227889
story
Comments: 150 +- Games: Xbox Division Posts Loss of $1.9 Billion on Friday July 20 2007, @11:47AM
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicxbox.gif); width:74px; height:56px;
xbox
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicbusiness.gif); width:64px; height:54px;
business
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicmoney.gif); width:84px; height:74px;
money
Just when reduced manufacturing costs were beginning to turn Microsoft's Xbox division around, the weight of the warranty guarantee came crashing down on the company. The Xbox division of Microsoft Entertainment posted a loss of $1.89 billion for the fiscal year. Overall the Entertainment division did well, as sales of the Zune, consoles, and Xbox titles helped push revenues higher. Just the same, as Next Generation reports: "The fourth quarter in the EDD was down, with operating losses increasing 183 percent to $1.2 billion, again due to the billion-dollar-plus warranty charge. Revenues dropped 10 percent from a year ago to $1.16 billion due specifically to 'decreased Xbox 360 console sales.' Microsoft shipped 700,000 consoles during the quarter compared to 1.8 million for the same period a year prior."
Related Stories
Xbox 360 To Profit Next Year, Says Bach 132 comments
Xbox Warranty To Cost $1 Billion, Customer Good Will 158 comments
We were happily married for eight months. Unfortunately, we were married
for four and a half years.
-- Nick Faldo
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.
This is clearly a sign. (Score:5, Funny)
seems being first isn't what's important (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:seems being first isn't what's important (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:seems being first isn't what's important (Score:5, Interesting)
Anyways, I have anecdotal evidence too.
At my college our "games club" has about 21 360 owners, 9 got theirs at launch (day 1 till late about December 05), 8 of them got their boxes at various times from February till around august 06, the other 3 got their boxes this year.
2 people who got theirs early on (1st run, maybe the second run) have had theirs break. The ones who bought their boxes later on, all but one poor bastard has sent there back, most of them more than once, always the 3 rings of death issue. 4 of them got it back and sold their boxes in disgust. The first problems started happening in july of 06 for our little group.
Not to mention the fact that I constantly hear see online "My launch box is still just chuggin away." or things to that effect.
I'm just finding it funny. One guy in our group is convinced it is something to do with the Solder used and RoHS compliance. I think its a possible reason, but MS and its manufactures should ahve had plenty of time to solve the problem.
Parent
Re:seems being first isn't what's important (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:seems being first isn't what's important (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Hey now! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Lots of Numbers (Score:4, Interesting)
Would someone care to explain how all this accounting mumbo-jumbo translates to "Overall the Entertainment division did well, as sales of the Zune, consoles, and Xbox titles helped push revenues higher?"
I know businesses have to do this song-and-dance for shareholders and the IRS and all. It's also quite clear that posting a $1 billion loss on the warranties now does not mean MS has actually spent or will ever actually spend $1 billion on their replacement plan. There's a lot of fancy numbers being tossed around and frankly I don't know which ones represent cash and which ones represent accounting magic.
So why not some of your accountants out there answer me this very simple question: based on how much real, actual money MS has spent, over the life of the XBox and the XBox360, on getting into the console business, and based on how much real, actual money they've earned by being in the console business, has the total "console project" broken even yet?
Re:Lots of Numbers (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it's adorable that you think those are two different things.
-Peter
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
This surprises me a bit... as I've never seen one of the things, and hardly ever see an ad for one.
Anybody here ever buy a Zune?
Re:Lots of Numbers (Score:4, Insightful)
I think MS knows that it can't really overcome the iPod at this point, but if it doesn't advertise them (or advertises very selectively), people will buy them and they'll not have to spend huge gobs of money trying to beat Apple's advertising.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Would someone care to explain how all this accounting mumbo-jumbo translates to "Overall the Entertainment division did well, as sales of the Zune, consoles, and Xbox titles helped push revenues higher?"
It's Zonk-atorializing in action.
The 360 warranty fiasco was approximated at a $1 billion loss, just from following the link he listed, but now we see:
1) A nearly $2 billion division loss for the quarter.
2) Revenues dropping 10%
3) Xbox 360 sales less than half the level they were a year ago
Clearly this leads to "Overall the Entertainment division did well", while Sony was ripped apart for its $2 billion loss.
I own all three consoles and don't take a particular side, but there's a lot of spin in this post.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Microsoft's SEC filing [edgar-online.com] says--
Re:Lots of Numbers (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, it's more complex than that. By earmarking the money now, Microsoft is avoiding the problem impacting future returns. i.e. It would suck if in 2 years Microsoft is going gangbuster on sales, but its quarterly earnings show a loss thanks to the extended warranty two years ago. By doing it this way, Microsoft gets the loss out of the way in a single quarter, thus providing themselves and investors with a better understanding of how they're doing in the future.
Accounts payable vs. receivable may seem like the best accounting method, but in many cases it's not. Payables vs. Receivables is always in a state of flux, so you tend to try and account for known quantities instead. To a certain degree you do this yourself (or at least SHOULD be doing this!) when you record checks you made out in your checkbook. The balance reflected in your checkbook is entirely on paper and does not necessarily represent the actual contents of your account at any given point in time. The more checks you make out, the less likely the two sources are to be in sync. Which isn't really a problem as at the end of the day you still have the same amounts of money going in and out.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That 8.4 billion comes from:
By 2005 the Xbox had lost $4 billion.
(http://www.forbes.com/home/technology/2005/09/12/ microsoft-management-software_cz_vm_0913microsoft. html)
In 2005 the entertainment division lost 391 million.
(http
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Caught between a Brick and Red Rings of Death (Score:2, Insightful)
Clearly a Sign (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Think of it this way; if Microsoft was some other company and the X Box 360 was a research project, wouldn't the capitalistic system have to be working for them to sink $2 Billion into it in hopes of a return?
Just cause you hate M$, don't try and blame larger forces (the government, capitalism, wha
Re: (Score:2)
That's misleading... (Score:5, Informative)
Take for instance a stock I am following. BRLC (They sell LCD TV's Olevia brand). The company last year allocated $16 million for warranties; a cost for them. But they only used $4 million in warranties. Thus, the following year they posted a $12 million rollover profit. If XBOX quality control is better than expected, a good chunk of MSFT's $1 billion will go back into their own pockets. And will help them boost earnings.
Now you know why Moore left... (Score:2)
The ability of high-level execs to get their bonuses (most of the time a bigger number than their salaries) is tied to the performance of their respective divisions.
Case closed.
Bizzare (Score:2, Insightful)
It's shocking... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:New consoles suck (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:New Markets (Score:5, Insightful)
You're completely right, and as such this would be a complete non-story except that this has been going on for six years. At what point does it stop being short-sighted to question repeated 9+ figure (before the decimal) quarterly losses on a product? Could any company other than Microsoft have afforded to maintain "loss leader" status for so long? Could any company have avoided a lawsuit by their competitors over it for this long? The story goes out of the way to make it look like it's the warranty thing that is pushing them into the red, but last I checked $1.1 billion was $700 million dollars less than $1.8 billion... So they would have been eating a $700 million dollar loss even without the warranty thing. That's still a $350 loss per console even after accounting for the "profit" on the high attach rate.
Parent
Oops... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:New Markets (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:New Markets (Score:4, Interesting)
How is the 360 breaking into a new market? They broke into the market with the original Xbox. The 360 is supposed to be a mature platform at this point - Xbox Live ability, huge games library, multimedia features. The fact that not only did they ship fewer consoles than last year and lost money while doing so definitely can't be excused by them "breaking into the market." Instead, it looks like in their rush to dominate they seemed to favor quantity over quality, and even lost on the quantity part.
