Wii After a Year

[Zaphod]

When was the last time that idea was suggested on this forum?

Yesterday? "Sony could buy 10 Nintendos without really noticing that in their financials"...

It was good to have this little (slightly off) topical sidetrack to see just how much the Wii (and DS) have impacted "tiny" Nintendo's finances during its first year of existence. Puts things into perspective.

 

[_xxx_]

Well it was a bit far fetched But still they have much higher value, like 3x Nintendo.

 

[Zaphod]

A bit far fetched? With their current financials, I'd say Sony might manage to buy at best half a Nintendo (could probably buy a lot of other companies about Nintendo's size though).

And yeah: If we disregard stock market valuation and assume that we got both companies for free with the intention of liquidating them tomorrow (just looking at total equity), then Sony is actually ~3x more 'valuable'.

 

[ErnstH]

A bit far fetched? With their current financials, I'd say Sony might manage to buy at best half a Nintendo (could probably buy a lot of other companies about Nintendo's size though).

And yeah: If we disregard stock market valuation and assume that we got both companies for free with the intention of liquidating them tomorrow (just looking at total equity), then Sony is actually ~3x more 'valuable'.

But a company is worth far more than just the value of its assets. A company that makes huge profits and has a high future earnings potential is far more valuable than a company with an equal amount of assets with lower future profits.

Compare it to money on a bank account. An account with 0% interest is worth less than an account with 4% interest, even if both contain the same amount of money.

 

[liuelson]

If the PS3 and 360 was the same price with everything you needed (game storage, a game, etc) I don't think the Wii would be selling this well.

No way to prove it of course

Actually, if someone had the data, they could compare the sales of the Wii at this price point v. last gen consoles at a similar price point. If your argument is truly that console demand is overwhelming determined by price alone ("price is king"), that should actually be pretty easy to demonstrate with data. If, however, one believes that non-numerical factors like "waggle" are more responsible for Wii sales, that is where you could say "no way to prove it."

 

[Zaphod]

But a company is worth far more than just the value of its assets.

I know. That's why I specifically qualified it by "if we disregard stock market valuation", which of course includes all these other factors. Only if I got them both for free and had to liquidate is Sony more valuable.

A decent analogy for the stock market valuation is whether I could both for free, couldn't liquidate, and had to give one back immediately. Which one to keep? Given Sony's current problems and complexity vs. Nintendo's current successes and simplicity, I think looking at it that way makes it easier to understand why the market favors Nintendo.

 

[liuelson]

Edit: price and demand have a very strong relationship when you toss in a third variable.... competition.

You could probably do a macro analysis of the market as a whole to determine price elasticity of demand, rather than focusing on one manufacturer compared to another. Your argument is that console purchasers have a very high PED.

 

[liuelson]

Anyone got 47.7 billion to spend? You'll possibly make out up to 2:1 by slaughtering it and selling off the parts.

I can only think of 2 tech companies that would be willing to spend that kind of money...

 

[archangelmorph]

I can only think of 2 tech companies that would be willing to spend that kind of money...

Apple & Microsoft?

 

[Zaphod]

I can only think of 2 tech companies that would be willing to spend that kind of money...

In general, or for Sony? Not that it's really relevant as the buy-to-liquidate comment was made mostly in jest (they have, of course got liabilities too, not just assets). Seriously, I can't see anyone wanting to buy all of Sony (even if they could). Too messy.

However - from Stringer's recent statements - I do think he's looking to divest certain parts, but damed if I'm sure which parts those might be...

Anyway: This is off topic, so I'll leave it at that.

 

[ninzel]

Well it looks like not only are Wii owners buying GH3 but playing it hardcore.
http://gonintendo.com/?p=30200

It's a pretty interesting and revealing stat imo.

 

[PARANOiA]

Well it looks like not only are Wii owners buying GH3 but playing it hardcore.
http://gonintendo.com/?p=30200

It's a pretty interesting and revealing stat imo.

Wow. Are all versions scored the same, with no real differences (eg, easier to pull off moves with the Wii-tar)?

 

[ninzel]

Wow. Are all versions scored the same, with no real differences (eg, easier to pull off moves with the Wii-tar)?

Well The Wii version is only in mono,but all have scored basically in the same range.

 

[PARANOiA]

Well The Wii version is only in mono,but all have scored basically in the same range.

I mean scored as in number of points for performing the same song with the same skill across all versions.

 

[ninzel]

I mean scored as in number of points for performing the same song with the same skill across all versions.

AFAIK they are the same. Judging by the prices that GH3 Wii is fetching on places like Ebay and craigslist,some owners are pretty big fans.
I'm curious,if the top scores had come from 360 owners,would you have wondered the same thing?

 

[Teasy]

Well it was a bit far fetched But still they have much higher value, like 3x Nintendo.

Saying that Sony could afford to buy Nintendo at all would be a bit far fetched. Saying that a part of Sony's company could buy Nintendo 10 times without noticing a difference is......... nope I can't think of a word to describe it

 

[PARANOiA]

I'm curious,if the top scores had come from 360 owners,would you have wondered the same thing?

Definitely not - I'd have picked (360 = PS3) > Wii.

Everyone I know with a Wii is not the kind of gamer I'd expect to get super-crazy-insane high scores in a GH game. They'll all super casuals, picking it up largely for Wii Sports, Rayman and whatnot. In fact, when I started trying to convince a friend to get Mario, she said, "oh, is it supposed to be ok is it? I haven't heard anything about it!"

I've never actually met a "hardcore" Wii gamer - and I'd expect those kinds of gamers to own the "superior" versions on 360 or PS3 (ie, HD + non-mono).

 

[itsmydamnation]

snip

Hi my names Andrew.


you now know a hardcore gamer who owns a wii and not a Xbox or ps3. but i am stuck in the past abit, 1994 for the win(in terms of gaming quality!)!!!

 

[Cryect]

I've never actually met a "hardcore" Wii gamer - and I'd expect those kinds of gamers to own the "superior" versions on 360 or PS3 (ie, HD + non-mono).

Heh, we are definitely out there. Personally its because I'm a PC Gamer mainly and still waiting for a little more differentiation in the 360 before I pick that up. I've just always found Nintendo has best complemented the PC gaming experience and get the other consoles normally as they drop in price and build up more significant libraries. A solely Wii owner who is hardcore gaming I hope though is getting in lots of VC usage.

 

[ninzel]

Definitely not - I'd have picked (360 = PS3) > Wii.

Everyone I know with a Wii is not the kind of gamer I'd expect to get super-crazy-insane high scores in a GH game. They'll all super casuals, picking it up largely for Wii Sports, Rayman and whatnot. In fact, when I started trying to convince a friend to get Mario, she said, "oh, is it supposed to be ok is it? I haven't heard anything about it!"

I've never actually met a "hardcore" Wii gamer - and I'd expect those kinds of gamers to own the "superior" versions on 360 or PS3 (ie, HD + non-mono).

No offense but your opinion on the typical Wii owner is so cliched I have a hard time believing you know many Wii owners at all. Maybe you should get to know some more before basing your stereotypes on internet chatter.