The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
[URL]http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/6456/Microsoft-Interested-in-Buying-Nintendo[/URL]
Discuss.
Discuss.
Page:
I was close, $6.2 billion in liquid assets:
[URL]http://weblogs.asp.net/justin_rogers/archive/2004/04/07/109125.aspx[/URL]
[URL]http://weblogs.asp.net/justin_rogers/archive/2004/04/07/109125.aspx[/URL]
Nintendo are losing money off of the Gamecube but they've made a lot of money in the past.
I can't remember how much Nintendo have it's somet like 6.7 billion dollers or 67... that's why I just say billions.
Nintendo have relationships with third parties, have massive teams, a company designed to make games. Microsoft will of course fund them and insist on online play, insist on Microsoft's name appearing left right and centre etc...
But Nintendo are far more experienced and well frankly better than Microsoft. If Microsoft bought Nintendo they'd get their money's worth and let Nintendo carry on.
I can't remember how much Nintendo have it's somet like 6.7 billion dollers or 67... that's why I just say billions.
Nintendo have relationships with third parties, have massive teams, a company designed to make games. Microsoft will of course fund them and insist on online play, insist on Microsoft's name appearing left right and centre etc...
But Nintendo are far more experienced and well frankly better than Microsoft. If Microsoft bought Nintendo they'd get their money's worth and let Nintendo carry on.
Dringo wrote:
> gamesfreak wrote:
> It would be a good prospect for Nintendo though.
>
> Nintendo would become an in-house developer, like Bungie.
>
> Rubbish.
>
> Microsoft tried buying Nintendo before they considered the X-box.
>
> If Nintendo were bought out then Nintendo would become THE company.
> Sure Microsoft would add resources to them, capital and their games
> studios but Nintendo would make the decisions about the games, how
> they are made, the innovative ideas etc... etc...
I doudt it would be called THE company i would not see Microsot not using there name as they have built up a better image in terms of the market they are aiming for.
> X-box would dissapear and the "revolution" console would be
> the next step. Microsoft may enforce extra features and of course
> insist on certain games being released but other than that Nintendo
> would have the main control. Mainly because Nintendo are bigger and
> more experienced.
Bigger, yes maybe in the handheld market i will give you that but i would say that they are very closer to Microsoft than you may think. Microsoft like to buy companys and then put them to use on there stuff. Remember they are an american company and are very much and probably the basis of the culture.
> Nintendo are worth BILLIONS they have billions and billions in liquid
> assets alone. I'm not sure even Microsoft would be willing to spend
> as much money as they'd have to.
Im pretty sure Microsoft would jump at the chance, look what they would get. Not only that they would double there market share and more plus dominate the handhld market(until the PSP never know what might happen). Im currently searchign in to infomation about Nintendo see how much liquid assets they have. But i do presume your right i just want to check.
> gamesfreak wrote:
> It would be a good prospect for Nintendo though.
>
> Nintendo would become an in-house developer, like Bungie.
>
> Rubbish.
>
> Microsoft tried buying Nintendo before they considered the X-box.
>
> If Nintendo were bought out then Nintendo would become THE company.
> Sure Microsoft would add resources to them, capital and their games
> studios but Nintendo would make the decisions about the games, how
> they are made, the innovative ideas etc... etc...
I doudt it would be called THE company i would not see Microsot not using there name as they have built up a better image in terms of the market they are aiming for.
> X-box would dissapear and the "revolution" console would be
> the next step. Microsoft may enforce extra features and of course
> insist on certain games being released but other than that Nintendo
> would have the main control. Mainly because Nintendo are bigger and
> more experienced.
Bigger, yes maybe in the handheld market i will give you that but i would say that they are very closer to Microsoft than you may think. Microsoft like to buy companys and then put them to use on there stuff. Remember they are an american company and are very much and probably the basis of the culture.
> Nintendo are worth BILLIONS they have billions and billions in liquid
> assets alone. I'm not sure even Microsoft would be willing to spend
> as much money as they'd have to.
Im pretty sure Microsoft would jump at the chance, look what they would get. Not only that they would double there market share and more plus dominate the handhld market(until the PSP never know what might happen). Im currently searchign in to infomation about Nintendo see how much liquid assets they have. But i do presume your right i just want to check.
gamesfreak wrote:
> It would be a good prospect for Nintendo though.
>
> Nintendo would become an in-house developer, like Bungie.
Rubbish.
Microsoft tried buying Nintendo before they considered the X-box.
If Nintendo were bought out then Nintendo would become THE company. Sure Microsoft would add resources to them, capital and their games studios but Nintendo would make the decisions about the games, how they are made, the innovative ideas etc... etc...
X-box would dissapear and the "revolution" console would be the next step. Microsoft may enforce extra features and of course insist on certain games being released but other than that Nintendo would have the main control. Mainly because Nintendo are bigger and more experienced.
Nintendo are worth BILLIONS they have billions and billions in liquid assets alone. I'm not sure even Microsoft would be willing to spend as much money as they'd have to.
> It would be a good prospect for Nintendo though.
>
> Nintendo would become an in-house developer, like Bungie.
Rubbish.
Microsoft tried buying Nintendo before they considered the X-box.
If Nintendo were bought out then Nintendo would become THE company. Sure Microsoft would add resources to them, capital and their games studios but Nintendo would make the decisions about the games, how they are made, the innovative ideas etc... etc...
X-box would dissapear and the "revolution" console would be the next step. Microsoft may enforce extra features and of course insist on certain games being released but other than that Nintendo would have the main control. Mainly because Nintendo are bigger and more experienced.
Nintendo are worth BILLIONS they have billions and billions in liquid assets alone. I'm not sure even Microsoft would be willing to spend as much money as they'd have to.
Yuri_Fan wrote:
> Foszy wrote:
> Does anyone know where ic a actualy find the sale figures for the
> three consoles?
>
>
> Duh, in gaming magazines!!!!
On the net you retard.
> Foszy wrote:
> Does anyone know where ic a actualy find the sale figures for the
> three consoles?
>
>
> Duh, in gaming magazines!!!!
On the net you retard.
Foszy wrote:
> Does anyone know where ic a actualy find the sale figures for the
> three consoles?
Duh, in gaming magazines!!!!
> Does anyone know where ic a actualy find the sale figures for the
> three consoles?
Duh, in gaming magazines!!!!
Mav wrote:
> Foszy wrote:
> I agree with what you say they probably will want to reogranise the
> company in its way/culture. But that doesnt mean they have to lay
> off
> staff. I have a strong feeling tha if they did purchase it they
> probably might make a few sackings but not even .1% of the staff.
> You
> make it sound like the way MIcrosoft woudl sort the company as a bad
> way, if you are you should look at how successful Microsoft has been
> and what they have done with the company. Maybe they could do that
> with Nintendo?
>
> Microsoft have been successful in their field because they have
> essentially monopolised it. That is what they want to do with the
> games industry, and I would be upset to see such a negative
> philosophy brought to Nintendo - who work in the opposite way.
>
> Microsoft have lost billions on the Xbox, are third place in the
> console market and still lose money on each one sold. In contrast,
> Nintendo are business geniuses - and that's not far from the truth.
> They can afford to sell a small-ish (compared to PS2 sales figures)
> number of consoles at a very low price and still make a very healthy
> profit. Their strategy with the GBA SP, DS and GBA 2 is also
> brilliant.
>
> Nintendo work effectively and they do it well. They don't want nor
> need anybody like Microsoft to come along and change that.
Yeh thats a fair point, but you have to see that MIcrosoft is exapanding the Xbox to the market its selling and there increasing there market share. You seem to be worried byt the idea of manopolising the games market, they want to do it but they cant. Why do you think tescos couldnt buy Safeway, competition Commision. Governements all around the world appreciate that competition is needed. Plus MIcrosoft has been fined on several occasions plus they have had to make changes because of there monopoly they have. BUt all you have to do is own 25% of a market share and you are classified as a monopoly. Its when you start to abuse it that the governments get pi$$ed off.
> Foszy wrote:
> I agree with what you say they probably will want to reogranise the
> company in its way/culture. But that doesnt mean they have to lay
> off
> staff. I have a strong feeling tha if they did purchase it they
> probably might make a few sackings but not even .1% of the staff.
> You
> make it sound like the way MIcrosoft woudl sort the company as a bad
> way, if you are you should look at how successful Microsoft has been
> and what they have done with the company. Maybe they could do that
> with Nintendo?
>
> Microsoft have been successful in their field because they have
> essentially monopolised it. That is what they want to do with the
> games industry, and I would be upset to see such a negative
> philosophy brought to Nintendo - who work in the opposite way.
>
> Microsoft have lost billions on the Xbox, are third place in the
> console market and still lose money on each one sold. In contrast,
> Nintendo are business geniuses - and that's not far from the truth.
> They can afford to sell a small-ish (compared to PS2 sales figures)
> number of consoles at a very low price and still make a very healthy
> profit. Their strategy with the GBA SP, DS and GBA 2 is also
> brilliant.
>
> Nintendo work effectively and they do it well. They don't want nor
> need anybody like Microsoft to come along and change that.
Yeh thats a fair point, but you have to see that MIcrosoft is exapanding the Xbox to the market its selling and there increasing there market share. You seem to be worried byt the idea of manopolising the games market, they want to do it but they cant. Why do you think tescos couldnt buy Safeway, competition Commision. Governements all around the world appreciate that competition is needed. Plus MIcrosoft has been fined on several occasions plus they have had to make changes because of there monopoly they have. BUt all you have to do is own 25% of a market share and you are classified as a monopoly. Its when you start to abuse it that the governments get pi$$ed off.
Foszy wrote:
> I agree with what you say they probably will want to reogranise the
> company in its way/culture. But that doesnt mean they have to lay off
> staff. I have a strong feeling tha if they did purchase it they
> probably might make a few sackings but not even .1% of the staff. You
> make it sound like the way MIcrosoft woudl sort the company as a bad
> way, if you are you should look at how successful Microsoft has been
> and what they have done with the company. Maybe they could do that
> with Nintendo?
Microsoft have been successful in their field because they have essentially monopolised it. That is what they want to do with the games industry, and I would be upset to see such a negative philosophy brought to Nintendo - who work in the opposite way.
Microsoft have lost billions on the Xbox, are third place in the console market and still lose money on each one sold. In contrast, Nintendo are business geniuses - and that's not far from the truth. They can afford to sell a small-ish (compared to PS2 sales figures) number of consoles at a very low price and still make a very healthy profit. Their strategy with the GBA SP, DS and GBA 2 is also brilliant.
Nintendo work effectively and they do it well. They don't want nor need anybody like Microsoft to come along and change that.
> I agree with what you say they probably will want to reogranise the
> company in its way/culture. But that doesnt mean they have to lay off
> staff. I have a strong feeling tha if they did purchase it they
> probably might make a few sackings but not even .1% of the staff. You
> make it sound like the way MIcrosoft woudl sort the company as a bad
> way, if you are you should look at how successful Microsoft has been
> and what they have done with the company. Maybe they could do that
> with Nintendo?
Microsoft have been successful in their field because they have essentially monopolised it. That is what they want to do with the games industry, and I would be upset to see such a negative philosophy brought to Nintendo - who work in the opposite way.
Microsoft have lost billions on the Xbox, are third place in the console market and still lose money on each one sold. In contrast, Nintendo are business geniuses - and that's not far from the truth. They can afford to sell a small-ish (compared to PS2 sales figures) number of consoles at a very low price and still make a very healthy profit. Their strategy with the GBA SP, DS and GBA 2 is also brilliant.
Nintendo work effectively and they do it well. They don't want nor need anybody like Microsoft to come along and change that.
Does anyone know where ic a actualy find the sale figures for the three consoles?
Mav wrote:
> Gar-J wrote:
> So "some" translates to "all" in your little
> world then? Sacking the tea lady is hardly going to effect the
> games.
>
> Talk about jumping to conclusions.
>
> How has anybody jumped to conclusions?
>
> Nobody mentioned sacking "all" of the staff. The argument
> here is that it's a very real possibility that Microsoft could sack
> staff at Nintendo, and even reorganise the entire company.
> Considering they both work in different ways, it's likely that MS
> would want Ninty to conform to [I]their[I] business plan.
I agree with what you say they probably will want to reogranise the company in its way/culture. But that doesnt mean they have to lay off staff. I have a strong feeling tha if they did purchase it they probably might make a few sackings but not even .1% of the staff. You make it sound like the way MIcrosoft woudl sort the company as a bad way, if you are you should look at how successful Microsoft has been and what they have done with the company. Maybe they could do that with Nintendo?
> Gar-J wrote:
> So "some" translates to "all" in your little
> world then? Sacking the tea lady is hardly going to effect the
> games.
>
> Talk about jumping to conclusions.
>
> How has anybody jumped to conclusions?
>
> Nobody mentioned sacking "all" of the staff. The argument
> here is that it's a very real possibility that Microsoft could sack
> staff at Nintendo, and even reorganise the entire company.
> Considering they both work in different ways, it's likely that MS
> would want Ninty to conform to [I]their[I] business plan.
I agree with what you say they probably will want to reogranise the company in its way/culture. But that doesnt mean they have to lay off staff. I have a strong feeling tha if they did purchase it they probably might make a few sackings but not even .1% of the staff. You make it sound like the way MIcrosoft woudl sort the company as a bad way, if you are you should look at how successful Microsoft has been and what they have done with the company. Maybe they could do that with Nintendo?
Page: