Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Nintendo Businesses The Almighty Buck Entertainment Games

Nintendo Quarterly Profits Down 80% 637

mybrainonfire writes "1UP is reporting that Nintendo had a 78.5% reduction in operating profits for the quarter. 'Speculation from the news service on the reason for the drop makes perfect sense - the GameCube doesn't have enough exclusives, first-party and third-party, and sales of GBA SP and GameCube have been declining.' Time to release more Pokemon games, stat!"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Nintendo Quarterly Profits Down 80%

Comments Filter:
  • by hobotron ( 891379 ) on Friday July 29, 2005 @02:59AM (#13192772)

    Alright guys, which one of you didn't buy a gamecube?
    • I refuse to purchase one until the price goes down. If they sold at maybe half their price, I think more than twice as many people would have bought one. Profit. I know it's not precise, don't reply and say "but the profit margin is too blah blah blah."
      • It's a frickin' hundred dollars? WTF!? How cheap do you expect it to be???
        • by SuperIceBoy ( 787273 ) on Friday July 29, 2005 @03:40AM (#13192890)
          I refuse to purchase one until the price goes down. If they sold at maybe half their price,
          It's a frickin' hundred dollars? WTF!? How cheap do you expect it to be???

          Obviously half of $100 is $50.
        • I don't think it is realistic to expect the price to really come down much more (except maybe a bit during some post-Christmas Sales) until the next-gen consoles force the GC to join the long list of obsoletes.

          Then I reckon you can expect to see thousands on e-bay for next to nothing. Having said that, they are already going for between $50 - $100 (often with some games) on e-bay.

      • Re:sorry had to (Score:3, Insightful)

        by CastrTroy ( 595695 )
        I paid $127 Final, after tax, last november, with 2 controllers and Mario Kart Double Dash. Which still costs $60. And this is in Canada. It must be around $75 US now for the system. Actually scratch that. Just checked. It's $100 US. That's very cheap for a game system. Pay $127, and you get 2 good games. Not like xbox and it's tennis/snowboard combos. You get Zelda and Metriod. These are top selling games. Anyway. I don't know why GC isn't more popular. It's got the right price, and is small
        • Re:sorry had to (Score:3, Interesting)

          by schtum ( 166052 )
          I don't know why GC isn't more popular.

          Because perception is reality in their industry. Gamers are extremely image-conscious, and Nintendo was never able to shed their "kiddie" image. Some people think the kiddie thing isn't so bad because Nintendy is building brand loyalty in the most impressionable audience there is. What those people fail to take into account is that little boys worship their big brothers. That's why commercials for toys use kids a few years older than the intended audience.

          The more peop
          • Re:sorry had to (Score:5, Interesting)

            by schtum ( 166052 ) on Friday July 29, 2005 @10:05AM (#13194444)
            Grr. So I went and read TFA. Talk about burying the lead! The story here isn't that Nintendo profits are down 80%, it's that Nintendo is PROFITABLE while their competitors are not.

            The points I made above still stand, with the added note that Nintendo runs the tightest ship in the industry and never sells anything for a loss. Still, it's anyone's guess how long they can go on bleeding market share and still make money. Like I said, perception is reality. Headlines like this probably do more to hurt Nintendo than any questionable business move they may make because it scares people away from buying their products.
    • by Norfair ( 845108 ) on Friday July 29, 2005 @03:38AM (#13192886) Journal
      A lot of people I know skipped out on buying a Gamecube simply because it was damn near impossible to pirate the games. IMO, you want an early success for your console? Let the games be copyable. Yeah, it'll hurt sales to begin with, but its probably the best way to stir up some interest (not to mention building up some trust among gamers) early on. If the games are good enough, most people will end up buying them anyway. You want an example, just look at the GC's current competition.
      • by bleaknik ( 780571 ) <jamal@h@khan.gmail@com> on Friday July 29, 2005 @03:44AM (#13192903) Homepage Journal
        You're right, Norfair.

        The only reason I bought an X-Box was because I knew I could pirate games. I mean, I've downloaded 30 or 40 of those suckers now...

