By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
fordy on 10 January 2014
Edit Thread
Yakuzaice said:
fordy said:

Before you embarass yourself further, I urge you to backtrack through this thread , right to where I was mentioning confusion amongst new members and VGC figures in...you guess it.....2007. 

Who the hell is talking about 2013? I take it you pulled that year out of your arse for some reason, right?

This is gold....they "purposefully put extra stock...." ......yeah? Where, exactly? Care to complete that first part of the sentence? Did Microsoft rock up at stores with boxes of consoles and force them to take them? You do realised that "shipped" figures only apply once the consoles have been.....shipped, right? If there's a discrepancy between the shipped and sold figures, then you might be on to something, but if Microsoft is packing their own warehouses with stock (ie not "shipped"), then you're only clutching at straws...

To add to this, I never saw many misleading figures investors to cover up the fact that they fucked up (see: Shipped numbers on investment reports, "Total PlayStation family shipped" figures to make the dismal PS3 figures look better). It's easy to tell when a fuckup is being sugarcoated in the business/investment world.

He's talking about the Oct-Dec 2006 quarter.  Microsoft overshipped in order to hit 10 million.  There was a large shipped/sold gap at the end of the year.  It resulted in the Jan-Mar and Apr-Jun quarters being the lowest shipping by far for the 360.  It is most evident in that Jan-Mar quarter.  The next worse of the eight Jan-Mar quarters that the 360 has seen was 160% higher.

As for your last paragraph, how exactly were they misleading investors by publishing shipped numbers in their financial reports?  All three console manufacturers put shipped numbers in those reports.  They didn't start lumping together PS3/PS2 and PSP/PSV shimpent numbers until the first quarter of the 2012 Fiscal Year.  Pretty sure that was to make the dismal Vita numbers look better, not the PS3 (which was the top shipping home console the previous quarter)

I honestly don't give a shit about what Microsoft do, as long as the figures here reflect retail sales, which certainly  got a lot less scrutiny at the time than the new Sony members in 2007 demanding VGC use Sony's shipped number. Seriously, its almost like you and this guy I replied to think I'm going to get all riled up if you say something about Microsoft. Let me tell you two things:

1. The initial post of mine was in regards to the continuation of shipping vs sold, which WAS a problem here in 2007, and the question was in regards to if this is still a factor. What does "Microsft shipped lots too at the time", have to do with it? Are you saying two wrongs make a right?

2.Cut out the "team mentality" bullshit. It doesn't work on me. Not only is it sickening to read, it's a plague on the forums themselves and makes you look like you cannot build a logical argument, rather you'd attempt the Pathos argument of reasoning.

If the "Playstation family" point had any relevance to the main point that I was originally making, then I'd do a search and show you that it has indeed happened in earlier times, when Sony needed PS2 figures to make their PS3 figures not seem like a total disaster, but I'm not going to bother with it. Why? Because this has already deviated way too far from the original question, thanks to members of the Sony Inquisition....