| etking said: Unless they completely drop consoles and go full mobile +Steam / multiplattform, there won't be any profits in future too, unfortunately. |
That isn't true at all, because they are making profit overall profit (Net profit) even this their worst gen ever, they will just not have operating profit this gen, but bottom of line is Net profit.
| RolStoppable said: As for the argument that Nintendo should keep making hardware because they are still profitable despite a low volume of sales, that makes a whole lot more sense when losses for selling hardware do not apply anymore. That's what holds largely true for the latter years of this generation. But the bigger reason for Nintendo to keep making hardware is that the potential profits from such a business model are far greater than going third party. Regarding the losses this generation, a company like Nintendo which has several billions of cash reserves easily survives it. The losses would have had to be multiple times higher in order to humor a legitimate discussion about whether or not Nintendo should go third party. As it is, it was and is nothing more than wishful thinking of people who do not want to buy Nintendo hardware for whatever reason. |
Absolutely, the Wii was much more succesful for Nintendo then going third party would have been, while the software business is safer and less of a risk there is higher potential for them making hardware. In the event of the NX failing atrociously too then the question would arise, but as of now, nintendo should remain in the hardware business, and I'm confident their financial situation will improve as it has done the past two fiscal years.
| RolStoppable said: The 3DS was responsible for the first fiscal year with an operating loss (due to an early significant price cut) and it took a while until 3DS hardware returned to profitability. Wii U hardware was sold at a loss from the start, so it didn't help Nintendo's bottom line. As for the argument that Nintendo should keep making hardware because they are still profitable despite a low volume of sales, that makes a whole lot more sense when losses for selling hardware do not apply anymore. That's what holds largely true for the latter years of this generation. But the bigger reason for Nintendo to keep making hardware is that the potential profits from such a business model are far greater than going third party. Regarding the losses this generation, a company like Nintendo which has several billions of cash reserves easily survives it. The losses would have had to be multiple times higher in order to humor a legitimate discussion about whether or not Nintendo should go third party. As it is, it was and is nothing more than wishful thinking of people who do not want to buy Nintendo hardware for whatever reason. |
Actualy Wii U was sold at loss only in 1st year or so.
Fact is there will not lose any money this gen, they have operating loss yes, but overall they will have solid profit from this gen.
tak13 said:
Those are the selective and individual cases that I was talking about! You do the same mistake that many people do... NPD? Only top ten with multi-platform game, with their sales combined? How the fuck an exlusive game will chart there for more than 1 month or how there will be 3ds games there there are no recent releases? And 3ds is 6 years old!
In single skus or better, a bigger chart, you would see 3ds titles...
You could have used at least uk chart instead, in order to support your argument... |
Because in the uk chart the 3ds wouldn't be 6 years old?
This is not selective. I took the last three months. I'm not gonna go through all the charts just to find the few games that charted over the years.
Also, you're calling mt charts selective while bringing up Uncharted 4 vs Yokai in Germany.
I rest my case.
Truf is with all the negative talk and dismal sales of the Wii U it's very good by Nintendo to have break even during the last five years.
And Nintendo will be very profitable soon with their mobile strategy (as much as I hate mobile).
Each year the mobile games could make $1-2 billion in profit.
Well they are profitable now despite selling even less wiiu consoles and games than before
We still got another year, and Pokemon Go looks like it could be the most profitable thing that might have ever happened to Nintendo. Basically this thread is a little premature.
I wonder if a Nintendo console or handheld game will effect Pokemon Go or vice versa. Especially since one is free and the other will be priced as a AAA game.
Well, it could have been worse. Didn't it take a couple of years before the PS3 became profitable? At least the 3DS helped deflect the losses.
Dance my pretties!
The Official Art Thread - The Official Manga Thread - The Official Starbound Thread
| bigtakilla said: We still got another year, and Pokemon Go looks like it could be the most profitable thing that might have ever happened to Nintendo. Basically this thread is a little premature. |
Unfortunately, Nintendo itself will barely see any profits from the game. Most profits go to Apple, Google, Niantic and the Pokemon company.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
