Predictions for PS3 vs 360

Wait, are you talking to me or just saying that in general?

oh man


that chart I posted man, refer to it for these profits

Didnt see post earlier.

Thats just a fraction of a period. Sum up the profits and the losses and you get only losses.
Also that time it was when the highly anticipated Halo2 an AAA title was released which explains it.

all effects?  are you new to computer graphics or something?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anisotropic_filtering

definition of poop

Thats weird. It didnt look like that at all when I saw it

It looked 10 times better

Didnt see post earlier.

Thats just a fraction of a period. Sum up the profits and the losses and you get only losses.

I think you missed my point.

Sum up the profits and losses? Go ahead. Microsoft, in total, invested 4 billion dollars for the Xbox. 2004 alone brought in 8.8 billion.

Source:

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Microsoft_invested_4_billion_USD_into_Xbox_division


http://www.forbes.com/business/global/2005/1003/036A.html

Probably.That I cant answer. But atleast Sony used their investments right generating profits.
MS didnt

You should definitely read the rest of my previous post.

My point was this statement is a complete lie.

edit

I\'d also appreciate it if you provide backing to your claims. Saying so and so did this and that without a source is pretty useless.

so they spent 4.5 billion and collected 8.8 million?

perhaps you never played monopoly as a child

The hell does that mean? I cleary said "go ahead" and provided some numbers.

I did nothing more.

edit

oh sweet, a typo, billion

8.8 billion

Heh, that was a significant typo.  I took it as it was written, figured they tanked 3 billion plus.
 
-Dan

I think you missed my point.

Sum up the profits and losses? Go ahead. Microsoft, in total, invested 4 billion dollars for the Xbox. 2004 alone brought in 8.8 billion.

Source:

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Microsoft_invested_4_billion_USD_into_Xbox_division


http://www.forbes.com/business/global/2005/1003/036A.html




You should definitely read the rest of my previous post.

My point was this statement is a complete lie.

edit

I\'d also appreciate it if you provide backing to your claims. Saying so and so did this and that without a source is pretty useless.

I think you understood wrongly the numbers in the sources you posted.


Also check date
September 28, 2005
"Since launching Xbox in 2001, the Microsoft game console project has resulted in a $4 billion loss for the company, an amount estimated to be approximately equal to 10% of Microsoft\'s total cash reserves."

4 billion lof losses arent the investments in 2001. But even if they were they would have been a fraction of the whole picture as to understand how well a product did you should take the profits & losses of the full life cycle and sum them not just the profit or losses of just one year which is only a seperate number since there are also costs not just investment.

 The real picture is the result of summed up revenues minus summed up costs from the date it was launched until September of 2005.

8.8 billion alone in 2004 is just only a part of the whole picture and just the year 2004. Taking all costs and revenues until today the result is 4 billion of losses according to that article

Check the other site as well
Date of article 10.03.05
"Newer products--the Xbox videogame machine, the MSN online service, the wireless and small-business software--collectively have racked up $7 billion in losses in four years. "

Its ok though. These are common errors if you arent used to reading these numbers. Its just a matter of getting used to them.

even still, dumping 50% of your company wide revenue into one losing division is an atrocity and i\'m shocked the shareholders let then go ahead with the x360

Dude, 2005 was just last year. Why are you even bolding "since 2001?" 4 billion is the total result up to 2005.

The MSN online service, wireless and small business software are both different sections of the company. They should be irrelevant.

I find it highly amusing that you even add up the losses from the other portions of the company. Do you honestly want me to bring up Sony\'s losses from their other divisions, again? Because I\'ve already done that and this is just getting redundant.

Its ok though. These are common errors if you arent used to reading these numbers. Its just a matter of getting used to them.

Please don\'t say that, because you posted up a very poorly done answer.

even still, dumping 50% of your company wide revenue into one losing division is an atrocity and i\'m shocked the shareholders let then go ahead with the x360

It\'s a risk. Many companies do it.

mm:That made me curious too.

I tried to find financial statements too about the XBOX or MS gaming division but I couldnt find anything. There are only financial statements about Microsoft\'s in general. I think that investors arent investing at divisions seperately but to MS as a whole.

I dont think an investor would have invested on the XBOX alone. That would have been a stupid decision. Some financial analysis wouldnt show XBOX as a good investment.I wanted to make a financial analysis and build a model to make predictions to see it by myself but I cuuldnt find the appropriate information.

Are you seriously debating what the rich do with their money?

oh my, psx2central is the new gamefaqs forums

we need a dragon ball z section quick

Dude, 2005 was just last year. Why are you even bolding "since 2001?" 4 billion is the total result up to 2005.

Exactly 4 billion losses up to 2005 which is more important and more informative than 8.8 Billion profits in just 2004. You havent posted any total result atleast up to 2006 showing profits from XBOX1
But you posted only the profits in 2004. Not even up to 2004

The MSN online service, wireless and small business software are both different sections of the company. They should be irrelevant.


I find it highly amusing that you even add up the losses from the other portions of the company. Do you honestly want me to bring up Sony\'s losses from their other divisions, again? Because I\'ve already done that and this is just getting redundant.

I agree that they are irrelevant. But what the article statement sais is that all newer products brought losses. XBOX included. I didnt state that 7 billion are thanks to XBOX only. Which it didnt. The number isnt the point here but that the XBOX also made losses

If XBOX was profitable it wouldnt have been mentioned in there because it would have misinformed investors. It would have mentioned the losses brought by other newer products with XBOX being the only newer profitable product. Which it didnt. The number isnt the point here but that the XBOX also made losses

That certain article isnt refering specifically to XBOX1\'s returns anyways. So you made the first mistake to post reduntant information not me.
 

Please don\'t say that, because you posted up a very poorly done answer.

I didnt post the answer. You posted the answer. Its in your own sources

The article speaks of Microsoft as a whole. The arguement was if the Xbox system profited at all and it did.

I didnt post the answer. You posted the answer. Its in your own sources

man what

I\'ll just assume english isn\'t your first language and move on.

Are you seriously debating what the rich do with their money?

oh my, psx2central is the new gamefaqs forums

we need a dragon ball z section quick

No I am not debating that.

I am studying these things in the university. It could be my job to make financial analysis and build models to make predictions for rich people.