foxtail said:
I see where you're going but it wouldn't work that way since Mojang wasn't a publicly traded company so you couldn't calculate with a revenue multiple. One reason I think Bloomberg shouldn't have used Nintendo to measure the Xbox brand value using multiples is because a large portion of Nintendo's revenue comes from it's handhelds and Xbox doesn't compete in that space. Again multiples are too simple. |
Well any "simplistic" calculation would give this kind of bizarre flaws... Why didn't Bloomberg gone for Sony Marketcap and made the same assumption, because that would also mix useless things... I quite believe they used a more positive number to put their analysis (and I'm not that far from believing 23B would be a fair price to pay on the whole Xbox brand) just said that it was obtuse to say Sony in whole is worth less than Xbox brand while PS brand is far more valueable than Xbox brand.
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."