WoW Loses 1.1M Subscribers, Down to 9.1M

[jarjarloves]

EA has not stated that TOR is still profitable, actually.

 

They have claimed they are above 500K subscriptions; they have claimed that 500K active, non-trial subscriptions is their break even point. They have not stated how many of those 500K+ subscriptions they have are not currently canceled and waiting to run out, nor how many are trial. Their claims about TOR's profitability have been directly questioned by their own investors and been hung up on rather than answered.

 

yes they have

 

Second earnings calll

 

STAR WARS - The Old Republic now has 1.3 million subscribers with a much higher mix of ongoing credit card consumers, but on a lower absolute number of subs. The service is stable, profitable and we have strong plans to grow at fiscal 2013.

 

Let me give you two additional points of perspective as it relates to our current subscriber base as an impact on our fiscal 2013 guidance. First, the current number of active subscribers, 1.3 million, is very consistent with the original assumptions we made when we acquired [bioWare] in 2008. Second, while this franchise is very profitable it only represents a mid-single-digit percent of our total profitability in fiscal 2013.

 

In the most recent earnings call they said 500k was their break even point as you said

 

But if you read they also said

 

Last year we announced that the breakeven point was roughly 500,000 subscribers. While we are well above that today, that is not good enough.

[ImperialSun]

Just like the huge increase in TOR "subscribers" we'll see in a couple months!

 

I trully hope so.

 

My server has not been busier since launch, I am still enjoying the game and the addition of a freemium option to the existing monthly sub will not affect my gameplay experience one bit.

 

 

Driz

[Cavell]

yes they have

 

Second earnings calll

 

In the most recent earnings call they said 500k was their break even point as you said

 

But if you read they also said

You're missing what I'm saying. They've said 500K active, paying subscribers was their break even point. Their most recent call did not say they were above 500K active, paying subscribers, just above 500K total - including trial accounts and accounts about to expire and not be renewed. This is why Goldman doesn't think they're actually profitable.

[leathfuil]

Of course Asians are people.

 

However, they are not paying subscribers in most cases, because they do not, you know, pay for a monthly sub.

 

Driz

 

Yes, in fact, they do pay-to-play, therefore, the only argument for not counting paying members of the Asian market is some sort of "Three-fifths of a person" logic.

[Valkirus]

9.1? Are you crazy? They were down to a little below 8 million last year when the subscriber losses ended.

 

Na. It is you which is the one who is misinformed. The numbers he posted are directly from the report released by Blizzard. Where do you get your 8 million from?

[Shingara]

You're missing what I'm saying. They've said 500K active, paying subscribers was their break even point. Their most recent call did not say they were above 500K active, paying subscribers, just above 500K total - including trial accounts and accounts about to expire and not be renewed. This is why Goldman doesn't think they're actually profitable.

 

They said there break even point was 500k, and that they had dropped just under 1 mil. how hard is that to understand. As for goldmen arnt they in trouble for stealing and the financial market in meltdown, ye lets listen to goldmen about it seriously.

[skygon]

This, and as mentioned earlier, WoW has been around the block for some time. The fact that TOR didn't even make it to a 1 year anniversary without going with added F2P model is hilariously bad.

 

No. it mean the P2P market have changed, a hybrid P2P/F2P model will give you more players and money than a 100% p2p model. By the end of the year it will be really possible to find more people playing swtor in the west than WoW, sure you can say but is F2P, but even but lot of pople wont be paying a subs, they gonna spend more than just 15$ in a month.

[Cavell]

They said there break even point was 500k, and that they had dropped just under 1 mil. how hard is that to understand. As for goldmen arnt they in trouble for stealing and the financial market in meltdown, ye lets listen to goldmen about it seriously.

No. They absolutely did not say they were "just under one million." They declined to say where they were between 500K and 1000K.

[Shingara]

Yes, in fact, they do pay-to-play, therefore, the only argument for not counting paying members of the Asian market is some sort of "Three-fifths of a person" logic.

 

No, your just diluting the point to try and make people look like racists for stating it which they arnt, if someone pays way more for something then another group then the group paying less dont contribute as much profit per head as the other group, its as simple as that no matter there race creed or religion.

[Shingara]

No. They absolutely did not say they were "just under one million." They declined to say where they were between 500K and 1000K.

 

First, the game many of you have been tracking closely, Star Wars - The Old Republic. Although it launched well, subscriptions have been on a declining trajectory and have now slipped below 1 million. Last year we announced that the breakeven point was roughly 500,000 subscribers. While we are well above that today, that is not good enough. The message from players exiting the game is clear -- 40% say they were turned off by the monthly subscription, and many indicate they would come

back if we offer a free-to-play model.

 

http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ERTS/2003095817x0x587660/dd5a6d27-4a63-48f5-929b-e232c4f57536/EA_Q1_2013_Transcript.pdf

Edited August 3, 2012 by Shingara

[Cavell]

First, the game many of you have been tracking closely, Star Wars - The Old Republic. Although it launched well, subscriptions have been on a declining trajectory and have now slipped below 1 million. Last year we announced that the breakeven point was roughly 500,000 subscribers. While we are well above that today, that is not

good enough. The message from players exiting the game is clear -- 40% say they were turned off by the monthly subscription, and many indicate they would come

back if we offer a free-to-play model.

 

http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ERTS/2003095817x0x587660/dd5a6d27-4a63-48f5-929b-e232c4f57536/EA_Q1_2013_Transcript.pdf

Slipped below 1 million to...what? They don't say. They only say they're above 500K, but below 1000K.

 

I don't know how to make it any more clear than that. You posted the exact words yourself.

[DarthTHC]

First, the game many of you have been tracking closely, Star Wars - The Old Republic. Although it launched well, subscriptions have been on a declining trajectory and have now slipped below 1 million. Last year we announced that the breakeven point was roughly 500,000 subscribers. While we are well above that today, that is not

good enough. The message from players exiting the game is clear -- 40% say they were turned off by the monthly subscription, and many indicate they would come

back if we offer a free-to-play model.

 

http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ERTS/2003095817x0x587660/dd5a6d27-4a63-48f5-929b-e232c4f57536/EA_Q1_2013_Transcript.pdf

 

They didn't say "just under" 1 million. They said they "slipped below" it. Difference.

 

They also said they were "well above" 500k. That includes 6 month subs, some of which have already been cancelled.

 

They do not define what "slipped below" or "well above" mean. "Slipped below" could mean any number between 1 and 499,999. "Well above" could be any number between 1 and 499,999.

[Shingara]

Slipped below 1 million to...what? They don't say. They only say they're above 500K, but below 1000K.

 

I don't know how to make it any more clear than that. You posted the exact words yourself.

 

OK i get where your going, your stating that its below 500k as its not in profit, where does it say that, they are either in profit and above 500k or not in profit and below 500k. pick one.

[Shingara]

They didn't say "just under" 1 million. They said they "slipped below" it. Difference.

 

They also said they were "well above" 500k. That includes 6 month subs, some of which have already been cancelled.

 

They do not define what "slipped below" or "well above" mean. "Slipped below" could mean any number between 1 and 499,999. "Well above" could be any number between 1 and 499,999.

 

so show its not just below 1 mil or its 500001.

[Cavell]

OK i get where your going, your stating that its below 500k as its not in profit, where does it say that, they are either in profit and above 500k or not in profit and below 500k. pick one.

No, it isn't.

 

They can be above 500K and not profitable if there are enough trial accounts and expiring accounts to push them from below 500K to over 500K.

[Shingara]

No, it isn't.

 

They can be above 500K and not profitable if there are enough trial accounts and expiring accounts to push them from below 500K to over 500K.

 

Trial accounts arnt subscribers, expiring accounts are still profit. they are in profit, to state otherwise is fraud. Well above 500k is what is stated.

Edited August 3, 2012 by Shingara

[Cavell]

Trial accounts arnt subscribers, expiring accounts are still profit. they are in profit, to state otherwise is fraud. Well above 500k is what is stated.

Trial subscriptions can be counted as subscriptions if the publisher so chooses. Weren't you arguing desperately that Blizzard includes non-subscription Eastern players as subscribers twenty-some pages ago?

 

To use your own words: pick one.

[ImperialSun]

Yes, in fact, they do pay-to-play, therefore, the only argument for not counting paying members of the Asian market is some sort of "Three-fifths of a person" logic.

 

No...you just choose to try and put words in peoples mouth because you are ignorant.

 

If someone asked you to go fetch a bag of apples you would not bring back a bag of apples and oranges with the excuse "they are all fruit".

 

When a company is asked to report on the number of active subsribers they have, they should not include over 4 million players who do not have a paid subscription to the service. It really is that simple.

 

Driz

[Shingara]

Trial subscriptions can be counted as subscriptions if the publisher so chooses. Weren't you arguing desperately that Blizzard includes non-subscription Eastern players as subscribers twenty-some pages ago?

 

To use your own words: pick one.

 

Pay by the hour still pay even if nothing compared to subs, so pay by the hour do not generate any where near as much profit to the game. Trail accounts do not pay, they are not subscribers and they dont count. /end of.

[Valkirus]

They didn't say "just under" 1 million. They said they "slipped below" it. Difference.

 

They also said they were "well above" 500k. That includes 6 month subs, some of which have already been cancelled.

 

They do not define what "slipped below" or "well above" mean. "Slipped below" could mean any number between 1 and 499,999. "Well above" could be any number between 1 and 499,999.

 

True. If it was close to one million they would say...."close to 1 million or well above 900k." so by saying it was well above 500k is really saying it is between 500k - 600k. To come across as being a postitive statement for the financial report, they certainly would have prefered saying...well above 600, 700 , 800 or 900k.

[DarthTHC]

so show its not just below 1 mil or its 500001.

 

I'm not arguing either of those numbers. It's somewhere in between. If you want to get math-y about it, call it 750k. If you want to try to read between the lines you could call it 900k or 550k. Doesn't matter.

 

What matters more is their actions and what you know they know.

 

I know they know how many 6 month subs have already cancelled. I see that they took the action of making the title free-to-play. I know based on previous EA VP comments that F2P was not the desired state of the game. I know based on previous MMO track records that F2P tends to be a response to subscription levels below profitability.

 

Based on what I know and can realistically assume based on EA statements and actions as well as actions in similar games, I believe that the number of 6 month subs already cancelled will take them below 500k subscribers.

 

If that's the case, the current subscriber count is probably much closer to 500k than to 1,000k.

 

Of course there's a lot of speculation there. But if we were to bet any significant amount of money on the number of current paying subscribers (including the 6 month subs that were already cancelled but would still be in the "active" count) and could guarantee EA would give us the accurate number... and you set the over/under at 750k, I would take the under without hesitation.

Edited August 3, 2012 by DarthTHC

[Shingara]

I'm not arguing either of those numbers. It's somewhere in between. If you want to get math-y about it, call it 705k. If you want to try to read between the lines you could call it 900k or 550k. Doesn't matter.

 

What matters more is their actions and what you know they know.

 

I know they know how many 6 month subs have already cancelled. I see that they took the action of making the title free-to-play. I know based on previous EA VP comments that F2P was not the desired state of the game. I know based on previous MMO track records that F2P tends to be a response to subscription levels below profitability.

 

Based on what I know and can realistically assume based on EA statements and actions as well as actions in similar games, I believe that the number of 6 month subs already cancelled will take them below 500k subscribers.

 

If that's the case, the current subscriber count is probably much closer to 500k than to 1,000k.

 

Of course there's a lot of speculation there. But if we were to bet any significant amount of money on the number of current paying subscribers (including the 6 month subs that were already cancelled but would still be in the "active" count) and could guarantee EA would give us the accurate number... and you set the over/under at 750k, I would take the under without hesitation.

 

They have stated they are giving Restricted F2P as a way to generate extra profit. That is what they are going after and nothing else. They stated there reasons why. And i wouldnt be shocked if they never give out sub numbers again as that has been the most bad press they have had, other mmos companys do that because right now it can be specualted its 500001 or 999999 subs and no one will be right.

Edited August 3, 2012 by Shingara

[DarthTHC]

They have stated they are giving Restricted F2P as a way to generate extra profit. That is what they are going after and nothing else. They stated there reasons why.

 

They stated the reasons they wanted their shareholders to know. It's called "spin".

 

But it's still all speculation.

 

The reality is the title is going F2P and in EA's hands that will be distasteful to many current subscribers. Doesn't matter what the numbers are. People will play or not based on that and whatever EA does with the game in the future.

 

I would say I hope they know what they're doing but at this point I find it hard to care enough about the financial state of the people who delivered so miserably on this game to say that.

[Shingara]

They stated the reasons they wanted their shareholders to know. It's called "spin".

 

But it's still all speculation.

 

The reality is the title is going F2P and in EA's hands that will be distasteful to many current subscribers. Doesn't matter what the numbers are. People will play or not based on that and whatever EA does with the game in the future.

 

I would say I hope they know what they're doing but at this point I find it hard to care enough about the financial state of the people who delivered so miserably on this game to say that.

 

Lets look at the facts, which is the most played game right now. Its LoL. play the game spend a fortune on fluff, Whats the biggest mmo coming out, GW2, whats that, pay for the game and buy fluff. Whats wow, pay for the game, pay the subs, buy fluff, charge a fortune for race changes, faction swaps and messing with a real money market,

 

So what do EA do, Turn swtor into a f2p game, get people to buy fluff, not have to pay subs, give the option to pay subs, allow people to pay for the things they want to unrestrict and how many people will play it cos its free to 50.

[CommunitySupport]

Hey everyone,

 

This thread has gone beyond contructive discussion about SWTOR and so we are going to close it. Although we appreciate your opinion on this topic we ask that these threads stay on the topic of SWTOR.

 

Thanks!