Tough call, currently I'd say MS simply because GTA has more name recognition, but if KZ2 manages to sell well it could turn a profit, I doubt the GTA DLC will manage to pull in $50 million.
Tough call, currently I'd say MS simply because GTA has more name recognition, but if KZ2 manages to sell well it could turn a profit, I doubt the GTA DLC will manage to pull in $50 million.
gebx said:
I'm really good at FPS's! Guerrila games mentioned that its roughly 10 hours, but the short length is one of the few complaints brought up against the game.. but that doesn't matter, I'll edit it to 10 hours.. wouldn't want anyone to start to cry! |
I'm sorry, but someone is going to have to explain to me how 10 hours is short when Nintendo Chanel stats show that the vast majority of games don't even get played that much. Even allowing for the difference in user bases, a game that last 10 hours won't even be completed by a very significant portion of users. This game has multiplayer on top of the campaign mode, too, so it's going to rack up a hell of a lot more than 10 hours from people that like it, while plenty of other games are shorter, lack multiplayer, and don't receive nearly as many complaints from peopel like you. Like NG2, for example. Methinks, perhaps, you're a bit biased?
You do not have the right to never be offended.
Anyway, original question - MS, because the money is going to come back to them much faster. The DLC for GTA 4 will cost way more than the work put into them was worth (and that work was no where near the $50 million) and will sell with minimal advertising. A cheap cash-in will always provide greater return than hard work.
You do not have the right to never be offended.
Bitmap Frogs said:
You ARE right. It's a loan. A fact conveniently ignored by many.... |
Can you guys source this loan discussion? It's my understanding that MS has given Take Two 50 million dollars for 2 episodes of dlc. Take Two has booked these as liabilities on their balance sheet as deferred payments. They will remove 25 million from their liabilities when the first episode is given to MS, and the second 25 million will be removed when they deliver the second installment. The repayment of the 50 million dollars will not be cash, it will be in the actual software. This is not a loan, but a purchase.
"The first 25 is for the first episodic content package that's supposed to go out and that is in March of '08. That's why it moved into current because it's in the next 12 months. The second 25 will be for the second episodic, the episode, and that will be later in fiscal '08." - Take Two from the F2Q07 conference call
Here is my source. http://seekingalpha.com/article/38017-take-two-f2q07-qtr-end-4-30-07-earnings-call-transcript
Just so we are on the same page here is the definition of a loan. "An advance of funds from a lender to a borrower on the agreement that the borrower pays interest on the loan, plus paying back the initial amount of the loan at or over an agreed time."
http://www.redearthfinance.com.au/bwWebsite/followon.asp?PageID=3599
I would like some additional information if this truly was converted to a loan.
Thanks for the input, Jeff.
dbot said:
Can you guys source this loan discussion? It's my understanding that MS has given Take Two 50 million dollars for 2 episodes of dlc. Take Two has booked these as liabilities on their balance sheet as deferred payments. They will remove 25 million from their liabilities when the first episode is given to MS, and the second 25 million will be removed when they deliver the second installment. The repayment of the 50 million dollars will not be cash, it will be in the actual software. This is not a loan, but a purchase. "The first 25 is for the first episodic content package that's supposed to go out and that is in March of '08. That's why it moved into current because it's in the next 12 months. The second 25 will be for the second episodic, the episode, and that will be later in fiscal '08." - Take Two from the F2Q07 conference call Here is my source. http://seekingalpha.com/article/38017-take-two-f2q07-qtr-end-4-30-07-earnings-call-transcript Just so we are on the same page here is the definition of a loan. "An advance of funds from a lender to a borrower on the agreement that the borrower pays interest on the loan, plus paying back the initial amount of the loan at or over an agreed time." http://www.redearthfinance.com.au/bwWebsite/followon.asp?PageID=3599 I would like some additional information if this truly was converted to a loan.
|
Just google it, there were plenty of articles on the deal.
In a nutshell, MS gave T2 50M$ to be repaid with GTA4 DLC revenue. If the DLC does good, MS gets the money back - if it tanks, the money's lost.
I guess the most proper term would be a loan/bet.
To be honest if i had a 360 i wouldn't get the DLC, i still haven't finished GTA 4 yet. One of the worst of the series imo.
assumption is the mother of all f**k ups
| Bitmap Frogs said:
Just google it, there were plenty of articles on the deal. In a nutshell, MS gave T2 50M$ to be repaid with GTA4 DLC revenue. If the DLC does good, MS gets the money back - if it tanks, the money's lost. I guess the most proper term would be a loan/bet. |
I have googled it. Some forum sites refer to it as a "loan", but I think they are just confused about basic accounting principles. It was briefly discussed by Take Two at the source I provided as a purchase. Unless someone can provide additional information, I think you should stop referring to it as a loan. It seems like MS purchased 2 episodes of DLC and prepaid the 50 million for exclusivity. Take Two is liable to deliver the 2 episodes before they can remove the liability from their books.
Thanks for the input, Jeff.
dbot said:
I have googled it. Some forum sites refer to it as a "loan", but I think they are just confused about basic accounting principles. It was briefly discussed by Take Two at the source I provided as a purchase. Unless someone can provide additional information, I think you should stop referring to it as a loan. It seems like MS purchased 2 episodes of DLC and prepaid the 50 million for exclusivity. Take Two is liable to deliver the 2 episodes before they can remove the liability from their books. |
But T2 will have to repay those 50M$ from the DLC revenue.
| Bitmap Frogs said:
But T2 will have to repay those 50M$ from the DLC revenue. |
I think this may be part of the confusion. Take Two removes a 25 million dollar liability from their books when they deliver each episode to MS. They don't need to wait to see what the sell through is. In fact, there is no indication that Take Two will participate in the revenue at all. The repayment is the delivery of the software, there is no cash repayment.
Thanks for the input, Jeff.
one thing about GTA4 is that because it's DLC you they can avoid many fees with manufacturing and retailers. Since everything there is owned by microsoft just about every penny should be going right back to microsoft, can't say the same about killzone.
currently playing: Skyward Sword, Mario Sunshine, Xenoblade Chronicles X