Nikon Reports On Its Money-Making: 2.9% Drop in Revenue, 3.4% Drop in Profit

Last week, Canon reported its latest quarter’s financial results, which included some big double-digit drops in revenue and profit. Now it’s Nikon’s turn to show the world how it’s finances are doing. The company reported its latest quarterly results yesterday, and the numbers are decent.

Nikon hauled in $2.95 billion during the three-month period, and pocketed about $202 million of that as profit. Compared to the same period of time one year ago, revenue and profit dropped 2.9% and 3.4%, respectively. No drop is good news, but the single-digit figures are more positive than Canon’s 13% and 42% drop in revenues and profits of $10.3 billion and $908 million.

Nikon may be earning less than 1/3 of what Canon does, but it seems to be doing a better job at keeping its ship steady as the industry is rocked by economic difficulties and the invasion of smartphoneography.

Also included in its latest financial reports are some facts and figures about its sales: during the first half of this fiscal year, the company sold 3.45 million interchangeable-lens cameras (up 720K), 4.77 million lenses (up 840K), and 8.26 million compact cameras (up 400K). Apparently the Nikon 1 mirrorless camera line is selling well: the company says that it’s a “solid performer”.

(via Nikon Rumors via Engadget)

Image credit: Photograph by Pyzhou/Wikimedia Commons

  • Mansgame

    No surprise at all. Nikon 5 years ago was falling behind Canon in Technology and completely changed that by having cameras that people wanted at every price level. The D3 was a pro camera that made it the darling of the world. The D700 had the same sensor with a few less features and offered no compromise. In the lower end, The D40 and D80 became the perfect first cameras for many people.

    While Canon was advertising more megapixels and mirrors falling off the 5D, Nikon was focusing on getting out great cameras like the D90, and D300. Then all of a sudden Nikon decided to mimic Canon.

    Having a simple, Entry level, Midrange, semi-pro, pro, and really pro lineup was too consumer friendly. They had to add extra steps in the upgrade progress because some people would buy an entry level camera, become good, and then skip to the semi-pro camera instead of getting the mid-range. Someone with a D80 all of a sudden would get a D700 and that hurt the sales of the D3 too since it shared the same sensor.

    So then Nikon started introducing cookie cutter cameras like the D5000, and then instead of a D90 replacement having the D7000 where the sensor was full of dust and oil. All of a sudden the D3200 had to have 24 megapixels, D800 would no longer have the same sensor as the D4. Not only that, quality went out the window. D800’s had a left focus issue along with a green tint on the LCD that they denied and admitted to later.

    The D600 was supposed to be ground breaking but instead is mostly a stripped D800 or a souped up D7000. Probably the ladder since it too has a oil/dust on the sensor issue that Nikon is ignoring.

    Is Canon any better? I don’t know, but I can’t feel too bad for Nikon.

  • 3ric15

    Looks like other camera companies are getting more market share because Canon had a drop in sales too.

  • jusuff12

    where is your source for that?

  • Carsten Schlipf

    Note that Canon is not just about cameras like Nikon. Therefore the overall company results are not comparable.

    Canon also offers stuff like printers, copy machines or scanners – stuff, where Canon is really falling behind.