A: We mention Sony because you're selectively throwing your doom theory at Microsoft, but not at Sony. If you think taking multi-billion dollar losses = about to exit the industry, shouldn't you be suggesting that Nintendo will soon be all alone to rake in cash?
The simple fact is that Microsoft's gaming division is poised to make money next fiscal year. Nobody is suggesting that magically they'll make $6 billion dollars in profit in a single year, but they'll start profitting. That's all that's important. You do not eliminate the division as they start to make a profit because they were in the red before that. That makes no sense. Hence, why I call your argument nonsense. Because it is.
So, how does a profit that's turned 3 years ago reverse the fact that they're still losing money? They can turn a profit only to fall into another billion dollar lull?
Research and Development. Same reason Sony's game division is in the hole right now, even with the strong sales of PS2 products.
It is an investment. You have to spend money to make money, and all that.
They've been spending billions over 6 years though. I mean I could understand the whole R&D side of the argument if they were actually doing R&D.
They had a head start at the market, kept losing money yet are still losing money.
Again, aside from the Wii, no consoles do anything besides lose money the first year. If they lose another billion dollars between now and this time next year, then you will have an argument, not now.
It was released November 22nd 2005, In 4 months that will be 2 years that it's been out, it had a head start on its competition; I mean I don't really see a reason how this argument is valid considering the focus of mine is the fact that the department has had a steady loss over 6 years totaling 5 billion plus.
Meiz on
0
Clutch414Dodge Swinger.......WHENEVER IT FEELS RIGHT!!!Registered Userregular
A: We mention Sony because you're selectively throwing your doom theory at Microsoft, but not at Sony. If you think taking multi-billion dollar losses = about to exit the industry, shouldn't you be suggesting that Nintendo will soon be all alone to rake in cash?
The simple fact is that Microsoft's gaming division is poised to make money next fiscal year. Nobody is suggesting that magically they'll make $6 billion dollars in profit in a single year, but they'll start profitting. That's all that's important. You do not eliminate the division as they start to make a profit because they were in the red before that. That makes no sense. Hence, why I call your argument nonsense. Because it is.
100% correct. I couldn't have said it better myself (even though I tried). Explaining to Meiz is like boxing a glacier (to borrow a Colbert-ism).
But the fact is that they knew going in it would be awhile before they could realistically see any profit. They had no illusions that Xbox 1 would make any money, it was simply intended to establish the brand - and it succeeded there. Then they released the 360, again selling it at a loss to establish market penetration.
Back when Microsoft first had the idea to get into the console business, they knew back then that it would be 6-8 years before they could realistically expect to start making money from it. The hardware failures are a setback I grant you, but you just keep saying over and over again "they have been losing money for 6 years" like Microsoft wasn't expecting that going in.
But the fact is that they knew going in it would be awhile before they could realistically see any profit. They had no illusions that Xbox 1 would make any money, it was simply intended to establish the brand - and it succeeded there. Then they released the 360, again selling it at a loss to establish market penetration.
Back when Microsoft first had the idea to get into the console business, they knew back then that it would be 6-8 years before they could realistically expect to start making money from it. The hardware failures are a setback I grant you, but you just keep saying over and over again "they have been losing money for 6 years" like Microsoft wasn't expecting that going in.
Tip: they were.
This is the point that Meitz and Vicious keep ignoring. The fact that this was all expected, and definitely planned for.
So, how does a profit that's turned 3 years ago reverse the fact that they're still losing money? They can turn a profit only to fall into another billion dollar lull?
Research and Development. Same reason Sony's game division is in the hole right now, even with the strong sales of PS2 products.
It is an investment. You have to spend money to make money, and all that.
They've been spending billions over 6 years though. I mean I could understand the whole R&D side of the argument if they were actually doing R&D.
They had a head start at the market, kept losing money yet are still losing money.
I was just explaining why they went from a profit to a loss like that after Halo 2.
Yeah, 6 billion is a hell of a lose but MS knew going into this thing that they wouldn't make any money the first generation. They actually did better than they expected, though. For the current generation they expect to be all profit starting THIS fiscal year, which is why they attached the $1billion Warrenty Extension fee onto LAST fiscal year. If that $1billion hurt their profit margin for this fiscal year/Xmas season their stackholders would be pissed, since MS said they would start turning a profit this season.
Also, let us not forget, that the whole reason MS jumped into the game market was to establish a living room presence. They feel the future is moving towards the living room and don't want to miss out. They started doing so with WebTV, but that sucked so they looked around for another way to make a presence in the living room. Video games were doing well and they had some developers of their own on the PC end of gaming so it was a natural fit.
1. Present a misrepresentation of the opponent's position, refute it, and pretend that the opponent's actual position has been refuted.
2. Quote an opponent's words out of context -- i.e., choose quotations that are not representative of the opponent's actual intentions (see contextomy).
3. Present someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, refute that person's arguments, and pretend that every upholder of that position, and thus the position itself, has been defeated.
4. Invent a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs that are criticized, and pretend that the person represents a group of whom the speaker is critical.
5. Oversimplify a person's argument into a simple analogy, which can then be attacked.
I know Meitz keeps bringing this up, so here goes: As far as I can tell, 1, 2, 3 & 4 have never actually been done by his detractors in this thread. Meitz seems to keep hitting on 5, believing that we are using a simple analogy to defeat his argument. Only it's not a simple analogy, when we compare his argument as applied to Sony. We're simply applying his logic to a very, very similar position, but one in which he is not spelling doom and gloom.
So, how does a profit that's turned 3 years ago reverse the fact that they're still losing money? They can turn a profit only to fall into another billion dollar lull?
Research and Development. Same reason Sony's game division is in the hole right now, even with the strong sales of PS2 products.
It is an investment. You have to spend money to make money, and all that.
They've been spending billions over 6 years though. I mean I could understand the whole R&D side of the argument if they were actually doing R&D.
They had a head start at the market, kept losing money yet are still losing money.
I was just explaining why they went from a profit to a loss like that after Halo 2.
Yeah, 6 billion is a hell of a lose but MS knew going into this thing that they wouldn't make any money the first generation. They actually did better than they expected, though. For the current generation they expect to be all profit starting THIS fiscal year, which is why they attached the $1billion Warrenty Extension fee onto LAST fiscal year. If that $1billion hurt their profit margin for this fiscal year/Xmas season their stackholders would be pissed, since MS said they would start turning a profit this season.
Also, let us not forget, that the whole reason MS jumped into the game market was to establish a living room presence. They feel the future is moving towards the living room and don't want to miss out. They started doing so with WebTV, but that sucked so they looked around for another way to make a presence in the living room. Video games were doing well and they had some developers of their own on the PC end of gaming so it was a natural fit.
edit: beat'd
Exactly, and all signs still point to them turning a profit this fiscal year (which is 08).
Now if they lose another billion dollars this fiscal year, this debate will have some merrit, but certainly not now.
Meiz why is it so hard to understand for you that the only reason MS was still in the red is because of extra billion dollars the new extended warranty/refunds are costing them. If not for that they would already be in the black and the returns from the division are still rising. They aren't going to "magically" come out of the red next year, they have been getting to that point steadily for awhile and realistically should already be there, but the hardware problems on the 360 fucked them there.
But it dosen't change thier upward trend, and from here on out they are set to make increasing profits every year.
I question the validity of this statement however it's a moot point. I already enumerated the fact that the hardware failures was one of the elements that lead me to believe MS is pulling out of the race.
Like I said, September and everything after will be the turning point when Halo 3 comes out but if they're still stagnating, I fear the worst. And who's to say they can keep that trend going anyways?
They have one of the best holiday line-ups in video game history, and a price drop is likely coming soon... Your doom and gloom predictions (still) make absolutely no sense. You clearly do not understand that (as has been said MANY times), the most successful consoles have always taken an early loss to reap rewards later. Most people call this an investment.
Continued loses into the year you predicted and banked on making money is no longer an investment.
Like I said, I'm anxious to see what September brings.
Meiz why is it so hard to understand for you that the only reason MS was still in the red is because of extra billion dollars the new extended warranty/refunds are costing them. If not for that they would already be in the black and the returns from the division are still rising. They aren't going to "magically" come out of the red next year, they have been getting to that point steadily for awhile and realistically should already be there, but the hardware problems on the 360 fucked them there.
But it dosen't change thier upward trend, and from here on out they are set to make increasing profits every year.
I question the validity of this statement however it's a moot point. I already enumerated the fact that the hardware failures was one of the elements that lead me to believe MS is pulling out of the race.
Like I said, September and everything after will be the turning point when Halo 3 comes out but if they're still stagnating, I fear the worst. And who's to say they can keep that trend going anyways?
They have one of the best holiday line-ups in video game history, and a price drop is likely coming soon... Your doom and gloom predictions (still) make absolutely no sense. You clearly do not understand that (as has been said MANY times), the most successful consoles have always taken an early loss to reap rewards later. Most people call this an investment.
Continued loses into the year you predicted and banked on making money is no longer an investment.
Like I said, I'm anxious to see what September brings.
So bring this up at the end of Microsoft's financial year. Anything you say now is merely wild conjecture that doesn't seem at all rooted in the realities of the market we're discussing.
A: We mention Sony because you're selectively throwing your doom theory at Microsoft, but not at Sony. If you think taking multi-billion dollar losses = about to exit the industry, shouldn't you be suggesting that Nintendo will soon be all alone to rake in cash?
The simple fact is that Microsoft's gaming division is poised to make money next fiscal year. Nobody is suggesting that magically they'll make $6 billion dollars in profit in a single year, but they'll start profitting. That's all that's important. You do not eliminate the division as they start to make a profit because they were in the red before that. That makes no sense. Hence, why I call your argument nonsense. Because it is.
Well I call your tact and poise in the face of making statements refuting mine to be laughable.
Sniping out arguments and dismissing them as nonsense doesn't get your point across, it just makes you look weak and childish.
A: We mention Sony because you're selectively throwing your doom theory at Microsoft, but not at Sony. If you think taking multi-billion dollar losses = about to exit the industry, shouldn't you be suggesting that Nintendo will soon be all alone to rake in cash?
The simple fact is that Microsoft's gaming division is poised to make money next fiscal year. Nobody is suggesting that magically they'll make $6 billion dollars in profit in a single year, but they'll start profitting. That's all that's important. You do not eliminate the division as they start to make a profit because they were in the red before that. That makes no sense. Hence, why I call your argument nonsense. Because it is.
Well I call your tact and poise in the face of making statements refuting mine to be laughable.
Sniping out arguments and dismissing them as nonsense doesn't get your point across, it just makes you look weak and childish.
Another dumb dumb to ignore.
I find it amusing that you chide me for lacking tact and poise... I recall you calling me a cunt tard earlier in the thread. You're truly the very definition of tact and poise.
But back on topic, your belief that Microsoft will suddenly retreat from the market is just not based on any real logic. You're basically suggesting that Microsoft will just give up on their 6 billion dollar investment and go home, just as the venture becomes profitable. Can you at least admit that there is no logic in pulling out at this point?
A: We mention Sony because you're selectively throwing your doom theory at Microsoft, but not at Sony. If you think taking multi-billion dollar losses = about to exit the industry, shouldn't you be suggesting that Nintendo will soon be all alone to rake in cash?
The simple fact is that Microsoft's gaming division is poised to make money next fiscal year. Nobody is suggesting that magically they'll make $6 billion dollars in profit in a single year, but they'll start profitting. That's all that's important. You do not eliminate the division as they start to make a profit because they were in the red before that. That makes no sense. Hence, why I call your argument nonsense. Because it is.
Well I call your tact and poise in the face of making statements refuting mine to be laughable.
Sniping out arguments and dismissing them as nonsense doesn't get your point across, it just makes you look weak and childish.
Another dumb dumb to ignore.
So your strategy now is to instead of replying to arguments is to call people names?
Childish? Lacking tact and poise? Look in the mirror
A: We mention Sony because you're selectively throwing your doom theory at Microsoft, but not at Sony. If you think taking multi-billion dollar losses = about to exit the industry, shouldn't you be suggesting that Nintendo will soon be all alone to rake in cash?
The simple fact is that Microsoft's gaming division is poised to make money next fiscal year. Nobody is suggesting that magically they'll make $6 billion dollars in profit in a single year, but they'll start profitting. That's all that's important. You do not eliminate the division as they start to make a profit because they were in the red before that. That makes no sense. Hence, why I call your argument nonsense. Because it is.
Well I call your tact and poise in the face of making statements refuting mine to be laughable.
Sniping out arguments and dismissing them as nonsense doesn't get your point across, it just makes you look weak and childish.
Another dumb dumb to ignore.
So your strategy now is to instead of replying to arguments is to call people names?
Childish? Lacking tact and poise? Look in the mirror
Well, it's been his tact since the beginning. Just look where he called Evangir a "cunt tard."
I've responded time and time again to all arguments placed on the table and have tried to be refuted by name calling, straw man arguments and have had the utmost tact and poise until you decided to resort to the same antics.
Well, when you grow up perhaps we can have a discussion worthy of my intellect.
Otherwise, you're not worth the time, you lack critical thinking and logic.
Also, Microsoft planned to be making profit in 2007.
Well, when you grow up perhaps we can have a discussion worthy of my intellect.
Man, I wanna be Meiz when I grow up. He's totally smart than us and he's a grown up, which means he can call people dumbasses and cunt tards and it's cool.
Hell they were expecting to make profits on the Xbox 360 period.
Quote John Connors, Microsoft's chief financial officer:
"The real crossover though, in terms of profitability delta, is when we get to the next generation of the Xbox console. Where we are today in the life-cycle of that console, it’s very clear if you look at previous life-cycles for consoles, that as you get to the end, the pricing dynamic heads one direction, and that’s down. With the current cost of goods, which we have taken down fairly dramatically, there’s no way to make money on the console in this first generation. So the key is, how do we do in the hardware design and the chip-set design and the supply-chain design with Version 2. If we do as expected, we have a good crossover point where that big negative number is no longer a negative number, and because of the size of the revenue and the size of the percentage that is negative, when you have a crossover, that’s a good contribution in terms of bottom line."
Anyway, let's enumerate the giant jumps to conclusions made in this thread
1. Due to the warranty extension/RRD/Peter Moore leaving, the xbox 360 will lose money this coming year
2. MS expected the xbox division to be making money by now
3. MS will ditch the 360 if it continues to lose money and thereby abandon the centerpiece of its strategy to invade the living room and expand beyond the software market
Sniping out arguments and dismissing them as nonsense doesn't get your point across, it just makes you look weak and childish.
Which is funny, cause thats all you've been doing in this thread.
Ah well, like you said, just another dumb dumb to ignore.
When have I ever dismantled someone points sir?
Why are you responding to me?
My vastly inferior intellect can not hope to compare to your grown up intellect, so I'll just sit here and hope and dream I can be as awesome as you one day.
Sniping out arguments and dismissing them as nonsense doesn't get your point across, it just makes you look weak and childish.
Which is funny, cause thats all you've been doing in this thread.
Ah well, like you said, just another dumb dumb to ignore.
When have I ever dismantled someone points sir?
Why are you responding to me?
My vastly inferior intellect can not hope to compare to your grown up intellect, so I'll just sit here and hope and dream I can be as awesome as you one day.
Ok, I was just checking to see if you could provide an argument other then the usual tripe.
Anyway, let's enumerate the giant jumps to conclusions made in this thread
1. Due to the warranty extension/RRD/Peter Moore leaving, the xbox 360 will lose money this coming year
2. MS expected the xbox division to be making money by now
3. MS will ditch the 360 if it continues to lose money and thereby abandon the centerpiece of its strategy to invade the living room and expand beyond the software market
Anybody have others?
The one where the Wii will be dead by 2008, the 360 will be posting massive losses and ps2 fans will buy ps3's and it'll lead the market
Hell they were expecting to make profits on the Xbox 360 period.
Quote John Connors, Microsoft's chief financial officer:
"The real crossover though, in terms of profitability delta, is when we get to the next generation of the Xbox console. Where we are today in the life-cycle of that console, it’s very clear if you look at previous life-cycles for consoles, that as you get to the end, the pricing dynamic heads one direction, and that’s down. With the current cost of goods, which we have taken down fairly dramatically, there’s no way to make money on the console in this first generation. So the key is, how do we do in the hardware design and the chip-set design and the supply-chain design with Version 2. If we do as expected, we have a good crossover point where that big negative number is no longer a negative number, and because of the size of the revenue and the size of the percentage that is negative, when you have a crossover, that’s a good contribution in terms of bottom line."
Notice how that quote doesn't say "We expect to make money by July 2007" or anything close to that. There's still plenty of time for the 360 to make money.
Nor does the quote say that they would pull out of the market if the 360 didn't make money. That is corporate speak trying to assuage investors, not an insight into their long term strategy.
DesertBox on
0
Clutch414Dodge Swinger.......WHENEVER IT FEELS RIGHT!!!Registered Userregular
Anyway, let's enumerate the giant jumps to conclusions made in this thread
1. Due to the warranty extension/RRD/Peter Moore leaving, the xbox 360 will lose money this coming year
2. MS expected to be making money by now
3. MS will ditch the 360 if it continues to lose money and thereby abandon the centerpiece of its strategy to invade the living room and expand beyond the software market
Anybody have others?
Yes:
4. Evangir is a "cunt tard."
5. The rest of us are "dumb dumbs."
6. Meiz has TEH INTELLECT.
Posts
A: We mention Sony because you're selectively throwing your doom theory at Microsoft, but not at Sony. If you think taking multi-billion dollar losses = about to exit the industry, shouldn't you be suggesting that Nintendo will soon be all alone to rake in cash?
The simple fact is that Microsoft's gaming division is poised to make money next fiscal year. Nobody is suggesting that magically they'll make $6 billion dollars in profit in a single year, but they'll start profitting. That's all that's important. You do not eliminate the division as they start to make a profit because they were in the red before that. That makes no sense. Hence, why I call your argument nonsense. Because it is.
It was released November 22nd 2005, In 4 months that will be 2 years that it's been out, it had a head start on its competition; I mean I don't really see a reason how this argument is valid considering the focus of mine is the fact that the department has had a steady loss over 6 years totaling 5 billion plus.
100% correct. I couldn't have said it better myself (even though I tried). Explaining to Meiz is like boxing a glacier (to borrow a Colbert-ism).
His points (in a nutshell):
MS LOSSES = DOOM
SONY LOSSES = IRRELEVANT
You simply cannot have it both ways.
Back when Microsoft first had the idea to get into the console business, they knew back then that it would be 6-8 years before they could realistically expect to start making money from it. The hardware failures are a setback I grant you, but you just keep saying over and over again "they have been losing money for 6 years" like Microsoft wasn't expecting that going in.
Tip: they were.
This is the point that Meitz and Vicious keep ignoring. The fact that this was all expected, and definitely planned for.
I was just explaining why they went from a profit to a loss like that after Halo 2.
Yeah, 6 billion is a hell of a lose but MS knew going into this thing that they wouldn't make any money the first generation. They actually did better than they expected, though. For the current generation they expect to be all profit starting THIS fiscal year, which is why they attached the $1billion Warrenty Extension fee onto LAST fiscal year. If that $1billion hurt their profit margin for this fiscal year/Xmas season their stackholders would be pissed, since MS said they would start turning a profit this season.
Also, let us not forget, that the whole reason MS jumped into the game market was to establish a living room presence. They feel the future is moving towards the living room and don't want to miss out. They started doing so with WebTV, but that sucked so they looked around for another way to make a presence in the living room. Video games were doing well and they had some developers of their own on the PC end of gaming so it was a natural fit.
edit: beat'd
One can set up a straw man in the following ways:
1. Present a misrepresentation of the opponent's position, refute it, and pretend that the opponent's actual position has been refuted.
2. Quote an opponent's words out of context -- i.e., choose quotations that are not representative of the opponent's actual intentions (see contextomy).
3. Present someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, refute that person's arguments, and pretend that every upholder of that position, and thus the position itself, has been defeated.
4. Invent a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs that are criticized, and pretend that the person represents a group of whom the speaker is critical.
