monjiay Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 EA is selling at 17? The horror. I guess Activision/Blizzard is failing because they are selling at 12. As a matter of fact, ATVI's 10yr high is 18. You're kidding right? You understand what market capitalization is? It means that not all stocks have the same value. Here's an example: Company A is worth $100,000 and issues 100,000 stocks so each stock is worth $1. Company B is worth $100,000 and issues 50,000 stocks so each stock is worth $2. Now both companies are equal in value, but their stock prices are different. See how that works? Just quoting the price for a stock has no meaning whatsoever if you don't know what percentage of the company that stock represents and how much the market capitalization is. Stick to playing games is my advice and let us big boys do the investing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mhak Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Well, thank the void of the universe that I ended up having a nihilistic crisis. Now I find most concepts that humanity holds as absolute to be kind of funny. Same for me, pretty much. Guess it takes getting so close to edge of the system that you're about to fall off in order to be able to turn around and see it all for what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tolarus Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 With the stock price getting lowered a tiny bit, I'm actually thinking of investing. Thanks to the OP for bring this to our attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonnnyB Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 They knew they were going to fail because they built them to fail. They bundled trillions of dollars in bad loans as investment products then sold them to their own customers as good investments... Yes, these were Goldmans Sachs OWN products that they knew were garbage and would eventually fail. They then took out insurance policies again them failing THEN shorted the stocks of the insurance companies. They knew that trillions of dollars in failed investments would bring down the insurance companies stocks, making them millions on the short. I dont expect most people on these forums to understand just went down in our financial markets, but it was EVIL ugly and 20 years ago would have all been illegal. Big money buys laws that big money likes. They weren't bad loans at the time the security was created. They WENT bad as the housing market tanked and people lost jobs. The securities themselves were purchased by sophisticated investors (pensions, et al) who knew perfectly well what they were buying and the potential losses they could incur. There are no guarantees in investing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coramac Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 They had the best selling MMO of all time and that's under their expectations? I smell gullabaloney I think AoC was the fastest selling MMO at release. I think DCUO was the fastest selling MMO at release. Expectations matter and the initial surge in sales is not as meaningful as you are trying to claim. MMOs make money on the subscriptions. It's basically an anuity. We also have WAR in as one of the fastest selling MMOs. That's another product brought to you by EA and lots of the same people involved in SWTOR. Both had the hype engine going full force and were subpar at launch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holden_Dissent Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 I know they were forcing banks to give people loans for housing knowing full well that they would default on those loans. it's a wonder the US still has a credit system. I think a rollback is in order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrotNoot Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 They weren't bad loans at the time the security was created. They WENT bad as the housing market tanked and people lost jobs. The securities themselves were purchased by sophisticated investors (pensions, et al) who knew perfectly well what they were buying and the potential losses they could incur. There are no guarantees in investing. Of course there are no guarantees in investing, but at least you would hope that the supposed professional stock broker from the billion dollar company is telling you something is a good buy actually means it. There was testimony before congress of Goldman executives calling certain products "****" and they knew it was a matter of time for them to fail. Also, IF the Goldman execs really thought the garbage derivatives they were selling were any good, WHY did they short sell the insurance carriers carrying the investments?? They KNEW they were garbage and would eventually fail... What happened was flat out fraud by any measure, the only problem is they have legalized fraud. /shrug... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gilbara Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 and Am I crazy, or do these paragraphs directly contradict one another? Maybe this Mitchell guy was expecting 5 million sold copies or something? The initial sales were strong, but since the first week, sales have slumped and people have been leaving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonnnyB Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Of course there are no guarantees in investing, but at least you would hope that the supposed professional stock broker from the billion dollar company is telling you something is a good buy actually means it. There was testimony before congress of Goldman executives calling certain products "****" and they knew it was a matter of time for them to fail. Also, IF the Goldman execs really thought the garbage derivatives they were selling were any good, WHY did they short sell the insurance carriers carrying the investments?? They KNEW they were garbage and would eventually fail... What happened was flat out fraud by any measure, the only problem is they have legalized fraud. /shrug... Goldman was selling a product - NOT giving investment advice. Just like a used car salesman is selling you a used car and not advising you on how to best solve your transportation needs. They also had an opinion in a separate part of the firm that is kept as separate as possible by internal controls and government regulators that these products were not only bad but that these companies were being too greedy and buying too many of them. Had their opinion been wrong they would have lost money on the trade and the companies they bet against would have benefited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nomaar Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Did anyone consider that maybe the analyst wrote his analysis after getting spawn camped yesterday? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monjiay Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Did anyone consider that maybe the analyst wrote his analysis after getting spawn camped yesterday? lol 45 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daeseer Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 They weren't bad loans at the time the security was created. They WENT bad as the housing market tanked and people lost jobs. The securities themselves were purchased by sophisticated investors (pensions, et al) who knew perfectly well what they were buying and the potential losses they could incur. There are no guarantees in investing. That's entirely incorrect. Companies like Countrywide were giving loans for $600k houses to people working on jobs that paid about $20k a year. The payments were affordable at the beginning, because nobody ever looked at the loan agreements. There were demonstrably bad loans being made all the time. And there were companies specifically requesting that these bad loans be packaged into CDOs so they could bet against them by buying credit default swaps against them. Read "House of Cards," about the collapse of Bear Stearns, and "The Big Short," about those investors who made billions betting against the housing market. Also, listen to the Planet Money podcast, and the episodes of This American Life about the financial crisis. And look around for information on a hedge fund called Magnetar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheisty Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Same crap happened to Activision (Blizzard) After making almost a billion dollars in a week, due to the smash hit MW3, the stock went from $16 to $11. Stocks and analysts do not make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Achromatis Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 When your game is the topic of discussion on a financial website, you know your in deep trouble. Not when youre a game making company... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogitu Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Suddenly opinion, and not objective data, dictates the rise and fall of companies. RIM has been on their backfoot for months not because the Blackberry is necessarily an inferior product, but because the mass appeal of something like Apple adds to it's value. It's value is inflated not by facts, not by demonstrably superior stats and power, but because of the name printed on their product. . i have a blackberry, trust me in saying that it actually is an inferior product:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Semitote Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Guess what? The game's subscription fee starts today. Time for investors to hop on board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GellonSW Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 i have a blackberry, trust me in saying that it actually is an inferior product:D For who? The blackberry works perfectly in my corporate environment. For personal use it sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gtmach Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Don't let stock price dictate your opinion on a game. Stock price is reflected on consumer perceptions regardless of the sales figures. You could be making record profits and your stock price could still go down. It's hard to tell since we have no reference to what the "casual observation" was. For all we know he could've browsed through these forums w/ the beloved trolls within. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pythoris Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Because analysts are always right... http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2011/12/27/8-Outrageously-Flawed-Economic-Predictions.aspx#page1 ^^I can't believe this didn't end the thread. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gilbara Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 This doesn't look like very good news, especially now that news media is reporting EA's stock is tumbling. ------------------------------------------- The Old Republic cost EA $500 million, MMO a “risky bet,” claims analyst “Risky” investment may define Riccitiello's time at the top, suggest market soothsayers Tom Goulter, January 18, 2012, http://www.gamesradar.com Speaking to Market Watch, analyst Doug Creutz estimates that Electronic Arts likely invested around $500 million dollars on Star Wars: The Old Republic, factoring in development costs and EA CEO John Riccitiello’s push to acquire the game’s developer, BioWare/Pandemic. “EA has minimized its risks as much as it can on this bet, but it’s still a risky bet,” says Creutz, suggesting that “the total all-in investment in Star Wars is probably approaching half a billion dollars.” While EA has said that it only needed 500,000 subscribers to begin turning a profit on The Old Republic (a milestone it surpassed in record time), Bigpoint CEO and MMO expert Heiko Hubertz argues that the game's subscription-driven model is unlikely to ever make it into the black (that's economy-talk for “stop losing money”). Impartial bystander Bobby Kotick's speculation is that regardless of the game's profit potential, “the economics [of any Star Wars property] will always accrue to the benefit of Lucas.” Read the rest here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orvish Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Impartial bystander Bobby Kotick This one phrase completely destroys the author's credibility. The CEO of Activision-Blizzard is not an impartial observer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Korusus Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 This doesn't look like very good news, especially now that news media is reporting EA's stock is tumbling. Wait... EA's stock went down 3 points since Dec 20 and that's tumbling? EA gives an earnings announcement February 1st, until then this is just nonsense. Some guy says SWTOR probably cost 500 million so it must be true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jett_Skirata Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 (edited) This doesn't look like very good news, especially now that news media is reporting EA's stock is tumbling. Lol, there's no facts in that article, it's speculation. And the article they linked as a source didn't have any hard facts on what the game cost. Also "Impartial bystander Bobby Kotick's" lol Edited January 19, 2012 by Jett_Skirata Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViperI Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Who cares what those jokes on wall street think? They've screwed things up so bad I wouldn't trust them with cleaning out my gutters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gilbara Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 what about this: "Bigpoint CEO and MMO expert Heiko Hubertz argues that the game's subscription-driven model is unlikely to ever make it into the black" Meaningless misinformation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts