EA to Release Fourth Quarter Fiscal Year 2012 Results on May 7, 2012

[Drakkip]

Anyone know why EA is laying off workforce?

 

I have a acquaintance who works at EA, they changed his working arrangement so instead of being an employee he works as a sub-contractor or something like that. Not sure if you would count that as a layoff, and to be honest I haven't talked to him in a few months.

[Dezzi]

Splitting of hairs. An account is either active or inactive. So the correct term should be "active account"

 

If you still have play time left on your account, then it's still an active account even if you have cancelled your "recurring subscription". Your account is inactive once play time expires on it and is not renewed.

 

And we know from past experience that these "active accounts" have been counted in subscription totals. Let's be honest here, their definition of "active account" allows them to count players who have actually left the game. There's no way to know just how many "active accounts" are actually "active players."

 

It's a neat trick.

Edited April 24, 2012 by Dezzi

[Nitewolfe]

Go on record!

 

Post your predictions and why!

 

Regardless of what others have said the 30 days free time has in fact keep other wise cancelled accounts listed as active.

Mine for example. The free days eligibility starts on the 12th my account was cancelled already but my game time didnt expire till the 18th. My account is still listed as active with no recurring sub. notice just says your game time will be ending soon. On the 24th i highly suspect my cancelled but still active account will be credited 30 days play time.

That makes my account and many many others still available as active for the investors call list.

The 30 days free time and the TIMING of if is clearly a play at keeping even cancelled accounts listed as active to boo9st the may investor call numbers.

 

As far as my call on numbers... Realistically i place tor at about 700k players that actually still play and not the ones sitting on cancelled but still active accounts.

[HeavensAgent]

And we know from past experience that these "active accounts" have been counted in subscription totals. Let's be honest here, their definition of "active account" allows them to count players who have actually left the game. There's no way to know just how many "active accounts" are actually "active players."

 

It's a neat trick.

Unless you can provide evidence that such a "neat trick" is being employed, though, your statements are nothing more than baseless rumor and supposition. Edited April 24, 2012 by HeavensAgent

[BCBull]

Actually, you don't. Stephen Reid addressed some concerns that players who had just cancelled their accounts, but had time remaining would still qualify for the 30-day giveaway.

 

http://www.swtor.com/community/showpost.php?p=3870165&postcount=140

 

I canceled the night night before 1.2. I guess the gave me the free month...So I bet I'm still a sub. I had 3 days left the night before the patch.

Edited April 24, 2012 by BCBull

[Dezzi]

Unless you can provide evidence that such a "neat trick" is being employed, though, your statements are nothing more than baseless rumor and supposition.

 

What? That they do indeed include accounts which are "cancelled" but have time remaining in their subscription numbers? I posted such evidence earlier in the thread, but I'll repost it here for you:

 

... which Brown said represents a mix of users who already have signed up for a paid subscription and users who have given their credit cards over, but have not yet had their paid plans kick in.

 

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/ea-beats-targets-on-sales-gain-forecast-off-2012-02-01?link=MW_story_featstor

[HeavensAgent]

What? That they do indeed include accounts which are "cancelled" but have time remaining in their subscription numbers? I posted such evidence earlier in the thread, but I'll repost it here for you:

You do realize that quote doesn't support your claims, right? The emphasized area doesn't even have anything to do with what you're stating. Edited April 24, 2012 by HeavensAgent

[Dezzi]

You do realize that quote doesn't support your claims, right? The emphasized area doesn't even have anything to do with what you're stating.

 

I'm stating that they can--and do--include "non-paying" accounts in their subscription totals. This means they can count people (like those who posted above) who have decided to quit the game, but have time remaining on their account, in their subscriber totals.

 

Their 1.7 million subscribers isn't actually 1.7 million subscribers. It'd more accurately be stated as 1.7 million people who have time on their accounts--playing or not.

 

The link and quote I posted provides a clear example of them doing this.

Edited April 24, 2012 by Dezzi

[Asuka]

My reply was

 

 

 

In comparison to other stocks over the same period they have taken a much larger hit. If you were a stock holder and don't think that warrants an explanation that's great. Myself personally think it would warrant an explanation, and the assertion that I made still stands.

 

People like to think that it all revolves around SWTOR and it doesn't. EA as a whole has issues, poor economy, some consistently unsuccessful franchises ie... Need for Speed, Madden next to Sims one of their primo moneymakers wasn't as good as it's been other years. BioWare is still BioWare and one subsidiary can't really dramatically change the parent company's shortcomings and ME3 as successful as it is only bumped EA stock up like 50cents. .

[HeavensAgent]

I'm stating that they can--and do--include "non-paying" accounts in their subscription totals. This means they can count people (like those who posted above) who have decided to quit the game, but have time remaining on their account, in their subscriber totals.

But that's not even close to what the article states.

 

Their 1.7 million subscribers isn't actually 1.7 million subscribers. It'd more accurately be stated as 1.7 million people who have time on their accounts--playing or not.

There's absolutely no support for this idea.

 

The link and quote I posted provides a clear example of them doing this.

No, the link and quote you provided demonstrates that they consider new accounts still within the first free month to be active. It has nothing to do with cancelled accounts. Edited April 24, 2012 by HeavensAgent

[Dezzi]

There's absolutely no support for this idea.

 

Read the article again then. The support is right there.

 

No, the link and quote you provided demonstrates that they consider new accounts still within the first free month to be active. It has nothing to do with cancelled accounts.

 

Let's follow that to its conclusion, okay?

