Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Nintendo's Stock: Values Keep Rising

OTBWY said:
megaman79 said:

I don't think the market pays as close attention as we do to the game info. Sales > everything else. 

Especially since games typically are seen as part of the entertainment industry rather than part of the tech industry. What Offline has posted doesn't even correlate with what happened to Nintendo's stock for a few days.

There is a difference between industry and sector. It's important to distinguish between the two.
https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/7974:JP
Nintendo Co Ltd
Sector: Technology
Industry: Hardware

The key takeaway here is the effect the GOP tax reform has had on the Tech sector. Tech stocks have dropped in markets across the globe since last week, with investors rotating to other sectors. This is not my word against the word of Serkan Toto. This is a series of reports from multiple business news outlets against a casual tweet from Twitter.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-29/signs-it-s-fear-of-missing-out-on-tax-bounty-that-s-routing-tech
The Tax Bill Is Hurting Tech Stocks
“It’s the tax bill hurting tech,” said Frank Ingarra, head trader at Greenwich, Connecticut-based NorthCoast Asset Management LLC, which oversees $1.8 billion.

https://www.investors.com/news/technology/broad-sell-off-rocks-technology-sector-apple-fang-stocks-down/
Broad Sell-Off Hits Tech, Investors Rotate To Banks, Value Stocks
"One day does not make a trend but we are seeing signs of a rotation," Belski said. "Does (the tech sell-off) mean that value investing strategies are beginning to become more prevalent — banks and financials being the biggest part of the value index — I think the answer to that is yes."

https://www.barrons.com/articles/asia-stocks-dragged-lower-amid-tech-selloff-1512030893
Asia Stocks Dragged Lower Amid Tech Selloff
Asia-Pacific stock markets are lower on Thursday as the U.S. selloff in technology stock  spilled over to Asia.

http://www.foxbusiness.com/features/2017/12/05/asia-markets-tech-stock-selloff-weighs-on-asian-markets.html
Tech-stock Selloff Weighs On Asian Markets
"Investors are rotating out from the valuation-rich sector in an attempt to lock in profits as the U.S. tax overhaul grinds on", said Margaret Yang, a market analyst at CMC Markets.



Around the Network
OTBWY said:
bdbdbd said:

Especially when mobile haven't made that much money for Nintendo, including Pokemon Go.

They have made much money actually. Just not the amount they were expecting (for some at least). It doesn't change the fact that Mario Run for example was this years top iOS game.

Ehh... OK, they did not make anywhere close to what they expected, which means they did not make a lot of money (from Nintendo's perspective). There's not much sense in investing into mobile development, when you can make more money elsewhere.

Secondly, being number one on the online marketplaces, means nothing on Nintendo's scale. The thing is, virtually nobody is making money there. Nintendo is using the mobile marketplace to promote their premium content on Switch/3DS, where their bread and butter is (although, lack of interest on mobile may indicate lack of interest for their console games).

I'm aiming to develop games for mobile (if someone capable of programming is interested in making mobile games on the basis of profit sharing, feel free to PM), and been looking for business opportunities there, and that's what the mobile market looks like. It could be that the investors expect Nintendo to perform like Supercell, that makes hundreds of million of Euros profit on constant basis with their handful of games.



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.

offline said:
OTBWY said:

Especially since games typically are seen as part of the entertainment industry rather than part of the tech industry. What Offline has posted doesn't even correlate with what happened to Nintendo's stock for a few days.

