MICROSOFT results Q4 and Full Year earnings. Huge.

[DonFerrari]

Azzanation said:

DonFerrari said:

1) Goes in the department, we don't know how much profit was made since we don't know the costs. Also we don't know how much of the subs revenue was eaten by other costs on the department (even if subsiding the HW that is what is needed to sell the subs, that is basically cost of making business)

2) I don't know, do you? But they release the P&L of the company right? How many major departments are there? And what does it have to do with this discussion?

3) Who said it is ok? It is just out of topic, or do you want to enumerate every company that do or don't?

4) Please provide source X360 was more profitable. Because we do have the numbers for Playstation department and even if not having exact numbers for profit or loss of PS3 we can get a good enough estimative, compared to Xbox never disclosed numbers.

5) Pointless question since you were already proved that the subs are related to the HW sold. But please provide how many of the 30M XBL subs are gold.

Your points are all your own assumptions without any evidence used to defend MS not releasing their numbers and them you use the lack of numbers to affirm it is good. Funny enough Ludicrous Speed have no issue with that.

The funny thing is you keep asking questions and demanding sources, but fail to answer. Is that a tactic to deviate?

So you are saying that the paid memberships didn't profit Xbox and MS? Even posting a link from Forbes which I will do again for you.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/velocity/2010/06/17/microsofts-xbox-live-is-making-boatloads-on-virtual-goods/#3f02a7442720  

The reason I use Blizzard as a prime example here is because even if you are a brand that makes a boat load of money, they don't have to announce it to the world, in this case, Subscriptions which both Blizzard and MS do and have the same method in not telling the world. 

Its pretty obvious the 360 was more profitable. Lets start with these examples.

1) X360 was cheaper to produce and in RnD.

     PS3 cost $805 to build compared to the 360s $470.

2) X360 sold more life time SW and digital content.

    Software PS3 - 974.58m / X360 - 1,007,71m

     Tie Ratio PS3 - 11.21 / X360 - 11.74  

3) X360 had 7+ years of paid up members of free cash flow. PS3 had no income from other alternatives for there console.

4) $1.25b estimated from Fordes annually is a crap ton of money to not only cover the 360s RnD costs estimated to be at 3.5b but also the Red Ring of Death costs estimated at $1.5b. 10+ years of paid members has easily covered these expenses and we don't need MS to tell us this. Much like we don't need Blizzard to tell us there making money on World of Warcraft. Obvious is obvious.

5) Your Logic - PS3 HW sold 86.90m Units - X360 HW sold 85.80m Units. Guess PS3 wins and made more money because of HW sales. #DonFerrari

Tell me how you think the PS3 made more profit than the 360? I am very curious. Do you actually think PS3 made more money and is more successful because it sold more HW?

No I'm not saying Live isn't profitable. I'm saying we don't know how much, and how much Xbox department is profitable. Not sure where you got confused though.

Any publicaly traded company have to disclose their P&L as company. Blizzard doesn't have multiple big departments (MS does) so even if they release a corporate one you know it is related to gaming even if you can't say which individual game done it. But please show us how much Xbox profits or loses, can you dig through MS corporate release to get it? Can you separate every year what is xbox and what isn't on its department?

We aren't discussing Blizzard, we mentioned that we don't know the sales of Xbox, XBL Gold, 1st party titles, etc... you have gone left and right saying MS look at what is important to bring revenue and that they are reaping a lot of profit, but can't show the profit.

1) Those are estimate costs for release of the consoles (in the case of PS3 60Gb), not the average cost during the generation (which you don't have). Plus you have what 2 or 3 Billion in losses for RROD?

2) Yes Xbox sold a little more SW, but Sony have sold a lot more 1st party due to the higher number of releases. So revenue was probably close.

3) Xbox 360 had to pay for a lot of exclusives and timed exclusives, total amount we don't know what was and with more servers on XBL it costed more, but sure we can safely assume XBL brought more money than PSN. THe amount? No one know.

4) So you are using 10+ year of revenue for the estimate of Forbes for a window time, even including years Xbox 360 wasn't released or was substituted?

5) Your assumption.

You don't have the numbers for the profit of the Xbox, so even if your estimates are reasonable (in some areas they aren't) you can't say for certain that X360 was more profitable, even more because from all that is know neither was even profitable to begin.

I'll keep waiting for your sources on X1 profits, that HW sales of PS4 didn't brought subs at about 50% rate, number of XBL Gold currently, saying that you made a bogus comparison between PS+ subs and total XBL accounts.

And of course you can also reread the posts and replied to the things you ignored and preferred to change subject.