A portable version would crush 3 m LTD. I think your estimate of 3 million is highly, highly unlikely too ... AC on Wii only sold 3.38 million with 5x+ the userbase the Wii U. I think about 2 million LTD is much more likely. 

There's nothing you can post to indicate Animal Crossing will be on Wii U. The only comment from the game's producer is above and it's highly ambigious. 

It hasn't been announced by Nintendo, and IMO it won't be. But lets see. 

The way I see it, what's the big deal anyway? Anyone who has a Wii U is likely a hardcore Nintendo fan is going to buy the next Nintendo portable/Fusion platform, so what difference does it really make? You'll be playing the game either way. It's smarter for Nintendo to get the benefit of it being a launch window title and more crucial to their future success. 

You mean the way many thought MK8 selling 3m at the point wouldn't be possible as well? Please don't give me me the usual userbase arguments that have fallen apart previously before, AC would easily hit 3m LT that's the average for the console versions, also AC on Wii sold 4.61m.

Your logic in the last part of your post highlights why you're not CEO of a platform holder nor ever will be, SEGA used that exact logic with their hardware and even abandoned the Saturn and moved titles over, they found that in the long term it's a bad idea as consumer question the commitment to the platform. Like it or not you don't abandon the present because under your logic all the games coming out this year should be moved to the next platform.

Animal Crossing is way more succesful than Zelda in handhelds, but in home consoles, Zelda is the player's choice.

We'll see who's right, if its at E3 on Wii U then so be it, but I have a feeling it won't be for Wii U. 3-4 million is small potatoes, it would easily double that as a launch title for the new system (especially because it would be an evergreen seller rising with the userbase). 

The Wii U is nothing like the Saturn either. It's more comparable to the XBox (the original), which MS supported from 2001-2005 and was succeeded by the XBox 360 that had no trouble selling and no one complained about that at all. So that whole "b ... but, Sega!" arguement can just stay flushed down the toilet. When Nintendo makes a Nintendo CD, a Nintendo 32X, and a Nintendo Saturn in a three year stretch and doesn't properly support any of them, then you would have a point there. 

Most people really only got their NES in North America after 1987, which means the SNES succeeded the NES in most people's eyes in 3-4 years too. That didn't bother anyone either. 

Except the NES came out in 85 in the west which still means it was on the market for 5-6 years, this argument of people not getting it at launch to try and back your point is hilariously flawed, for Japan the NES was out in 83 so by the time the SNES arrived it was on the market for a total of 7-8 years, MS cut the original Xbox and then began paying incentives for third parties to develop for the 360 as well as selling the console at a massive loss to get it to sell well and in the end it still finished third, do you really think Nintendo can take the same approach? Even Sony struggled to take similar losses and they're a big electronic company, it's a broken logic you're suggesting there as it would relegate the Wii U to being like the Saturn hence the comparison.

3-4m isn't small potatoes when you don't over inflate your budget and you're efficient in development which is why the first party have good returns at those sales, want to know why the logic is even further flawed why miss out on 3-4m sales on the current platform? The next platform's game is going to get that as well so why skip 3-4m this gen it would be like someone saying Zelda should skip a gen to do better in the next.

Considering the demographics of the Wii U audience, Animal Crossing U outselling Zelda U is about as likely as Bloodborne outselling this year's COD on PS4.

I'm not in the "Animal Crossing is definitely coming to Wii U" camp, because I agree with your broader point that Nintendo would be smarter to hold off certain IP for new hardware; particularly given the strain on internal development resources long-term Wii U support would necessitate.

However, I do think you've read this statement wrong. It sounds to me like the key point is that Animal Crossing as a home console experience has to be very different to the portable experience. They weren't able to do that with the Wii version, but they might be able to on Wii U or a future console. In this context, I don't think he means a future portable, he's suggesting that if Animal Crossing comes to either Wii U or a home console in future, it will need to be a different experience to both previous portable and home versions of Animal Crossing. 

Animal Crossing on the Wii U would have to do something that the 3DS can't in order to get the handheld buyers to invest. Just like who Monster Hunter does ok on consoles but gets its best sales on portables, Animal Crossing at this point is likely in a similar boat.

And it is very difficult to improve on a formula like Animal Crossing to make one version vastly superior while leaving room to grow in the next eventual installment.

It doesn't seem very likely to me! Mostly because AC games don't sell as well on consoles as they do on handhelds!