I'm sure FF:CC will attract no attention, too. Hehe...
"Analysts: Nintendo facing its biggest challenge"
- Thread starter Wunderchu
- Start date
I think he just wants to know from what you're pulling your numbers, that you're definitively making such statements.
Erm..... I have yet to see someone quoting numbers that show Teasy wrong. ALL sources confirm GC's second place in hw sales AFAIK (when quoting numbers, that is, not that BS report we're discussing here). That's NPD, Mediacreate, you name it. If someone finds this not to be true we'd all be interested to see those odd numbers...
cthellis42
I read his post as asking what the article actually meant by second place. Basically saying that if I don't know what the analyst means by second place then how can I possibly say he's wrong. I still believe this is what he was saying. But if he wants worldwide sales numbers then I will be perfectly happy to provide them for him.
I read his post as asking what the article actually meant by second place. Basically saying that if I don't know what the analyst means by second place then how can I possibly say he's wrong. I still believe this is what he was saying. But if he wants worldwide sales numbers then I will be perfectly happy to provide them for him.
Teasy said:
He might have been talking about the USA market only, in which case he'd be right...
What i meant with my previous posts is that i really don't see the point of getting all worked up for "who's second and who's third" if the difference is 500,000 units. And i'm sorry to say, there is people who do get worked up for such silly reasons, that's all.
I was in no way discrediting u Teasy, or Phil or anyone. I was just commenting on what i just find really useless...
Joe DeFuria
Legend
Teasy said:
Erm...where are those numbers? Show me the numbers in the report that contradict that assertion...
First of all, a few of you have confused a financial analyst with a market research analyst. In-Stat/MDR are market research analysts. I should I know since I worked for a market research firm for over 4 years. In-Stat/MDR was one of the companies we competed against. Our primary customers were not investors, but instead companies in the industry. The companies that bought our reports were presidents, VP of marketing, etc that wanted to know what the status of the industry that they were in or going to be in. That means they're getting market numbers(units sold, market share, etc) of the whole industry and not financial numbers or advice for public companies. In some instances, reports from market research firms are sponsored by one or more companies. There are advantages to the sponsors like getting more detailed data than what's in the report, being able to receive it before other companies, etc. However, if the market research firm plans to sell this report to other companies in the industry then they can not afford to show bias to any single company, because the other companies will see the data as being useless. When the reports sell for thousands of dollars you can't afford to loose any customers especially considering when these reports only come out quarterly or yearly. Are there instances of errors, inconsistencies or bias in all market reports? Yes, they're made by non-perfect humans, but does that mean that the firm and all their reports should be considered fiction? I don't think so, not by a long shot.
Anyway, I have to agree with Joe here, that until we see their data and their methodologies for collecting said data, then I don't think we have the right to call their data biased, bunk, etc. If you believe your data is more accurate then spend the $3000 and buy their report and show us. You can also go to the source and tell them that they're wrong. Here's the contact info...
Brian O'Rourke, Senior Analyst
Phone: 480-609-4527
Email: borourke@reedbusiness.com
Kirsten Skedd, Marketing Manager
Phone: 480-609-4534
Email: kskedd@reedbusiness.com
BTW, not sure how much of the site you guys looked over, but on the page I linked previously there is an abstract and a list of the table of contents, figures and tables. It would be interesting to see all of that data like that for free on the Internet. Somehow I doubt we will.
Tommy McClain
Anyway, I have to agree with Joe here, that until we see their data and their methodologies for collecting said data, then I don't think we have the right to call their data biased, bunk, etc. If you believe your data is more accurate then spend the $3000 and buy their report and show us. You can also go to the source and tell them that they're wrong. Here's the contact info...
Brian O'Rourke, Senior Analyst
Phone: 480-609-4527
Email: borourke@reedbusiness.com
Kirsten Skedd, Marketing Manager
Phone: 480-609-4534
Email: kskedd@reedbusiness.com
BTW, not sure how much of the site you guys looked over, but on the page I linked previously there is an abstract and a list of the table of contents, figures and tables. It would be interesting to see all of that data like that for free on the Internet. Somehow I doubt we will.
Tommy McClain
Joe
There are no numbers in that article. The second place thing is taken from this comment (as well as a couple of others):
AzBat
As far as I'm concerned if they don't readily back up there claims publically then I'll take the publically available info from sources like NPD, MediaCreate and ChartTrack ahead of them any day of the week. I take your point on not calling there report bias or crap or whatever, and I certainly wouldn't do that.
