No, what is hilarious is that you would put your name to a post that you yourself titled, "Wii not even in stock anymore at multiple online retailers" without bothering to check the facts of an article you decided to share with everyone.  All it took me was one minute on each of the 4 sites specifically mentioned in the article you read to prove that 75% of said article was fabricated nonsense.  So, your argument in return is that you can't be bothered to spend 4 minutes checking the facts of a story before you share it with the rest of us? 

You are so cool for not having 4 minutes to spare checking the facts of an article before trying to pass it off here as fact.

I did check long before you even wrote on my thread, by the time you wrote here they probably were back on stock. This explains the huuuuuuuge mystery you're trying to prove here. Congratulations for being such a good boy and checking those sites back again for me.... LOL.

Outdated PS2 numbers though...Sony will also release their quarterly shipments soon enough. PS2 will be 2-2.5m ahead (and it is still selling).

Seriously?  I responded to your thread the first day (within 11 hours) of your having opened it.  So, can the sarcasm.  This thread was pointless and proven false.  Stop making excuses and own up to forwarding a bogus article.

Seriously?  I responded to your thread the first day (within 11 hours) of your having opened it.  So, can the sarcasm.  This thread was pointless and proven false.  Stop making excuses and own up to forwarding a bogus article.

So you were 11 hours too late to notice the out of stock signs, you're getting pathetic dude.

I'm getting pathetic?  Whatever, dude.  Even if it was the case that you posted an article about Wii's being out of stock the exact same day the supposedly became back-in stock, it doesn't matter.  It would still mean you are defending if not false, than out-dated information.  No need to de-generate into name calling.  I stand by my point that this thread has no point, since at THIS moment in time, it is not true.

Nintendo is liek so doom3d...

Of course, but they are much better than inaccurate sold numbers

Yeah the new thing is DQM3D

SHIPMENTS =/= SOLD UNITS TO CONSUMERS

This isn't directed at anybody in particular, but I've seen different people in differnet threads saying this and that about DS sales vs. PS2 sales or Wii vs. PS2, etc.  I just think it is pure folly to compare the sales of a given handheld to that of a console, or sales of one generation's console to another from a previous generation.  The success of any handheld or console is based upon how well it did when compared to another device of a previous generation.  It's success is based upon how much of the market it captured during it's lifetime.  The Nintendo DS is not and has never been in competition with the PS2 for market share.  The DS is a handheld, and the PS2 is a console.  The DS's direct competition was the PSP, and the DS slaughtered it by more than double (152.30 million DS to 74.80 million PSP).  Whether the DS goes on to sell 154 million units at some point in time is not relevant.  It is the most successful dedicated handheld gaming platform ever.  Period.  And as for the Wii vs. PS2 argument, that is irrelevant as well.  Since they are from different console generations, they faced a whole host of different factors effecting their overall sales including different level of competition and strength of economy.  On the basis of the current argument, I could make ridiculously irrelevant statements like the PS1 (104.25 mil) didn't even sell as much as the Game Boy (118.69 million).  It doesn't matter.  The Wii is the clear leader of this generation (96.1 million) to Xbox 360 (67.5 mil) and last PS3 (65.5 mil).  Comparing sales outside of category or generation doesn't serve any purpose in my opinion.