How much revenue top companies earn per second(happier.co.uk) |
How much revenue top companies earn per second(happier.co.uk) |
Gazprom 1410
Exxon Mobil 1302
I&C Bank of China 1021
Shell 980
Chevron 852
China Constr. Bank 830
Apple 822
BP 814
BHP Billiton 749
Microsoft 734
Two banks, two high tech, the rest oil/gas/mining. Kind of depressing. List and figures from
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2012/perfor...
Why is this depressing?
It looks like the people manufacturing things for the economy are being rewarded. To me this seems like the economy is working properly.
On the other hand, Foxconn provides jobs for over 1.2 million people, while Google employs less than 50,000. Also relevant to the debate about manufacturing.
Jobs are a more complex issue - offshoring manufacturing may be efficient, but it does have an impact on the distribution of wealth, and unemployment. It's not clear what the right policy trade off is. I think cutting back on illegal immigration would be a better way to boost job growth in the low end of the job market.
I can't see how an investor would not care. It seems that given a more profitable business, for a desired ROI amount, the capital input is smaller.
And it isn't just manufacturing; resource extraction is similar. Look at Glencore[1], the Swiss mining conglomerate: $1.5BB in profit on $214BB in revenue (190,000 employees).
There are more "efficient" uses of capital. Unfortunately, someone needs to do the building and mining.
A simple bar graph would have been much better.
Google employee's time brings no revenue per se. Headcount is independent of market size (the only limiting thing is customer support whose max is O(log(customer)), and we are talking about google ...)
Apart from this detail, your point is very interesting. I wonder, all industries considered, how much % of worldwide's revenue is earned by nationally owned companies versus the corporations counterparts.
Shell, by the way, is $14,800/second. These numbers are public and trivially discoverable.
Also, how is Foxconn a technology company in the sense the others are? Don't they only (as oppsoed to Samsung for example which does that also) manufacture for others, what is designed by others? I really don't think they fit the description.
Using the numbers from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_companies_by_revenue
The bar chart somebody linked to showed the same data in a much nicer way. Easier to grasp at a glance, and easier to make comparisons.
To make the page's visual work it would have been better to show later numbers in terms of the previous companies. Show, for example, that Facebook is 1.3 Blackberries, Nokia is 4 Facebooks, etc.
This magnifies returns on equity, which makes them more competitive with non-manufacturing companies, which typically cannot run on as high of debt levels because they don't have the same kind of collateral.
So typically you probably do have lower returns on invested capital (the entire capital base, debt plus equity) but returns on equity might be comparable. And if the manufacturing business is more stable -- which it often is, compared to most more ephemeral businesses with few assets -- lower returns are acceptable because there is lower risk.
Of course not all manufacturing companies are lower risk than all non-manufacturing companies.
Put it more simply, if I have a business selling widgets and I need to invest $100 to start the business, it matters more what kind of profit I can get on that $100. If the widget I'm selling sells for $50 and I make $10 profit vs. sells for $500 and I make $10 profit, I'm still making $10 profit on $100 invested capital.
Now more often than not, I'd prefer to sell the higher margin product as it requires less working capital (such as inventory costs) which in itself has the 'cost of capital', but that's just the reality of some (fairly lucrative) industries you get into.
Sure, that's optimal, but they don't have that information easily accessible on Wikipedia for web debates...
I would be surprised if profits/revenues wasn't at least indicative of better measures like return on invested capital, at least for the companies in the above list.