I recall a moment in The Clone Wars in which General Grievious says to to Knobe, "you are doomed", but of course we know the end result. What troubles me about the incessant callout regarding Nikon, is simply that the basis is fake news in part because those with the podium surely do not know how to read financial statements nor have a keen understanding of corporate accounting principals. Clearly these idiots who assert being future seers are ignorant and without any intelligence concerning the actual facts.
Nikon's last posted cash position is comparable to their position for H1 2019, their liquidity is similar, and their FCFs actually improved for H1 2020!! They had significant write downs of intangibles that were deemed impaired (there is a multi-tiered test for this determination). In this case, an impairment is a reduction in assets which were "marked up" at cost for purposes of amortizing (expensing) the asset over its life span. When an asset's life span is deemed to be viable over a lesser period than what was expected, a NON-CASH expenditure occurs. Yes it affects profit but has no impact on cash, and cash is king.
So they have the same liquidity/cash they had the year earlier and now have a long list of excellent products and corrections of others. Their JIT inventory is similar to Leica and others who determine demand with preorders and then produce in batches. Simply because we are impatient doesn't mean that Nikon's production methods are without merit.
They are taking all the normal actions to become "agile" in a field where demand continues to slide; yet they are clearly delivering and without a whimper.
I must say that the dark past haunts Nikon though, and these mouth pieces on the net who portray Nikon as a loser, have a host of events to point to: the remarkably poorly handled D600 debacle, the disappointing 58MM f1.4 (they did not market this properly; however, it should have been much sharper wide open), the horrible 80-400v1 and at best mediocre v2, the 70-200 v1 which could not be used with proper results with FF cameras, the incredibly poor decision to include only one one drive slot on the Z6 and Z7, and there are others. Those who allowed the products into the market with these limitations/issues, should have been replaced. In such a competitive marketplace, you CANNOT CUT CORNERS, and must at minimum meet demand/competition or, preferably exceed it (the Nikon D800 and D850 and E teles are great examples of the latter). Those that don't usually fail.
Yes Canon is brisk with their new and innovative offerings, and some of the best Sony lenses are unmatched, but Nikon has a place and most of us want them to succeed. Nikon has a solid Z product, and with the Mitsubishi keiritsu to bolster them perhaps, they should be fine assuming the market picks up.
There seems to be a human need "to win" I believe, but with that, many relish the end result of the loser, its destruction. I cannot speak to why many become obsessed/thrilled with the destruction of others, but we can point to a cultural current of stepping on and disrespecting perfectly good people/companies. Perhaps it is in our nature.
Having said that, the one thing that really troubles me is that Nikon purchased treasury shares of sizable Yen amounts in the last several years when facing a stressed situation in their market. Any board of trustees should have shut down those purchases as it requires cash going out of the company for these shares.
Too many poor decisions mean poor top management; however, recent trends suggest that younger, more aware, and aggressive leadership is in place and hopefully with it, an ultimate turnaround of the company's prospects.