I find it perplexing when people use the argument "the 3DS will keep Nintendo...

#71kissdadookiePosted 12/26/2012 12:32:11 PM
Enigma149 posted...

Actually, you haven't presented a single credible argument at all, and most of your "facts" are incorrect. For example, you said that, were it not for handhelds, Nintendo wouldn't have made it through the Nintendo 64 and GameCube eras. In fact, Nintendo made money off of both systems. You claim that the only reason Nintendo said they were taking a hit on the Wii U was to use it as an excuse for their investors, yet their earnings reports and investors' meetings clearly outline not only what losses they are taking, but what they are taking those losses on. You say that they cannot rely on software to make up money they lose on the 3DS and Wii U, yet the 3DS has returned to per-unit profitability, and the hit they are taking on the Wii U isn't even in double-digits. You also ignore the fact that, for a company with $20 billion in the bank, taking an annual $450 million loss isn't going to put them anywhere near bankruptcy within 10 years.

Nintendo's got assets, too. Not as many as Sony, but selling the Seattle Mariners should make up for a year-or-two of losses, and their card game division could make up another year. And, of course, Sony hasn't made a profit in a decade, and lost $6 billion last year. And when you consider that they only have $60 billion in assets...

Actually, he was referencing Microsotf as a whole. Guess what? Microsoft has had losses these past two years that add up to more than the losses they've taken in the past 20. Much like Nintendo. Of course, since Microsoft has close to $100 billion in the bank, they're not in danger for a long time, either. Then again, they've also got to research and develop a new system, and they've got more competition now that Valve's entering the console business (sort of), and they've got to somehow get Windows Phone off the ground, and they've got to convince people to buy Windows 8, and they've got to prove that the Surface is a viable competitor to the iPad.


Let's break this down shall we? You say that Nintendo made money from N64 and GC but I'm not arguing that those systems were profitable, HOWEVER, what isn't being accounted for here is the fact that NONE OF YOU have bothered to look at the revenue from N64 and GC and subtract it from expenses. The revenue needs to exceed expenses for it to become a net profit. Plain and simple. Your argument is nothing more than "Nintendo didn't take a loss on each N64 and GC sold." Yeah, the Wii doesn't take a loss either right now, but the volume they sell can't cover Nintendo's expenses, plain and simple.

Nintendo has assets but they are small and really wouldn't float the company. Sony's assets are entire divisions along with fabrication plants. Did you even bother to look at WHY Sony is doing so badly? Look at Sony, they literally own their own manufacturing, they don't outsource that. That's a LOT of overhead. Nintendo doesn't manufacture anything, they buy components and then have them put together at Foxcon. You're comparing apples to oranges here.

As for Microsoft losing lots of money. Well, Microsoft also has a ton in the war chest. So how is it magically not a problem for Nintendo going down the same path but all of a sudden it's something debilitating for MS? MS literally throw money at things just because they can without worrying about profiting or not in the short term. They play the long term game. Look at Xbox, the original Xbox netted them a loss of about 5 billion but they knew that eventually it will be a very profitable division for the company thus that 5 billion loss on the original xbox really is just a investment for them.
#72Villain_S_FiendPosted 12/26/2012 12:32:52 PM
Bancario51 posted...
mmm root beer afloats


I prefer the ginger ale variety.
---
No man is pudding.
#73corpse_pookiePosted 12/26/2012 12:35:53 PM
To be fair, the only articles I have read have stated that Nintendo is no longer selling the 3DS below its manufacturing costs. That is a long way from making money on it when you factor in distribution, overhead, and design costs.

They could actually be making a profit, but nothing I have read has actually stated as much.
#741shadetail1Posted 12/26/2012 12:37:44 PM
kissdadookie posted...
1shadetail1 posted...
kissdadookie posted...
HA HA HA HA HA HA. I love how absolutely clueless you are on the subject.

...said the one who's really clueless. For instance, you brought up the N64 and Gamecube as evidence of your point, ignoring the fact that Nintendo profited handsomely off both of those systems despite their bad sales figures.

No, Nintendo is not in trouble. They know what they're doing, and that is a fact, your ignorant rambling notwithstanding.


HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA. I didn't say that Nintendo loss money on the N64 or GC, but those two systems certainly didn't maintain the company.

