PSN Alone Generated More Revenue Than The Entirety of Nintendo, MicroSoft's Entire Gaming Division!

[outlawauron]

Biggerboat1 said:

pokoko said:

 

It's not pointless in any measure of the word.  Revenue is very important--that's why it gets reported and why it gets talked about so much.  If Sony called it a day and just closed up shop after giving a quarterly report, then you'd be right, but that's not what's going to happen.  Revenue is the ability to keep moving forward, which is why it often means more to observers than margins.  Many of the most prominent companies in the world got that way by prioritizing revenue.  It's a measure of scope and a window on potential.  

Revenue, on it's own doesn't tell us anywhere near enough to draw a meaningful conclusion - within the context of this forum anyway.

I'm sure on the forums of The Economist where people have a deep understanding of particular companies / trends / business models, they could draw meaningful conclusions, though they'd still want to see how that translated to profit - but this forum is not that. I mean it's evident that a lot here don't even understand the distinction between revenue & profit...

You can have companies with large revenues that are healthy & other's that are haemorrhaging money...

Bottom line, I think it's asinine to compare revenue of a digital store front to a hardware/software company - don't you? And if you don't agree, can you explain why?

The point is pretty obvious. It's to show the change in the industry, why companies are acting the way they are (ie. why Nintendo is making you pay for online pay), and how truly massive the digital marketplace has become. All of that information is very important to investors because it shows how well they're doing in one of the very few growing game markets.