Katakura Industries

Company history

Financial history 1953–2025 — revenue, cost structure, balance sheet, cash flow and key ratios, year by year →

Founded
1873
Head office
Okaya, Nagano, Japan (founding)
Listed
1949
Founder
Katakura Ichisuke (Katakura Kentaro I)
Revenue · FYE Mar 2025
$272M (¥41bn)
Net profit · FYE Mar 2025
$38.8M (¥6bn)
Katakura Industries: long-term performance & turning pointsSales (revenue) and profit-margin ratio
Sales (¥ bn)Net margin (%)

1873Reeling silk for American stockings

Revenue (¥ bn, bars) · net margin (%, line)
Source: securities reports
  1. 1873Katakura Kentaro I opens a ten-reel filature in Suwa, Nagano
  2. 1890Mills spread from Shinshu to Omiya, Koriyama, Himeji, Tosu and beyond
  3. 1915Twenty-nine mills; raw silk shipped almost entirely to the United States

Katakura began in 1873, when the twenty-four-year-old Katakura Kentaro I set up a ten-reel hand-reeling shop in Kawagishi village, Suwa, in Nagano. The timing was deliberate: the Meiji government had opened its model mill at Tomioka only the year before, making the mechanised mass production of raw silk a matter of national policy. Katakura entered the same industrialisation from the private side, in a province whose climate suited mulberry and whose farmers already kept silkworms — the cocoons could simply be bought in.

The market, however, was abroad. Raw silk was a luxury with a small domestic appetite, and almost all of it went to the United States, where it was consumed in volume as the yarn for women’s stockings; dollar receipts, not Japanese demand, were what funded the company. On that trade Katakura built mills across the country through the Meiji period — Matsumoto, Omiya, Koriyama, Takahata, Ichinomiya, Himeji, Tosu, Oita — and by the Taisho years was running twenty-nine of them. Every one of those sites was bought as a factory. A century later most of them would matter for something else entirely.

Read the full history in Japanese →


1920The silk kingdom, and the market that vanished

Revenue (¥ bn, bars) · net margin (%, line)
Source: securities reports
FY1953 · unconsolidated
Revenue$9M
Net income$111K
Net margin1.2%
FY1968 · unconsolidated
Revenue$76M
Net income$0K
Net margin0%
  1. 1920Incorporated as Katakura Silk Spinning; head office in Kyobashi, Tokyo
  2. 193238,000 employees, 62 mills — the “Katakura kingdom”
  3. 1939Absorbs the former government mill at Tomioka
  4. 1943Founds Toa Eiyo; renamed Katakura Industries
  5. 1949Lists on the Tokyo Stock Exchange
  6. 1954Nylon takes the stocking market; two straight loss-making years
  7. 1969Dividend suspended

In March 1920 the business was incorporated as Katakura Silk Spinning with capital of ¥50 million and a head office in Kyobashi, Tokyo. It was immediately one of the two great names in the trade, alongside Gunze, and it grew by buying up smaller reelers. The symbolic acquisition came in September 1939, when Katakura absorbed the former government mill at Tomioka — the state had launched the industry, and a private company now inherited its monument. At its height in 1932 the firm employed 38,000 people across 62 mills; the family was called the silk kings of the world, and the group the “Katakura kingdom.”

The company also began, quietly, to hold things other than filatures. In October 1943 it founded Toa Eiyo, a wartime nutrition-chemicals venture that later became its pharmaceutical core, and the following month changed its own name to Katakura Industries — dropping “silk” from the title long before it dropped silk. It added the Omiya works in 1946 and listed on the Tokyo Stock Exchange in May 1949.

Then the trade itself disappeared. Through the 1950s nylon displaced silk as the material of women’s stockings; Toray built its fortune on the substitution, and Katakura absorbed it as a direct hit on its only real business. It lost money and paid no dividend in both 1954 and 1955. Moves downstream — a hosiery company in 1954, knitted underwear from 1960 — were never large enough to matter. Mill closures began in 1958, and a 1961 push into the synthetic fibre vinylon could not follow the capital spending of Toray and Teijin. In December 1969, ninety-six years after its founding, Katakura suspended its dividend altogether.

Read the full history in Japanese →


1969A raider, and a second life in real estate

Revenue (¥ bn, bars) · net margin (%, line)
Source: securities reports
FY1969 · unconsolidated
Revenue$79M
Net income-$694K
Net margin-0.9%
FY2007 · consolidated
Revenue$422M
Net income$16M
Net margin3.8%
  1. 1972Hong Kong investors take ~10%; Katakura reclassified as an “asset stock”
  2. 1973First shopping centre, at Toride — the mill-site redevelopment model
  3. 1983Omiya Katakura Park opens on the Omiya works site
  4. 1988Silk cut to one filature and one egg station
  5. 1994Exits silk manufacturing entirely, 121 years on
  6. 2004Katakura Shintoshin Mall — the first “Cocoon”
  7. 2005Donates the Tomioka mill buildings to the city

What Katakura still had, after the dividend stopped, was land — some 330,000 tsubo of mill sites acquired when they were on the edge of provincial towns and now, in many cases, sitting in the middle of them. In 1972 a group of Hong Kong investors built a stake of around 10 per cent on exactly that arithmetic, treating Katakura as an asset stock priced below what it owned. The pressure did not reveal anything the company did not know; it forced it to act on what it knew.