        I can't say I've actually bought an X-Box title yet... Maybe one day. I mean, at $150 Microsoft made a huge profit off of the sale of the system. Right?
      • However contrary to Microsoft and Sony which doesn't make the best seeling games for their system, Nintendo needs their software to be copyproof or otherwise they will lose money on it.
      • Easily copiable game isn't enough.
        You also need good marketing.

        Sony Playstation : Easily copied CD-R + Good marketing - was a sucess.
        Microsoft X-Box : Copiable and Backup-to-disk games + Complete marketing invasion - was a success
        Sega DreamCast : Games copiable out-of-the-box (not even needed to mod-chip the unit, just burn'n'play) but almost invisible marketing - was not as successful as concurrence, mostly because the developper listened to the PS2 hype and stoped producing DC titles and waited for PS2.

        On
      • by Junior J. Junior III ( 192702 ) on Friday July 29, 2005 @08:04AM (#13193615) Homepage
        Um yeah, that's a great business model:

        1) Sell console at a loss or very little profit.
        2) Sell games at absurd profit to make up for console.
        3) Make games easy to pirate to encourage people to buy your console.
        4) High price of games and easy copy-ability drives everyone to not buy your games.
        5) ???
        6) Certainly not profit.
        • 7) Force the competition to slim down their profit margin...
          8) Until they're broke, and out of the business
          9) Stablish a Monopoly
          10) ???
          11) Profit!!!

          It's Microsoft we're talking about, they don't want to compete with Nintendo, they want to destroy them!
  • by intmainvoid ( 109559 ) on Friday July 29, 2005 @03:03AM (#13192781)
    Speculation from the news service on the reason for the drop makes perfect sense - the GameCube doesn't have enough exclusives, first-party and third-party, and sales of GBA SP and GameCube have been declining.

    Nah, it's just that children the world over have rediscovered the pleasures of the great outdoors, of playing in the street and exploring the neighbourhood. They'd rather play in the real world than a virtual one. oh... wait...

  • http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?st ory=6051 [gamasutra.com]

    re Shacknews: "Gamasutra points out that while Nintendo is suffering from reduced profits, neither Sony nor Microsoft's Xbox division are currently making any profit."
    • Mod Parent Up (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Adam9 ( 93947 )
      Some profit is better than no profit.
    • Problem: (Score:5, Insightful)

      by bersl2 ( 689221 ) on Friday July 29, 2005 @03:22AM (#13192850) Journal
      Nintendo is not a division of an extremely successful multinational corporation: it is a multinational corporation. There is nothing to support it if it fails to show a profit.
      • But on the other hand, why should the others keep doing business they can't earn any money from? Atleast for Sony the playstation lineup might do some nice advertising for the brand.
      • Re:Problem: (Score:5, Insightful)

        by barc0001 ( 173002 ) on Friday July 29, 2005 @05:32AM (#13193162)
        True. At the same time, it also doesn't have any "fluff" divisions to drag it down, unlike Sony(film division) or Microsoft(err, Xbox division just posted another huge loss ;) ). Every time the "Nintendo is DOOOOOMED!!111" stories come around, people seem to forget that 1) they are still making profit, and have been for years, and 2) they also have been doing this for a LOT longer than all of their competitors. They've been pumping out games for almost 25 years. Sony's only been around for 10, and Microsoft less than 5 in this space.
        As for what will support Nintendo if they fail to show a profit? Dunno. Maybe some of those profits they've been keeping in the bank from the last 25 years? That *is* why responsible corporations keep a portion of their profits as "retained earnings", after all. Microsoft has several billion in the bank for rainy days, I'd be shocked if Nintendo didn't have enough to carry them for a year or two as well.

      • Something (Score:3, Interesting)

        by mcc ( 14761 )
        I think something is very, very wrong when we base a company's perceived future viability not on "does it have money?" or "is it making money?", but apparently solely on "does it have a big corporate sugar daddy to support it regardless of its fortunes?"
      • Re:Problem: (Score:3, Informative)

        by TheoMurpse ( 729043 )
        There is nothing to support it if it fails to show a profit.

        On the contrary -- they own the majority of the Seattle Mariners, a portion of the company that makes American and Canadian Idol, manufacture playing cards, and own retail stores. The company is over 110 years old. Don't tell me they just make video games.
  • Pokemon Release (Score:5, Informative)

    by linguae ( 763922 ) on Friday July 29, 2005 @03:09AM (#13192801)

    Unfortunately, the next major Pokemon release (Pokemon Diamond and Pearl [wikipedia.org]) isn't due until early 2006 in Japan, and if they follow the same pattern in the US that they have done with earlier Pokemon releases, we won't see it in the US until at least the fall of 2006.

    I personally like the Game Boy because of the Pokemon games (I still like Pokemon), and the Game Cube and Nintendo DS sounds nice, but the release of Sony's PSP and the upcoming release of the XBox 360 and Playstation 3 seem to be eating Nintendo's lunch right now, and those consoles aren't even out yet. Nintendo, on the other hand, isn't coming out with their new-generation console for at least another year.

    I just hope Netcraft isn't confirming anything yet.

    • Two things:

      1) Isn't Pokemon for, like, toddlers?
      2) "Diamond and Pearl"?! Is this the "Prince" Pokemon?
      • Re:Pokemon Release (Score:3, Insightful)

        by toad3k ( 882007 )
        I had this roommate in college. He was a big black ex-football player and one day he discovered pokemon, and played that game day in and day out, during class, at night. He even bought a gameboy for his girlfriend with the game (she abdicated soon after).

        Pokemon is just an rpg with cartoony characters. It has all the strategy of a final fantasy game. The only problem with it is they ran out of ideas for new pokemon, so they got cuter and stupider with each new generation of game. In any case, I have to
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 29, 2005 @03:11AM (#13192808)
    Perhaps it would be appropriate for someone to point out that Sony and Microsoft's gaming divisions have both reported net losses this quarter. Nintendo still profited, just not as much as it expected, and they remain more profitable overall than any other gaming division. Of course, you'll never see that in any gaming publication. It's all about how Nintendo is constantly doomed. Yeah right.
    • Perhaps it would be appropriate for someone to point out that Sony and Microsoft's gaming divisions have both reported net losses this quarter. Nintendo still profited, just not as much as it expected, and they remain more profitable overall than any other gaming division. Of course, you'll never see that in any gaming publication. It's all about how Nintendo is constantly doomed. Yeah right.

      Both Sony and Microsoft have other divisions that make enough money that they can afford to run their gaming divisio
  • Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday July 29, 2005 @03:11AM (#13192811)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by 3.5 stripes ( 578410 ) on Friday July 29, 2005 @03:15AM (#13192826)
    But far be it from anyone in the word of investor driven "growth at any cost" to acknowledge that fact.

    They're still in the black, they're still making a profit, they're not going out of business.

    • Remember their past - it's no different than their future. It's strengths are:

      - Low cost on console / handheld tech
      - LOTS of cool intellectual property like Mario and Pokemon
      - Appeals to younger kids who don't yet get all the killing and bloodfests competitor consoles push.

      My son is 7 years old. Given the choice of consoles he is always going back to either the Gamecube in the den or his SNES (yeah, used to be mine) in his room. He needs games that require little or no reading ability and have a 'fun factor
      • by Chordonblue ( 585047 ) on Friday July 29, 2005 @04:33AM (#13193015) Journal
        Stern Electronics is probably the best example I could give to refute those who think profitability is so bad.

        Stern are the only remaining pinball manufacturers in the world. Midway/Williams, Gottlieb, Sega, Atari, you name it - all gone.

        How did Stern survive? Well, they never were into the glitsy uber-electronic versions of pinball that Midway and Sega were killing themselves over. They simply did a simple thing: made FUN pinballs modestly.

        Eventually, their competitors priced themselves out of the market or found more profitable venues (Midway's arcade division produces gambling machines). With Sony and Microsoft not even close to breaking even after all this time, you know the next generation will be even worse for them. The PS3 is practically a supercomputer in console form, and the 360 will be more powerful than just about any PC you can put together.

        The ultimate question is: will they EVER turn a profit? I don't believe they will and in the meantime, Nintendo may experience a loss in sales to older, more demanding gamers, but they will continue to sail on through and IN THE BLACK.

        • Source: http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/mar20 05/sb20050331_4850_sb040.htm [businessweek.com]

          While I'm no expert on the subject, I'm afraid I'm going to have to challenge you on a fact or two....

          Stern Electronics, the 80s manufacturer of arcade games (including some pinballs), is not the same thing as Stern Pinball, although Gary Stern was involved with each of them. Stern Pinball is what used to be Sega Pinball, and before that, Data East Pinball. It's a pinball division that's changed hands, and been renamed, a few times. It doesn't make sense to say that they've "survived" all this time; only recently have they become an independent company, bought off Sega by Gary Stern (who had been an employee).

          Stern Pinball, in whatever form, has never known for making the best tables. When Williams (who also owned Bally) was in the market, they were king. When they left the market, dismantling their pinball division and firing several star designers including Pat Lawlor (Addams Family, Twilight Zone), that basically meant no one was making pinball games anymore.

          Gary Stern saw the opportunity to get into the market. Stern seems to genuinely love pinball, and so has more than a monetary motive in buying the company. Without Williams in the market, he saw that it was possible to make a profit, if he were the only real pinball manufacturer in the world. He's in a very precarious position, however -- if someone else starts making pingames, he could go under easily. Fortunately for him, that seems unlikely.

          On to point two:
          The PS3 and X-Box 360 will certainly be more powerful than the current generation of machines. But there is an amazing amount of hype flying around concerning them right now. In light of the promises made concerning the PS2 and X-Box back at their release, I'm taking whatever either company says with a three-ton grain of salt until the systems are actually released and the play of their games can be assessed.

          Point three:
          I'm not certain that neither Sony or Microsoft's game division will not make a profit. I'd put more money on Sony than Microsoft. Nintendo is not in as much trouble as the article seems to suggest -- reading the original article sources makes it clear what happened is that Nintendo had a large R&D charge this year, probably from development work on the Revolution.
  • Not surprising... (Score:5, Informative)

    by tktk ( 540564 ) on Friday July 29, 2005 @03:15AM (#13192827)
    Everyone's going down this year because buyers are all focused on the next gen. stuff.

    If you look for some hard numbers, it means that Nintendo only got about 3.75 billion yen in profit this quarter.

    Sony's also annouced results today. Their game division finished the quarter with an operating loss of 5.9 billion yen. I don't know about Microsoft game division but I'm pretty sure they're not making money.

    Nintendo execs. might not be dancing back in the boardroom, but I think they're happier than Sony and Microsoft.

    • Re:Not surprising... (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Dobeln ( 853794 )
      Even more importantly, the *producers* are all focused on next-gen stuff right now. My guess is all those next-gen development costs (that aren't generating one iota of profit at the moment...) are really eating in to profit margins.
  • Hmmmm (Score:4, Funny)

    by Dunbal ( 464142 ) on Friday July 29, 2005 @03:26AM (#13192858)
    The drop in sales must be due to.... piracy... oh, wait..
    • Seriously this has always been something that has annoyed me about the Gamecube. It was a long time before a modchip came out for it and until that time it was excedingly difficult to pirate games. Software companies have always said that piracy raises the price of games, however there was zero piracy on the gamecube and the games are the same price as Xbox or PS2 titles. I believe if they had made their games significantly (maybe $20) cheaper they might be in a better position.
      • If you buy a good game, it's actually worth the ~$50 spent, in my opinion. Some ones I suggest looking at for the Gamecube are Tales of Symphonia, Baten Kaitos, Metroid Prime (both), and some of the old staples - Super Smash Bros., Mario Kart, etc. Paper Mario is pretty damn fun too. =)
    • Piracy is actually quite a problem for the GBA software, take a look at this:
      http://www.supercard.cn/eng/index.htm [supercard.cn]

      With this little card reader, and download game ROMS on the web, you can play most GBA games without actually buying the games. This must hurt Nintendo quite a bit.
  • The previous quarter? A year ago? Ten years ago? When speaking of relative changes, without the original baseline, the figures are meaningless.

    It isn't in TFA, it isn't in the posting. So it comes across like a beg for pity and/or purchases.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 29, 2005 @03:45AM (#13192908)
    More half ass stuff from 1up.They post what they want,so they can bash who they want.

    Sony=52Million in the Red
    "Sony's game unit, which makes the PlayStation 2 and PlayStation Portable gaming consoles, saw a 64 percent sales increase to 105.4 billion yen ($941.1 million). But the division also booked a 5.9 billion yen ($52.7 million) operating loss due to marketing and research expenses. That loss widened from 2.9 billion yen the previous year.

    Shipments of the PSP, which went on sale late last year in Japan and earlier this year in the United States, totaled 2.09 million worldwide, while PS2 sales rose nearly fivefold to 3.53 million units. "

    http://www.forbes.com/associatedpress/feeds/ap/200 5/07/28/ap2162457.html [forbes.com]

    Microsoft=178 Million in the red..
    "A 22 percent spike in Xbox sales narrowed the company's losses in its home and entertainment division to $179 million, compared to $340 million a year ago.

    "I think that, to some degree, validates Microsoft's business model in getting into the console space in the first place," Rosoff said. "Microsoft is selling more games and fewer consoles, and that's really the business model. They acknowledged it would be expensive to get a foothold in the market."

    http://www.forbes.com/associatedpress/feeds/ap/200 5/07/22/ap2152617.html [forbes.com]

    Nintendo=In the black with a thing called PROFIT
    Read there returns here.
    http://www.nintendo.com/corp/annual_report.jsp [nintendo.com]

    Nintendo is not going to be closing up anytime soon.They have made a big profit in seven of the past 8 quarters.Barly red in the 8 to make any diff for the year, which was deep into the black.

    Sony has been hit and miss.There game part of there company has been one of the few things making any money, even tho they have to sell 2-3 times as much as nintendo to make even close to same profit.

    Microsoft has only had one quater of profit sense the xbox has come out, if it wasn't because they have a big company to back it up, it would have been canned a long time ago.
    • by SirSlud ( 67381 ) on Friday July 29, 2005 @04:18AM (#13192978) Homepage
      The whole industry is drinking this Koolaid.

      I own a Gamecube. I own 15 games. Many crossplatform (and better looking than the PS2 ports, I might add.)

      RE4? Check. Both primes? Check. GTA? Loved Vice City for the PC, but SA was really not worth it. Not much new, worse missions (less driving, what the hell. Edgy content doth not a replayable game make.) I bought the PS2 for Burnout 3, and so far, thats the only thing thats been worth it. I regret buying the PS2.

      I really don't care at this point. Let the naysayers keep coming, but so far, the PS and the Xbox have just been expensive adventures in getting brand names beside your television.

      My Gamecube has repaid itself over and over and over in terms of the amount of time I've spend in first and second party games.

      Smash bros, Pikman, Eternal Darkness, Wind Waker, Ikagura ...

      And I'm capable of dissing first party GC games; Sunshine sucked, and Mario Kart just didn't have what it takes. I still think for the connaiseur gamer, Nintendo will continue having 'what it takes' for a long time to come, and their bottom line will reflect that.

      Sony and MS can absorb the losses, so whatever. I've been keeping tabs on the trailers, but holy yawn, Batman. They're all the same games, but with *crowds* this time! Whoa!
      • I bought the PS2 for Burnout 3, and so far, thats the only thing thats been worth it. I regret buying the PS2.

        Go find a copy of Ico. That should help. No, really...go.

        And yes, my Cube easily sees more play that the other two consoles...the only reason the Xbox ever came close was XBL. And yes, I think most reasonable people will agree that Sunshine blew.
      • "I regret buying the PS2."