 

If they include accounts that haven't actually paid for time (meaning they just have time on their account, but they haven't actually paid for anything) like new accounts as demonstrated by their statements in that article, then what's to stop them from including the free 30-day crowd?

 

After all, that's what the 30-days free with purchase of the game is, isn't it?

Edited April 24, 2012 by Dezzi

[HeavensAgent]

Read the article again then. The support is right there.

I've read it twice now. There's nothing in there supporting your statements.

 

Let's follow that to its conclusion, okay?

 

If they include accounts that haven't actually paid for time (meaning they just have time on their account, but they haven't actually paid for anything) like new accounts as demonstrated by their statements in that article, then what's to stop them from including the free 30-day crowd?

 

After all, that's what the 30-days free with purchase of the game is, isn't it?

Well, there's nothing stopping them from doing so, no. There's also nothing stopping them from reactivating all accounts that were ever created for the single day that the population metric is taken. Without telling anyone.

 

The fact that something can be done is not evidence that it is actually being done. You have absolutely no proof for your claims. You may believe your statements, but without evidence demonstrating their validity, without proof of your claims, they are nothing more than supposition and rumor.

Edited April 24, 2012 by HeavensAgent

[Dezzi]

I've read it twice now. There's nothing in there supporting your statements.

 

Well, there's nothing stopping them from doing so, no. There's also nothing stopping them from reactivating all accounts that were ever created for the single day that the population metric is taken. Without telling anyone.

 

The fact that something can be done is not evidence that it is actually being done. You have absolutely no proof for your claims.

 

The proof is absolutely there, you just refuse to recognize it--or maybe you simply can't.

Edited April 24, 2012 by Dezzi

[HeavensAgent]

The proof is absolutely there, you just refuse to recognize it--or maybe you simply can't.

I find it interesting that you insist the proof is there, yet you cannot produce it yourself. Please, if it exists, share with us. Illuminate us. Provide us with the superior understanding you possess, something which we all apparently lack.

[Dezzi]

I find it interesting that you insist the proof is there, yet you cannot produce it yourself. Please, if it exists, share with us. Illuminate us. Provide us with the superior understanding you possess, something which we all apparently lack.

 

I did.

 

[HeavensAgent]

I did.

 

No, you provided information that failed to support any of your claims.

[-Sev]

DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!

 

lol jking. I think we will pull out with +1,7 million

[Necrolepsy]

It's pretty sad that this whole trend of watching financial reports and stocks IF YOU'RE A GAMER started last year. 99% of you don't even understand them let alone have a reason to care about them.

[Dezzi]

No, you provided information that failed to support any of your claims.

 

I can stick my fingers in my ears and go "lalalalala" too!

[Asuka]

An active sub is an active sub whether it's the 30 days free with purchase or the 30 days free for having a lvl 50. Either way you had to have thrown down money to get it.

[FooBard]

This doesn't affect me.

 

*goes back to my own life*

[HeavensAgent]

I can stick my fingers in my ears and go "lalalalala" too!

I know you can. You've been doing it for the past couple of pages at least.

 

You provided evidence that demonstrates Bioware includes new accounts still within the first free month when determining their total number of active subscribers. That is the only thing you have provided.

[Kthx]

I'm stating that they can--and do--include "non-paying" accounts in their subscription totals. This means they can count people (like those who posted above) who have decided to quit the game, but have time remaining on their account, in their subscriber totals.

 

I agree with you and this is exactly what they should do. BioWare has no way of predicting when someone who has canceled a sub will start playing again. Nor can they predict when someone is going to cancel in the future or start playing in the future. The subcription numbers provided at the earnings call is a historical number: It is not forward looking. It should include all players who were contributing revenue, through game purchases or paid subscriptions, at the end of the period of performance. This is a straightforward measurement, leaves no room for ambiguity, and is the de facto standard for the industry.

Edited April 24, 2012 by Kthx

[Dezzi]

I know you can. You've been doing it for the past couple of pages at least.

 

You provided evidence that demonstrates Bioware includes new accounts still within the first free month when determining their total number of active subscribers. That is the only thing you have provided.

 

Said evidence is used to establish a behavior. Here's a hypothetical, and my last attempt at helping you to understand this before I go to bed:

 

One player has 29 days left on her account; she recently joined the game, but has decided to wait it out before deciding to sign up for a recurring subscription plan (she "cancelled" right after signing up). She's currently playing on free time, and despite having her card information on file, she will not make a decision about subscribing until there's 2 days left on the account.

 

A different player has 29 days left on his account; he just finished cancelling his subscription and has no desire or intent to return either in the 29 days remaining or afterward. He won't be back, even when BioWare hands him 30 days for free (see Stephen Reid's comments about who qualifies).

 

Another player has 29 days left on his account; he's currently signed up for a recurring monthly subscription. He's gung-ho and plans to be here for a while.

 

What's the difference between these three players for BioWare? I'll give you a hint: there is no difference. They're all "subscribers" simply because they have time left on their accounts.

Edited April 24, 2012 by Dezzi

[Dezzi]

I agree with you and this is exactly what they should do. BioWare has no way of predicting when someone who has canceled a sub will start playing again. Nor can they predict when someone is going to cancel in the future or start playing in the future. The subcription numbers provided at the earnings call is a historical number: It is not forward looking. It should include all players who were contributing revenue, through game purchases or paid subscriptions, at the end of the period of performance. This is a straightforward measurement, leaves no room for ambiguity, and is the de facto standard for the industry.

 

I'm not disagreeing with you, but can you cite some examples of other companies doing this?