NPD Sales Results for June 2014 [Up3: All Hardware (June/LTD), Top 10 Software SKUs]

May 24, 2012
18,812
119
500
Everyone knows that the Vita sales are a joke that no one laughs at anymore. That thing is bombing, HARD. I have no idea why Sony even supports it.
1) It's making them profit. The Vita may have failed at retail, but it's done...somewhat okay in Japan, and the people in the West who do buy it tend to buy a ton of third-party games. So if you look at other forms of revenue like royalties, it's not worth to just discard their system just like that...especially since I bet Sony doesn't have anything to replace the Vita. Might as well keep it going if it isn't losing money because hey, if you get some goodwill and loyalty for the PlayStation brand, you might want to go out and buy a PlayStation 4 as well. That's when they might get you hooked into the Playstation ecosystem.

2) SCEA and SCEE have heavily neglected the Vita at retail. It has absolutely pathetic retail momentum. Just look at how the launch of the new Vita 2000 Slim SKU---which is supposed to refresh the system---was just squandered by sheer carelessness in proper stocking. In that sense, Sony doesn't even support the Vita all that much. When you go months with a big retailer without restocking or a real advertising campaign, that's an indication that the console manufacturer just doesn't care anymore.

3) For the most part, Sony has stopped significant, major 1st-party titles for Vita that aren't ports of existing games. What do we have this year...MLB 14...Soul Sacrifice Delta...Freedom Wars...and maybe Oreshika: Tainted Bloodlines? What kind of 1st-party lineup is that supposed to be for a system in its 3rd year? Sony did well with games like Uncharted: Golden Abyss but now...it's just not where SCEA and SCEE have their priorities. And what about 2015? What major Vita titles are coming then?
 

Ape

Banned
Dec 27, 2013
6,323
0
0
1) It's making them profit. The Vita may have failed at retail, but it's done...somewhat okay in Japan, and the people in the West who do buy it tend to buy a ton of third-party games. So if you look at other forms of revenue like royalties, it's not worth to just discard their system just like that...especially since I bet Sony doesn't have anything to replace the Vita. Might as well keep it going if it isn't losing money because hey, if you get some goodwill and loyalty for the PlayStation brand, you might want to go out and buy a PlayStation 4 as well. That's when they might get you hooked.

2) SCEA and SCEE have heavily neglected the Vita at retail. It has absolutely pathetic retail momentum. Just look at how the launch of the new Vita 2000 Slim SKU---which is supposed to refresh the system---was just squandered by sheer carelessness in proper stocking. In that sense, Sony doesn't even support the Vita all that much. When you go months with a big retailer without restocking or a real advertising campaign, that's an indication that the console manufacturer just doesn't care anymore.

3) For the most part, Sony has stopped significant, major 1st-party titles for Vita that aren't ports of existing games. What do we have this year...MLB 14...Soul Sacrifice Delta...Freedom Wars...and maybe Oreshika: Tainted Bloodlines? What kind of 1st-party lineup is that supposed to be for a system in its 3rd year? Sony did well with games like Uncharted: Golden Abyss but now...it's just not where SCEA and SCEE have their priorities. And what about 2015? What major Vita titles are coming then?
Microsoft did get some goodwill from the Zune brand too, I suppose.
 
Dec 14, 2010
3,263
0
0
Microsoft did get some goodwill from the Zune brand too, I suppose.
The cost of Vita is mostly sunk already and is making some money for Sony now, so Sony has no reason to not see Vita to its EOL or to try to leverage stuff learned from the Vita for something like the PlayStation TV. Now, Sony creating a successor to the Vita would be stupid but there is no indication that Sony won't merely focus on the mobile market as far as portable gaming is concerned.

It can be the same with the Xbox One. It's already sunk costs for Microsoft and so long as they are making money from it, MS may as well keep it around until its natural EOL and leverage the Xbox brand into other areas. Certainly an Xbox TV similar to that of a Fire TV wouldn't be a bad idea for Microsoft to make given the popularity of their gaming brand and their desire to try to get in on the mobile market somehow. Even Sony's doing that with PlayStation TV.
 
Jan 20, 2013
933
0
0
I always find it strange how profitability is quite often neglected in sales threads. As much as I like PS3 and as likely it is for the PS3 to pass XB360 WW LTD, its huge losses makes it the least succesful Playstation system for profit.

...Im going for biased dangerious ground now, but isnt Vita in theory more succesful in PROFIT(Making money! Not selling amount!) than PS3? I mean if PS3 lost almost if not all profit from PS1-PS2-PSP, and the fact that Playstation hasnt produced that much losses during Vita's lifetime. Or is it countered By the fact that PS4 could potentially bring more profit than ever before, while PSV wont get successor? Of course if this is about having actual share of market rather than profit, then yeah... Which would be seem better, selling pathetically low but in profitable way, or selling a lot but not as profitable?

How much has PS3 even made money during its profitable years?

I have bad tendency to try to make Vita look ok-ish. So apologies if this seems like another shitty spin. :v
 
Jun 5, 2013
8,808
0
340
New York, NY
Do they expect to sell more units? They clearly won't. The Vita is dead in the water and imo it is a waste of Sony's resources to put devs on vita projects of any kind. Accept that it failed and move on.
He's subtly making a joke that Sony (at least SCEA) is doing absolutely nothing to support it. So your comment is "confusing" to him, because they've already dropped it.
 
I always find it strange how profitability is quite often neglected in sales threads. As much as I like PS3 and as likely it is for the PS3 to pass XB360 WW LTD, its huge losses makes it the least succesful Playstation system for profit.

...Im going for biased dangerious ground now, but isnt Vita in theory more succesful in PROFIT(Making money! Not selling amount!) than PS3? I mean if PS3 lost almost if not all profit from PS1-PS2-PSP, and the fact that Playstation hasnt produced that much losses during Vita's lifetime. Or is it countered By the fact that PS4 could potentially bring more profit than ever before, while PSV wont get successor? Of course if this is about having actual share of market rather than profit, then yeah... Which would be seem better, selling pathetically low but in profitable way, or selling a lot but not as profitable?

How much has PS3 even made money during its profitable years?

I have bad tendency to try to make Vita look ok-ish. So apologies if this seems like another shitty spin. :v
Indeed, that is a major factor that is often ignored.

Take Nintendo & the Wii U. People keep saying that a serious price drop would get it to sell more, and while true, it'd be far more damaging to Nintendo's business.

Their first ever financial loss was largely because the 3DS took off while being sold at a loss, and their recovery is gradual.
 
Jan 20, 2013
933
0
0
Indeed, that is a major factor that is often ignored.

Take the Wii U. People keep saying that a serious price drop would get it to sell more, and while true, it'd be far more damaging to Nintendo's business.

Their first ever financial loss was largely because the 3DS took off while being sold at a loss, and their recovery is gradual.
Either Wii U or 3DS will be actually be the worst Nintendo system ever for profit since they are the only things that have actually made losses for them.

...Did Nintendo lose money in 1994-1996? It would be embarrasing if Virtual Boy would be more profitable than Wii U. Probably not since we still have some years for Wii U to make profit. But as of now?
 
Either Wii U or 3DS will be actually be the worst Nintendo system ever for profit since they are the only things that have actually made losses for them.

...Did Nintendo lose money in 1994-1996? It would be embarrasing if Virtual Boy would be more profitable than Wii U. Probably not since we still have some years for Wii U to make profit. But as of now?


They had an overall operating profit, but that was due to the GameBoy and SNES. Virtual Boy only had less than a million units so it wasn't that much a drain.
 
May 24, 2012
18,812
119
500
Either Wii U or 3DS will be actually be the worst Nintendo system ever for profit since they are the only things that have actually made losses for them.

...Did Nintendo lose money in 1994-1996? It would be embarrasing if Virtual Boy would be more profitable than Wii U. Probably not since we still have some years for Wii U to make profit. But as of now?
No. Nintendo made an Operating Profit in 1994-1996 despite the failure of the Virtual Boy from the strength of the SNES, Game Boy, and Nintendo 64.

Core profitability:

April 1993 - March 1994: 103.711 billion JPY

April 1994 - March 1995: 94.955 billion JPY

April 1995 - March 1996: 71.939 billion JPY

April 1996 - March 1997: 65.088 billion JPY
 
Oct 4, 2009
12,563
6
0
They had an overall operating profit, but that was due to the GameBoy and SNES. Virtual Boy only had less than a million units so it wasn't that much a drain.
We know VB sold more than 1 million thanks to Aquamarine.

VIRTUAL BOY

Lifetime worldwide shipments: 1.26 million

Shipments (Japan) - 0.63 million
Shipments (The Americas) - 0.56 million
Shipments (Other) - 0.07 million
 
Jan 20, 2013
933
0
0


They had an overall operating profit, but that was due to the GameBoy and SNES. Virtual Boy only had less than a million units so it wasn't that much a drain.
No. Nintendo made an Operating Profit in 1994-1996 despite the failure of the Virtual Boy from the strength of the SNES, Game Boy, and Nintendo 64.

Core profitability:

April 1993 - March 1994: 103.711 billion JPY

April 1994 - March 1995: 94.955 billion JPY

April 1995 - March 1996: 71.939 billion JPY

April 1996 - March 1997: 65.088 billion JPY
I suspected that.

It really puts 3DS and Wii U in different light if you look at them for profitability.
...Well not the Wii U.
 
May 4, 2005
11,451
673
1,240
31
Germany
www.gaming-universe.de
LTD

Yoshi ~ 287k
BD ~ 277k
Kirby ~ 196k
Golf ~ 58k

FFHD ~ 82k
B2 ~ 39k
GOWC ~ 25kk
Thank you very much creamsugar! Yoshi seems to have a decent shot at reaching 500k ltd, considering it hasn't had a christmas season yet and the 3DS will likely not be replaced for two more christmas seasons either, doesn't it :)? 31k this month seems definitely healthy. I'm also heappy Yoshi didn't get destroyed by Kirby, this increases the probability Nintendo will not just drop him again like they did after Yoshi's Island DS and Yoshi's Story.
 
Aug 8, 2007
8,217
0
0
Not unless Mr. Nadella goes absolutely bonkers and wants to get fired very quickly.

Xbox One may not be a major part of Microsoft's operating income, but it's an important brand for the company that Microsoft has invested quite a large amount of money into.
Hate to break it to you but a number of the primary shareholders in MSFT have recommended selling the xbox for years now. Even Bill Gates has said he'd back Nadella if he chose to sell xbox.
 
That graph really highlights the tough spot Nintendo is in. All the blue and the suddenly for the last 3 years they've lost money.
To be fair, Net Profit wise, it's not as bad as that. They even turned a profit the year before last. They would have done last year too, if it wasn't for a one-time injection into R&D and Marketing in January.

It is turning around, it's just gradual.
 
Jan 30, 2014
367
2
280
New York
You might be invested, but unless youre a shareholder you havent invested in anything
It makes no sense to me why quite a few people refer to money spent on gaming hardware (consoles/PC) as an investment. Some youtubers could actually make that case, but for the large majority video games are just a form of entertainment or an expensive hobby.
 
May 24, 2012
18,812
119
500
Hate to break it to you but a number of the primary shareholders in MSFT have recommended selling the xbox for years now. Even Bill Gates has said he'd back Nadella if he chose to sell xbox.
Give me a list of the "number of primary shareholders" besides ValueAct Capital / Vulcan Capital who have made these calls?

And Microsoft clarified that Gates is supporting Nadella as a CEO, not that Gates is implying any support for the sale of the Xbox division.

It indeed can muddle their razor-sharp restructuring processes but there is potential value to be extracted from Xbox. Why do you think Mr. Nadella has been keeping Xbox around for the short-term?

Now as time goes on, if Xbox remains in the same state, maybe they'll re-analyse their priorities.
 
Aug 8, 2007
8,217
0
0
Give me a list of the "number of primary shareholders" besides ValueAct Capital / Vulcan Capital who have made these calls?

And Microsoft clarified that Gates is supporting Nadella as a CEO, not that Gates is implying any support for the sale of the Xbox division.

It indeed can muddle their razor-sharp restructuring processes but there is potential value to be extracted from Xbox. Why do you think Mr. Nadella has been keeping Xbox around for the short-term?

Now as time goes on, if Xbox remains in the same state, maybe they'll re-analyse their priorities.
My point wasn't that Gates wanted to sell Xbox, rather he along with other stakeholders would back Nadella if he decided to sell or spin-off the xbox division. You said Nadella would get fired for doing so... which is clearly blasphemous
 
May 24, 2012
18,812
119
500
My point wasn't that Gates wanted to sell Xbox, rather he along with other stakeholders would back Nadella if he decided to sell or spin-off the xbox division. You said Nadella would get fired for doing so... which is clearly blasphemous
The timeline and context is important here. I was responding to the event that Mr. Nadella just said on a whim tomorrow "Well, that's it! No more Xbox One! Sell everything right now!" spontaneously.
 
Aug 8, 2007
8,217
0
0
The timeline and context is important here. I was responding to the event that Mr. Nadella just said on a whim tomorrow "Well, that's it! No more Xbox One! Sell everything right now!" spontaneously.
Don't think it would matter too much what time he did it. MSFT championed the Zune up until the week before they completely killed it.... if it is the right business decision then Nadella would likely be rewarded rather than criticized or punished. I don't think he will kill it though, Xbox is such a strong brand it would be insane to throw that away. I do find it increasingly likely that the XB1 will have a shorter life cycle than its competitors, clean slate and all that jazz.
 
Feb 3, 2007
10,323
0
0
It makes no sense to me why quite a few people refer to money spent on gaming hardware (consoles/PC) as an investment. Some youtubers could actually make that case, but for the large majority video games are just a form of entertainment or an expensive hobby.
I assume its because its easier to rationalise "I just invested $500 into the future of entertainment" than "I just spent $500 on the latest toy".

I don't think I've ever seen Nadella mention 'Xbox One.' But he seems interested in the Xbox and Xbox live brands.
I wouldn't be surprised to see a non-sidetalking NGage "Xbox Go!" phone or "Xbox Mini" controller embedded tablet be floated
 
The timeline and context is important here. I was responding to the event that Mr. Nadella just said on a whim tomorrow "Well, that's it! No more Xbox One! Sell everything right now!" spontaneously.
If he makes that decision they will handle it in the manner that allows them to maximize the sale price. Any sale would be well into negotiations before the public hears about it, ideally.
 
Ok, well if Wii U maintains an average of 250k(ww) a month over the next 40 months and considering how Nintendo does in the holidays, (I feel this is a safe bet) it will sell 10 million more units. Putting it just under 17m.

The break down is fairly simple too:

Current Wii Us in the wild is ~6.5 sold. 2.5 in America, 1.8 in Japan and 2.2 for rest of the world.

North America selling 100k Wii Us a month on average is very realistic when you have 2 months that will do more than double that, and a couple releases through out the year peaking sales a bit. This is 4 million more Wii Us sold in North America.

Japan will average 60k a month for Wii U, it is currently over 300k Ltd in the 7th month of the year, and the holidays will increase the average. This over 40 months is 2.4 million more Wii Us sold.

The rest of the world would have to sell 90k on average a month, considering the current breakdown of sales, I feel fairly safe in this estimate. This is another 3.6 million Wii Us sold by the end of its life.

So the breakdown would be:
NA: 6.5m
JP: 4.2m
Rotw: 5.8m

Anyways, I had to point this out as Anihawks numbers from a few days ago was bugging me as I read through some past pages. I really think 11m (less than 4.5m more Wii U) is just as ridiculous as 30m at this point, especially because Nintendo can't jump ship until 2017.
 
Jul 29, 2010
4,238
66
655
Ok, well if Wii U maintains an average of 250k(ww) a month over the next 40 months and considering how Nintendo does in the holidays, (I feel this is a safe bet) it will sell 10 million more units. Putting it just under 17m.

The break down is fairly simple too:

Current Wii Us in the wild is ~6.5 sold. 2.5 in America, 1.8 in Japan and 2.2 for rest of the world.

North America selling 100k Wii Us a month on average is very realistic when you have 2 months that will do more than double that, and a couple releases through out the year peaking sales a bit. This is 4 million more Wii Us sold in North America.

Japan will average 60k a month for Wii U, it is currently over 300k Ltd in the 7th month of the year, and the holidays will increase the average. This over 40 months is 2.4 million more Wii Us sold.

The rest of the world would have to sell 90k on average a month, considering the current breakdown of sales, I feel fairly safe in this estimate. This is another 3.6 million Wii Us sold by the end of its life.

So the breakdown would be:
NA: 6.5m
JP: 4.2m
Rotw: 5.8m

Anyways, I had to point this out as Anihawks numbers from a few days ago was bugging me as I read through some past pages. I really think 11m (less than 4.5m more Wii U) is just as ridiculous as 30m at this point, especially because Nintendo can't jump ship until 2017.
I think what Anihawk and others are thinking is that the Wii U will not be selling anywhere near those numbers in 2016-17. I personally think 2015 will be higher than 2014, and thus the real decline starts in 2016, but we'll see. For one, with your numbers the Wii U will outsell the GC in Japan (at its current pace and the state of consoles there, I don't think that's going to happen).
 
May 31, 2013
23,628
0
0
Ok, well if Wii U maintains an average of 250k(ww) a month over the next 40 months and considering how Nintendo does in the holidays, (I feel this is a safe bet) it will sell 10 million more units. Putting it just under 17m.

North America selling 100k Wii Us a month on average is very realistic when you have 2 months that will do more than double that, and a couple releases through out the year peaking sales a bit. This is 4 million more Wii Us sold in North America.
That seems very unlikely. What big software will the Wii U get over the next 3 and a half years that will stop it's baseline from dropping over all that time?

MK8 is already out, Smash comes out this winter. so Zelda?

Next year is 2015 and there's probably going to be one big title released on Wii U that has any chance of keeping the baseline up. What about 2016? 2017?

Why would Wii U's baseline maintain itself so steadily over 40 months like that?
 
Aug 25, 2013
24,331
0
0
Ok, well if Wii U maintains an average of 250k(ww) a month over the next 40 months and considering how Nintendo does in the holidays, (I feel this is a safe bet) it will sell 10 million more units. Putting it just under 17m.

The break down is fairly simple too:

Current Wii Us in the wild is ~6.5 sold. 2.5 in America, 1.8 in Japan and 2.2 for rest of the world.

North America selling 100k Wii Us a month on average is very realistic when you have 2 months that will do more than double that, and a couple releases through out the year peaking sales a bit. This is 4 million more Wii Us sold in North America.

Japan will average 60k a month for Wii U, it is currently over 300k Ltd in the 7th month of the year, and the holidays will increase the average. This over 40 months is 2.4 million more Wii Us sold.

The rest of the world would have to sell 90k on average a month, considering the current breakdown of sales, I feel fairly safe in this estimate. This is another 3.6 million Wii Us sold by the end of its life.

So the breakdown would be:
NA: 6.5m
JP: 4.2m
Rotw: 5.8m


Anyways, I had to point this out as Anihawks numbers from a few days ago was bugging me as I read through some past pages. I really think 11m (less than 4.5m more Wii U) is just as ridiculous as 30m at this point, especially because Nintendo can't jump ship until 2017.
even if we go along with everything in here, this regional breakdown is completely absurd, ROTW will probably match Japan at best

edit: of the current 6.17m shipments, 2.81m are the Americas, 1.81m Japan, and 1.56m other

though apparently the attach rate in "other" is nearly double Japan's, weird
 
May 31, 2013
23,628
0
0
Could you describe what the Mario kart sales pattern has been so far on DS, Wii and 3DS? Have these games been front loaded, or did they help sell systems over years?
So your proposition is that MK8 and Smash will keep Wii U monthly sales above 100k for NA let alone all the other regional sales needed to hit those claims in 2016 and 2017?

Sure the games will continue to sell, no doubt about that but marketing will be long gone and there's no way the baseline can be maintained like that from games 2 years old at that point
 
The cost of Vita is mostly sunk already and is making some money for Sony now, so Sony has no reason to not see Vita to its EOL or to try to leverage stuff learned from the Vita for something like the PlayStation TV. Now, Sony creating a successor to the Vita would be stupid but there is no indication that Sony won't merely focus on the mobile market as far as portable gaming is concerned.

It can be the same with the Xbox One. It's already sunk costs for Microsoft and so long as they are making money from it, MS may as well keep it around until its natural EOL and leverage the Xbox brand into other areas. Certainly an Xbox TV similar to that of a Fire TV wouldn't be a bad idea for Microsoft to make given the popularity of their gaming brand and their desire to try to get in on the mobile market somehow. Even Sony's doing that with PlayStation TV.
Yep, Vita is basically being Gamecubed; it's unsuccessful in generating revenue but it's probably profitable, so just let it ride out until the profitability doesn't exist anymore.
 
To be fair, Net Profit wise, it's not as bad as that. They even turned a profit the year before last. They would have done last year too, if it wasn't for a one-time injection into R&D and Marketing in January.

It is turning around, it's just gradual.
I'd point out that excuses like the one for this year (one time R&D cost!) are very common for companies experiencing persistent downturns.

If you play the "oh if it weren't for this one thing" game, you can probably excuse a lot of unprofitable years for a lot of unsuccessful companies. Here's what a successful company is like: they experience a few unexpected, one time bumps in the road, and still manage to turn a profit. Nintendo has certainly fit that model in the past.

Or, put differently: a company that's really doing well plans for things to go bumpy, and don't need absolutely everything to go just right in order to make a profit. That's a fool's plan, because it's very rare for any company to have absolutely everything go just right. This isn't to say that Nintendo can't turn it around, mind you.
 
I think what Anihawk and others are thinking is that the Wii U will not be selling anywhere near those numbers in 2016-17. I personally think 2015 will be higher than 2014, and thus the real decline starts in 2016, but we'll see. For one, with your numbers the Wii U will outsell the GC in Japan (at its current pace and the state of consoles there, I don't think that's going to happen).
It doesn't have to sell 250k on average a month ww in 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017.

I expect Smash, the holidays, Amiibos and skylanders/DI to actually put November and December at 400k a piece this holiday in America, leaving Wii U only needing to sell 400k for the rest of the year prior to this point to meet that 100k average, it's already done that, so 2014 will be well over the average needed for this break down, and I agree that 2015 will sell better as it looks like less gaps in releases should be expected as well as likely another price drop.

Japan's breakdown is similar, if the holidays is similar to last year, it won't need much up to that point to meet these numbers, infact it's at an average of 45k a month right now YTD, holidays will help it catch up and push it over these numbers, again next year should be bigger for Wii U, and I think some releases like Animal Crossing can help it sell in japan. (City Folk sold nearly 4m ww iirc)

Why can't they jump ship until 2017?
They don't have hardware ready, dev kits take time on top of that and they need at least 24 months after dev kits are in their basic stage to get software ready... you are talking about missing 2016 holidays at that point and being into 2017.

That seems very unlikely. What big software will the Wii U get over the next 3 and a half years that will stop it's baseline from dropping over all that time?
It's not about the baseline dropping, Wii U is probably going to do ~150k on average this year in America thanks to a loaded holiday season and other consoles having no heavy hitters this holiday beyond the usual 3rd party AAAs.

MK8 is already out, Smash comes out this winter. so Zelda?

Next year is 2015 and there's probably going to be one big title released on Wii U that has any chance of keeping the baseline up. What about 2016? 2017?

Why would Wii U's baseline maintain itself so steadily over 40 months like that?
It's not about a steady 40 months of sales, its a regular up and down with an average across all months of 250k ww, but even if you were right and you saw the average ww drop to 200k across the next 40 months, it would still sell another 8 million Wii Us, 60 month mark would be nearly 15m units. Not a big difference if you ask me.

even if we go along with everything in here, this regional breakdown is completely absurd, ROTW will probably match Japan at best
That breakdown includes the much bigger Europe markets, currently Wii U is outselling Japan in those other markets, so I don't see a reason that would change.