There are no numbers in that article. The second place thing is taken from this comment (as well as a couple of others):
AzBat
As far as I'm concerned if they don't readily back up there claims publically then I'll take the publically available info from sources like NPD, MediaCreate and ChartTrack ahead of them any day of the week. I take your point on not calling there report bias or crap or whatever, and I certainly wouldn't do that.
Joe DeFuria
Legend
Teasy said:
My point exactly.
http://www.gameinformer.com/News/Story/200312/N03.1202.1048.33672.htm
[sarcasm]I feel sorry for Nintendo, GameCube is sooooo doomed[/sarcasm]
[sarcasm]I feel sorry for Nintendo, GameCube is sooooo doomed[/sarcasm]
Just read thru all the posts. Its interesting some ppl just ignores the profit side of things and care for the numbers.
I find it difficult for anyone to argue whose 2nd place without definitive source(s) for worldwide figures. Even if you do know, what’s more important? A company throwing $X Billions to be 2nd or a much smaller game only company making a profit being 3rd and still remain competitive? Yes, it’s the same old argument!
The report is definitely not a definitive representation of the current state of the market given we don't know their sources and what real work was involved. I'll take it as their view of the market, bias or not (views are always bias in some degree on way or another).
For those that enjoy Xbox games will like to believe this report and probably really content with what MS is doing, but the truth is MS should be gunning for Sony for the amount of investment in their entry into the market.
From the Nintendo’s view of life, its doing ok given its issues and lack of better 3rd party relations, but things can be a lot rosier, thus plenty of room for improvement.
Personally, there is a lot more games I want to splash cash on the Cube then the Box, but that’s my taste. For the money MS forked out, I honestly hoped they have produced more quality games in all genres by now, rather the more PC centric releases.
I find it difficult for anyone to argue whose 2nd place without definitive source(s) for worldwide figures. Even if you do know, what’s more important? A company throwing $X Billions to be 2nd or a much smaller game only company making a profit being 3rd and still remain competitive? Yes, it’s the same old argument!
The report is definitely not a definitive representation of the current state of the market given we don't know their sources and what real work was involved. I'll take it as their view of the market, bias or not (views are always bias in some degree on way or another).
For those that enjoy Xbox games will like to believe this report and probably really content with what MS is doing, but the truth is MS should be gunning for Sony for the amount of investment in their entry into the market.
From the Nintendo’s view of life, its doing ok given its issues and lack of better 3rd party relations, but things can be a lot rosier, thus plenty of room for improvement.
Personally, there is a lot more games I want to splash cash on the Cube then the Box, but that’s my taste. For the money MS forked out, I honestly hoped they have produced more quality games in all genres by now, rather the more PC centric releases.
Deepak said:
I wish Nintendo would break down and release the N5 under the Panasonic label. Basically, take the fight to Sony. Though I love Nintendo's philosophy of, "Playing the game its way", Nintendo needs to be damn aggressive to secure its long term presence (I think I stole that from Sonic
). MS and Sony are not going to suddenly go away.Short term, US sales for GameCube hardware seems healthy, which is always a good sign.
Matsushita and it's company Panasonic have had a few tries already. They failed with 3DO and its successor pulling out completely.
Nintendo under Panasonic would be another disaster IMHO. Nintendo could not get on with Sony (or the other way around) - Nintendo's way of doing things is Nintendo's way of doing things.
Nintendo under Panasonic would be another disaster IMHO. Nintendo could not get on with Sony (or the other way around) - Nintendo's way of doing things is Nintendo's way of doing things.
They need to buy sega . Buying them will give them a sports line up and all of the sega fans will go to the next nintendo system knowing all the games they want will be on that system and they can get sega at a song and a dance .a4164 said:Deepak said:
I wish Nintendo would break down and release the N5 under the Panasonic label. Basically, take the fight to Sony. Though I love Nintendo's philosophy of, "Playing the game its way", Nintendo needs to be damn aggressive to secure its long term presence (I think I stole that from Sonic
Short term, US sales for GameCube hardware seems healthy, which is always a good sign.
Any of them can just keep outright buying developers... I'm rather hoping they do less "game/library purchasing" and more hardware innovation, middleware supply and development assistance to increase third-party support and uniqueness, and heck, get their OWN in-house developers to work on showcase titles for their platforms and inspire others. (Obviously that last part doesn't apply to Nintendo. )
)
