EA profits slump

Deepak

B3D Yoddha
Veteran
Link

Game giant Electronic Arts (EA) has seen profits fall 91% ahead of new consoles due out later this year. The firm said net profits for the three months to March were $8m (£4.2m), down from $90m the previous year :oops: , with profits for the full year dropping 13%.

EA made its name with sports simulations but also produces games such as The Sims.

The two biggest players in the games console business, Sony and Microsoft, are both releasing new models in 2005.

Neither the PlayStation 3 nor the Xbox 2 have release dates set yet, and analysts said gamers often held off on purchases in order to invest in software for new consoles.

Industry slump

PJ McNealy of American Technology Research pointed out that the slump was affecting the industry as a whole.

"These guys are the blue-chip company of their sector," he said.
"This is only proof that they are not immune to the down-cycle."

Growing competition and higher price-tags attached to lucrative licences for film and other tie-ins were also to blame for the shortfall, EA said - all factors which affect its competitors.

But some observers said EA would have to work hard to improve their product range.

"I think this is all catalogue-driven," said Michael Pachter, an analyst at Wedbush Morgan.

"I think their catalogue has got weak because they don't have as competitive a line-up for the last six months as they did in the past."
 
Deepak said:
"I think their catalogue has got weak because they don't have as competitive a line-up for the last six months as they did in the past."
Do you think any of these analysts actually play console games? How does he decided what is and is not a weak lineup?
 
Shifty Geezer said:
Do you think any of these analysts actually play console games? How does he decided what is and is not a weak lineup?

Maybe they do, or maybe they thought such a big slump couldn't have been due to good lineup. :)
 
Maybe the constant milking of franchises has caught up to them?


That said, it has not hurt Nintendo yet, well, profit wise anyways.
 
They lost so much money because Sega Sammy/Take-Two managed to finally take some of their precious sports market, forcing them to cut their software prices and ravage those profit margins.
 
I find it astounding that EA remains at the top considering the shit they publish year for year. Seriously, the only games I ever enjoyed from EA were the ones that were first independant and later aquired. The only exceptions are SSX (EA Big) and the original Need for Speed back in the days. Oh and Desert Strike of course, on the Amiga. :oops:
 
Lazy8s said:
They lost so much money because Sega Sammy/Take-Two managed to finally take some of their precious sports market, forcing them to cut their software prices and ravage those profit margins.

Uh, did those sport titles sell that well? I don't believe so.

I'm guessing the loss in profits could be due to the huge amount they're paying to lock franchises.

/shrug.
 
Ty:
Uh, did those sport titles sell that well?
NFL 2K5 sold over a million on both platforms and beat Madden in sales on Xbox. EA's pricing reduction was applied to other titles in their sports line too at their launches to be competitive.

The ESPN games ended up selling competitively all around.
 
I had no idea they sold that well...that is, I was still under the impression that EA still killed the competition.

How well did the respective EA titles sell? Still the lion's share? Have EA's marketshare decreased significantly or were these customers simply buying from both camps?
 
EA still grabbed the largest share of the sports market, but Sega Sammy/Take-Two brought in a lot of new buyers -- the value line purchasers, people who had just gotten a new console with the price drops, people experimenting with a football game for the first time, etc. -- and really expanded the demographic.

Publishing carries high fixed costs, especially with sports titles which tend to have mutliple licenses attached. Losing the much fatter margins of the $49.99 MSRP for the $39.99 and $29.99 points, even with some slight savings on the tiered licensing fee from the hardware manufacturers, can be devastating to earnings if it wasn't initially expected.
 
Anyone think it might be EA backlash? There are alot of peeved people over EA's dealing with liscences. Not to mention their sub par work on games. EA games seemed to be rushed especially this year. Not even sure if they were, or if they were what caused it. One thing is for sure they need to fire their beta testers :devilish:

But then again its EA and now thats its even larger than ever has liscences I think they can buckle down and do it right (least I hope they do). Their Madden Football better be nothing short of flawless becasue they have NO competition and only deadline is to coordinate with the NFL season.
 
My guess is EA will make a kings ransom come August. With Madden being the only game in town they should be able to charge 59.99 and get away with it.

Also I wonder if EAs profits being so far down is the reason we are hearing rumors of next gen games being 59.99 and up?
 
... 59.99 and up?
i'm not going to handle that. i'm still pretty pissed at myself for buying DooM3 for $54.99 on launch day for the PC, only to have it drop to $39.99 within a few months and come out later on the xbox at $59.99 including a pretty decent metal case (that wasn't even offered to PC buyers) and including the first 2 DooMs. $49.99 each for PSP titles is pretty outragous, too, considering the lineup is filled with ports (everything from EA) or re-hashes of old games (ridge racer, darkstalkers, wipeout).

if they start charging $60 a title again i'll retract myself completely from the console market and only play games on the PC.
 
Back
Top