Talk:List of largest technology companies by revenue

message: This list is by no means complete. Community members should add IT companies that aren't on the chart, if and when relevant!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Buryatrider (talk • contribs) 03:44, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional companies 

message: When making a statement of the sort "The largest ...",  one should specify what measurement is used.  One could have several businesses claiming to be the largest because they use different measurements.  Some possible measurements: annual revenue, annual net income, value of assets, value of inventory, annual number of units sold, number of employees, total square feet of buildings, maybe some others.  
However, for this article, the table clearly indicates that it is by annual turnover. 206.53.197.24 (talk) 14:38, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Standard of Measure (Trivial) 

message: World's largest software companies, Largest gold companies, tech company apple overtakes microsoft, Big Five (banks) put more emphasis on market capitalization than revenue.  some tech companies like the remaining parts of nortel have much more value than their revenue suggests.  This article should be moved to a page with a name reflecting the emphasis it puts on revenue or the data should be changed to include market capitalization like forbes does.
List of companies by revenue doesn't say anything about its list meaning anything more than that.Grmike (talk) 06:38, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: why does highest revenue mean largest company ?

message: Am I just talking madness or didn't Apple recently become larger than Microsoft corp.?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.220.106.35 (talk) 23:42, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outdated info 

message: Why is Fujitsu not included in this list?  And surely companies like Samsung are broader than IT...
188.222.64.130 (talk) 13:03, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  How are companies selected for this list? 

message: There are many missing companies. The table uses only one metric of size. It may not be worth the effort to maintain or even meet guidelines for WP  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.237.186.136 (talk) 18:33, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  removal of article 

message: I have been working on List of companies by revenue when I came across this article. I have several points  I want to make:
* Why Datamonitor? Primary sources like annual reports exist.
* Article is severely outdated and has many errors. For example, Uniden only has 0.3 billion dollars in revenue the past fiscal year (the article states $44 billion).
If no objections, I will update the article using primary sources such as annual reports and form 10-Ks and 20-Fs. Jonathansuh (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I completely agree and fully support the proposed update. Before seeing the above I had removed Uniden, as well as TeliaSonera, which is a telco services company and not relevant to the list. A few other changes which I haven't yet made but think should be: 1. Ericsson (2010 revenues of around US$28.3 billion) should be included. 2. Sanyo is now owned by Panasonic, and should either be removed completely or at a minimum a note on its ownship given. 3. The market cap numbers are currently meaningless as the date at which they are taken is not given (and they may be taken at different dates). Since market caps tend to fluctuate considerably in any case I propose that this entire column be removed. 4. Philips should be included (€25.42 billion revenues in 2010). 5. If Hitachi and Toshiba are included, which are both highly diversified, then why shouldn't Siemens and General Electric? 6. Xerox should be added (US$ 21.633 billion revenues in 2010). 7 LG Electronics should be added (USD 48.2 billion revenues in 2010). 8. Alcatel-Lucent should be added (€16.00 billion revenues in 2010). 9. STMicroelectronics should be added (US $10.346 billion revenues in 2010)Rangoon11 (talk) 22:57, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

text: Another missing name: Texas Instruments (US$ 13.966 billion revenues in 2010). Rangoon11 (talk) 23:06, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

text: Also Renesas Electronics (US$ 11.8 billion revenues in 2010), Research In Motion (US$ 19.907 billion revenues in FY 2011) and Qualcomm (US$ 10.99 billion revenues in 2010) Rangoon11 (talk) 23:10, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Huge update needed 

message: This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) --172.223.135.152 (talk) 15:04, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contested deletion 

message: The companies mentioned here are well positioned to make 50 billion revenue within couple of years. 
LG Electronics, Cisco Systems, Nokia, Oracle Corporation, Canon Inc., Mitsubishi Electric.--♥ Kkm010 ♥ ♪ Talk ♪  ߷  ♀ Contribs ♀ 04:44, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Company Sub-50 billion 

message: What about Lockheed Martin, Accenture, Telefonica, and Qualcomm? Zalunardo8 (talk) 15:42, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: And also, Sony Zalunardo8 (talk) 11:17, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other companies 

message: Who ignorant people are referring to these technology companies as IT companies? Do you even know what IT is? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.232.222 (talk • contribs) 00:39, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  January 2014 

message: Sort by employee count does not work for Foxconn or Alphabet. Presumably the numbers are in the wrong format?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.60.43.240 (talk) 05:04, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table sort not working 

message: Isn't it a public company? MK (talk) 21:10, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dell 

message: The ranking given in the table is sourced to the Fortune 500 Global citation. People should not add or remove companies, or change the ranking, in contradiction to this source. Some people have been updating revenues, changing positions, or adding companies that are not on the Fortune list, resulting in a mixed comparison between different years. This creates an inaccurate, unsourced picture, and original research regarding the ranking. Please don't!
Also, the list previously contained market capitalizations, which were recently removed. I don't see the reasoning behind that, and suggest that they be returned. Companies are most often referred to as "largest" by that metric. The article is called "List of the largest information technology companies", not "List of the largest information technology companies by revenue". While it's not unreasonable to sort them that way, based on Fortune, it shouldn't exclude the possibility to compare market capitalization. A separate "by market capitalization" article could be created, but it would be more useful to have them in one.
The citations given in the "refs" column don't say exactly what they support. Again, I'm concerned that they may contradict the numbers used in the Fortune citation, and therefore the source of the ranking, by being from different fiscal years.
--IamNotU (talk) 14:56, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updates needed, original research in ranking, and other problems 

message: The rankings in the list are currently made according to revenue for the fiscal years ending on or before March 31st, 2018, as found in the Fortune Global 500 source cited, and whatever other citations are given. Please do not update individual revenue figures and citations to later years, or change the rankings, unless the entire list is done at once, for example when the next version is published by Fortune, some time after March 2019. Otherwise the ranking order will be unsourced and incorrect. Also, needless to say, changes made to revenue figures without citations, will be summarily reverted. Thanks... --IamNotU (talk) 02:06, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please do not mix fiscal years 

message: Where did Apple go? It is the largest company by revenue but it disappeared for 2020 and 2021.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.160.49.199 (talk) 14:20, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Edit made on Oct 22 has number of problems: Google is inserted, using Alphabet revenue number for 2022, despite Alphabet already in the table, and the table is for 2021. Suggest reverting this edit. Ddhawk (talk) 16:43, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

text: I undid the Oct 22 edits which inserted 2022 Google(??) results overtop of Apple. The entire table needs to be updated for 2022 values, rather than single lines being edited. See comment above "Please do not mix fiscal years" ! Ddhawk (talk) 16:51, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apple 

message: My Father retired from there  but he is deceased both my parents deceased today also govguam retirees My Name Jennifer Nededog Topasna 11 GCA alive on Guam whom just recently found documents court # stating my inheritance that i never knew of till yesterday statement says of tye year 2019 but year today 2023 so looks like i need to take a trip to retirement office later &submit real documents for discovery&get finalized 209.164.184.8 (talk) 19:56, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about GTA Telecommunications#1