5. Oversimplify a person's argument into a simple analogy, which can then be attacked.
I know Meitz keeps bringing this up, so here goes: As far as I can tell, 1, 2, 3 & 4 have never actually been done by his detractors in this thread. Meitz seems to keep hitting on 5, believing that we are using a simple analogy to defeat his argument. Only it's not a simple analogy, when we compare his argument as applied to Sony. We're simply applying his logic to a very, very similar position, but one in which he is not spelling doom and gloom.
Exactly, and all signs still point to them turning a profit this fiscal year (which is 08).
Now if they lose another billion dollars this fiscal year, this debate will have some merrit, but certainly not now.
You are evil if you think children should be locked up for their own safety.
This is straw man argument, I dont think Meiz realises that this kind of argument has not been said in this thread yet.
Continued loses into the year you predicted and banked on making money is no longer an investment.
Like I said, I'm anxious to see what September brings.
So bring this up at the end of Microsoft's financial year. Anything you say now is merely wild conjecture that doesn't seem at all rooted in the realities of the market we're discussing.
They lost 6 billion on the games division? A drop in the ocean guys.
ocean of doom?
SSB code- 0216-0856-6886 PM me so I can add you
More like doomed ocean, amirite?
ocean of evil
This is all you said.
MS was supposed to be making money by now, they're not though.
Weak ass rebuttal and considering the volume of people offering somewhat intelligible responses, I'm simply going to ignore you from now on.
You're doing it wrong.
Ocean of doom.
No, they're supposed to be turning a profit next financial year. Come back then.
MS was not expecting to be making money by now - see above. 2008 is when they expected to get into the black.
Well I call your tact and poise in the face of making statements refuting mine to be laughable.
Sniping out arguments and dismissing them as nonsense doesn't get your point across, it just makes you look weak and childish.
Another dumb dumb to ignore.
I find it amusing that you chide me for lacking tact and poise... I recall you calling me a cunt tard earlier in the thread. You're truly the very definition of tact and poise.
But back on topic, your belief that Microsoft will suddenly retreat from the market is just not based on any real logic. You're basically suggesting that Microsoft will just give up on their 6 billion dollar investment and go home, just as the venture becomes profitable. Can you at least admit that there is no logic in pulling out at this point?
So your strategy now is to instead of replying to arguments is to call people names?
Childish? Lacking tact and poise? Look in the mirror
Ah well, like you said, just another dumb dumb to ignore.
OH, THE DELICIOUS IRONY!!!
Over 5 pages you've made 6 billion retarded posts.
Well, it's been his tact since the beginning. Just look where he called Evangir a "cunt tard."
To me, that's the epitome of tact and poise.
Well, when you grow up perhaps we can have a discussion worthy of my intellect.
Otherwise, you're not worth the time, you lack critical thinking and logic.
Also, Microsoft planned to be making profit in 2007.
When have I ever dismantled someone points sir?
After his last post, I have to agree with you now. Wow. Just... wow.
Quote John Connors, Microsoft's chief financial officer:
That was in January 27, 2004
Source:
http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/microsoft/archives/001336.html
1. Due to the warranty extension/RRD/Peter Moore leaving, the xbox 360 will lose money this coming year
2. MS expected the xbox division to be making money by now
3. MS will ditch the 360 if it continues to lose money and thereby abandon the centerpiece of its strategy to invade the living room and expand beyond the software market
Anybody have others?
My vastly inferior intellect can not hope to compare to your grown up intellect, so I'll just sit here and hope and dream I can be as awesome as you one day.
Ok, I was just checking to see if you could provide an argument other then the usual tripe.
You obviously can't.
The one where the Wii will be dead by 2008, the 360 will be posting massive losses and ps2 fans will buy ps3's and it'll lead the market
That one made me choke on my drink
Eh, other folks have already done it better, and you just bury your head in the sand anyway.
Notice how that quote doesn't say "We expect to make money by July 2007" or anything close to that. There's still plenty of time for the 360 to make money.
Nor does the quote say that they would pull out of the market if the 360 didn't make money. That is corporate speak trying to assuage investors, not an insight into their long term strategy.
Yes:
4. Evangir is a "cunt tard."
5. The rest of us are "dumb dumbs."
6. Meiz has TEH INTELLECT.