The funny part is that the criticism of the PS3 is that it's a high price for a console. And yet, it's a damn good piece of hardware. So I guess you get what you pay for?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Which is exactly what they're in the process of doing. This division has lost billions and never made a profit. Which means, of course, everything from the original XBox to the Zune is sold at a loss and paid for by Vista and Office profits. Leveraging one monopoly to create another is conceptually illegal, but in practicality there's nothing
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Forgive my ignorance as I've only taken an intro economics class. I thought as a convicted monopoly, Microsoft has more rules imposed upon them than other companies. They've made billions upon billions of dollars with their Operating System and Office products. Now with that money and monopoly in one market, they seem to be using predatory pricing [wikipedia.org] to capture a new one. They have the ability to lose more money than their competitors, to the point where they may even knock a competitor out of the game (So
Re:New Markets (Score:5, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_leader [wikipedia.org]
Is what is being done. Predatory pricing is an established market power temporarily reducing their prices to loss levels to keep out competition. The difference here is that the fresh competition is taking loss levels first, in order to become competitive, which is good for the market overall(but risky for the company doing so, which is what I mean by those corpses).
And even with MS's huge pockets propelling them to #1 early this generation, it looks like Nintendo will be passing them by the end of the year, and leaving them in the dust by the end of the generation, and the company has never adopted a loss-lead strategy.
With 3 major players, gamers have it pretty good actually with the increased competition. The console gaming industry already has high levels of product differentiation which is sort of like a partial monopoly in that a company is granted some level of market power due to idiosyncracies of their product. You miiight be able to substitute between a PS3 and an Xbox360, but substituting to or from a Wii is much harder to justify. The three are not directly equivalent because of product differentiation, so they are able to wield power due to this inelasticity.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Let's not get ahead of ourselves. The PS3 is actually selling quite well if you treat the Wii as an outlier. It's selling better than I expected it to, given the price point.
It always takes a year or so before a new console gets its first generation of games that actually know how to use the hardware. So why don't we give it another year before we write the PS3 off as a disaster.
Re:New Markets (Score:4, Informative)
The PS3 is selling about the same as the X360 if you align the launch dates. [vgchartz.com]
The PS2 (how many years old is that now? Seven?) is selling the same as the X360 each week. [vgchartz.com] In other words, if you think thtat MS is about to knock Sony out of the market, you must be speaking from the far future or coming from a different dimension or something. The PS3 is not a disaster. It's not the success Sony wanted it to be, but if you think the X360 is doing great, then the PS3 is right behind it.
Parent
Re:New Markets (Score:5, Insightful)
As others have said, that excuse may have worked in 2002. It's no longer very convincing in 2007.
Video games were a new market for Sony in 1990. Didn't take them nearly that long to start turning a profit.
Additionally, reporting like this just promotes the same short sighted point of view of earnings and stock performance that we deride Enron execs for.
We deride Enron for breaking the law. Not for a "short sighted view of earnings."
I don't know how Gates and and Co. view the current performance of the 360, but I'm sure they are pleased that they've held their own against the PS3 so far, primarily because Nintendo is eating Sony's lunch.
At some point, the idea is to make money. It's not a popularity contest. If that were MS's goal, it certainly would be "short sighted" and worthy of derision. Presumably, they are in business to make money, not just so they can waggle their fingers and say "nyah nyah!" at Sony.
So far, their Xbox division has been run like a charity. And it's not getting any better. They've been saying they're on the verge of turning a profit for years now, and they still say it. Well, guess what? A $1.89 billion loss is not due to a $1.1 billion charge. Where's the extra $800 million coming from? Those are real and continuing losses outside of the reliability problems. Additionally, sales of the system are way down from a year ago, they've missed their shipping targets by 400,000 systems, and revenue at the division is down a commiserate amount.
Combine that with the reassignment of J Allard and the resignation of Peter Moore, and it's all starting to look a bit like a ship that, if it's not sinking, is at least taking on water and listing badly.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re:New Markets (Score:5, Informative)
But a few years back Sony released the PS2/DVR combo device called the PSX, but it wasn't released in NTSC U/C territory.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
That being said, except for potential warranty costs, current 360's are sold at cost or at a slight profit. They haven't been under cost for a few months now, a little more tha
Re:Wait... (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)