JeramieCrowe Posted May 23, 2012 Author Share Posted May 23, 2012 Technically, he is right in his usage of "profitable" and "very profitable." According to Bioware, they only need 550k subscribers to be "profitable." Right now they are "very profitable" in that they have double the subscription at the time the report was released. However, that report was very vague in that it only took into account people who were actively subscribed at the time. If you were on a rolling 3 month plan, you were subscribed. If you had just bought the game for a free month, you were subscribed. If you were patiently waiting for 1.2, you were most likely subscribed. I am curious to see June's call. I am pretty sure it will show either a small gain or perhaps no loss. Reason: resubscription rate post 1.2 patch to "try out." Also free months were given out to active paying subscribers at the time. My free month ends at the end of June, and I've already unsubscribed so I don't forget. If you use common sense, you will ignore these "profitable" remarks and stop putting their words in quotes. Play the game and *think* about it. If sparse server population does not indicate a worsening trend, then there's nothing more to say. The report should be taken only in the present tense. I think people are trying to use it to divine the future of TOR, and that's erroneous at best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Durasturan Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 He also said subscriber numbers were growing. What metric allows him to say that nonsense? He also down played SWTOR's role in the EA line up ins direct conflict with prior statements made in the SH meetings prior to launch. I am not trying to be mean at all so Im sorry if I come off that way. There are no HARD number to crunch and that was my point. You cannot make definitive statements without those numbers. And CEO and CFO's will manipulate and spin during SH meetings. He did not say this, and if you'd read the document that you asked for and that I linked to you, you would know that he did not say this. Citation needed. Where did you hear him say this and when? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeramieCrowe Posted May 23, 2012 Author Share Posted May 23, 2012 (edited) He also said subscriber numbers were growing. What metric allows him to say that nonsense? He also down played SWTOR's role in the EA line up ins direct conflict with prior statements made in the SH meetings prior to launch. I am not trying to be mean at all so Im sorry if I come off that way. There are no HARD number to crunch and that was my point. You cannot make definitive statements without those numbers. And CEO and CFO's will manipulate and spin during SH meetings. I haven't see anywhere he said subs were growing. Certainly not in the linked report. Well, in the video I posted in my OP here, he also said that TOR was NEVER in the top five of their priority list. Investors and players put it in the number one spot of EA's priority list and THAT'S why he seems to be "downplaying" it, when he's actually reiterating it's appropriate spot. My point is that if TOR hasn't paid for itself yet, claiming any profit at all to Wall Street would land John Riccitiello in federal prison. Edited May 23, 2012 by JeramieCrowe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogoo Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 Two words: Damage Control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squatdog_nz Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 I dont believe that for one second. This is damage control and spin for investors. Compare the suspected budget for this game and other EA titles. This. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalfear Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 Google chart not showing it at $10 the last 5 years... Did you buy it back in the late 90s? Edit: Durasturan originally said he bought the stock @ $10/share and made $15,000 profit so far. Nice quick edit there Durasturan. heheh I saw that as well and just laughed! In all my years Ive never seen a grown adult go on a gaming site and brag about their stock porfolio for that product. Anyways, ignore these guys argueing back and forth I have a question On page one some guy claims that TOR is set to make its money back by end of fiscal year (yeah yeah I know the math doesnt add up when you estimate employee costs and licence costs and every thing else, just hear me out here) and that makes it successful. So my question is, since when did breaking even become the definition of successful for a stock holder or company????? Things that make you go "bangs head off computer desk over and over and over" huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Durasturan Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 You are the one that doesnt understand how the financing of projects like this works. Its very simple to write of the cost of production very similar to a loan for laymen. The company can then pay itself or subsidiaries off (write off) over a period of time to help with financial reports just like that QSH report. I find intense irony here with all your derogatory BS directed at me yet your this naive into how corporations report revenues and expenditures. Do you have a citation for this? That they actually did this? You see you asked me for one to back up what I posted, and I gave it to you and you were proven WRONG. Now you're just making stuff up, you're just throwing everything against the wall and hoping it sticks. So lets go back and use your own completely made up number of $200mil. Lets assume the low ball here and say 1.3mil subs over 5 months. That's 97 mil right there. Then we have the low ball of 2.4 mil units sold, lets just look at base units, not even taking into account DDE and CE and all the Oceanic and new market sales, that's 144mil right there, 97+144 is 241... WOAH, so using youre completely made up and much too high figure of 200mil and using the lowest of the lowball estimates for revenue, they still made 41million dollars!!!!!! Crazy!!! Now go read the investor report and do your homework and see why they aren't too worried about it. Because it's small change compared to their other titles and it's MAKING MONEY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zilrota Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 Hello everyone. We've had to remove a number of posts from this thread and would like to take a moment to remind everyone of the rules of conduct in these forums. While we understand that not everyone is going to agree on a topic, rude and insulting comments towards others are not allowed. If you cannot agree on a topic, please civilly agree to disagree and continue on constructively. Rude comments attacking other posters because you disagree is disruptive to constructive discussion and a violation of the rules of conduct. If someone continues to be disruptive, please ignore their comments and flag the post without replying to it. We encourage everyone to be civil, constructive and respectful in their discussions on the forums, even if they do not agree. Please keep this in mind when posting in the future. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kilosoldier Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 On page one some guy claims that TOR is set to make its money back by end of fiscal year (yeah yeah I know the math doesnt add up when you estimate employee costs and licence costs and every thing else, just hear me out here) and that makes it successful. So my question is, since when did breaking even become the definition of successful for a stock holder or company????? Things that make you go "bangs head off computer desk over and over and over" huh? Yes. SWTOR has not returned its investment yet. Im glad you see this as well as trying to argue this point with grouchy was impossible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Durasturan Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 heheh I saw that as well and just laughed! In all my years Ive never seen a grown adult go on a gaming site and brag about their stock porfolio for that product. Anyways, ignore these guys argueing back and forth I have a question On page one some guy claims that TOR is set to make its money back by end of fiscal year (yeah yeah I know the math doesnt add up when you estimate employee costs and licence costs and every thing else, just hear me out here) and that makes it successful. So my question is, since when did breaking even become the definition of successful for a stock holder or company????? Things that make you go "bangs head off computer desk over and over and over" huh? I actually bought the stock in 1990, not the late 90's but thought that bragging about money was incredibly rude so I changed the post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobamech Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 heheh I saw that as well and just laughed! In all my years Ive never seen a grown adult go on a gaming site and brag about their stock porfolio for that product. Anyways, ignore these guys argueing back and forth I have a question On page one some guy claims that TOR is set to make its money back by end of fiscal year (yeah yeah I know the math doesnt add up when you estimate employee costs and licence costs and every thing else, just hear me out here) and that makes it successful. So my question is, since when did breaking even become the definition of successful for a stock holder or company????? Things that make you go "bangs head off computer desk over and over and over" huh? Tell me about it! It's as if people think the $14.99 fee you pay EA/Bioware is 100% profit. haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiabloDoom Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 The average business looks to make their investors return back within the 3 year period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobamech Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 I actually bought the stock in 1990, not the late 90's but thought that bragging about money was incredibly rude so I changed the post. FYI Durasturan, Using http://www.davemanuel.com/inflation-calculator.php, your $10 / share should be equivalent to $17.54 / share now. So you are in fact losing money from inflation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kilosoldier Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 The average business looks to make their investors return back within the 3 year period. Games and movies are a bit different in that line of thinking but I get your point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Durasturan Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 FYI Durasturan, Using http://www.davemanuel.com/inflation-calculator.php, your $10 / share should be equivalent to $17.54 / share now. So you are in fact losing money from inflation. I sold most of EA stock in 2008, so I don't have even half as much as I used to, but it has made me quite a bit of profit, inflation aside. Stock is meant to be kept for the long haul and I plan on keeping what I have left until EA is bought out by NEXON or whatever comes lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WLpride Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 Good for him. I think EA isn't that big into MMO's comparted to other games. Too bad though, it hurts them, and their brand. All of their MMO's are great but lack continued support, and usually suffer from being pushed out too early. /cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiabloDoom Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 Games and movies are a bit different in that line of thinking but I get your point. Yes, 3 years from when they start to produce gross. This game has probably grossed around 80million so far, their net isn't much higher as all you are essentially taking away is the expenses that it takes to deliver it's product and services, then you take away tax and pay your investors dividends whatever % they may be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnyangelo Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 That is a flat out lie, they were anticipating 8-10 million subs at release and they barely broke 2 million. 1-2 million subs were barely enough to cover the development costs. lol man, no way. they knew how many preorders they got and it supposed to be 2 mils, then 1.7 in january and by now they were counting with 1,6. Instead it's 1.3 now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irenicus_Jon Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 The five people on imperial fleet at prime time on my server will agree with me, this game is a resounding success! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeramieCrowe Posted May 23, 2012 Author Share Posted May 23, 2012 The five people on imperial fleet at prime time on my server will agree with me, this game is a resounding success! And what about everyone else past your nose? Err, I mean, your server? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiabloDoom Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 The five people on imperial fleet at prime time on my server will agree with me, this game is a resounding success!Success is measured in currency these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drudenfusz Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 (edited) I never said it had no issues, where you inferred that from beats me. The game isn't as big a success as they initially hoped, but it's still a success. The job layoffs were simply because their original dev team were massive, and I mean massive. Now the game has launched, they don't need all that staff anymore.It was mostly concept artists and marketers that were laid off. I would also like to live in such a dream bubble, where do I get one? Reality is they let people go from many different departments, not just artists (which are mostly contractors anyway) and merketers (actually, it seems like they are looking to hire people for that). There was somewhere an interview (I think with James Ohlen), in which it was said that the true work only starts after launch. BioWare told us they will give us more stories, more PvP stuff, more PvE stuff, more events, and of course work on the game mechanics (and fix stuff that is broken). They plan to put more achievements into the game, said they work on same gender romances, expand legacy, and many more things... but all this needs people to work on to get it done (and BioWare is currently already quite slow)... so they better hire some people to get the stuff faster out... but instead they fire staff. Edited May 23, 2012 by Drudenfusz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irenicus_Jon Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 Success is measured in currency these days. Yep, that's the reason I unsubbed. I really, REALLY want to play this game (and enjoy it), but they've handled many situations (including server population problems) in ways I don't approve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teenki Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 And what about everyone else past your nose? Err, I mean, your server? Well the one other player I was chatting with at fleet when I logged back in to my original server certainly agrees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheAincient Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 I too believe it's spin. For BW it just comes down to will they make a profit on their investment, I personally wouldn't care to guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts