Ok, so that's your opinion. We don't have to fight about it. Poor Wii will be limited to 40 million units in its first 2.5 years.

According to the most recent annual financial statement (should have one for March 2007 soon) March 2006, they had around 7 Billion dollars in cash on hand. About never being unprofitable this report would disagree with you. http://www.hoovers.com/nintendo/--ID__41877,period__A--/free-co-fin-cash.xhtml View: Annual Mar 06 Mar 05 Mar 04 Net Operating Cash Flow -- 1,083.9 1,136.6 Net Investing Cash Flow -- (108.9) (634.5) Net Financing Cash Flow -- (571.3) (228.0) Net Change in Cash -- 675.2 (269.6) Those are annual cash flow reports of course. The parentheses indicate negative cash flow. A lot of companies will report positive "earnings" but when you count the cash that's what they actually have in terms of real money. I don't think it is worth more. http://www.hoovers.com/nintendo/--ID__41877,period__A--/free-co-fin-balance.xhtml Total equity is what the company is worth in terms of everything. Counting liabilities, assets, equipment, value of it's stock and that totals about 8.5 billion from what I can see there, I wish they had more info (as you can see 2006 is ----). It's hard to get good info though as it is a foriegn company not listed directly on the NYSE. http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/charts/charting.asp?Symbol=US:NTDOY&&ShowChtBt=Refresh+Chart&DateRangeForm=1&CP=0&PT=8&C5=4&C6=2007&C7=4&C8=2007&C9=2&ComparisonsForm=1&CE=0&DisplayForm=1&D4=1&D5=0&D3=0&ViewType=0&PeriodType=8 That chart only goes back 10 years, but I'd say if you were invested in it earlier sure your money would be up. Heck, if I invested in Hansen natural 7 years ago would have been up 3500% this last winter. Still, as you can see during product cycles it's up, but off launch time goes back down. That happens with Sony too. I agree, a larger company does have more difficulty maintaining guidance of what it thinks it will sell. But the advantage is economy of scale for companies like Sony or Microsoft. In an analysis of Economic Moats (a strategy Warren Buffet employs to determine if a company can maintain long term by having a large moat that no one can get around), economies of scale are one of those factors. Nintendo has the advantage of being able to do one thing and do it very well. But when I point out manufacturing ability, it doesn't surprise me that it can't do as well as it can in designing games or a gaming system. A large company can reduce a lot of costs merely by having common logisitcs, common manufacturing, and it can also essentially influence parts suppliers if need be. A smaller company has a harder time doing so simply because it won't provide as much business. By that I mean a company like Sony may be outsourcing manufacturing of other products to the same companies supplying PS3 components and thus will be more important in its que of business.

That remains to be seen. Though it would not surprise me, but I don't address it or anything as forgone conclusions.

Nintendo has publicly ackowledged on several occasions that they need to increase supply for the DS. It is a known fact that they just can't increase supply fast enough. Even Nintendo didn't expect the DS to be in such high demand, continuously. If the Wii is gonna be having the same problem the DS is having, i.e. practically selling out 2 years from its inception, selling 80 mln Wii's would be a slam dunk. Well, that was kind of a confusing statement, I really mean "if demand is so high that Nintendo has trouble satisfying it, Nintendo will find a way to make more units" such that by the end of its life cycle the culmulative sales will exceed 80 mln. Making more units of course doesn't mean satisfying the demand.

Actual numbers: "On February 28, 2007 Nintendo was ranked #16 on the TOPIX 30. With 127.9 million shares outstanding and a market price on that date of 31,400 yen, the total market value (market capitalization) of Nintendo was 4 trillion yen or $33.5 billion."

You said it yourself it only goes up to 2005. Nintendo's stock has exploded in 2006 due to much better than expected DS sales. Shareholders equity goes way up--200%, 300% or something ridiculous like that.

While Cash Flow is likely the best "bottom line measure", especially for companies in distress, it is NOT profit, and one should still give the actual earnings number the full benefit of the doubt. One could go on arguing forever what is "profit" since there are so many ways to account for it, but as far as we know there hasn't been accounting irregularities at Nintendo so we're take their earnings numbers for granted, not by digging into their cash flow.

Cash Flow is measured as the difference between all costs and expenses and its income. The difference between this and stated profit would be slight at best, regardless, I highly doubt the company has had solid profit every single quarter for 40 years, that's practically impossible given the way product cycles work and investment leading up to a launch. Especially in the N64 and GC days when software sales and hardware sales went down. I'm saying it's practically fact they have lost money at some times over these years.

They've mistated the price of the stock. http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/charts/charting.asp?Symbol=US%3aNTDOY There are 127.9 million shares, but the regular shares do not cost 31400 yen. There's no way, that would mean it was 260 bucks a share, which it is not. The chart is right there it's 36 bucks a share. I'm dead certain this is their companies stock, it goes right to the nintendo home page.

Its not that simple with Saturn, PSX and N64... Sega pissed off its fans by releasing Saturn right few months after releasing 32X to Mega Drive, so besides they were pissed, many who bought 32X, could not afford Saturn at the start. PSX gained some gap and few good games, because of poor Saturn sales (3rd parties might have had better support for Saturn, if it would have sold more), so many Sega fanboys bought PSX besides Saturn, when they could afford a new console. N64 was too late to market, Sony was already too far ahead in sales. Also it had much cheaper media, and finally the FF7 for PSX, told that Square is supporting PSX, instead of N64. And finally PSX was a trend item and as every salesman knows; people are like Lemmings when it comes to buying products. Piracy was one reason, why PSX got so popular, it was easy to copy a game with CD-burner to your modified PSX. Oh, and N64 was more powerful and cheaper than PSX, Saturn was released earlier with the same price. When 360 was released, i thought that Micro$oft is this time knowing what it was doing. Now i know that theyre not... M$ was planning a strategy, that they have sold enough units when competitors release their consoles, and they have decent gap and by that time 360 makes profit. Now M$ is in one way at the point, where they wanted Sony to be: chasing. First mistake M$ made, was right after 360 release, they announced, that 360 will be updated with HD-DVD drive, so everyone was waiting for updated 360, and did not dare to buy "the old one" (yes, that one Bill Gates comment outdated 360 at its start). Second mistake: they are trying to catch up with PS3 with "what else it can do besides gaming", they should be chasing Nintendo, with abilities for gaming, even better for keeping their own way. Now we have 3 consoles, of which one is "something for everyone, but the price for few", one for "people who wants to play games, with price for everyone" and one, which "doesnt know what its all about and what it will be". Nintendo has the most on its targeted group. Pricecuts. Wii has 50(enter currency here) higher price because resellers wanted more money out of it, so good sales should convince them, that they could make better profits with less price (and Nintendo also), but Wiis price wont drop, until they can produce as much as its demand is. 360 doesnt really make money, and even M$ cant lose money too much. I dont know, that is M$ making money with 360 at the monent, but looking at how PS3 exclusives are porting to 360, i bet that developers can have all the money, that the ported games make (=M$ doesnt charge license fees). PS3 really cant have a pricecut either, before Sony can produce PS3 cheaper and this can happen when people buy enough PS3s, although, without lower price, people wont buy them much. So, Nintendo has the best chances for a "massive" pricedrop. The Fad. PS1 was a fad, PS2 was a fad and now Wii is a fad. True, people are like lemmings. Its like an avalanche, if there is enough snow sliding down a hill, all the snow starts sliding with it. When Wii comes trendy enough and market penetration reaches critical point, you can not stop selling it. Fad will fade, but is it because next generation comes, or will Remote lose its interest? Its not impossible in any ways that 360 or PS3, as well as Wii, gets the fad finally. At this moment Wii has The Fad. Longevity. PS2 outsells PS3 and 360 at the moment. Why? Because its massive penetration (by number of consoles and number of titles), people are like lemmings and still PS2 gets new games, so its not dead yet. If Wii gets popular enough, it will keep selling (and will be produced) after next generation is released, no matter how outdated the console will be by then. If PS3 or 360 cant sell enough, they dont have future after next-gen release, no matter how up-to-date consoles are at the time, they still will be old. Looking at Wiis sold and titles announced, looks like Wiis lifespan could be easilly ten years. Production issues. Wiis supply does not meet demand, but its much more easy to start increasing it, than cut it down. Yes, cutdowns means it does not sell, and then there is a problem. One thing is for sure, Nintendo increases production as long as its necessary. Nintendo has the situation when it comes to production issues. Hardware updates. M$ has announced about after-launch updates a few times. Sony propably will soon too (besides dropping the EE off). Nintendo has no need at the moment and when they have production issues, its propably even not wise. "Wii2" will never be out. Updates will be software, possibly a new microcode, possibly nothing significant or minor hardware updates. Satoru Iwata has told about Wiis follower, but that means, that Nintendo is not going to exit console market, they will be there, when next generation arrives. M$'s updates play the game for Wii. No hardware updates for Wii, what is good thing for consumers, who own the product. Technical advances. Only 360 is without technical advance, PS3 has BD-drive, and Wii has Wii Remote. Compared to PS3, theres one good thing in 360:s external HD-DVD: you can buy it, if you need it, but you dont have to and you get the console for less price (than with build-in drive). Theoreticly speaking, PS3 and Wii has technical advance over 360 (and over each other). HDTV penetration. This doesnt necessarily work against Wii, most people buy HD-sets, becuse they think that better TV resolution, gives you a better image quality. As you know, source gives better image quality than resolution. And if you buy expensive TV, you cant afford to buy expensive console with it. Besides, many older HD:s in US and Japan, are 480p/1080i sets. So you wont benefit that much of sets like that (no 720p or 1080p). Eventually these people might buy 360 or PS3, but they need to save more money, what takes time and at that time all the good games might be on Wii. This can be Wiis weak point, but it could also happen vise versa. Ported games. At the moment ports for Wii are shitty, developers just want to make fast money. But as soon as more quality titles starts to hit Wii, even these ports are made better than now. If Wii reaches the critical mass, most games will be made for Wii, when 360 and PS3 getting ports, if vice versa, ports can be made easily (compared to fixing controls), by downgrading the graphics. Who wants to play crippled Wii sports? If sold enough, this will be strong area for the Wii. Development costs. After you master developing for Wii Remote, its a lot cheaper than developing for its competitors. After all, the one which makes most money, gets the most investments. Again point for the Wii. Price. Its cheap, when compared to competitors, and if it gets cheap enough, it could be a hit in China or India (they are getting more money from day to day), which have population over 2 billion combined. With the price of 360 and PS3, theres no way that they penetrate to those markets. Well, Nintendo said, that they expand gaming in to new areas (yes, they sell consoles in Asia outside Japan). I dont see any reason why Wii would not sell over 80M, over 100M or over 120M. Its of course hard to tell at the moment, but my guess is (even with wide range) that Wii sells between 50 and 150 million units worldwide.