I doubt it ...

lol at the ammount MS is loosing :o 

They did indeed, but not as videogame comapany, when they started back in 1889 they made cards, this wasn't extremely profitable after WW2 and Nintendo tried everything from love hotels to taxi companys to a TV network. However none were extremely profitable. After the tokyo olympics thier card sales fell drmatically and they were left with 60yen in stock. However they then moved into electronics and the rest is as they say history.

Wait, so in 2 quarters, Microsoft made 532K profit, while in 3 Nintendo made 2.2M? That means Microsoft actually earns roughly 40% of Nintendo. That's actually much better than I had thought.

I'm not an expert but when you lose money every year like Microsoft has regardless of how much money you have, don't you think it might be time to get out while you can? I know Bill Gates has enough money to do whatever he wants but I don't understand the point.

1 thing i dont understand though is why do people get happy when their console maker is earning a lot of money selling their consoles, doesnt this mean your paying more then its worth?

I mean looking at the consoles that sell for a loss or very little profit means you are getting more for your money then a console that sells at a huge markup.

lultor, Microsoft and Sony aren't selling their consoles at a loss because they love you. They are trying to recoup their losses via software, accessories, and downloadable content. Whatever we're willing to pay for a console is, at the very least, what it's worth.

If System X costs $1000 to produce, sells for $700, and I refuse to buy it, it's not worth $700 to me.

If System Y costs $150 to produce, sells for $200, and I'm willing to pay that (and then some), which company did a better job?

 Well, it's kind of curious: they make huge amounts off their pc os monopoly and they dump them investing on markets that are monopolized (zune vs ipod, xbox vs playstation). One would think the E&D division of MS exists just so they dont feel that bad earning so much money off their windows monopoly.

Early 2000 if I remember correctly and it was due only to an unfavorable conversion rate ( yen - dollar ).

However Yamauchi risked to lose his company prior the entry of Nintendo on Toy business ( Ultra-Hand by Gumpei Yooi ) and gaming business ( they sold an Odissey-based console around 1977 ).

This fact , I think, influenced him so Nintendo is amous to be a conservative company with an huge hoard of cash in bank.

Yamauchi's success in video games -- Nintendo dominated the industry in the 1990s -- didn't come overnight. After Yamauchi succeeded his father as president in 1949, the company was almost forced to file for bankruptcy in the late 1960s after several failed attempts to expand its product lineup into toy guns, baby carriages and even to fast food, according to several books written on Nintendo's history.

Chastened by the experience, Yamauchi vowed then not to borrow money to fund Nintendo's operations.

"Even if we need 500 billion ($4 billion) or 1 trillion yen, I never, ever want to bow my head to someone to ask for money, and that is the very message I want to bestow on the new management," Yamauchi said last week.

 Nope, the difference between Nintendo and Sega was that the former never had a financial failure console ( except for Virtual Boy , this is why Nintendo never cited it ).

Nintendo fisrt goal was always make a profit, Sega first goal was always be number one, be the next Nintendo. 

Nintendo always sell its hardware without take a loss, this couple with strong software performance even in small markeshare console gave them an near immortal status in gaming industry ( the problem Nintendo was encounter before DS and Wii , was that it was rapidly becaming a irrilevant force in the industry. They needed a new aim to focus its strenght, Iwata gave them ).   

That's all Nintendo does so they have to make a lot of money like they are supposed to.