By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
bonzobanana said:
eva01beserk said:

The point of what I said is that MS did give billions away in hopes of probable future returns in investments. AT no point am I saying the future cant be all digital, or even streaming, which I would hate. WHat Im saying is that no company will give a product for almost free and take a huge loss just to increase the intallbase. That is just crazy. Investors would not allow that.

I've not read here anyone that has suggested almost free, I certainly didn't I wrote subsidized but yes many companies will play the long game running at a small profit or loss in order to ensure they are the major player in the future where very large profits will be available. Companies like Tesla are in no way profitable today but as it establishes market share in the long term it will become profitable which investors and creditors have accepted.

Bonzo, not all companies operates on the profit philosophy... like Amazon. All that is generated is reinvested on the company (that is if they are even operating at any profit margin on the products)... they work on growing the company value and investors making their money this way.



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."