Wow, you are excruciatingly ignorant. You actually claimed that making a profit "didn't maintain the company", which has got to be the most laughably idiotic thing I've ever seen anyone say about running a business. Making a profit is the very definition of "maintaining a business".
---
Religion is like spaghetti: either stiff and fragile, or wet and limp.
#75LinkBeanPosted 12/26/2012 12:39:29 PM
This thread in one image.

http://i.imgur.com/2rD1G.jpg
#76kissdadookiePosted 12/26/2012 12:41:50 PM(edited)
1shadetail1 posted...
kissdadookie posted...
1shadetail1 posted...
kissdadookie posted...
HA HA HA HA HA HA. I love how absolutely clueless you are on the subject.

...said the one who's really clueless. For instance, you brought up the N64 and Gamecube as evidence of your point, ignoring the fact that Nintendo profited handsomely off both of those systems despite their bad sales figures.

No, Nintendo is not in trouble. They know what they're doing, and that is a fact, your ignorant rambling notwithstanding.


HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA. I didn't say that Nintendo loss money on the N64 or GC, but those two systems certainly didn't maintain the company.

Wow, you are excruciatingly ignorant. You actually claimed that making a profit "didn't maintain the company", which has got to be the most laughably idiotic thing I've ever seen anyone say about running a business. Making a profit is the very definition of "maintaining a business".


Again, you're isolating the profits of the system sales from the overall operational expenses of the company as a whole. So in actuality, you are excruciatingly ignorant and idiotic.

Again, all you have to do is show me how the N64 and GC revenues were higher than operational expenses. That's all you have to do.

Unfortunately, it's most likely you won't be able to due to the fact that you have NO CLUE as to how all this works. To you, in your fictitious world, if you don't sell something at a loss, then that must magically mean that you will end up with a profit at the end of the day. It's absolutely hilarious how you fail to grasp even the simplest of concepts here.
#77Enigma149Posted 12/26/2012 12:44:43 PM
kissdadookie posted...
Enigma149 posted...

You...do realize that most of the losses they took during the last year were caused by the 3DS selling at a loss, and not operating expenses, right?


You didn't read their financial report did you? The 3DS price cut accounted for some of the poor financial showing but they've noted that their net loss was heavily due to exchange rates as well as the dramatic slow down of Wii sales.


The dramatic slowdown of Wii sales, which prevented them from using Wii profits to cover 3DS losses. Yeah, I read the report.

Let's break this down shall we? You say that Nintendo made money from N64 and GC but I'm not arguing that those systems were profitable, HOWEVER, what isn't being accounted for here is the fact that NONE OF YOU have bothered to look at the revenue from N64 and GC and subtract it from expenses. The revenue needs to exceed expenses for it to become a net profit. Plain and simple. Your argument is nothing more than "Nintendo didn't take a loss on each N64 and GC sold." Yeah, the Wii doesn't take a loss either right now, but the volume they sell can't cover Nintendo's expenses, plain and simple.


Actually, no. My argument was that Nintendo made money off of the Nintendo 64 and the GameCube. And the Wii is selling enough to cover Nintendo's expenses for the Wii. Just not Nintendo's expenses for the Wii, and the 3DS, and the Wii U.

Nintendo has assets but they are small and really wouldn't float the company. Sony's assets are entire divisions along with fabrication plants. Did you even bother to look at WHY Sony is doing so badly? Look at Sony, they literally own their own manufacturing, they don't outsource that. That's a LOT of overhead. Nintendo doesn't manufacture anything, they buy components and then have them put together at Foxcon. You're comparing apples to oranges here.


Yes, as a matter of fact, I did bother to look at why Sony was doing so badly. Let's look at their Q4 2011 earning's report, shall we?

http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/financial/fr/11q4_sony.pdf

Page 5
Sales decreased 18.5% year-on-year to 3,136.8 billion yen. Sales to outside customers decreased 18.8% year-on-year. This was primarily due to a decrease in sales of LCD televisions, PCs, digital imaging products including digital cameras, and the game business.

The decrease in the game business reflects lower sales of the PlayStation 3 hardware due to a strategic price reduction and lower sales of PlayStation 2 due to platform migration

Of course, this isn't the only reason, but there was nothing about manufacturing anywhere.

