Xbox Head Phil Spencer Said "The Business isn't About Selling How Many Consoles "

[DonFerrari]

jason1637 said:

DonFerrari said:

MS hides it under 10 feet. But if we use a rule of thumbs with PS4 having about 45% PS+ subs, then with X1 I think about 50% would be a good measure (so 15-20M subs to gold).

PSNow is under 2M, so Gamepass probably also on the 1-2M subs.

SW sales still makes most of the revenue, and for that if they don't have the platform they miss most since most of the SW sold on Xbox is 3rd party.

Gamepass is probably closer to 4m. 

Please give us numbers, because MS don't give them.

Consider their announcements of "1M people have played SoT" or equivalents, that have people on Gamepass plus people that bought the game I doubt they have a stable 4M subs on gamepass. Anyway XCloud will probably take quite a time to achieve great numbers of subs.

VAMatt said:

thismeintiel said:

Those profits came from Nintendo selling tens of millions of handheld HW, which led to tens of millions of SW sold from that HW. It definitely didn't come from underperforming home consoles.

And yes, digital subs and sales are important, but it is the combination of both that and physical retail that makes one very successful. And more boxes sold means more profit from HW and higher potential for sales of physical and digital goods.

Except that nobody has ever made an real money on sales of consoles.  They're a loss leader.  They're used to get you in the "store", so you'll buy the other merchandise (software, subscriptions, and peripherals) where they make real money.  

But, your other points are right.  Selling consoles is an important part of the overall recipe for success, as the industry works now.  But, with MS selling subscriptions to PC users, and games to users of nearly every platform, the recipe is changing.  And, in that context, Phil's statements make sense.  

MS won't sell Xcloud or Gold on PS. They may sell some on PC.

And Nintendo almost always makes money on HW. Sony is loss leading at the start of the gen (well PS3 probably for almost all gen), but they make money on the HW when they are doing the price cuts and slim.

DialgaMarine said:
I’m aware that Xbox has been under new management since last gen, but they clearly didn’t have this philosophy when their hardware sales numbers were actually more competitive. I only disagree because I think their metrics for success are far more vague than putting out hard sales numbers, and I feel that they’re implying that putting out hardware numbers somehow equates that company’s console not being consistently used by the majority of its buyers.

We don't even know the revenue and profit of Xbox itself. It is the whole division that have more stuff than Xbox.

Snoopy said:

COKTOE said:

He's right?....Can you envision any other scenarios aside from the 2 you mentioned that might draw into question how stupid this idea is in 2019? If you buy a console and smash it in the parking lot is literally an equivalent to one of your 2 arguments as to how Phil Spencer is right. Out....standing.

Software and subscription services are what matters the most. In fact, if these companies can sell less hardware, but more software/subscriptions the more money they will make.

Yes sure, MS will sell less Xbox but that will make they sell more Gold membership, that also will make they sell more SW.