The closures, which will see Sony Ericsson’s North American headquarters moved to Atlanta, will result in the loss of some 2,000 jobs. This a little more than a year after the joint venture’s last big round of layoffs, part of a companywide cost-cutting plan that also left about 2,000 people unemployed.

In its second quarter–the first with the Pre in its lineup–Sprint (S) lost 991,000 postpaid subscribers. And in its third, reported yesterday, its lost 801,000. So subscriber loss, while unquestionably gruesome, is diminishing.

How much of this is due to Palm’s (PALM) Pre? Not that much, says CL King & Associates analyst Lawrence Harris, who believes the Pre had only a moderate impact on Sprint’s postpaid subscriber base.

“Within postpaid, the number of CDMA-only subscriber losses was about 100,000 in the September quarter, compared to the 200,000 in the June quarter,” Harris wrote in a research note to clients. “At Sprint, the Palm Pre is a CDMA-only postpaid device. The number of Sprint postpaid subscribers upgrading their handsets was slightly higher in the September quarter than in the June quarter at just over 2.0 million.”

According to Harris, “This number provides some indication of the available market for all high-end devices at Sprint. In Palm’s August quarter, 85% of the company’s sales went to Sprint. Given the absence of growth in Sprint’s CDMA postpaid category, it appears likely that most of the Palm Pre sales went to existing Sprint subscribers as opposed to winning customers from other carriers.”

That would seem to be the case. Sprint rivals AT&T (T) and Verizon Wireless (VZ) each added subscribers during the second quarter–1.4 million and 1.1 million, respectively. So if the Pre did anything for Sprint, it helped to stem CDMA postpaid losses a bit.

And that’s something, right? After all, there’s no panacea for Sprint’s affliction–well, perhaps there is, but it’s locked up in an exclusivity agreement with AT&T (T). Still, when Sprint last reported earnings, CEO Dan Hesse said the carrier expected to sign up more new customers as the Pre gained wider distribution through retail outlets like Best Buy (BBY) and RadioShack. And that doesn’t really seemed to have happened. Perhaps next quarter after Sprint launches the Pre’s not-quite-cheaper sibling, the Pixi.

UPDATE: A quick addendum. In a research note this morning, Bernstein Research analyst Craig Moffett notes that while Sprint has reduced subscriber losses a bit, the cost of doing so has been worrisomely high.

“Yes, net subscriber losses were better,” Moffet explains. “But the cost was very high. Post-paid equipment subsidies soared to $139 per subsidized subscriber in Q3 (up 39 percent from last year), as the company recovered just 36 percent of their equipment costs….Yesterday’s results illustrate why it may not be possible for Sprint to have its cake and eat it too. After all the drastic cost cutting, after all the efforts to refresh the product line, after all the price cuts and new pricing plans, Sprint was able to manage only a modest improvement. Not growth, just a slightly slower rate of decline. And that Herculean effort almost broke the bank. The huge costs of even marginally improving gross additions (and the rate of net subscriber loss) crushed margins.”

Sony’s net loss in the quarter was 37.1 billion yen ($390 million), a brutal change from the 35 billion yen profit in the year-ago period. Still, it was smaller than the 109.6 billion yen loss analysts polled by Thomson Reuters had been expecting. That said, all three of Sony’s core electronics divisions registered losses for the quarter.

Not a good sign. Because while the company’s smaller-than-expected loss proves its cost-cutting measures have been effective, it also shows that Sony (SNE) must do more than just slash jobs and suppliers if it ever hopes to regain its position in the market. For while cost-cutting might improve Sony’s bottom line, it’s not going to make the company competitive against Samsung, Nintendo and Apple (AAPL), who’ve usurped its position in TVs, gaming consoles and media players, respectively. What Sony needs most is not more cost-cutting; it’s a new gotta-have-it product.

Seriously. It’s been, what, 30 years since the debut of the Walkman?

“If we were any more successful, we’d be bankrupt.”

– Sony CEO Howard Stringer on the company’s LCD business, May 28, 2008

About the best thing to be said for Sony’s grotesque financial results is that they came in smaller than expected. The company’s 98.9 billion yen ($1 billion) loss for the fiscal year ended March–its first net loss in 14 years–wasn’t nearly as bad as the 150.0 billion yen ($1.57 billion) figure it had predicted in January or even close to the 173.8 billion yen ($1.8 billion) analysts polled by Thomson Reuters had been forecasting. And the same is true for Sony’s fourth quarter, as well. The net loss of 165.1 billion yen ($1.7 billion) it reported was far better than the 228.7 billion yen ($2.39 billion) forecast.

Still ugly as hell, though. And according to the company’s leadership, its next fiscal year will be little different. Sony is forecasting a loss of 120 billion yen ($1.2 billion). Given that unfortunate outlook, Sony (SNE) is closing three factories in Japan, part of an ongoing effort to shore up a business ravaged by the worst recession in decades. But cost-cutting measures like that can only do so much.

As analysts note, what Sony really needs is a killer product. It is no longer the force it once was in consumer electronics, having ceded its dominance in portable music players to Apple (AAPL) and its leads in the television and videogame console markets to Samsung Electronics and Nintendo. “Their outlook gave me the impression that their business is heading for a gradual recovery,” Fujio Ando, senior managing director at Chibagin Asset Management, told Reuters. “But it would all depend on whether they would be able to start producing popular products, because right now they have no ‘Number One’ products. I see Sony’s branding power weakening.”

And that’s something of which Sony is painfully aware.

“We have two distinct challenges facing us,” Sony CEO Howard Stringer recently told the New York Times. “The first is the global slowdown, which forces us to make significant adjustments. The second challenge is the evolution of our competitive environment. New competitors [are] springing out everywhere.”

Indeed. And while Sony seems to be meeting the first challenge, albeit slowly, it hasn’t yet begun to make headway toward meeting the second. And at this point, one wonders if the company is even capable anymore. As Japanese Economy, Trade and Industry Minister and former Sony employee Akira Amari asked back in October 2006, “What has become of the Sony known for its technology?”

We’re assuming more of the same … deterioration in the economic markets,” Xerox CEO Anne Mulcahy said on a conference call with analysts. “That’s why we’re being so aggressive in terms of the cost reductions, so we can be assured of delivering the earnings growth that we expect in 2009.”

[Image Credit: The Great Copy Machine Epidemic]

Cost-cutting is one of my favorite subjects. We have quite a bit more to do.”

– HP CFO Cathie Lesjak, Sept. 10, 2008

When Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) CFO Cathie Lesjak said she was fond of cost-cutting, she wasn’t kidding. On Monday HP announced plans to cut 24,600 jobs over the next three years as it digests Electronic Data Systems, the technology services giant it acquired for nearly $14 billion this summer. The job cuts amount to about 7.5 percent of the combined company’s total workforce, and most will come from EDS, whose bloated cost structure was in need of a good trim. HP estimates $1.8 billion in annual cost savings once the three-year program is completed. “I think most of you that follow us know I am a big believer that having the most efficient cost structure directly relates to your ability to scale and grow,” HP CEO Mark Hurd explained to securities analysts.

Incidentally, 24,600 sacked employees is a new record for Mark Hurd, whose first big act as HP’s CEO was a restructuring that eliminated some 15,000 jobs.

[Image credit: jischinger]