NilanVoid Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 EA acknowledges SWTOR has less than 1 million active subs: http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20120731-722956.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goretzu Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 From the language it's probably more like 600,000-700,000 active accounts. Which may well mean significantly less than the magic 500,000 actively playing and paying accounts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MillionsKNives Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 (edited) Am I missing the rest of the article? All it shows me are like 3 bullet points. Edited August 1, 2012 by MillionsKNives Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthWoad Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 EA acknowledges SWTOR has less than 1 million active subs: http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20120731-722956.html I thought it was "well over 500k subs" ? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NilanVoid Posted August 1, 2012 Author Share Posted August 1, 2012 Am I missing the rest of the article? All it shows me are like 3 bullet points. hmmm.... when I click link obtained from google I get the full page...when I the link above I get "please subscribe to continue reading". Try using the following search in Google to get the full WSJ article: ea financial report 2nd quarter star wars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NilanVoid Posted August 1, 2012 Author Share Posted August 1, 2012 I thought it was "well over 500k subs" ? lol That's their "break-even" point. Apparently, with such a rapid bleeding of subs they're hoping to raise additional revenue with a cash shop before losing even more monthly subscription money. It makes good business sense ( in a Zynga sort of way ) although with all the negative publicity ( most of it justifiable IMHO ) surrounding this game I personally don't think it will remain online beyond 2013... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayla_Felana Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Yeh, why not go and just post in the main existing thread instead of making a new one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mangarrage Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 All they said was they had well over 500k and less then 1 million which ofc doesnt tell us anything at all It is very comfortable to conclude they have lost 1/2 their subs that they started with And considerin gthe 6monthers and 2x3monthers whose subs end in 17 days are still included it is a bloated number. Now with ftp yet another hit to sub numbers I think q3 is going to be really bad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cavell Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Regarding those numbers, if you actually listen to the conference call, a guy from Goldman Sachs essentially calls their subscription numbers BS, in conference call terms...and promptly gets hung up on. Make of it what you will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agarwaenn Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 The range mentioned was between "under a million" and "well over 500,000". So, maybe 750-800 thousand? They will lose a chunk of subs after this month though. All the original 6-month subs run out(renew) this month. Accounts currently actively playing the game, more like 400,000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistols Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Yeh, why not go and just post in the main existing thread instead of making a new one? Yeah, let's all thank the hall monitor here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sporin Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 (edited) Yeah, let's all thank the hall monitor here! Edited August 1, 2012 by Sporin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danakar Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Yeh, why not go and just post in the main existing thread instead of making a new one? Maybe you could include a link to this 'main existing thread' next time instead of providing a pointless post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeepMe Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Maybe you could include a link to this 'main existing thread' next time instead of providing a pointless post. maybe you could use the search feature and find it your self. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danakar Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 (edited) maybe you could use the search feature and find it your self. Oh, this is rich. I'm offering advice so that next time people can use such links and funnel them to the correct thread and you just had to make a pointless ******** remark telling me to go use the search feature? Edited August 1, 2012 by Danakar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NilanVoid Posted August 1, 2012 Author Share Posted August 1, 2012 maybe you could use the search feature and find it your self. And just where exactly where do you find another post providing quarterly results info? Thought so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeepMe Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 (edited) Oh, this is rich. I'm offering advice so that next time people can use such links and funnel them to the correct thread and you just had to make a pointless ******** remark telling me to go use the search feature? Just as pointless as yours... maybe you didn't know they have a search or maybe you are just too lazy to use it. Edited August 1, 2012 by KeepMe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tickdoff-Tank Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 And this is why no one can take forum posts seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaick Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 I think its very sad that you people can't enjoy a game unless it has millions of subs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emeda Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 (edited) I thought it was "well over 500k subs" ? lol They also say each planet has tons of hours. A ton of hours I would consider 2000 hours about. I dont know any planet that has more than 100 hours max. You trust that your interpetation of what EA said is the same as what they really mean? Dont forget 50 is much more than 1 isnt it? 470,000 also is but just remember 50 is too. BTW the + in 300,000+ should be + Edited August 1, 2012 by Emeda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danakar Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 So, anyone find this supposed 'main thread'? I sure as hell can't seem to find it through the search feature. Guess those ********es were too lazy to use it themselves in order to verify if one actually exists or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blattan Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 (edited) The range mentioned was between "under a million" and "well over 500,000". So, maybe 750-800 thousand? If they had 750-800 thousand, don't you think they would have said something like "between 750K and 1 million," or if it is closer to 800K "We have under a million, but well over 750K?" Being able to state they have at least 750K subs would be beneficial to them. So, it is likely between 500K and 750K. And probably closer to 500K, but that is pure speculation on my part. Edited August 1, 2012 by Blattan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NilanVoid Posted August 1, 2012 Author Share Posted August 1, 2012 So, it is likely between 500K and 750K. And probably closer to 500K, but that is pure speculation on my part. That's my feeling as well, and also why the F2P model was announced simulataneously. It's nothing more than a last ditch effort to attempt to recoup investment. Nothing wrong with that, per se, but EA/BW are NOT addressing the main issues people have with the game. If they listened to the legitimate gameplay complaints, made as far back as beta, they could have prevented the mess they're in now in the first place... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nydus Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 It's nothing more than a last ditch effort to attempt to recoup investment. Re-coup investment? Just an issue with your language as the game would have made close to $100 million just in the box sales over the first 3-months. Then some 7 months of subscriptions? The question is not whether the game will re-coup investment costs, the question is whether it is profitable enough to justify the resources dedicated to it and I have no idea how to estimate that. Internally, EA has indicated that 500,000 makes the game "worth it" and "north of 1,000,000" makes is "very profitable". We are somewhere between 500,000 (that's $7.5 million a month; $90 million a year) and 1,000,000 ($15 million a month; $180,000,000 year). I'm not saying those are good numbers to EA and what they were expecting, but lets inject some reality into this discussion. - Arcada Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supafreak Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Now with ftp yet another hit to sub numbers I think q3 is going to be really bad I dont understand why peopel assume F2P will lower subscriber. Iassume yo uall can afford 14.99 or you wouldnt be here. Ill also assume that if you are subsribed you play Ops, or warzones, or do more than just stand aroudn the fleet...so why oh why would F2p change anything? F2p is a pimpedd out trial account, nothing more. If you want to play the full game you just go ahead and pay like you always have. F2P is basically for new players to try the game. Why would a vet go F2P? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts