Bruce Springsteen
Member
Why?
I fail to see this logic.
Also there are 5 Nintendo Mobile games coming. They've embraced it
Embracing it means you're putting your most valued IP's on mobile, not some Mii social game that quickly fizzles away
Why?
I fail to see this logic.
Also there are 5 Nintendo Mobile games coming. They've embraced it
Why didn't Nintendo develope the game themselves?
Just because they want to make people believe they still just develop for their own consoles? Seems very childish if that's the case.
Embracing it means you're putting your most valued IP's on mobile, not some Mii social game that quickly fizzles away
Embracing it means you're putting your most valued IP's on mobile, not some Mii social game that quickly fizzles away
Why didn't Nintendo develope the game themselves?
Just because they want to make people believe they still just develop for their own consoles? Seems very childish if that's the case.
That's not what it means, that's what you've decided it means.
If mobile games could make much money in the first place...Maybe if Go wasn't completely broken this wouldn't have happened
We all have a different perceptive
But if Nintendo thinks "fully embracing" mobile doesn't include it's biggest IP's which they would reserve for their NX console, they will be in for a rude awakening
Whoops, I misread a analyst estimate as official PR. However, I still don't think that they'll be too far off the actual figure.What PR?
As a rule of thumb, taking things at face value is a bad idea.
Tomodachi Life, Animal Crossing and Fire Emblem are some of their most recent hits, especially the first two among the "expanded" crowd. Embracing mobile gaming doesn't mean they have to jump in head first and just throw everything on cellphones immediately. The chances we won't see Mario in some form at some point on mobile are pretty low.
Embracing it means you're putting your most valued IP's on mobile, not some Mii social game that quickly fizzles away
Mario, Zelda, those are the names I'm waiting for
Mario, Zelda, those are the names I'm waiting for
There are several other Pokémon games on mobile, nobody cares.
Not the first mobile Pokémon game.
Mario, Zelda, those are the names I'm waiting for
Past Pokémon apps are dead and gone. Nobody will pick them back up because there'll be no press release > news outlet > audience informing loop.
Animal Crossing and Fire Emblem aren't big for you? Ok...
Zelda isn't bigger than the others title mentioned, especially for the casual audience
"Wii Series" is Nintendo's most successful IP in recent years. Just saying.
Well that's a lie
You can choose to disbelieve the PR if you want to, but it probably makes more sense to take it at face value.
Nintendo said:The Pokémon Company is the Companys affiliated company, accounted for by using the equity method. Because of this accounting scheme, the income reflected on the Companys consolidated business results is limited.
Its not the stake in Niantic. Its the stake in this project, and I find 13% to be downright unbelievable and an analyst lowball (do not listen to public analyst opinion). Nintendo has a trademark cut that will generally come off of the top of the earnings along with Google/Apple's 30% cut off of the storefront. There is no way I find "13%" as a believable figure.
They have 33%-base ownership in TPC directly, an unknown ownership in Creatures Inc. (its not 10%, that is a made up analyst guess, it has never been disclosed), and a Trademark ownership cut for the characters and Pokemon property. There is a further a large investment from both Google and Nintendo in Niantic directly, and we have no idea how this is being handled whether its shares of the company (as it is private) or funding directly into the project with kick-backs from Niantic's earnings.
There is next to zero chance that Niantic is somehow making more money than Nintendo in this deal. However, if they follow operation as they normally do with external Pokemon projects, the earnings here will not be directly on their own projections but in equity accounting on the side through TPC. Due to this nature of reporting, TPC gains or Pokemon gains on project not directly tied to the mainline games that Nintendo publishes (which will go back to Nintendo) do not show up on the earning sheet directly under Nintendo's own earnings. If the only thing Nintendo is going to factor in to their direct reporting from this app are a trademark cut, then... ya, its not going to amount to much relative to the rest of their business and isn't going to magically swing their reports to some stratospheric highs.
No it isn't. It hasn't been relevant for half a decade.
Also he said most valuable not most successful.
The guy I'm responding to (Busaiku) said that nobody buys or cares about previous Pokémon apps. You can ask him for evidence. I'm just arguing based on what he said.
It doesnt jive though. Even an analyst said Nintendo were being disingenuous at best with their statement. The statement doesnt even include the information required to make a sound judgment because it effectively clarifies that the income will be kept off the books in the pokemon company, a company that Nintendo controls (regardless of their 30% public ownership of it, they control the cash floes apparently). So just because you put the pokemon go cash in one bucket (TPC) rather than your publicly traded one (NTDOY) doesnt mean you arent benefitting massively from the cash in take from pokemon go. All it takes is one transfer from TPC to nintendo and suddenly they are doing gangbusters.What the fuck. None of this is true.
The only benefit they would have had as a company was to sell more stock at the inflated price knowing full well the company was over valued on faulty expectations. It would have been borderline criminal to do something like that.
I've never played either of those games, so no
Zelda isn't a "casual" game but's well known, they could make a causal game for that IP if they wanted to
Animal Crossing has been one of their most successful franchises in recent years, Fire Emblem has been on the rise. Both are coming to mobile in the next year.No it isn't. It hasn't been relevant for half a decade.
Also he said most valuable not most successful.
Well he has a point. Past Pokémon apps have done terribly even with promotion. The idea that just because it's Pokémon it'll do well is a massively erroneous one.
They're not wrong though.
You're not following me.
My point is that Pokémon has been in a slump for years. The whole brand. Perhaps 'slump' is an exaggeration, but it's not what it was. Thus all the apps they created went nowhere. In Busaiku's words, "nobody cares".
Today, Pokémon Go has come along and totally rejuvenated the brand - beyond even its historic peak.
My point is that if Nintendo released one or more new paid apps now, those apps would do infinitely better than those pre-Go apps, because now the brand has got insane momentum.
I'm essentially saying that while Pokémon Go may not add up to much for Nintendo revenue-wise, it has increased the brand's potential energy so much that smaller products will probably grow huge legs.
You should read Nintendo´s statement. I guess most here have no understanding of accounting. TPC keeps the profits because of taxes and dividends. Nintendo´s profits indirectly because their investment grows in value but this is something that is not reflected on their consolidated income statement.
Nintendo´s share is probably just the trademark licensing.
Lot of my friends have already deleted the app.
Short shelf life with the masses unlike Candy Crush/Game of War etc.
You should read Nintendo´s statement. I guess most here have no understanding of accounting. TPC keeps the profits because of taxes and dividends. Nintendo´s profits indirectly because their investment grows in value but this is something that is not reflected on their consolidated income statement.
Nintendo´s share is probably just the trademark licensing.
Well the trump card for Nintendo here might be their internally developed Pokemon Go Plus (which by the way is kind of an example of QoL products - though this is still video game related). This is essentially Nintendo's direct method of profiting from Pokemon Go's success aside from their ownership cuts. How successful it is - or the company predicts it will be is an interesting question.
I disagree. Pokémon hasn't been in a slump. If a slump is what most other franchises aspire to, then gaming is screwed.
You are severely overestimating how "low" Pokémon was.
Also, Animal Crossing mobile is coming. That's definitely one of Nintendo's more valuable properties as it still sells bucket loads on handheld.
Pokémon sales have been increasing the last 3 years, that's not a slump.You're not following me.
My point is that Pokémon has been in a slump for years. The whole brand. Perhaps 'slump' is an exaggeration, but it's not what it was. Thus all the apps they created went nowhere. In Busaiku's words, "nobody cares".
Today, Pokémon Go has come along and totally rejuvenated the brand - beyond even its historic peak.
My point is that if Nintendo released one or more new paid apps now, those apps would do infinitely better than those pre-Go apps, because now the brand has got insane momentum.
I'm essentially saying that while Pokémon Go may not add up to much for Nintendo revenue-wise, it has increased the brand's potential energy so much that smaller products will probably grow huge legs.
What's Go Plus?
Absolutely, I even said 'slump is an exaggeration'; I'm not saying it was dead in the water, of course it wasn't and isn't dead.
Regardless of the whole 'was it in a "slump"' argument my point is that, brand-wise, Pokémon Go is going to generate loads of revenue for them because it thrust Pokémon back into being a global cultural phenomenon. Nintendo specifically can harness this by putting out small phone apps alone. Indeed, apps which didn't do much for them in recent history (as noted by Busaiku).
Pokémon sales have been increasing the last 3 years, that's not a slump.
It made $1.5 billion in 2013 and $2 billion in 2014.
And it was $2.1 billion in 2015, with no mainline release.
You can't believe that Pokémon Comaster or Shuffle Mobile, if released now, would be huge hits.
As someone who said something to this effect in one of the original market reaction threads, this news isn't a surprise. Nintendo is really going out of their way to keep expectations in line, which is a continued sign of their corporate responsibility.
Even if they don't make money directly from the app, surely the cultural craze surrounding it will bring some positive energy to the Pokemon brand?
.Of course, but the surge in stock was nothing short of lunacy. It was impossible to maintain irregardless of the scenario.
what I'm saying is, it's very ignorant value the stock so high based off a single game.
But someone seeing the success of Pokemon go, bet on other Nintendo IPs to being similarly successful on mobile, then the valuation would have made sense
My face when a wave of investors realize that The Pokemon Company is a separate entity, and that Nintendo is basically just making licensing fees from Pokemon Go.
We are to believe that Nintendo invested money into a company they hadn't previously worked only to get a trademark licensing fee? I fail to believe Nintendo would do that. I think they wanted to point out that they aren't getting all of the profits out of Pokemon Go but I also don't think they are getting only a licensing fee out of it. Doesn't make sense to me.
jesusThey're really burying the lede that is this photo.
Nintendo created the Pokemon franchise, but the rights to the characters are held by The Pokemon Company. Nintendo owns 32 percent of The Pokemon Company and is reported to hold a similarly sized stake in Niantic, the U.S. lab that developed the Pokemon Go game. Niantic was a Google internal startup before being spun off, and the search giant remains an investor.
No. Nintendo are idiots.
Unless they are intending to buy more shares of themselves at a lower price. But that would be considered illegal by the SEC, to try to bring your own share price down so you could buy shares.
Not only did they issue a statement saying they dont benefit when that clearly isnt the case ( since they own TPC) but now they are letting the 13% rumor go unanswered yet again.
I see why they did what they did but it literally makes no sense why they chose to release that dumbass statement now.
I agree. Pokemon Go has to be one of the worst Pokemon games ever made.