I mean if you just want to compare the gaming divisions then this is a comparison between Nintendo's Operating Income and Sony's Game and Network Services Operating Income. Of course the difference between Sony and Nintendo is that one is a games company and the other has many different segments and therefore higher operating costs. 

I'm not sure why many people compare lifetime profit. Comparing cash flow is a better metric. 

http://i.imgur.com/9qKN01O.png

Tnx.

Good thing they sold the Mariners......otherwise they wouldnt have made anything profit wise

Nonsense, even without selling Marines they would have profit of around $500m.

I think it would be $264 million operating profit for fiscal year ending 2017, which is basically the profit generated from their main game business (so minus the Mariners sale). I could be wrong though I didn't take a hard look at their financials this year yet. 

http://www.theverge.com/2017/4/27/15447342/nintendo-switch-sales-forecast-earnings-2016

They kinda got screwed on Pokemon Go by letting Niantic publish it and getting cut out of the majority of its profits. 

EDIT: Yeah looks like they sold the Mariners for $660 million or so. So 660 (Mariners) + 264 (Game Division) = $924 million incoming profit. 

Net profit would be around $500m. Nintendo bought Marines in 1992. for $125m and sell them last year for $660m while they retain 10% of stocks, so they maid profit of around $400-450m with inflation. Nintendo made great investment with Marines purchase.

Yes, but yeah the vast majority of their profit is from the Mariners this year, that part is true. The game division made $264 million. 

On the positive side it looks like Switch is a hit, so they should have a good sales drive in 2017 to get back to better operating profit. 

Net profit is never really a good way to look at the health of a company because it can be skewed by factors like sales of factories, business equipment, or in this case a baseball team. Operating profit is what you want to look at because that tells you how well the company is doing with their actual main business. 

This also does show though that the people who thought Nintendo could go another year just off 3DS + Wii U were fucking crazy, lol. They likely would have made little to no profit this year without the Switch launch + NES Classic. 

Like wrote, Marines made them profit of around $400-450m profit this year, so yes, Nintendo would still made profit of around $500m even without Marines.

Pretty sure you are wrong there. 

It's $661 for the Mariners sale, this is accounted for as a complete profit total actually, as it is net funds coming in. You don't subtract the original price from 1992, that was something for the 1992 financials. 

Technically actually I believe it was Yamauchi's personal money that purchased the Mariners to begin with, it wasn't taken out from Nintendo's company assets, I think they may have used the Nintendo of America branch in the purchase because at the time there was a big bruhaha over a Japanese businessman taking over an American baseball team. Ownership of the company was transferred over to Nintendo of America towards the end of Mr. Yamauchi's life in prepartion for his passing. 

So it's $661 for the Mariners (which basically is like a gift from Mr. Yamauchi) + Nintendo's operating profit from the game business, which is only $264 million. You can't really call that a $500 million profit minus the Mariners. 

This actually a textbook example of why companies are forced to disclose operating profit and net profit seperately, because companies would easily be able to lie/mislead about their profitability in situations just like this. 

$661 from the Mariners sale. So, $259M in profit. Of course a bunch of that came from Pokemon Go, which doesn't leave much for the core gaming business.