By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sales Discussion - Nintendo: We Are Responsible For 99% Of Game Industry Growth In 2008

Groucho said:

What is the point of this statement, actually? Raising potential stock prices for those so ignorant about the industry that they are vulnerable to this kind of crazy spin?

Wii mantra is the growth ( not take away share from competotors ). Nintendo is basicaly saying : " Have you seen ? We are growing while others growth is flat. Our business model  for Wii and DS is superior than the one traditionally aopted by the market in the last 20 years." 

 



 “In the entertainment business, there are only heaven and hell, and nothing in between and as soon as our customers bore of our products, we will crash.”  Hiroshi Yamauchi

TAG:  Like a Yamauchi pimp slap delivered by Il Maelstrom; serving it up with style.

Around the Network
bdbdbd said:
@Puffy: If Sony and M$ were flat individually and Nintendo up, then there's no spin.
If Sony was down, M$ up and Nintendo up, then there's a spin, since two instances contributed to the growth.

Of course, this is a pretty standard way of looking at it, since all the companies make the spin.

Problem is that the real battle is Nintendo business model against MS/Sony business model. DS/Wii vs PSP/Xbox360/PS3(/PC) so there isn't really a spin there only we don't know what happen precisely on single platforms.

 



 “In the entertainment business, there are only heaven and hell, and nothing in between and as soon as our customers bore of our products, we will crash.”  Hiroshi Yamauchi

TAG:  Like a Yamauchi pimp slap delivered by Il Maelstrom; serving it up with style.

So how long before nintendo pulls a Sony?



Cueil said:
So how long before nintendo pulls a Sony?

Funny how Sony has replace Sega in the last couple of years. Their fallen is spectacular.

I hope Iwata is a paranoid guy

 



 “In the entertainment business, there are only heaven and hell, and nothing in between and as soon as our customers bore of our products, we will crash.”  Hiroshi Yamauchi

TAG:  Like a Yamauchi pimp slap delivered by Il Maelstrom; serving it up with style.

celine said:
Cueil said:
So how long before nintendo pulls a Sony?

Funny how Sony has replace Sega in the last couple of years. Their fallen is spectacular.

I hope Iwata is a paranoid guy

 

 

 reggie has already made comments about nintendo being the most paranoid company in the world. not just because there at the top but because theve been in this position before and blew it.  it dont think itll be third party relations so in wonder what will get them this time?



 nintendo fanboy, but the good kind

proud soldier of nintopia

 

Around the Network
celine said:
bdbdbd said:
@Puffy: If Sony and M$ were flat individually and Nintendo up, then there's no spin.
If Sony was down, M$ up and Nintendo up, then there's a spin, since two instances contributed to the growth.

Of course, this is a pretty standard way of looking at it, since all the companies make the spin.

Problem is that the real battle is Nintendo business model against MS/Sony business model. DS/Wii vs PSP/Xbox360/PS3(/PC) so there isn't really a spin there only we don't know what happen precisely on single platforms.

 

 

This is the standard way the companies look at the market. "us" vs "them". Any company takes the same viewpoint.

Problem with the model is, that it takes the average instead of the individuals. For example if Sony had experienced negative growth of 1 billion and M$ and Nintendo had 1b each, both could show they accounted for 100% of the growth. Then again, i'm interested seeing the numbers in revenue because of the 360 pricecut, that definately cut down its revenue per unit sold (also, the relative number of games sold at budget  price account largely to the revenue too).



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.

bdbdbd said:

This is the standard way the companies look at the market. "us" vs "them". Any company takes the same viewpoint.

Problem with the model is, that it takes the average instead of the individuals. For example if Sony had experienced negative growth of 1 billion and M$ and Nintendo had 1b each, both could show they accounted for 100% of the growth. Then again, i'm interested seeing the numbers in revenue because of the 360 pricecut, that definately cut down its revenue per unit sold (also, the relative number of games sold at budget  price account largely to the revenue too).

I understand what you say but I think you miss the important point here.

Take the definition of "Revolution" :

 a fundamental change in the way of thinking about or visualizing something : a change of paradigm 

A common competition would be that one company try to be better than another one in the same contest. The current situation in the gaming industry is that one company decided that a change of the way of thinking was due because they believed that a safe, common and incremental approach was unfeasble in the long term.

In a common competition a company PR will try to spin that his company is better than the others but in a competition of different system/model of values who is part of one system will try to spin that his system is the right one whereas the other system is wrong and destined to failure.

In our case there is one company that has adopted a new way of thinking while other two company follow the common way of thinking. What Nintendo is affirming with those PR is that their ideological choice was the right one whereas the obsolete paradigm , adopted by the other two companies, is destined to failure or stagnation.



 “In the entertainment business, there are only heaven and hell, and nothing in between and as soon as our customers bore of our products, we will crash.”  Hiroshi Yamauchi

TAG:  Like a Yamauchi pimp slap delivered by Il Maelstrom; serving it up with style.

celine said:
bdbdbd said:

This is the standard way the companies look at the market. "us" vs "them". Any company takes the same viewpoint.

Problem with the model is, that it takes the average instead of the individuals. For example if Sony had experienced negative growth of 1 billion and M$ and Nintendo had 1b each, both could show they accounted for 100% of the growth. Then again, i'm interested seeing the numbers in revenue because of the 360 pricecut, that definately cut down its revenue per unit sold (also, the relative number of games sold at budget  price account largely to the revenue too).

I understand what you say but I think you miss the important point here.

 

Take the definition of "Revolution" :

 a fundamental change in the way of thinking about or visualizing something : a change of paradigm 

A common competition would be that one company try to be better than another one in the same contest. The current situation in the gaming industry is that one company decided that a change of the way of thinking was due because they believed that a safe, common and incremental approach was unfeasble in the long term.

In a common competition a company PR will try to spin that his company is better than the others but in a competition of different system/model of values who is part of one system will try to spin that his system is the right one whereas the other system is wrong and destined to failure.

In our case there is one company that has adopted a new way of thinking while other two company follow the common way of thinking. What Nintendo is affirming with those PR is that their ideological choice was the right one whereas the obsolete paradigm , adopted by the other two companies, is destined to failure or stagnation.

 

Yes i did understand what you were meaning in the first place and i agree to that. Nintendos PR so far has been in the light of their businessmodel anyway (which of course is the only thing that means anything to them). But looking at the market, which companies had success and which didn't, the set may change. In he end, in practise we are arguing about semantics, since no matter how do you want to look at it, Nintendo did contribute most to the growth.

 



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.

Huh? I'd fully expect Sony and MS to pull stunts like these (and they deliver every time) but this is a new and surprising low for Nintendo imo.
What the hell?
The next time someone mentions arrogance in the console industry, I think I might have to bring this up again. Jeez.



NJ5 said:
This statistic looks misleading to me... There could actually be two companies "responsible for 99% of the industry growth" if they're calculating the way I think they are.

Company A, B and C. In 2007 they sell 200, 100, 100. In 2008 company A goes out of business and they sell 0, 400, 400 (industry growth was 400).

Woah, both company B and C are responsible for 75% of the industry growth!

 

Great eye NJ5! I hadn't thought of that until you said it.