Ah, well. Everyone should have listened to you back then 
could Gamecube end up 2nd place for last-gen ?
- Thread starter Megadrive1988
- Start date
fearsomepirate said:
The articles are out there if you want to search for them.
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-938999.html
I remember reading another aticle that specifically said they expected to lose 4 + billion over the life of the console.
Well, that's a post-XB-release article after some real sales figures. The only pre-laucnh estimate mentioned there is $800 million lost over 8 years. Not an insubstantial figure, but not an expectation to lose billions to secure a foothold entering the race. With some quick Googling i haven't managed to come up with any such predictions either.
Shifty Geezer said:
Well YES it's a post xbox release article, you don't really think you'll see an article out before xbox launched stating how much they expected to lose? that type of information doesn't come out to the public unless they want it to.
For one the 800 million over 8 years was an estimate from 1999. clearly not a valid estimate. The next estimate mentioned claimed MS expected to lose X amount of dollars in 2002 and that would raise past a billion in 2003. I'd wager MS already knew how much they were going to lose each year. They have to set budgets and spending estimates. Now I don't know about you, but I'm certain MS already estimated how much they would lose each year xbox was on the market. Those estimates were revised based on the price of the console and manufacturing costs and numerous other factors.
btw I'm not talking about anlysts estimates, i'm only talking what MS was internally forcasting. I mean MS kows how much they are willing to spend, how much the consoles cost to make, exactly how many were manufacured or planned to be manufactured, and generally how much they will get back from software. If you really think they didn't have an idea how much they would lose each year, that would really shock me.
Last edited by a moderator:
Qroach said:
Your point is rather moot. Everyone was talking about what MS expected to lose before the current gen not during. If they were unable to accurately estimate their losses in the middle of the generation, I'd call them incompetent. Nobody suggested that they didn't know what they are in for after 2 or 3 years.
It's MS pre-launch estimated losses that were off by a wide margin. This exemplified by the renegotiation of the Nvidia deal during this generation. The miscalculated their costs and / or the projected sales.
Um, that article nowhere says Microsoft intended to lose $1.1 billion for their 2nd fiscal year, nor that they planned for sales and 3rd-party support to be as poor as they were. That's merely analysts looking at how much money MS had lost, looking at market conditions, and forecasting. In fact, the whole context of the article is a rumor about a new Xbox version intended to gain them marketshare and help them stop losing money.
What everyone is saying is that all along, MS was planning and expecting to lose billions of dollars in a 5-year life cycle and gain only about 16% marketshare. If this was their plan since the beginning, I want to see some evidence of that. I don't want to see how their strategy changed later on. Obviously, by 2004 or 2005, the plan was "cut our losses and start next gen ASAP." I want to see some evidence that this was their plan when they decided to enter the console arena.
I want an investor report or something prior to the Xbox launch where MS or analysts say "OK, we're going to lose billions and get squat for marketshare, but we're just trying to establish a brand presence so that Xbox 2 will be the real success." One source. That's all I'm asking for.
What everyone is saying is that all along, MS was planning and expecting to lose billions of dollars in a 5-year life cycle and gain only about 16% marketshare. If this was their plan since the beginning, I want to see some evidence of that. I don't want to see how their strategy changed later on. Obviously, by 2004 or 2005, the plan was "cut our losses and start next gen ASAP." I want to see some evidence that this was their plan when they decided to enter the console arena.
I want an investor report or something prior to the Xbox launch where MS or analysts say "OK, we're going to lose billions and get squat for marketshare, but we're just trying to establish a brand presence so that Xbox 2 will be the real success." One source. That's all I'm asking for.
Last edited by a moderator:
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
fearsomepirate said:
And you're serious?
That's hilarious.
hupfinsgack said:
Point one, I'm saying the reports of how much they expected to lose came out AFTER MS made those estimates. Long after. They didn't renegotiate a deal they went into arbiration with MS. There was an expectation that the price of components would drop and Nvidia said, umm no. Which is the reason they lost that battle.
fearsomepirate said:
Oh brother. I'm NOT going to continue discussing this with you and the spin of "they planned to loose billions in 5 years while only gaining 16% market share" nonsense. They didn't know what kind of market share or problems they would encounter when they atarted. They DID know how much money they were spending and willing to spend in order to reach Xbox 2.
http://gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?section_name=pub&aid=210
This article states "Sources within Microsoft have quoted internal estimates showing the company losing". Now look at the date of the article. June 2002. Xbox 1 launched in November of 2001. It was on the market for 7 months. Do you really think these "internal estimates" were "new" at the time the article appeared? They were estimates or that quarter and beyond. Come on, use your head...
Anyway there was other articles that stated they were prepared to lose 4+ billion over the course of the xbox 1's life cycle. Did they want to lose this? no. but they certainly aren't dumb enough to NOT figure things out once they had the cost of advertising, software development, hardware manufacturing, etc... factored in.
if your are goign to argue at least attempt at being realistic. If you really want to find out what was going on before it launched just read that book available. "Inside the xbox" or whatever it's called.
Last edited by a moderator:
Without it, how did you decide...Qroach said:
?
How can we know MS went into XB knowing it was going to lose billions without any such reports?
Without that sort of information there's no way to prove MS went into the console business actually expecting to lose $billions. From the linked to report, over 8 years they expected a loss of $800 million, and were willing to go with that. $100 million a year to MS isn't much. That's quite a different plan from expecting to lose nearer to 10x that. That was a plan in 1999. Maybe a year or so later they had revised their plan expecting to lose at least $2 billion due to XB but went ahead with it anyway? Without any reports though, I say your wrong in the assmuption MS knew they were going to lose so much. I think their forecasts were for a lot less and the losses made were a surprise to them. At least, I've never seen any reports saying MS, beofre XB ever launched, were factoring in the possibility of a 4 billion/ Maybe they're out there, but I haven't found them!
Last edited by a moderator:
Shifty Geezer said:
Do you really think these internal estimates reported were made BEFORE or AFTER the XBOX launched? Think logically about it.
like i said before ONCE they knew how much money they wanted to spend, how much it would cost them for hardware, how much to expect to make back on software, how many consoles they could produce, they could formulate and estimate over the life of the console. i mean, do you really think they had no idea how much money they put into the console before it launched, and how much they expected to put in after that? MS is not a stupid company when it comes to financials...
Well for one I really don't see why you keep quoting that. it's an old estimate long before they settled on what hardware would be inside the xbox. That was probably back when it was a geforce 1 based console being proposed.
?
Shifty how can you say what I'm saying is an assumption when there's articles stating that internal estimates revealed 7 months after launch are the only proof we have of them knowing how much they expected to lose. meanwhile, you're arguing that you "think" their forecasts were for a lot less and the losses were a suprise with nothing to support that assumption at all?
Last edited by a moderator:
Only because it's the only before-launch estimate I've ever seen.Qroach said:
To be clear on the point, you said
That means categorically before they released the machine they were anticipating such high losses. Any estimates coming after launch are not 'going into XBox' , but 'having entered the market'. A change of heart after 7 months to revise your position and expect billions in losses isn't the same as knowing your going to lose billions before ever launching the console.
Yes, because that's a POV and I'm not claiming I've read reports that showed MS were expecting to lose no more than $1 billion for XB. Without any hard evidence that before XB launched, MS were expecting losses in the billions, I have only my guesswork on which to form an opinion, thus I explain my reasoning. I might be wrong. And there may be reports out there that show MS were expecting very high losses entering the console race. Until I see them though, given the only figure with have before the race is entered, I stick with my reasoning
Shifty Geezer said:
That's the point I'm making. You heard about this 800 million loss estimate from 1999 reported in the same article where they state that MS had internal estimates stating they would lose over a billion the next following year after launch. How can you look at one estimate and immediately think the second estimate was at the time of the article was written?
I know this. That's why I'm sayign the estimates reproted in that article were not current day estimates they were made months before that. just ebcuase you only heard abotu them when the article was written doesn't mean they were "current" as of the time the article was published.
Yes, because that's a POV and I'm not claiming I've read reports that showed MS were expecting to lose no more than $1 billion for XB. Without any hard evidence that before XB launched, MS were expecting losses in the billions, I have only my guesswork on which to form an opinion, thus I explain my reasoning. I might be wrong. And there may be reports out there that show MS were expecting very high losses entering the console race. Until I see them though, given the only figure with have before the race is entered, I stick with my reasoning
Well that's your point of view that isn't based on anything substantial, yes. the old estimate of 800 million isn't applicable as somethign to base your opinion off, since in 1999 MS had no idea what hardware they would end up using or cost them. As I said before. go read the book "Inside the xbox" or whatever it was called.
did it? im curious
i know at the start they made a profit on evrey console sold (the only one to do so) but i believe now the ps2 sells for more than the manufacturing costs (perhaps for the last couple years) couple this with the 100+ million ps2 owners buying games i believe = greater profits than gc
u misread read that article,estimate given to Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates in 1999 that the Xbox project could lose $900 million over eight years
certainly ms never planned to lose 4+ billion dollars with the xbox
Qroach has already explained this in his replies to me. His idea is that those later estimates (7 months later) existed before the console launched, with estimates of up to a billion a year type losses. Maybe.zed said:
estimate given to Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates in 1999 that the Xbox project could lose $900 million over eight years
certainly ms never planned to lose 4+ billion dollars with the xbox
DuckThor Evil
Legend
fearsomepirate said:Let's say 3 men run 10K Meters. Runner A finishes in 31 minutes. 18 hours later, we see Runner B crawling toward the finish line with a gaping, infected flesh wound on his leg, with runner C tagging behind him by about 100 meters with a broken ankle.
Arguing about how much faster runner C has to limp in order to beat runner B to earn "I didn't get quite as mercilessly slaughtered as you" bragging rights is kind of stupid.
Well yeah you have a point there, however that is off-topic, at the very least you should have pointed that second paragraph to the original poster instead of me.
I merely made a point that catching up someone after the other is quitted is not a very magnificent achievement, I didn't say anything like "MS sure had a strong performance" etc.
The fact that you and Teasy had to step in with weird and off-topic counter arguments was a bit weird though not unexpected.
Last edited by a moderator:
Last I heard the guy with the starting pistol was the son of the guy who started the Gizmondo company. That's only a rumour though.
Similar threads