As for Microsoft losing lots of money. Well, Microsoft also has a ton in the war chest. So how is it magically not a problem for Nintendo going down the same path but all of a sudden it's something debilitating for MS? MS literally throw money at things just because they can without worrying about profiting or not in the short term. They play the long term game. Look at Xbox, the original Xbox netted them a loss of about 5 billion but they knew that eventually it will be a very profitable division for the company thus that 5 billion loss on the original xbox really is just a investment for them.


I don't think you understand. I was using Microsoft to point out your hypocrisy in saying that it's perfectly fine for Microsoft to take losses, because they have money in the "war chest", but that Nintendo taking losses for a few years would doom them.
---
Look kid, when you grow up you'll learn women aren't all that smart or interesting. They do excel for purposes of coitus though.
-Unmoderated post, Wii U board
#78Enigma149Posted 12/26/2012 12:44:53 PM
4096 / 4096
---
Look kid, when you grow up you'll learn women aren't all that smart or interesting. They do excel for purposes of coitus though.
-Unmoderated post, Wii U board
#791shadetail1Posted 12/26/2012 12:45:09 PM
kissdadookie posted...
1shadetail1 posted...
kissdadookie posted...
1shadetail1 posted...
kissdadookie posted...
HA HA HA HA HA HA. I love how absolutely clueless you are on the subject.

...said the one who's really clueless. For instance, you brought up the N64 and Gamecube as evidence of your point, ignoring the fact that Nintendo profited handsomely off both of those systems despite their bad sales figures.

No, Nintendo is not in trouble. They know what they're doing, and that is a fact, your ignorant rambling notwithstanding.


HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA. I didn't say that Nintendo loss money on the N64 or GC, but those two systems certainly didn't maintain the company.

Wow, you are excruciatingly ignorant. You actually claimed that making a profit "didn't maintain the company", which has got to be the most laughably idiotic thing I've ever seen anyone say about running a business. Making a profit is the very definition of "maintaining a business".


Again, you're isolating the profits of the system sales from the overall operational expenses of the company as a whole.

Wow, yet another excruciatingly ignorant thing from you, leaving me to wonder if you even have a rock-bottom. Apparently, you believe that profit doesn't already take into account the business' expenses, which proves that you really know absolutely nothing about what "profit" means, or how business works. What will come next from your ignorance hole?
---
Religion is like spaghetti: either stiff and fragile, or wet and limp.
#80Enigma149Posted 12/26/2012 12:47:20 PM
kissdadookie posted...
1shadetail1 posted...
kissdadookie posted...
1shadetail1 posted...
kissdadookie posted...
HA HA HA HA HA HA. I love how absolutely clueless you are on the subject.

...said the one who's really clueless. For instance, you brought up the N64 and Gamecube as evidence of your point, ignoring the fact that Nintendo profited handsomely off both of those systems despite their bad sales figures.

No, Nintendo is not in trouble. They know what they're doing, and that is a fact, your ignorant rambling notwithstanding.


HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA. I didn't say that Nintendo loss money on the N64 or GC, but those two systems certainly didn't maintain the company.

Wow, you are excruciatingly ignorant. You actually claimed that making a profit "didn't maintain the company", which has got to be the most laughably idiotic thing I've ever seen anyone say about running a business. Making a profit is the very definition of "maintaining a business".


Again, you're isolating the profits of the system sales from the overall operational expenses of the company as a whole. So in actuality, you are excruciatingly ignorant and idiotic.

Again, all you have to do is show me how the N64 and GC revenues were higher than operational expenses. That's all you have to do.

Unfortunately, it's most likely you won't be able to due to the fact that you have NO CLUE as to how all this works. To you, in your fictitious world, if you don't sell something at a loss, then that must magically mean that you will end up with a profit at the end of the day. It's absolutely hilarious how you fail to grasp even the simplest of concepts here.


And you show me that they didn't. You've been saying all along that the GameCube and Nintendo 64 didn't make enough money to make up for operating costs, that they represented only a sliver of Nintendo's profits, etc., yet you have yet to cite a single source.
---
Look kid, when you grow up you'll learn women aren't all that smart or interesting. They do excel for purposes of coitus though.
-Unmoderated post, Wii U board