183 réponses à ce sujet

[Father_Jerusalem]

tobiasks wrote...

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

crazyrabbits wrote...

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

Ugh. Yet another amateur stock analyst making ridiculous claims. EA's stock has been crap for quite a long time. No matter how much you wish it, that's not the fault of ME3. 

I could have quoted Forbes, Bloomberg or anyone of the dozens of publications repeating the same thing. I doubt you care - you always like to skew the argument to suit your needs.

I never said this was the fault of ME3. EA may turn a corner, sure, but it's got a long way to go. Bleating about how great they are, in spite of their weak outlook, is not seeing the forest for the trees. Lest we forget this company still has a lower valuation than Zynga.

Anyway, what this article (and the others like it) note via the investors' report is that the TOR subscription loss is disappointing, the company is at risk of oversaturing the market via digital content in FY13, and a generally weak projected outcome for the next quarter.

Every EA release seems to court controversy in one way or another. I doubt it will be any different this year.

Please point out to me where I said they're great. I'll go ahead and wait right here. 

For the record, my statement was "EA makes a profit for the first time since 2007, and people are still saying it's "bad news" for EA.

Yeah."

Not anything along the lines of "OMG EA IS TEH GREATEST THING EVA!" 

Sorry for asking, but I really find it ironic you never answered SalsaDMA's question on page 6, so are you ever going to reply? I am not trying to be a douche, but just thought it was funny that was the first and only post you decided to ignore.

edit: Also earlier in this thread you accused a guy for saying that he hopes bioware dies which he obviously did not state, so he asked you to quote him but you never did, you just based it on 'previous posts in other topics'. And now some guy does the exact same thing to you. oh the irony.

It's because that in general I do my best to ignore Salsa, and he ought to know this by now. 

However, to answer the question, I base MY requirements for "minor" vs "major" on how well something does in regards to how things of a similar nature have done, not a statement saying "we should target 10 million sales!" when nothing you've sold has even come CLOSE to that. 10 million sales was a pie in the sky statement. Comparing ME3's sales to ME2's and ME1's, or even the Dragon Age series' sales, tells a much more accurate story of how it's doing. 

[AkiKishi]

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

It's because that in general I do my best to ignore Salsa, and he ought to know this by now. 

However, to answer the question, I base MY requirements for "minor" vs "major" on how well something does in regards to how things of a similar nature have done, not a statement saying "we should target 10 million sales!" when nothing you've sold has even come CLOSE to that. 10 million sales was a pie in the sky statement. Comparing ME3's sales to ME2's and ME1's, or even the Dragon Age series' sales, tells a much more accurate story of how it's doing. 

It's still not doing enough EA can't live on those numbers so congratulating them is somewhat empty. You can't claim to be premier league and have league 1 results.

[Father_Jerusalem]

Yet, to use your analogy, Bob, isn't there a clear competitive difference between, for example, Wiggin and Man City? And yet aren't they both still Premiere League?

And that exhausts my knowledge of the EPL, really.

[sAxMoNkI]

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

Yet, to use your analogy, Bob, isn't there a clear competitive difference between, for example, Wiggin and Man City? And yet aren't they both still Premiere League?

And that exhausts my knowledge of the EPL, really.

True but in the premiere league if a team performs consistently poorly they are relegated to a lower league. A few minor victories here and there can keep them limping on but generally unless something changes they end up in a lower league.

[Andromidius]

Its clear they frontloaded the game. Ignoring that ****** poor excuse for an intro and the face import not working. Tuchunka is the first major part of the game after a reasonable ramp-up on Mars and Palavan. And its the best part, by far (yeah, better then Rannoc I'm sorry to say). I can't find a single fault with Tunchunka, and that's saying something (other then...no, I'm not going to nitpick).

Then everything else is heaped on top, with Rannoc being the gem in the rough of the second half of the game. Citadel was boring, Cerberus Headquarters felt pointless and anti-climatic, and Earth was just... Well, let's put it this way - the N7 sidemissions were more fun.

Why frontload the beginning? Because its what the majority of the fans will see, so only a small number of people wil be complaining on the forums for the first few weeks. Thus more sales. Not to mention reviewers wouldn't play the whole game, so they give a good review to the first parts.

This hurts me.

[luzburg]

IsaacShep wrote...

billy the squid wrote...

Yet I would hazard a guess that those figures do not include the cost of servicing debts from the market or payments to creditors which I believe comes after the GAAP calculation. Ipso facto the net income is potentially far smaller, depending on how leveraged the company is and it's payment schedules.

76 million is the GAAP number

Here's a chart of their GAAP income/losses over the years:

wow how did ea stay alive with that kind of losses.  no wonder the ending suffered

[Atakuma]

luzburg wrote...

IsaacShep wrote...

billy the squid wrote...

Yet I would hazard a guess that those figures do not include the cost of servicing debts from the market or payments to creditors which I believe comes after the GAAP calculation. Ipso facto the net income is potentially far smaller, depending on how leveraged the company is and it's payment schedules.

76 million is the GAAP number

Here's a chart of their GAAP income/losses over the years:

wow how did ea stay alive with that kind of losses.  no wonder the ending suffered

Huh? This has no relation to the ending whatsoever.

[Vertigo_1]

Atakuma wrote...

luzburg wrote...

IsaacShep wrote...

Here's a chart of their GAAP income/losses over the years:

wow how did ea stay alive with that kind of losses.  no wonder the ending suffered

Huh? This has no relation to the ending whatsoever.

Yeah, I don't see blue

Modifié par Vertigo_1, 09 mai 2012 - 04:54 .

[SalsaDMA]

Vertigo_1 wrote...

Atakuma wrote...

luzburg wrote...

IsaacShep wrote...

Here's a chart of their GAAP income/losses over the years:

wow how did ea stay alive with that kind of losses.  no wonder the ending suffered

Huh? This has no relation to the ending whatsoever.

Yeah, I don't see blue

Didn't play enough multiplayer for that one :innocent: