Microsoft's third quarter may not have been the hotness, but the company's entertainment and devices division (that's Xbox) can have a very tiny fiesta to celebrate its sales victory. The mega-corp's revenues took a 6% beating, with net income down 32% over the prior year to $2.98 billion. The Xbox's (Zune, etc.) entertainment and devices division lost 31 million this quarter, after achieving a $106 million profit during the same time last year.
On a happier note -- and pretty much the only relevant part for gamers -- the Xbox 360 console sold 1.7 million units during the quarter, an impressive year-over-year increase of 30 percent. The company also claims that the current tie ratio for the console is 8.3 games per owner. The company's chief financial officer said he was happy with the results given that this is the "most difficult economic environment" in the company's history.
Source -- Microsoft's Xbox 360 division loses $31 million
Source -- Microsoft Reports Third-Quarter Results
Reader Comments (77)
Posted: Apr 23rd 2009 9:16PM FernandoRocker said
mmmm spooky... Rune Factory was the first game that I added to the CAG tool, and I also set the game at $30 dlls.
=s
Reply
=s
Posted: Apr 24th 2009 2:15AM Foetoid said
And how is that. How on earth am i delusional. I just went back and looked at my previous post, seeing nothing out of the ordinary, basic facts of life, the only fanboyish remark was about sitting back with no hardware issues and laughing, but that was a friendly jab at the 360 i will soon own myself. The fact of the GC having equivalent power to the Xbox is a simple fact, the graphics tell the truth, and even my list of games, which is just a LIST, got voted down. Fanboys FTW! I might enjoy everything i play on the Wii, but if i had the money, i would own all 3 consoles no worries. I'm not a Nintendo Fanboy, i just enjoy everything they make.
Reply
Posted: Apr 24th 2009 9:07AM (Unverified) said
"I'm not a Nintendo Fanboy, i just enjoy everything they make."
Confusing statement is confusing.
Reply
Confusing statement is confusing.
Posted: Apr 24th 2009 11:36AM Da Largest said
Foetoid, I have no animosity towards you. Even though I disagree with your games lists (you tend to put any even halfway promising Wii game or ports that aren't entirely god awful on your 'great AAA Wii games!!1' lists), you do respect what the other consoles have to offer, and that's something not many folks here are capable of.
However, the Gamecube was not capable of out-powering the Xbox. I'd bring out the whole tech argument but that's tired, shit hit its peak seven years ago. Anywhos, instead, I'll just let you know that it's kind of (really) stupid to keep acting as though Halo, Halo 2, and Fable have the best graphics on the console.
Play some Black, some Chronicles of Riddick, etc. and tell me anything on the Gamecube matches up. Metroid Prime was stunning and its my favorite game of last generation but I can't compare it visually or technically to these titles.
Reply
However, the Gamecube was not capable of out-powering the Xbox. I'd bring out the whole tech argument but that's tired, shit hit its peak seven years ago. Anywhos, instead, I'll just let you know that it's kind of (really) stupid to keep acting as though Halo, Halo 2, and Fable have the best graphics on the console.
Play some Black, some Chronicles of Riddick, etc. and tell me anything on the Gamecube matches up. Metroid Prime was stunning and its my favorite game of last generation but I can't compare it visually or technically to these titles.
Posted: Apr 23rd 2009 8:44PM Mr Khan said
$31 mil? Eh. It's small potatoes compared to overall losses for the division.
Though in these times, Microsoft might be considerably less willing to let the division slide.
Though in these times, Microsoft might be considerably less willing to let the division slide.
Posted: Apr 23rd 2009 9:21PM (Unverified) said
What overall losses are you talking about? Did MS lost more money than just $31 million?
You're probably talking about the Zune right?
Reply
You're probably talking about the Zune right?
Posted: Apr 23rd 2009 8:46PM Giantenemycrab said
Wait, they sold more consoles this year, but they lost money this year whereas they didn't last year? How is that possible?
Posted: Apr 23rd 2009 8:49PM superklye said
Wait, I'm lost (or maybe I just misread something) but Q309? Shouldn't that be Q109 which just ended?
Posted: Apr 23rd 2009 8:53PM EngadgetSoFunny said
"The next Xbox will be an incremental upgrade of the 360 with full backwards compatibility."
Your logic stinks like several day old fish left on the top of the refridgerator. So what your saying is, sales are low, so the next console will take longer to come out and only be an incremental upgrade.
Say, what?? I can agree with the full backwards compatability being a possibility since the xbox 360s backwards compabilility over the PS3->PS2 debacle is one of its selling poiints but why on earth would you imply that the next console will be an incremental upgrade?
Computers, especially ram, graphics cards and video cards, at a rate thats almost an exponential increase in processing power and strength year over year. So in purchasing a PC, the longer you wait to purchase your next pc, the more your new pc will outpower your old pc. If you said two years, the new computer may be 2x as fast as your current pc. If you waited four years, the new computer may be 4x as fast and if you wait eight years, your new computer may be 8x as fast.
If we won't be seeing the next cycle of the xbox 360 for a LONGER time and this hardware cycle for consoles lasts LONGER, longer equates to a more powerful future machine not a less-powerful machine. Therefore, its not logical to assume the next upgrade will be 'incremental'. Rather, we could assume the next upgrade would be 'substantial'.
Honestly, if you look at say the 4950 ati radeon card, its a $99.00 dollar card that performs nearly as good as the 4870. This $99.00 card is also about 4x as powerful as the video card currently in the xbox 360. In another 4 years from now, if thats how long you think the next generation of consoles will be delayed by the current depression, there's likely going to be a video card 16x more powerful at this $99.00 price point. So yes, just 16x more powerful. What an 'incremental' upgrade.
Your logic stinks like several day old fish left on the top of the refridgerator. So what your saying is, sales are low, so the next console will take longer to come out and only be an incremental upgrade.
Say, what?? I can agree with the full backwards compatability being a possibility since the xbox 360s backwards compabilility over the PS3->PS2 debacle is one of its selling poiints but why on earth would you imply that the next console will be an incremental upgrade?
Computers, especially ram, graphics cards and video cards, at a rate thats almost an exponential increase in processing power and strength year over year. So in purchasing a PC, the longer you wait to purchase your next pc, the more your new pc will outpower your old pc. If you said two years, the new computer may be 2x as fast as your current pc. If you waited four years, the new computer may be 4x as fast and if you wait eight years, your new computer may be 8x as fast.
If we won't be seeing the next cycle of the xbox 360 for a LONGER time and this hardware cycle for consoles lasts LONGER, longer equates to a more powerful future machine not a less-powerful machine. Therefore, its not logical to assume the next upgrade will be 'incremental'. Rather, we could assume the next upgrade would be 'substantial'.
Honestly, if you look at say the 4950 ati radeon card, its a $99.00 dollar card that performs nearly as good as the 4870. This $99.00 card is also about 4x as powerful as the video card currently in the xbox 360. In another 4 years from now, if thats how long you think the next generation of consoles will be delayed by the current depression, there's likely going to be a video card 16x more powerful at this $99.00 price point. So yes, just 16x more powerful. What an 'incremental' upgrade.
Posted: Apr 23rd 2009 8:59PM wshwe said
Sony wishes they lost only $31 million on the PS/3.
Posted: Apr 23rd 2009 9:03PM JCarpio said
Remember the 31 million lost when it comes time for Sony to announce their quarterly report.
It'll look small in comparison.
It'll look small in comparison.
Posted: Apr 23rd 2009 9:04PM (Unverified) said
Papa Gates is gonna be mad about this...for a few minutes.
Posted: Apr 23rd 2009 10:59PM F1 Basu Gasu Bakuhatsu said
Are you kidding? He's to busy doing charity work and making the world a little better. All while doing some slick jumps in his gold encrusted General Lee.
Reply
Posted: Apr 23rd 2009 10:19PM RobAccomando said
Uh oh.. time to roll out Xbox720
Posted: Apr 23rd 2009 11:02PM Mazrael said
Only 8.1 attach rate... I have 91 games on my 360, 33 of which are XBLA
got about 6 games for my Wii.., 5 Games for my PSP (playing Phantasy Star Portable at the moment).. got 12 or so games for my DS.. if I knew where they were...
got about 6 games for my Wii.., 5 Games for my PSP (playing Phantasy Star Portable at the moment).. got 12 or so games for my DS.. if I knew where they were...
Posted: Apr 23rd 2009 11:05PM Mazrael said
Last time they mentioned the losses on PS3, it was negated by profits on PS2..
good job for them they took out the b/c, eh
good job for them they took out the b/c, eh
Posted: Apr 24th 2009 1:22AM RKN said
If Joystiq replaced "Xbox" with "Playstation" in the headlines, Sprinkes would be all over this thread like flies on dung.
Posted: Apr 24th 2009 1:39AM ViolentSquirrel said
It looks like those nearly $10 billion invested in the Xbox adventure will take at least 20 years to pay off.
Revenues are nice, but profits are the only thing that matters.
Revenues are nice, but profits are the only thing that matters.








