Ninsect said:
czecherychestnut said:
S.Peelman said:
Uhm, maybe I'm overlooking something and being stupid, but...
I don't think it says that.
It said revenue and cost of revenue increased by an amount, not what amount it increased to. Wouldn't we need to know from what number both increased to come to any sort of conclusion?
EDIT: Yeah, Ka-Pi sort of Ninja'd this observation.
|
We can say that XB1 cost MS $400 million, what we can't say is that the Xbox Platform as a whole lost money (a mistake I made before) because we don't have the absolute amounts. Total revenue could still be higher than the cost of revenue (making them profitable) but if the cost of revenue has increased faster than total revenue when the only change has been the release of the XB1, then it can be inferred that the XB1 lost MS $400 million, versus if it hadn't been released.
|
Eh, but we do have the absolute numbers.
Cost of revenue was 5B while revenue was 6.7B (1.7B + 1.7B/0.34). Yep, they didn't lose money lol
|
Oops, you are correct! Glossed over the percentage figures.
