The truth about Nintendo

[Zod95]

noname2200 said:

Apologies for this, as the rest of your post may be the most brilliant analysis in the history of internet forums, but I got this far and stopped, as I presume you led with one of your strongest points.

The above is laughably absurd. "Nintendo makes a bigger profit, therefore they must be milking the consumer!" is an accurate summary of the above argument, with no analysis provided to back it. The company wasn't profitable because it provided a cost-effective product which people were willing and able to pay money for, it's profitable because Nintendo is evil enough to turn a profit rather than subsidize unprofitable gaming consoles on the assumption that they can get enough money back later in royalties to make up for it. Moreover, the international corporations known as Microsoft and Sony run such obscene losses not due to incompetence or poor business decisions, but rather because they care about us, the gamers. I know that's true because Kevin Butler told me so.

I'm willing to wager that this whole thread is an elaborate joke, in which case I tip my hat to you sir. Now if you'll excuse me, I have a check to write to Microsoft: gotta pay off my debts, after all!

That's a misunderstanding of what the OP says. The OP only talks about numbers and therefore "assumes" that all companies are equal in cost-effective efforts, which may actually not be true once I guess big companies like Sony and Microsoft have a more professional structure and are more experienced at getting the same for less. I find it hard to believe that Nintendo would be more cost-effective than them. But the point is that the 1.1 section does not specify the reasons of such numbers, it's just a "cash-flow" analysis. And that's why it is the first section. The others go into more specific details in order to try to understand what happens to the money.

Regarding the "debts", like I said before, there's a very good reason why I put them within "". I think it's not hard to understand that.