The property business proper opened in March 1973 with a shopping plaza at Toride, and the model was fixed from there: redevelop a dead filature site into retail and collect rent, rather than sell the land once. Matsumoto Katakura Mall followed in 1981, Omiya Katakura Park — the seed of Cocoon City — in 1983. The silk side was wound down in the opposite order: a March 1988 decision fixed the end state at one filature (Kumagaya) and one silkworm-egg station (Numazu), reeling stopped in 1992, and both were idled in 1994. Katakura left the manufacture of silk 121 years after it had begun it.

Around the property income the company assembled the remainder of itself from subsidiaries founded decades earlier for other reasons: Toa Eiyo, by then a specialist in cardiovascular prescription drugs; Katakura Kiki in machinery; Nichibi in fibres. The 2004 Katakura Shintoshin Mall, minutes from the new Saitama-Shintoshin station, became the centre of the property arm — and was named “Cocoon,” after the raw material of a business the group no longer had. In 2005 it gave the Tomioka mill buildings to the city of Tomioka and sold the land the following year, ending sixty-six years of ownership; the site was inscribed as a World Heritage property in 2014. By fiscal 2007, of consolidated sales of $422M (¥50bn), pharmaceuticals were the largest segment and textiles the smallest.

Read the full history in Japanese →


2008Cocoon City, Kyobashi, and the last of the textiles

Revenue (¥ bn, bars) · net margin (%, line)
Source: securities reports
FY2008 · consolidated
Revenue$491M
Net income$10M
Net margin2%
FY2025 · consolidated
Revenue$272M
Net income$39M
Net margin14.3%
  1. 2013Tokyo Square Garden opens on the old Kyobashi head-office site
  2. 2015Cocoon City completed at Saitama-Shintoshin
  3. 2019Joko Ryosuke, from Mizuho, becomes president
  4. 2022Moves to the TSE Standard market; pharmaceuticals sold in-house
  5. 2023Apparel and knitwear transferred out; machinery-electronics exited
  6. 2024Buyback of $9.2M (¥1bn); dividend raised to ¥60

In March 2013 Tokyo Square Garden was completed on the site of the old Kyobashi head office, a high-rise office complex connected directly to the subway. The plot was the third use of the same land: head office of a silk company from 1920, then part of the estate that survived the silk business, then prime central-Tokyo rent. In 2015 the Omiya sites were consolidated as Cocoon City with the opening of Cocoon 2 and 3, and a further centre followed at Fukushima in 2021.

In March 2019 Joko Ryosuke, who had come from Mizuho Financial Group, became president, with the previous president Sano Kimiya moving up to chairman — an outside financial brain placed over an asset-heavy balance sheet. What followed was the tidying-up that the four-pillar structure had postponed. A hundred voluntary redundancies were taken in 2020; the 2017 medium-term plan was abandoned outright and replaced by restructuring — apparel transferred to the subsidiary Ogland Japan, the machinery-electronics business exited, the pharmaceutical model rebuilt so that Toa Eiyo’s cardiovascular drugs were sold in-house from 2022. In June 2023 knitted underwear, begun in 1960, left the parent company as well.

The rebuilt group buys rather than starts: Tokin Shiko in 2023, FPG Technology in 2023 (now Katakura Cross-Technology), Sanzen in 2024. Fiscal 2024 closed with sales of ¥39.4bn, a 10.4% operating margin, interest-bearing debt down to ¥7.8bn and equity of ¥86.0bn — a company whose balance sheet is more than twice its revenue. Joko’s answer to that was distribution rather than accumulation: cross-shareholdings sold down, a $9.2M (¥1bn) buyback in 2024, and a year-end dividend raised to ¥60. By fiscal 2025 the four segments — property, pharmaceuticals, machinery, textiles — each fell within a band of roughly ¥6.8bn to ¥11.7bn in sales. The company that in 1932 ran a kingdom on one product now runs four businesses of almost equal size, none of them the one it was founded for. Its 2022 choice of the TSE Standard market over Prime was of a piece with that: finish the restructuring first.

