By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
crissindahouse on 27 October 2011
Edit Thread
padib said:
leatherhat said:
padib said:
leatherhat said:
maximus22 said:
Wow if true! I find it hard to believe that Ninty was never in the red during the 64 or Gamecube eras. But if so then kudos.


They always sold for a profit

They still need to cover R&D, there isn't just cost. Thankfully Pokemon sold in enough numbers to save the impending death Nintendo was facing during those days.

I'm sure the GC and 64 more than recouped the R&D costs

Then add management overhead. You don't make profit over console sales, especially not on home consoles. You make it off software or handheld profits. I don't see GC and 64 being money-makers. And from what I learnt lately the GC was selling at a loss when it was released. Of course over the span of time a margin gets created but I doubt it being one to significantly recover R&D and overheads...

@Data: With 32.92 Mil (N64) and 21.75 Mil (GC) over the span of 10 years... that gives roughly 500K yearly spread through (poor metric but we'll work with it). Assuming say a 50$ margin at best, that's 25Mil yearly. Seems miniscule in front of numbers like 500Mil (at worst). Compare that to values like 14Mil yearly on a nearly annual basis -> http://gamrreview.vgchartz.com/browse.php?name=pokemon (Orange square for total sales).

Assuming a low margin of 20$ per game, that's 280Mil yearly just on Pukemon.


huhhh?