EA Financials Are In: PC Making more money than consoles

That's coz they have more games on PC. What if we only compare sales of multiplats?

[QUOTE="Zurrur"]

Seriously who plays FPS on controller rather than keyboard and mouse LOL

lowe0

If you're used to playing with M/KB it feels like steering a tank.

doing a 180 turn with a mouse is a flick of the wrist.

With a controller? Well, I have time to check my phone for messages.

[QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]No. Investors certainly do not look at non-GAAP.KC_Hokie

Lol, what?

I know they are not required, but are you telling me you're not going to take into account non-recurring financial information in a quarter?

So lets look below at the figures shall we?

I think you guys are looking at the GAAP figures - or entirely in the wrong place.

The non-GAAP is what investors look at, since it's the more accurate reflection of the status of the company.

Not sure what you guys are looking at, so I can't help you.

Kinthalis

14% increase for PC (net change) 154 million vs 152 million for xbox and 111 for PS3.

Wow 3 quarters before xbox pwned everythign though.... What came out 3 quarters ago?

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

[QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

Did you read it? The PC brought in $154 million, the xbox is I think 4 m below that and the PS3 is like 40m below that.

razgriz_101

So you're conclusion is wrong.

if i could post the chart i would but every time i try post it i cant :( so we could put this topic to rest quickly cause i dont thnk a lot of folks will look at the link ;(

Do you have a link to this chart? If I am reading the report correctly total console sales is at 698 while PC is at 205 for the quarter.

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

Lol, what?

Kinthalis

I know they are not required, but are you telling me you're not going to take into account non-recurring financial information in a quarter?

14% increase for PC 154 million vs 152 million.

Wow 3 quarters before xbox pwned everythign though.... What came out 3 quarters ago?

Kinthalis

damage controlling are we?

numbers on the sheets are higher showing they are still bigger revenue streams, no way to spin the numbers man.

14% increase for PC 154 million vs 152 million.

Wow 3 quarters before xbox pwned everythign though.... What came out 3 quarters ago?

Kinthalis

This is for the quarter people, and I specificlaly stated vs "any one of the consoles".

Mind you PC doesn't do bad the rest of the time - except for three quarters ago. Seriously, what was released then?

I know they are not required, but are you telling me you're not going to take into account non-recurring financial information in a quarter?

Kinthalis

I'm financially ilitterate so could you possibly do a vague description of the differences between GAAP and non-GAAP?

As I understand it, GAAP are "Generally Accepted Accounting Principles" used in the US, and are in the process of being phased out, because they won't necessarily correspond with numbers provided by a company using "International Accounting Standards".

Is that correct in a very vague sense?

Edit: GAAP as opposed to IFRS?

[QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

14% increase for PC 154 million vs 152 million.

Wow 3 quarters before xbox pwned everythign though.... What came out 3 quarters ago?

SaltyMeatballs

pretty sure a few of those are big q2 releases.

[QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

I know they are not required, but are you telling me you're not going to take into account non-recurring financial information in a quarter?

Filthybastrd

I'm financially ilitterate so could you possibly do a vague description of the differences between GAAP and non-GAAP?

As I understand it, GAAP are "Generally Accepted Accounting Principles" used in the US, and are in the process of being phased out, because they won't necessarily correspond with numbers provided by a company using "International Accounting Standards".

Is that correct in a very vague sense?

Simple analogy:

You own a burger joint. the past 6 months you made $100,000.

The next 6 months you made $100,000 also, BUT, a customer fell down at your restaurant and sued you for $50,000.

Technically you made $50,000, but it's not because your burgers sold any less. you had a non-recurring exceptional expense, that is not expected next time.

IT's very simplified, but you get the gist.

I think you guys are looking at the GAAP figures - or entirely in the wrong place.

The non-GAAP is what investors look at, since it's the more accurate reflection of the status of the company.

Not sure what you guys are looking at, so I can't help you.

Kinthalis

So lets look below at the figures shall we?

razgriz_101

Anyway, I'm pretty sure I worded my TC correctly.

But sorry if it seemed misleading. Yes, this quarter it made more than any of the two consoles (individually). That was my point.

Even when the consoles are winning, year over year it seems like the PC brings in about as much as a console and more than any othe rnon console platform. -And apparently the trend is for PC to continue to rise.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure I worded my TC correctly.

But sorry if it seemed misleading. Yes, this quarter it made more than any of the two consoles (individually). That was my point.

Even when the consoles are winning, year over year it seems like the PC brings in about as much as a console and more than any othe rnon console platform. -And apparently the trend is for PC to continue to rise.

Kinthalis

Anyway, I'm pretty sure I worded my TC correctly.

But sorry if it seemed misleading. Yes, this quarter it made more than any of the two consoles (individually). That was my point.

Even when the consoles are winning, year over year it seems like the PC brings in about as much as a console and more than any othe rnon console platform. -And apparently the trend is for PC to continue to rise.

Kinthalis

[QUOTE="Filthybastrd"]

[QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

I know they are not required, but are you telling me you're not going to take into account non-recurring financial information in a quarter?

Kinthalis

I'm financially ilitterate so could you possibly do a vague description of the differences between GAAP and non-GAAP?

As I understand it, GAAP are "Generally Accepted Accounting Principles" used in the US, and are in the process of being phased out, because they won't necessarily correspond with numbers provided by a company using "International Accounting Standards".

Is that correct in a very vague sense?

Simple analogy:

You own a burger joint. the past 6 months you made $100,000.

The next 6 months you made $100,000 also, BUT, a customer fell down at your restaurant and sued you for $50,000.

Technically you made $50,000, but it's not because your burgers sold any less. you had a non-recurring exceptional expense, that is not expected next time.

IT's very simplified, but you get the gist.

So GAAP would post profits of 100k even though it's technically incorrect?

More importantly, look at this:

(non-GAAP)

Mobile: 57

DS: 6

PSP: 5

(GAAP)

Mobile: 57

PSP: 11

DS: 8

If someone wants to talk about mobiles taking over the portable market, at least for Western publishers, look no further than Electronic Arts' financial reports.

[QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

[QUOTE="Filthybastrd"]

I'm financially ilitterate so could you possibly do a vague description of the differences between GAAP and non-GAAP?

As I understand it, GAAP are "Generally Accepted Accounting Principles" used in the US, and are in the process of being phased out, because they won't necessarily correspond with numbers provided by a company using "International Accounting Standards".

Is that correct in a very vague sense?

Filthybastrd

Simple analogy:

You own a burger joint. the past 6 months you made $100,000.

The next 6 months you made $100,000 also, BUT, a customer fell down at your restaurant and sued you for $50,000.

Technically you made $50,000, but it's not because your burgers sold any less. you had a non-recurring exceptional expense, that is not expected next time.

IT's very simplified, but you get the gist.

So GAAP would post profits of 100k even though it's technically incorrect?

Anyway, I'm pretty sure I worded my TC correctly.

But sorry if it seemed misleading. Yes, this quarter it made more than any of the two consoles (individually). That was my point.

Even when the consoles are winning, year over year it seems like the PC brings in about as much as a console and more than any othe rnon console platform. -And apparently the trend is for PC to continue to rise.

Kinthalis

In your OP: "This story paints the PC as the leading profit creating platform for EA. That's right, one of the biggest video game publishers out there makes more money from the PC than from either current gen console."

No it doesn't.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure I worded my TC correctly.

But sorry if it seemed misleading. Yes, this quarter it made more than any of the two consoles (individually). That was my point.

Even when the consoles are winning, year over year it seems like the PC brings in about as much as a console and more than any othe rnon console platform. -And apparently the trend is for PC to continue to rise.

Kinthalis

"Non-GAAP," or "pro-forma" earnings are usually superfluous and can be easily made up by a company. Hence, the term "non-GAAP." It does not conform with the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, which are set by the Financial Accounting Standards Board. That's why investors sometimes don't bother with them. They can't be compared to financial reports from other companies.

That said though, they are useful as a guide to any analyst and are not completely useless. There is probably an accounting rule in GAAP that prevents EA from recognizing revenue from digital sales immediately during the quarter. If anything, I suspect it's related to a rule that forces EA to defer revenue from the sales of digital revenue because EA usually provides free updates after the sale. Hence, GAAP would essentially force EA to recognize that revenue over the lifetime of a said digital product.

i dont think is knows what he is reading

ps why is it 90% of the time pc gamers are the ones talking about pc gaming dying?

So, after all is said and done, after examining the charts, is this thread a "self own?"TheMoreYouOwn

Either the OP doesn't know how to read financial statements, doesn't know accounting, or both.

whelp the TC has abandon his thread, if you don't know what your talking about then don't post.

[QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

[QUOTE="Filthybastrd"]

I'm financially ilitterate so could you possibly do a vague description of the differences between GAAP and non-GAAP?

As I understand it, GAAP are "Generally Accepted Accounting Principles" used in the US, and are in the process of being phased out, because they won't necessarily correspond with numbers provided by a company using "International Accounting Standards".

Is that correct in a very vague sense?

Filthybastrd

Simple analogy:

You own a burger joint. the past 6 months you made $100,000.

The next 6 months you made $100,000 also, BUT, a customer fell down at your restaurant and sued you for $50,000.

Technically you made $50,000, but it's not because your burgers sold any less. you had a non-recurring exceptional expense, that is not expected next time.

IT's very simplified, but you get the gist.

So GAAP would post profits of 100k even though it's technically incorrect?

No. According to GAAP in a case similar to the one you quoted we would either include it in the notes to investors or take a percentage of the figure and post it as a liability depending on likely it is that we may lose the case. It's actually rather subjective, and GAAP does not dictate the exact way to take care of this. GAAP provides a framework for which to do accounting, it differs from IFRS in recognizing liabilities and revenues and when to recognize it, but it both methods should boil down to the same number eventually just at different times. Accounting does not create or take away money, it just tracks it.

Probably because of The Sims. Didn't EA buy Popcap as well?

dommeus

GAAP is the only number required by law for publicly traded companies.KC_Hokie

That's not what I asked though.

I'm financially ilitterate and asked for a little clarification on the terms themselves.

So, GAAP are the principles used in the US and non-GAAP would constitute something like IFRS?

No. According to GAAP in a case similar to the one you quoted we would either include it in the notes to investors or take a percentage of the figure and post it as a liability depending on likely it is that we may lose the case. It's actually rather subjective, and GAAP does not dictate the exact way to take care of this. GAAP provides a framework for which to do accounting, it differs from IFRS in recognizing liabilities and revenues and when to recognize it, but it both methods should boil down to the same number eventually just at different times. Accounting does not create or take away money, it just tracks it.

themyth01

Thanks mate. This, I can digest.

After reading it over a few times at least ;)

I thought pc made more money than all the consoles combined??? EA is by far one of the biggest publishers and the numbers are very significantly in favor of consoles which makes me think this claim is flat out wrong.dom2000

Hard to say really. The two markets are'nt exactly identical.

why is it 90% of the time pc gamers are the ones talking about pc gaming dying?

dontshackzmii

this is a phenomenal question right here. the majority of the times i see this phrase nowadays, it's coming from pc gamers. lol it's like they feel they have to convince themselves as well as others that what they're investing their hard earned time and money into is somehow relevant.

the fact is, console gamers couldn't care less either way.

So what's wrong with the TC's statement?

It seems people are bashing him for stating the PC makes more than all consoles combined, but the original post doesn't even mention them being combined.

[QUOTE="dontshackzmii"]why is it 90% of the time pc gamers are the ones talking about pc gaming dying?lazerface216

So what's wrong with the TC's statement?

It seems people are bashing him for stating the PC makes more than all consoles combined, but the original post doesn't even mention them being combined.

Ly_the_Fairy

People are bashing him for misreading and coming to a false conclusion. That is all.

So what's wrong with the TC's statement?

It seems people are bashing him for stating the PC makes more than all consoles combined, but the original post doesn't even mention them being combined.

Ly_the_Fairy

Multiple reports confirm that the PC is an extremely healthy platform.

This financial report from EA is also interesting in that it shows the 360 made them more money than the PS3, which pokes a giant hole in the argument of those who say that the 360's actual install base is much lower than the PS3's due to supposed repurchases caused by RROD. If those cows really want to stick to the imagined concept of an inflated 360 install base it only makes the PS3 look worse still. If the PS3 really has the larger install base then it should be consistently selling more software, which generally hasn't been the case.

[QUOTE="lazerface216"][QUOTE="dontshackzmii"]why is it 90% of the time pc gamers are the ones talking about pc gaming dying?Heil68

yeah, but most of them are low level trolls or fakeboys that you know are just trying to get a reaction.

[QUOTE="dontshackzmii"]

why is it 90% of the time pc gamers are the ones talking about pc gaming dying?

lazerface216

this is a phenomenal question right here. the majority of the times i see this phrase nowadays, it's coming from pc gamers. lol it's like they feel they have to convince themselves as well as others that what they're investing their hard earned time and money into is somehow relevant.

the fact is, console gamers couldn't care less either way.

Console gamers flamed the PC during it's transition period from only disc-based media to digital distribution in around 2004-2006. PC was an easy target during those years. Now that things are shifting it's natural that PC gamers mock those old arguments that were proven to be false.

this is a phenomenal question right here. the majority of the times i see this phrase nowadays, it's coming from pc gamers. lol it's like they feel they have to convince themselves as well as others that what they're investing their hard earned time and money into is somehow relevant.

the fact is, console gamers couldn't care less either way.

lazerface216

Really now?

Did you already forget the miriads of "PC gaming is dying" threads with TCs posting NPD/VGC data (which is retail only) and claiming poor sales, while in fact most of times you had to double that number due to DD?

Console gamers couldn't care less? Do you think it was hermits who made these threads? Or are you just plain wrong?

[QUOTE="Kinthalis"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]No. Investors certainly do not look at non-GAAP.KC_Hokie

Lol, what?

GAAP figures are required because they are standardized, but Non-GAAP figures often tell a lot more about the comparative performance of different sectors of a company... A company as large as EA has all sort of BS cluttering up their GAAP books and the Non-GAAP is an attempt to decouple that from the individual sectors of the company.

Take EA's recent acquisition of Popcap. That is dragging down the GAAP figured for EA's PC division. Why? Because EA paid more for Popcap than Popcap was actually worth(as is standard for acquisitions). EA has to account for that in their books. The Non-GAAP figures remove that distortion. A company as large as EA with as many moving parts as they have makes the GAAP tell absolutely nothing about how individual parts of the business are doing. GAAP is definitely better if you want to know the overall state of the entire company and whatnot, but comparing different areas of the company becomes utterly impossible with the GAAP figures.

Multiple reports confirm that the PC is an extremely healthy platform.

This financial report from EA is also interesting in that it shows the 360 made them more money than the PS3, which pokes a giant hole in the argument of those who say that the 360's actual install base is much lower than the PS3's due to supposed repurchases caused by RROD. If those cows really want to stick to the imagined concept of an inflated 360 install base it only makes the PS3 look worse still. If the PS3 really has the larger install base then it should be consistently selling more software, which generally hasn't been the case.

kalipekona

Till april 2010

http://www.psuni.com/ps3-software-sales-outstrip-xbox-360s-ps3-attach-rate-up-to-8-1-3807/

Im sure same thing happened in fiscal 2010 considering bigger number of exclusives and their sales.

And topic is self ownage at its finest. Spent 5 minutes looking where did he got those numbers.