It's not made up. It's saying they added that amount to the company's bottom line. Microsoft's accounting doesn't report individual projects or divisions in their financials, but each division track how much they earn and how much they beam up to the mothership.
I looked into this further. The income statement does include "expenses associated with acquisitions" but not really the acquisition itself. So that would be whatever is required to get the deal done. I'm guessing a shit-ton of lawyer fees and perhaps the employee retention as well, not sure about that one though.
Topher is right.
The important thing about the news is not whether XBOX obtains more profits than Sony (which could be in this case due to "extraordinary" expenses by Sony in that period). The news is that XBOX division is profitable and makes profits and does so at a respectable %. Even more so when the installed console base is half.
I'm too lazy to verify numbers, but I was thinking the same thing in terms of what level of the income statement are they taking.
It's the margin/distance that Microsoft keeps away from accountability. seriously I have no idea
Spencernomics.Phil Spencer math is always fundamentally flawed. Look at the top of the chart for proof
Where does it show the Game Pass breakdown since it only accounts for 10-15% of revenues?
No, operating profit/operating income and net profit/net income are not the same thing.
That graph cited Nintendo's net profit actually.
Don't know too much about finances, but we don’t know if all this is meeting MS' targets.
MS themselves said they were losing a lot of money on hardware. The reason you don't see it impact, is because they are not moving as much units as the competition. The competition is outselling them 2 to 1 at this point, thus it impacts profits more.
Alot of people?
www.gamespot.com
They are different. But go hand in hand in a way.
A bar graph with different metrics is garbage from the start. It's crazy. It's basically different X/Y coordinate metrics, but thrown on one graph to push some narrative.
I mean operating profit/income can be the same. And Net profit/income can be the same.No, operating profit/operating income and net profit/net income are not the same thing.
That graph cited Nintendo's net profit actually.
In recent years Nintendo's annual operating profit margins reached a level above 30%.
It's pretty clear - Gamepass is a money sink that is massively subsidized by MS and is unsustainable but is also making money. MS is subsidizing each subscriber and also they are ripping off the subscribers by over charging them.
Spencernomics!
Probably. Ya.I looked into this further. The income statement does include "expenses associated with acquisitions" but not really the acquisition itself. So that would be whatever is required to get the deal done. I'm guessing a shit-ton of lawyer fees and perhaps the employee retention as well, not sure about that one though.
www.gamespot.com
I am pretty sure that Sony misses console sales expectations its stock will tank.
Acquiring a company is not an expense that affects profits. It's a shift in assets from cash to what was purchased (Bungie in this example).
If they miss it by a greater than 25-33% margin, it will dip 5% or so. If they are within 10% or less, nah.
you want a company to reinvest in its business, sitting on money does nothing for the business and consumers.
That's someone else's made up graph, the only data from MS is in the figure.
True, I was an accountant for over 15 years and I've never heard of that term. I can only presume it's an internal term for divisions before full accounts are produced. That's the only way it makes sense to me.
So, shouldn't that have been your very first question instead of feigning ignorance for pom poms? Set aside the fanfare and ask the real questions then.
