• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

No, Microsoft hasn't lost $400 million on Xbox One

mocoworm

Member
Click the link for the full breakdown. What do you think?

http://www.neowin.net/news/no-microsoft-hasnt-lost-400-million-on-xbox-one

In the past week, many articles have hit the web claiming that Microsoft lost $400 million on its relatively new Xbox One console since it launched in November. That would be an interesting fact if it weren’t completely untrue.

The stories all cite Microsoft’s recent 2014 fiscal year financial results as the source of the information, such as today’s Forbes article, though many got their incorrect interpretation of the data from a NeoGAF forum topic. What Microsoft’s financial statements actually say about its Xbox One revenue is much different than what many of the headlines are claiming.

There are two key things to note about Microsoft’s statement. First, this data reflects gross margins (revenue and the cost of revenue), not overall profit or losses. Secondly, and far more importantly, these figures are not totals for the year – they represent the changes over the previous year.

What does this mean? It means Microsoft increased its total revenue from Xbox by $1.7 billion compared to the previous year, while the cost of those sales – including what it costs to manufacture consoles – increased $2.1 billion. Microsoft’s revenue in this category, $1.7 billion, is an increase of 34 percent, which means the starting figure from last year was roughly $5 billion; the $2.1 billion cost of revenue increase is a 72 percent raise, which puts its starting figure at $2.9 billion.

Adding those figures together, that means Xbox sales resulted in roughly $7.1 billion in revenues against roughly $5 billion in costs. That’s not a $400 million difference that outlets such as Forbes are citing – they obtained their erroneous figures by simply adding the yearly increases together.

Still, however, the figures in Microsoft’s report don’t equate to profit or loss. Subtracting the $5 billion costs associated with Xbox production and other areas from Microsoft’s $7.1 billion Xbox revenue only represents gross margin, not the overall profit or loss.

UPDATE ON FORBES

http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2014/08/11/why-its-perfectly-fine-if-microsoft-has-lost-400m-on-xbox-one/

FORBES said:
Update: The $400M figure itself was not the point of this article, but many are pointing out the math leading to all these headlines is misguided. These numbers reflect gross margin, not profit and loss, and are increases, not totals. While we can use that data to approximate $7.1B in revenues compared to $5B in costs, without further information from Microsoft, it’s hard to pinpoint an exact profit or loss on the Xbox One. Though if they have lost money on the system so far, it’s for the reasons I go into below, and would not be cause for alarm.
 

L~A

Member
GAF > Internet > GAF again?

I think EvilLore should change the GAF's motto from "The Gaming Industry's Guiltiest Pleasure" to "Game Journalists' #1 interactive RSS feed".
 

Nander

Member
I haven't heard of this is at all, but how can Forbes of all places make a mistake like this??:
"That’s not a $400 million difference that outlets such as Forbes are citing – they obtained their erroneous figures by simply adding the yearly increases together."
 
Xbox platform gross profit =/= Xbox One gross profit.

Neowin are talking about the Xbox platform gross profit which includes Xbox 360 hardware and third party licencing profit.

As I stated, the narrower measure that only talks about Xbox One shows a $400m erosion of gross profit. In my world that is a loss, but the figure isn't clean as Kev rightly pointed out.
 
Kinda reflects poorly on everyone involved if true.

It reflects poorly on the media for doing a truly poor job of checking sources and figures, something that should be fundamental to any bit of editorial that gets put out.

But it also reflects poorly on GAF for allowing a misinterpretation of numbers to become the dominant narrative in a thread. I got in trouble for getting into a debate about Microsoft/Xbone on another thread, so I won't say too much more, but I do think some people on GAF could benefit from easing up on the Xbone bashing, an accepting that it's not the end of gaming, nor the end of Microsoft's gaming division. There's a lot to recommend in the Xbone, Spencer has turned things around on Microsoft's end, and we shouldn't go into any story on Microsoft or the Xbone looking to crucify them for the mistakes of last year. Misinterpreting the data like this, if true, would be one such example, I think, of how people need to calm down a little.

So yeah... basically everyone just needs to check their figures better. Media writers, Gaffers and all.
 
That article is wrong too. Whilst a big leap was made in the thread on here, they're wrong in that the figure is not just Xbox One figures. It also includes other gaming items.

So they're saying if you work it out it is $7.1b minus $5b costs != $400m Xbox One loss well it still can, because Xbox One is only one item in the group so it is impossible to calculate.

Which is where the leap in the thread came from, no? Xbox One didn't exist in FY13, so if you see a huge jump in costs in FY14 but revenues don't raise at the same rate then you've lost money somewhere, and so whilst not directly attributable to Xbox One it is a likely cause as it is unlikely the 360 suddenly became massively less profitable.
 
XBOX ONE was singled out as losing the $400m. This is not the case as the numbers are unattributable.
But Microsoft attributed a $1.7bn increase in revenue to Xbox One and $2.1bn increase in cost of revenue to Xbox One. It's in their bloody 10K. The wider Xbox platform revenue and cost figure includes Xbox 360 which is not relevant to Xbox One.
 
Oh hell. I know at least 2 of those threads were locked. People also argued the same point the article does. This is a forum for discussion. Forbes is a business magazine so they should tell us then. Not that it is that important this early in the production cycle.
 

Griss

Member
But Microsoft attributed a $1.7bn increase in revenue to Xbox One and $2.1bn increase in cost of revenue to Xbox One. It's in their bloody 10K. The wider Xbox platform revenue and cost figure includes Xbox 360 which is not relevant to Xbox One.

Exactly. Frankly, this logic still seems sound.

In simple steps:
1. There were increases in both revenue and cost of revenue
2. Those increases were due to the launch of the Xbox One, and attributed as such
3. The difference between the 'Xbox One revenue' and 'Xbox One cost of revenue' was (400m) or -400m, whatever way you want to write it.

Unless the guy is arguing simply that we don't know exactly how to perfectly attribute the numbers, or that Microsoft doesn't, then it looks like GAF still wins.
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
The assumption that was made in the original thread is that the costs (and revenue drivers) are all directly related to the Xbox one, which is attributed in the 10k but with potential for still other costs embedded. That's not really a bad assumption. However, it wasn't explicitly stated so I told omg we would need a new thread with his basic assumptions clearly laid out.

The article in the OP seems pretty bad.

Were this any year other than launch year, this would be correct reasoning. I still don't believe the numbers are perfectly clean. But I'm not sure I understand what the Original Article is saying.

Edit: look at all the squawking about self righteous offended fanboys and the gaming media's latest transgression.
 
XBOX ONE was singled out as losing the $400m. This is not the case as the numbers are unattributable. So yes, the thread title is correct.

No it is not. It's an assumption, we do not know if it lost $400m or not. There are assumptions that it did and some say that it didn't.
 

Handy Fake

Member
The figures in Microsofts report does not equate to profit or loss .....

Oooooooook

This as as far as I need to go.

"Profits and losses" in 2014 MicrosoftWorld is an existential concept, and metaphysical by the very nature of their existence.
In fact, one could go so far as to say that any number In MicrosoftWorld immediately becomes what is known in nature as a recipreversexcluson the minute it is written down, uttered or otherwise made physical in the real world.

By this rationale, we could go so far as to deduce that Microsoft is merely a figment of its own over-active imagination, and Don Mattrick is currently in negotiations to play Bobby Ewing in the forthcoming mini-series "My Reappearance in a Million Shower Scenes Where I Wasn't Dead After All".
 

Seanspeed

Banned
But it also reflects poorly on GAF for allowing a misinterpretation of numbers to become the dominant narrative in a thread.
Sort of thing happens all the time on here(and elsewhere, to be fair).

People tend to just take something said at face value without questioning it. And even if somebody points out that something isn't right, it can often go mostly unnoticed while people keep piling in to blindly accept what was written before. I think with news like this, a lot of people were quite excited to hear it as well, and we all know that people are far more to accept without questioning something they want to believe.
 

fritolay

Member
ohNO.jpg
 
Meh, bad assumptions about gross margin still. The 10K doesn't have enough data to make many assumptions cleanly, but it 100% does NOT equate to losing $400 million. The best assumption is MSFT has a much lower margin on the X1 compared to other gaming segments; however it could still be positive (made money). It would just show an erosion of the gross margin as a whole. It does not come close to saying they "lost" $400 million and anyone trying to attribute this filing as negative needs to take a deep breath and relook at their assumptions.
 

Principate

Saint Titanfall
The assumption that was made in the original thread is that the costs (and revenue drivers) are all directly related to the Xbox one, which is attributed in the 10k but with potential for still other costs embedded. That's not really a bad assumption. However, it wasn't explicitly stated so I told omg we would need a new thread with his basic assumptions clearly laid out.

The article in the OP seems pretty bad.

Were this any year other than launch year, this would be correct reasoning. I still don't believe the numbers are perfectly clean. But I'm not sure I understand what the Original Article is saying.

Edit: look at all the squawking about self righteous offended fanboys and the gaming media's latest transgression.

If I'm getting this right, It's basically an issue of how Microsoft decided segregate it's costs within the accounting. We don't know if costs from other divisions were included those numbers (since it basically comes down to precisely how Microsoft decides to separate it's division losses due to intrinsic relationships and vice versa). Is that right?
 
Xbox platform gross profit =/= Xbox One gross profit.

Neowin are talking about the Xbox platform gross profit which includes Xbox 360 hardware and third party licencing profit.

As I stated, the narrower measure that only talks about Xbox One shows a $400m erosion of gross profit. In my world that is a loss, but the figure isn't clean as Kev rightly pointed out.

lol, what a joke
 

JaggedSac

Member
But Microsoft attributed a $1.7bn increase in revenue to Xbox One and $2.1bn increase in cost of revenue to Xbox One. It's in their bloody 10K. The wider Xbox platform revenue and cost figure includes Xbox 360 which is not relevant to Xbox One.

That number doesn't include any MS published software sales or Live transactions since that is accounted for in a different division. Which, certainly a decent amount can be attributed to the Xbox One.
 
Top Bottom