There is a difference between industry and sector. It's important to distinguish between the two.
https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/7974:JP
Nintendo Co Ltd
Sector: Technology
Industry: Hardware

The key takeaway here is the effect the GOP tax reform has had on the Tech sector. Tech stocks have dropped in markets across the globe since last week, with investors rotating to other sectors. This is not my word against the word of Serkan Toto. This is a series of reports from multiple business news outlets against a casual tweet from Twitter.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-29/signs-it-s-fear-of-missing-out-on-tax-bounty-that-s-routing-tech
The Tax Bill Is Hurting Tech Stocks
“It’s the tax bill hurting tech,” said Frank Ingarra, head trader at Greenwich, Connecticut-based NorthCoast Asset Management LLC, which oversees $1.8 billion.

https://www.investors.com/news/technology/broad-sell-off-rocks-technology-sector-apple-fang-stocks-down/
Broad Sell-Off Hits Tech, Investors Rotate To Banks, Value Stocks
"One day does not make a trend but we are seeing signs of a rotation," Belski said. "Does (the tech sell-off) mean that value investing strategies are beginning to become more prevalent — banks and financials being the biggest part of the value index — I think the answer to that is yes."

https://www.barrons.com/articles/asia-stocks-dragged-lower-amid-tech-selloff-1512030893
Asia Stocks Dragged Lower Amid Tech Selloff
Asia-Pacific stock markets are lower on Thursday as the U.S. selloff in technology stock  spilled over to Asia.

http://www.foxbusiness.com/features/2017/12/05/asia-markets-tech-stock-selloff-weighs-on-asian-markets.html
Tech-stock Selloff Weighs On Asian Markets
"Investors are rotating out from the valuation-rich sector in an attempt to lock in profits as the U.S. tax overhaul grinds on", said Margaret Yang, a market analyst at CMC Markets.

It's like you don't want to read and actually look at stock data. Nintendo's stock rose regardless (the subject of your articles). It dipped only after news about Nintendo's mobile game.

Your articles mean nothing when it still does not correlate. And not taking Serkan seriously is laughable, since he most definitely has contact with actual investors of Nintendo. I will say it again, it is your word, against that of a Economics PhD, games industry consultancy CEO. Literally.

Last edited by OTBWY - on 10 December 2017


bdbdbd said:
OTBWY said:

They have made much money actually. Just not the amount they were expecting (for some at least). It doesn't change the fact that Mario Run for example was this years top iOS game.

Ehh... OK, they did not make anywhere close to what they expected, which means they did not make a lot of money (from Nintendo's perspective). There's not much sense in investing into mobile development, when you can make more money elsewhere.

Secondly, being number one on the online marketplaces, means nothing on Nintendo's scale. The thing is, virtually nobody is making money there. Nintendo is using the mobile marketplace to promote their premium content on Switch/3DS, where their bread and butter is (although, lack of interest on mobile may indicate lack of interest for their console games).

I'm aiming to develop games for mobile (if someone capable of programming is interested in making mobile games on the basis of profit sharing, feel free to PM), and been looking for business opportunities there, and that's what the mobile market looks like. It could be that the investors expect Nintendo to perform like Supercell, that makes hundreds of million of Euros profit on constant basis with their handful of games.

...Except they did make a ton of money. Like millions and millions. Not meeting expectations can be the difference of a few million (Nintendo historically has been pretty out there with expectations). It's funny too because Fire Emblem Heroes did really well for them, only Mario Run did not meet expectations. That's literally it. I don't see them abandoning mobile any time soon, Pokemon Go for example did in fact cause Pokemon sales (hardware, games, merch) to grow exponentially.

Anyway, I wish you good luck with your game.




OTBWY said:
bdbdbd said:

Ehh... OK, they did not make anywhere close to what they expected, which means they did not make a lot of money (from Nintendo's perspective). There's not much sense in investing into mobile development, when you can make more money elsewhere.

Secondly, being number one on the online marketplaces, means nothing on Nintendo's scale. The thing is, virtually nobody is making money there. Nintendo is using the mobile marketplace to promote their premium content on Switch/3DS, where their bread and butter is (although, lack of interest on mobile may indicate lack of interest for their console games).

I'm aiming to develop games for mobile (if someone capable of programming is interested in making mobile games on the basis of profit sharing, feel free to PM), and been looking for business opportunities there, and that's what the mobile market looks like. It could be that the investors expect Nintendo to perform like Supercell, that makes hundreds of million of Euros profit on constant basis with their handful of games.

...Except they did make a ton of money. Like millions and millions. Not meeting expectations can be the difference of a few million (Nintendo historically has been pretty out there with expectations). It's funny too because Fire Emblem Heroes did really well for them, only Mario Run did not meet expectations. That's literally it. I don't see them abandoning mobile any time soon, Pokemon Go for example did in fact cause Pokemon sales (hardware, games, merch) to grow exponentially.

Anyway, I wish you good luck with your game.

Yes, that's what Pokemon Go did, and that's what Nintendo expects from their mobile strategy.

SMR did not meet expectations, but that's a game that should've made tons of money. FE did not have high expectations, but that's an IP Nintendo want's to make better known to public. Basically this is about where they direct their resources. SMR was a Miyamoto game, and Nintendo's no.1 team can make more money doing something else. In the end, mobile is only a small portion in Nintendo's revenue.

Thanks! Once we have the first game out, I'll PM you a download code (may take some time).



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.

Around the Network
bdbdbd said:
OTBWY said:

...Except they did make a ton of money. Like millions and millions. Not meeting expectations can be the difference of a few million (Nintendo historically has been pretty out there with expectations). It's funny too because Fire Emblem Heroes did really well for them, only Mario Run did not meet expectations. That's literally it. I don't see them abandoning mobile any time soon, Pokemon Go for example did in fact cause Pokemon sales (hardware, games, merch) to grow exponentially.

Anyway, I wish you good luck with your game.

Yes, that's what Pokemon Go did, and that's what Nintendo expects from their mobile strategy.

SMR did not meet expectations, but that's a game that should've made tons of money. FE did not have high expectations, but that's an IP Nintendo want's to make better known to public. Basically this is about where they direct their resources. SMR was a Miyamoto game, and Nintendo's no.1 team can make more money doing something else. In the end, mobile is only a small portion in Nintendo's revenue.

Thanks! Once we have the first game out, I'll PM you a download code (may take some time).

Absolutely true that Nintendo first and foremost wants to use the mobile platform in order to increase IP awareness.

I think the main difference between SMR and FE and their performance has been it's payment model. SMR had a pretty sharp price for the full game (which was too short for that price IMO), wherein FE had simple transactions for a continuous flow. I don't know why Nintendo went for that payment model with SMR, but I think it had to do with not wanting to put that sort of payment model in a Mario game (timed, microtransactions). It's a good discussion to have.

Thanks man, looking forward to it.




OTBWY said:
bdbdbd said:

Yes, that's what Pokemon Go did, and that's what Nintendo expects from their mobile strategy.

SMR did not meet expectations, but that's a game that should've made tons of money. FE did not have high expectations, but that's an IP Nintendo want's to make better known to public. Basically this is about where they direct their resources. SMR was a Miyamoto game, and Nintendo's no.1 team can make more money doing something else. In the end, mobile is only a small portion in Nintendo's revenue.

Thanks! Once we have the first game out, I'll PM you a download code (may take some time).

Absolutely true that Nintendo first and foremost wants to use the mobile platform in order to increase IP awareness.

I think the main difference between SMR and FE and their performance has been it's payment model. SMR had a pretty sharp price for the full game (which was too short for that price IMO), wherein FE had simple transactions for a continuous flow. I don't know why Nintendo went for that payment model with SMR, but I think it had to do with not wanting to put that sort of payment model in a Mario game (timed, microtransactions). It's a good discussion to have.D

If I remember the first level was free, but the rest of the game cost 10€, or so. The model was different because Nintendo expected the all time biggest IP in games industry to sell like hotcakes, but the gameplay wasn't what people expected from 2D Super Mario. I did try the game out and thought it was bad.

It was so expensive because of the "value" of the IP - and the value of the time of the team that developed it. But, I also think Nintendo wants to try out different models and how they work.



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.