Looks like fun. I thought Stern was evil?

Especially with the impact that Alien and Predator made...

Arguing with whysnow is a moronic exercise due to his loose grasp of facts, blatant cheerleading/hating, cherrypicking of data, etc so I don't event know why I am wading into this but here goes.

Let's ignore the gross revenues and look at net profits on the numbers that you referenced. Based upon these volumes, are these companies making much money? We know that Stern is and has much better margins on their games. The possible exception would be CGC since a lot of R&D can be reused. But with Spooky and JJP, are they being adequately profitable at the levels that they are producing games, particularly factoring in the lead time for developing and distributing games? We know that JJP has had financial troubles in the past that have required outside financing, that they have had delays due to redesigns, and actually lost money per unit sold on WOZ. Without knowing particulars but not needing to, those are potential warning signs there.

You allege to have insight into Spooky's particulars, but the question with them has been if they can achieve the scale needed. TNA has been a great boon for them as the R&D was handled outside, although I am sure that they have had to pay in some way those costs (whether a royalty per unit, flat fee, etc.) With them trying to control margins (you mentioned this yourself in another thread about keeping the cost of TNA low), and at the volume that they are creating games, but based upon their manufacturing backlog, their throughput, and the fact that they have 2 games at the same time, are they going to be able to generate enough volume to be relevant? The 700 game backlog that you mention has to be amortized based upon how quickly they can produce the games, and that gives you a better feel about profitability. The Spooky crew could be in a position where they are the right size and scale for them based upon financial status, risk profiles, etc and that if they try to grow too fast or big, that they would actually go backwards. From the outside, Charlie seems to have a good head on his shoulders and feel for this, and might be the reason he is trying to tightly manage growth.

As flynn already mentioned, Stern is focused on profitability per unit. They have that luxury because they have the ability to manufacture at scale, which other manufactures don't have that ability to Stern's level. Stern's marketshare can shrink (and to be clear, these other companies have relatively negligible impacts due to the volume that they can produce games) but they can be more profitable due to their scale.

Just remember, it is not the volume of games produced, it is the profitability per unit manufactured that matters. Having better margins and the ability to produce at scale is the key. Based upon these metrics, Stern has no real concerns about Spooky, JJP, American, etc, regardless if they go from 94% of the market to 93%, etc.

The wildcard is CGC because even though they are doing some new R&D, a majority of their's is already done. If they decided to increase volume (numbers of titles on the line and output), they are in the best position to materially impact Stern.

Got to side with gambit3113 on this. Since Spooky, JJP, etc are not operating under the same business model as Stern, they are not going to materially impact Stern's bottom line because they do not have the scale. That is not to say that they are not carving out great businesses for them, but until they can up scale and increase per unit profitability, they will have minimum impact on Stern's day to day operations.

Bold text. BWAHAHAHAH. It's all good.

Just for the record, Target rules, Walmart sucks, Kmart is on the verge of dying, and Meijer's is a weirder, often-times grosser Walmart.

Went and listened to clips of the voice actor for Deadpool. Great choice there.

My reaction to any discussion with @whysnow. (Just having fun buddy. Keep being imamaculate )

f6572f5c421c5c2771c5039b51cd5984--deadpool-humor-deadpool- (resized).jpg