Read the full history in Japanese →


Key decisions — the author’s view

Revenue (¥ bn) · net margin % · around FY1973

Redeveloping the mill sites in-house: the turn to real estate (1973)

What is left to a company that has lost its business

The heart of this decision lies less in whether the diversification succeeded than in who got to decide first how the assets would be used. The 1972 stake-building did not point out value Katakura had failed to notice; it was closer to an outside party moving value the company had noticed but could not move itself. Sell the sites and you book a gain once; develop them and rent accrues every period — and in choosing the second, a company that had lost its founding trade answered the question of what kind of company it would now be through the use of its land. It is worth noting that the conversion from factory to retail took sixteen years, from a driving range in 1967 to Omiya Katakura Park in 1983: the raid did not turn the ship overnight.

At the same time, the decision left the same question standing for a long while. Even today, with rent at the centre of earnings, the value of the property held and the valuation of the shares remain apart, and outside investors have pointed at the gap again and again. A company that earns from operations and a company that owns assets are measured on different scales in the equity market. When a firm that has lost its founding business seeks a way out through land, that land eventually brings with it the question of whom it is being put to work for. Katakura’s choice in 1973 was also a decision to carry that question for half a century.

Revenue (¥ bn) · net margin % · around FY1988

Cutting silk to one filature and one egg station, then leaving manufacturing (1988)

Deciding how to fold before you fold

What stands out in this decision is not the speed of the withdrawal but the order in which it was made. The March 1988 resolution set out not which sites to close but what would be kept — one filature, one silkworm-egg station — and that end state then served as the measure for six years of work. Retreat from a founding business is hardest on the people involved when the end is not in sight. By placing the final shape first, the closures and suspensions that followed could be handled as steps in an agreed procedure.

That this method was available at all, however, was because the preparations for a company that could stand without silk had already been made. The pharmaceutical and machinery subsidiaries, and the rents accumulated from the shopping centres built after 1973, were ready to fill the hole the founding business would leave. Put the other way round: setting a deadline on a founding trade with no replacement earnings in place does not proceed the same way. The question of when to fold the original business has, in truth, the same shape as the question of by when the next pillar must be grown — and Katakura’s closing of a 121-year story is an example of that sequence.

Revenue (¥ bn) · net margin % · around FY2005

Giving the Tomioka mill buildings to the city, then selling the land (2005)

Opening an exit you had narrowed yourself

The difficulty of this decision lay less in the transfer than in the eighteen years that preceded it. In resolving neither to sell, nor to lease, nor to demolish, Katakura had sealed off its own means of disposing of the asset and accepted an open-ended outlay of more than ¥100 million a year. For a listed company to commit that much time and money to an asset that generates no income is a choice that requires explaining to shareholders. That it held the policy anyway, and then released the burden with a final move of giving the buildings away, is what characterises the decision.

The form of a donation was chosen partly because no other route satisfied both the continuity of preservation and the ending of the cost. Splitting the treatment — buildings without charge, land for a price — was also a piece of clear-headed practice, separating what had to be protected from what could be sold. Among the non-operating assets a company carries, some have a character that the figures in the ledger alone cannot settle; depending on how the release is designed, ending the burden and passing something on to society can be made compatible. The World Heritage listing was an outcome conferred afterwards, and it should be remembered that in 2005 it could not have been priced in.

Each heading links to the full Japanese analysis — background, decision and outcome, with sources.


References & sources

This is a condensed English edition. The full, source-by-source history — with the detailed narrative, financial tables, shareholders and executives — is maintained in Japanese: 日本語版(詳細)— Katakura Industries full history in Japanese →

  1. Katakura Industries — 有価証券報告書 (annual securities reports) and 株主報告書 (shareholder reports).
  2. Katakura Industries — earnings briefing (決算説明会), FY2022 results (2023), on the withdrawal of the “Katakura 2021” medium-term plan.
  3. Katakura Industries — message from the president (社長ごあいさつ).
  4. 証券調査 (Securities Research), no. 7, April 1971 — on the share accumulation and the company’s land holdings. NDL Digital Collections.

Yen amounts are converted at the average rate of each figure’s own year — not today’s rate; revenue charts are shown in yen. Exchange rates & sources — the full ¥/US$ table →


Disclaimer


Data API

Katakura Industries’s history, financials, executives and shareholders are published as static JSON — no key, plain GET.

Method Endpoint Returns
GET /api/companies.json All companies
GET /api/3001/manifest.json Resource index
GET /api/3001/history.json History overview
GET /api/3001/timeline.json Chronology
GET /api/decisions.json All management decisions (index)
GET /api/3001/decisions.json Management decisions (index)
GET /api/3001/decisions/{slug}.json One decision (full dossier)
GET /api/3001/executives.json Executives
GET /api/3001/shareholders.json Major shareholders
GET /api/3001/financials.json Financial statements
GET /api/3001/financials-longterm.json Long-term results
GET /api/3001/segments.json Business segments
GET /api/3001/regions.json Sales by region
GET /api/3001/workforce.json Workforce