ken c wrote on 1/24/2009, 10:34 AM
well at least Vegas is a solid workhorse of a program and, despite it not adding much in the way of significant features over the years, is still something that works and helps us all produce, so that's something to be thankful of.

it would be nice if it had the user base/3rd party support and enthusiasm of something like AE/After Effects, and ongoing feature adds, but it's still a great program just the way it is. i wonder what the evolution of Vegas will look like; so far it seems to be working fine, just not cutting edge stuff though.