        Have you tried God of War?

        I was almost regretting getting the PS2 (could have swapped it for something else), but God of War alone is worth it! I can't remember the last game I had as much fun with as I did with God of War. It has blood, gore, violence and boobs. The graphics are incredible. And, of course, the gameplay is awesome!

        If you regert buying the PS2, at least give GoW a chance. My guess is that you won't regret it.

        If GoW2 is released for PS3, I might just get my

      • I'll add a bit to the list of good games...

        Tales of Symphonia, Baten Kaitos, Paper Mario... Soul Calibur II is pretty good, too, and Link is better than the other 'exclusive' characters, in my mind.

        Mario Kart is pretty fun, if you're going for multiplayer. The single player is ok, but not *that* much fun.
    • That's a fair point, though in balance I'd have to suggest that Sony are very likely happy to sustain a $50 million loss to subsidise $100 million in extra profit from their tv, hi-fi, and other associated departments, all of whom benefit in the long run from the 'console wars', especially since they have their own runner in the race...
  • till Netcraft confirms it.
  • Not quite so bad (Score:5, Informative)

    by Bigthecat ( 678093 ) on Friday July 29, 2005 @03:59AM (#13192936)
    From a far more informing Gamespot article here [gamespot.com]
     
      "It also can't be understated that Nintendo saw a profit in its last quarter. By comparison, Sony Computer Entertainment today reported a quarterly loss of 5.9 billion yen ($52.6 million). Last week, Microsoft's Home and Entertainment division, which makes the Xbox, said it lost $179 million during its last quarter.
    I'd take a profit over a loss any day of the week. It's also the first time Sony has ever had two back-to-back losses.
  • ...are the problem Nintendo has. Seriously.

    I'm not a fan of any of their money-spinning franchises. I don't really like Mario since it went 3D. Never really liked Zelda. I don't "get" Metroid, I can recognise some of its goodness, but I don't enjoy it. Even their few exclusives don't really float my boat (Resident Evil? No thanks!).

    Whether good or bad, PS2 has the breadth and depth of range that the Gamecube could only dream of. Whether you like sports games, driving games, beat 'em ups, survival horrors, s
    • > Ah well. Maybe Revolution will have more for general gamers like me... :/

      No it won't. Nintendo will continue making consoles and games for gamers, while Sony and MS will cater to people who consider only wanting 2 or 3 games for a console justifies the purchase of one.

      Jesus dude, you're going to drive them out of business, if you say you like the console, pick up more games because they're selling those to you at a loss!!!
      • No it won't. Nintendo will continue making consoles and games for gamers, while Sony and MS will cater to people who consider only wanting 2 or 3 games for a console justifies the purchase of one.

        Jesus dude, you're going to drive them out of business, if you say you like the console, pick up more games because they're selling those to you at a loss!!!


        I love games. I am a gamer, and have been for about 20 years. I have many games on many consoles, and on my PC. I am by no means a 'casual' gamer, I quite like
    • "Whether good or bad, PS2 has the breadth and depth of range that the Gamecube could only dream of."

      Yes, the breadth of... shooter clones. And survival-horror clones. And Final Fantasy-clones. And sports-game clones, and racing-game clones.

      And the depth of... sequels to clones.

      *yawn*

  • Just release another Smash Bros for the GC
  • When I first heard what the DS was (remember, it was a secretive thing for a while, much like the revolution is now) it just brought back into my mind this two-screen kick Nintendo has been on for several years. Its a cool idea, definetely, two screens to work with, one dedicated to stats, the other to gameplay. Or a screen to keep to yourself, whatever.

    Thing is though, Nintendo has never gotten it to take off, they had wanted to do it with the N64, but never got around to it. Did it with the GBA and Gam
  • Pokemon (Score:5, Funny)

    by Turn-X Alphonse ( 789240 ) on Friday July 29, 2005 @04:49AM (#13193048) Journal
    Time to release more Pokemon games, stat!

    Please STFU. Pokemon RPGs are a lot more indepth then people give them credit for. Each pokemon stats wise have hundreds of varients and tactics, far more then the latest FF menu slogging interactive movie.

    When you can tell me what EV, IVs and base stats are relating to pokemon and I might listen to you're opinion. Untill then you're taking cheap shots at a fantastic RPG series which happens to be easy enough to pick up and play it's marketed to kids.
  • More expensive games (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mattbee ( 17533 ) <matthew@bytemark.co.uk> on Friday July 29, 2005 @05:12AM (#13193107) Homepage
    As an owner of all three consoles and reasonably frequent game buyer (1 or 2 a month), I like the choice of being able to pick the best game on whatever platform... unfortunately when games come out on multiple platforms the GC always seems to be the more expensive version, and I'd be a fool to pick it after spending money on all the consoles just so I can get the best value :-) So for Price of Persia, XIII and more recently killer7, I went for the PS2 versions because, well, it they were all about £8 cheaper than the equivalent Gamecube edition.

    Does Nintendo not see the value in paring down their costs for non-exclusive titles, just so that their GC owners (and fans of their exclusives, Zelda, Mario, Pikmin etc.) can build up a library on their platform? As it stands I really don't own many GC games, but I do appreciate the big N's higher quality control (loading times? what loading times?) and would like to enjoy it a bit more often.

    Mind you, this is all from a cheapass who's bought maybe 4 games in the last 4 years actually *new*, and all the rest second hand :-)
  • Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday July 29, 2005 @06:07AM (#13193285)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by BinaryOpty ( 736955 ) on Friday July 29, 2005 @06:38AM (#13193368)
    More expansive article here [gamespot.com] If you read the article, it tells you "80% decline," but that's a lie. If you actually do the math, a 3.75 billion yen decline to 13.72 billion yen of operating profit is obviously not an 80% decline, and in fact what actually happened is a decline TO 80%. Likewise, they had a 14% drop in sales, netting 70.7 billion yen.

    Now, let's look at Sony and Microsoft's numbers (linked article last paragraph). Microsoft lost more money than Nintendo made in profit. Sony lost about a third as much as Microsoft, but they're still in the red! Where's the front page "Sony's losing money! So's Microsoft!" articles?!

    Good lord, no wonder why everyone thinks Nintendo's doomed: the media has it out for them! Why didn't they report on Sony or Microsoft's losses, let alone why didn't they check their numbers/headline/article before posting it?! Seriously, Nintendo has an uphill battle next generation, and it's mostly because the media puts them in a bad light like this.
    • Now, let's look at Sony and Microsoft's numbers (linked article last paragraph). Microsoft lost more money than Nintendo made in profit. Sony lost about a third as much as Microsoft, but they're still in the red! Where's the front page "Sony's losing money! So's Microsoft!" articles?!

      Irrelevant. What we are talking about here are the total-profits of the company. Nintendo's profits dropped 80%. And while both MS and Sony are having losses in their console-business, both are making lots of money overall. He

  • by EvilDonut ( 164879 ) on Friday July 29, 2005 @08:19AM (#13193691)
    While the article mentions the fall in profit, it completely fails to mention the fall in revenue, and that number is in no way insignificant.



    Nintendo's profit has dropped $120 million, while the revenue has dropped $102 million. While Nintendo's sales have dropped in the last quarter, that is not why their profits are going down. If you are going to use the argument that they aren't selling as much as they did last year then you should see a larger fall in revenue than profits as you take the unit production/marketing/logistics/etc. costs out of the total revenue costs, leaving you with profit.



    What was posted was a 1.2:1 decline for profit:revenue - something that is very bizarre to begin with. You should be seeing things like 0.5:1 decline if sales were the primary cause. Even if you get a 1:1 decline, you're sitting pretty as your investment/production/etc. capital is returning double what you invested. This 1.2:1 decline should indicate only 1 thing, Nintendo is spending more.

    They are gearing up for the next console generation, that is all.

  • Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday July 29, 2005 @10:08AM (#13194461)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

"Protozoa are small, and bacteria are small, but viruses are smaller than the both put together."

Working...