By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Slimebeast on 30 May 2008
Edit Thread
@bdbdbd 
@Plapius
.
Man, am I talking to deaf ears? You dont have have to go through the details of business management again. I don't dispute that. But you're missing the point. I'm talking about the topic of the OP: 
.
WHY IT IS FOR GAMERS INTERESTING TO LOOK AT REVENUE. AND WHY IS IT MOST OFTEN MORE INTERESTING/RELEVEANT TO BASE DISCUSSIONS/ANALYSIS ON REVENUE THAN PROFITS.
.
Change the perspective. 
.
How can I reach to you. Let me try this:
It's like taking pictures of reality.
.
* A report is released from Ubisoft/MS/EA/Sony/NPD/whoever.
* We analyze the numbers, try to draw conclusions - EVERYTHING RELATED TO THE PREMISE WHICH WE HAVE CHOSEN
(like similar to the ones that the OP asked; such as "will publisher X make games for this console?", "will there be a sequel?", "Is this brand big?", "will game Y be an AAA title?", "Will Sony compete with Nintendo next gen?", "will they make new IP?", "is this franchise a system seller? etc etc 
* the RELEVANCE is decided by OUR premise.
* our PERSPECTIVE is not the one of a shareholder/business leader.
.
.
bdbdbd said:


I'm not sure what was your Ford/BMW examples point. Ford creates more revenue? Or that Ford still exists despite making no profit? Or Ford is somehow doing better? The example is what Plaupius said. Ford uses its assets and investors (this counts in banks as credit companies) money.
The Ford/BMW example is a good example how stupid it is just to look at revenue, since revenue doesn't count for anything without the ability to make profit. Of course, it shows the potential, but it looks like Ford needs to focus (haha) on certain market segments, instead of trying to cater the full market. While Ford is the 3rd biggest car manufacturer and BMW is one of the smallest, BMW as a company, is financially much healthier.

Yes, yes, no.

Of course Ford as a company isn't doing "better" than BMW! Every business leader/shareholder would choose BMW. I picked the example easy so that you could see this.

You're missing the point.

Take a picture of reality. Just freeze time for a second and see what we got.

Ford is there.

BMW is there.

The PREMISE in that example would be discussion about cars. The PREMISE is not "will my shares go up? (well it can be technically, but it seldom is on a game sales related site).

I showed you, that Ford - despite showing 0 profit - can be more relevant to talk about than BMW thanks to it's revenue.

Revenue is a factor deeply connected to how relevant a gaming-related phenomenon is. I'm arguing that it's more relevant than profit. The PREMISE for discussion is set by US. Profit is also relevant, but I'm explaining why revenue, generally speaking, spawns a lot more analysis, disussions, speculations and whatnot among gamers on a site like this.

 

EDIT: frigging editing options, sometimes it adds double blank lines, sometimes you get none. WTF