STIHL.2489 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 Ok so in 2016, when HoT came out, GW2 was making around 17 - 30 Million a Quarter, with anywhere between 1.9 - 2.5 million players. So roughly, everyone was spending some where around at least 10+ quarter, Or put another way, **everyone** was buying at least a one 10 dollar/400 gem purchase a quarter. With a bit more being bought on occasion. Not bad. in 2018, we have 3.3 million and an average of 13 million a quarter, which means on average everyone is spending around 4 dollars a quarter. That means player spending has been cut in over half over 2 years, while they have increased their overall player numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mourningcry.9428 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"STIHL.2489" said: > Ok so in 2016, when HoT came out, GW2 was making around 17 - 30 Million a Quarter, with anywhere between 1.9 - 2.5 million players. So roughly, everyone was spending some where around at least 10+ quarter, Or put another way, **everyone** was buying at least a one 10 dollar/400 gem purchase a quarter. With a bit more being bought on occasion. Not bad. > > in 2018, we have 3.3 million and an average of 13 million a quarter, which means on average everyone is spending around 4 dollars a quarter. > > That means player spending has been cut in over half over 2 years, while they have increased their overall player numbers. > > They released Q4 financials? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STIHL.2489 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > Ok so in 2016, when HoT came out, GW2 was making around 17 - 30 Million a Quarter, with anywhere between 1.9 - 2.5 million players. So roughly, everyone was spending some where around at least 10+ quarter, Or put another way, **everyone** was buying at least a one 10 dollar/400 gem purchase a quarter. With a bit more being bought on occasion. Not bad. > > > > in 2018, we have 3.3 million and an average of 13 million a quarter, which means on average everyone is spending around 4 dollars a quarter. > > > > That means player spending has been cut in over half over 2 years, while they have increased their overall player numbers. > > > > > > They released Q4 financials? Q4 would be heavily influenced by PoF expansion sales, so would not be a good metric. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mourningcry.9428 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > Ok so in 2016, when HoT came out, GW2 was making around 17 - 30 Million a Quarter, with anywhere between 1.9 - 2.5 million players. So roughly, everyone was spending some where around at least 10+ quarter, Or put another way, **everyone** was buying at least a one 10 dollar/400 gem purchase a quarter. With a bit more being bought on occasion. Not bad. > > > > > > in 2018, we have 3.3 million and an average of 13 million a quarter, which means on average everyone is spending around 4 dollars a quarter. > > > > > > That means player spending has been cut in over half over 2 years, while they have increased their overall player numbers. > > > > > > > > > > They released Q4 financials? > > Q4 would be heavily influenced by PoF expansion sales, so would not be a good metric. Forgive me then, but where is the 2018 number you're using coming from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STIHL.2489 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > Ok so in 2016, when HoT came out, GW2 was making around 17 - 30 Million a Quarter, with anywhere between 1.9 - 2.5 million players. So roughly, everyone was spending some where around at least 10+ quarter, Or put another way, **everyone** was buying at least a one 10 dollar/400 gem purchase a quarter. With a bit more being bought on occasion. Not bad. > > > > > > > > in 2018, we have 3.3 million and an average of 13 million a quarter, which means on average everyone is spending around 4 dollars a quarter. > > > > > > > > That means player spending has been cut in over half over 2 years, while they have increased their overall player numbers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They released Q4 financials? > > > > Q4 would be heavily influenced by PoF expansion sales, so would not be a good metric. > > Forgive me then, but where is the 2018 number you're using coming from? I said _average_ so I was using the _Average_ spending over the last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mourningcry.9428 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > Ok so in 2016, when HoT came out, GW2 was making around 17 - 30 Million a Quarter, with anywhere between 1.9 - 2.5 million players. So roughly, everyone was spending some where around at least 10+ quarter, Or put another way, **everyone** was buying at least a one 10 dollar/400 gem purchase a quarter. With a bit more being bought on occasion. Not bad. > > > > > > > > > > in 2018, we have 3.3 million and an average of 13 million a quarter, which means on average everyone is spending around 4 dollars a quarter. > > > > > > > > > > That means player spending has been cut in over half over 2 years, while they have increased their overall player numbers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They released Q4 financials? > > > > > > Q4 would be heavily influenced by PoF expansion sales, so would not be a good metric. > > > > Forgive me then, but where is the 2018 number you're using coming from? > > I said _average_ so I was using the _Average_ spending over the last year. I'm sorry, now I'm really confused... so, you're only using 2017Q1 & 2017Q2 sales figures versus 2016Q1-4? And population estimates from? What I'm getting at is, and maybe I'm a bit slow on the uptake, but I'm not seeing the apples to apple comparison of financials. Ultimately, I'm not even seeing what an estimated average spend per user is supposed to demonstrate. It doesn't equate in anyway to the financial health of the company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Durzlla.6295 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 3.3mil seems about right imo, and for the spending drop is anyone too surprised by that after the mountgate fiasco? A lot of people who were normally buying gems have gone to straight up refusing to purchase gems because of it. However, it also generated a LOT of press and probably got few people to check it out, see there’s a free account and give it a shot. The numbers seem believable to me, and as someone else mentioned would also be as likely to undercut the actual numbers as inflate them, i for example would not be recognized in that data since I don’t even have an account on reddit, much less go and look at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mourningcry.9428 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"Durzlla.6295" said: > 3.3mil seems about right imo, and for the spending drop is anyone too surprised by that after the mountgate fiasco? A lot of people who were normally buying gems have gone to straight up refusing to purchase gems because of it. However, it also generated a LOT of press and probably got few people to check it out, see there’s a free account and give it a shot. > > The numbers seem believable to me, and as someone else mentioned would also be as likely to undercut the actual numbers as inflate them, i for example would not be recognized in that data since I don’t even have an account on reddit, much less go and look at it. So... again, where are people getting these recent sales figures? Especially those as recent as after "Mountgate"... I musta missed the memo... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Durzlla.6295 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > @"Durzlla.6295" said: > > 3.3mil seems about right imo, and for the spending drop is anyone too surprised by that after the mountgate fiasco? A lot of people who were normally buying gems have gone to straight up refusing to purchase gems because of it. However, it also generated a LOT of press and probably got few people to check it out, see there’s a free account and give it a shot. > > > > The numbers seem believable to me, and as someone else mentioned would also be as likely to undercut the actual numbers as inflate them, i for example would not be recognized in that data since I don’t even have an account on reddit, much less go and look at it. > > So... again, where are people getting these recent sales figures? Especially those as recent as after "Mountgate"... > > I musta missed the memo... I have no clue where they’re getting straight up numbers, I’m just speaking from what I’ve seen and heard from guildies, friends, and other players, and from what I’ve seen and what people are claiming number wise it makes sense and looks believable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STIHL.2489 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > Ok so in 2016, when HoT came out, GW2 was making around 17 - 30 Million a Quarter, with anywhere between 1.9 - 2.5 million players. So roughly, everyone was spending some where around at least 10+ quarter, Or put another way, **everyone** was buying at least a one 10 dollar/400 gem purchase a quarter. With a bit more being bought on occasion. Not bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > in 2018, we have 3.3 million and an average of 13 million a quarter, which means on average everyone is spending around 4 dollars a quarter. > > > > > > > > > > > > That means player spending has been cut in over half over 2 years, while they have increased their overall player numbers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They released Q4 financials? > > > > > > > > Q4 would be heavily influenced by PoF expansion sales, so would not be a good metric. > > > > > > Forgive me then, but where is the 2018 number you're using coming from? > > > > I said _average_ so I was using the _Average_ spending over the last year. > > I'm sorry, now I'm really confused... so, you're only using 2017Q1 & 2017Q2 sales figures versus 2016Q1-4? And population estimates from? > > What I'm getting at is, and maybe I'm a bit slow on the uptake, but I'm not seeing the apples to apple comparison of financials. > > Ultimately, I'm not even seeing what an estimated average spend per user is supposed to demonstrate. It doesn't equate in anyway to the financial health of the company. Actually I am using 2016Q2 to 2017Q2 sales, because 2017Q3 was PoF pre-launch sales. It means in short.. we have more people playing and spending less. Draw from that whatever you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mourningcry.9428 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > Ok so in 2016, when HoT came out, GW2 was making around 17 - 30 Million a Quarter, with anywhere between 1.9 - 2.5 million players. So roughly, everyone was spending some where around at least 10+ quarter, Or put another way, **everyone** was buying at least a one 10 dollar/400 gem purchase a quarter. With a bit more being bought on occasion. Not bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in 2018, we have 3.3 million and an average of 13 million a quarter, which means on average everyone is spending around 4 dollars a quarter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That means player spending has been cut in over half over 2 years, while they have increased their overall player numbers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They released Q4 financials? > > > > > > > > > > Q4 would be heavily influenced by PoF expansion sales, so would not be a good metric. > > > > > > > > Forgive me then, but where is the 2018 number you're using coming from? > > > > > > I said _average_ so I was using the _Average_ spending over the last year. > > > > I'm sorry, now I'm really confused... so, you're only using 2017Q1 & 2017Q2 sales figures versus 2016Q1-4? And population estimates from? > > > > What I'm getting at is, and maybe I'm a bit slow on the uptake, but I'm not seeing the apples to apple comparison of financials. > > > > Ultimately, I'm not even seeing what an estimated average spend per user is supposed to demonstrate. It doesn't equate in anyway to the financial health of the company. > > Actually I am using 2016Q2 to 2017Q2 sales, because 2017Q3 was PoF pre-launch sales. > > It means in short.. we have more people playing and spending less. Draw from that whatever you want. > > It kinda, sorta, but not really, means that... for that period of time.... and by not really, I'm mean it doesn't. At the simplest level, account population is not 1-1 versus actual person. So, at best you have average sales per account, not customer... which offers even less insight from a financial perspective. And it doesn't really matter what I draw from it, you're the one putting it out there. What matters is you're throwing those statistics out there for interpretation. When in fact, those statistics don't represent what you're claiming they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mourningcry.9428 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"Durzlla.6295" said: > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > @"Durzlla.6295" said: > > > 3.3mil seems about right imo, and for the spending drop is anyone too surprised by that after the mountgate fiasco? A lot of people who were normally buying gems have gone to straight up refusing to purchase gems because of it. However, it also generated a LOT of press and probably got few people to check it out, see there’s a free account and give it a shot. > > > > > > The numbers seem believable to me, and as someone else mentioned would also be as likely to undercut the actual numbers as inflate them, i for example would not be recognized in that data since I don’t even have an account on reddit, much less go and look at it. > > > > So... again, where are people getting these recent sales figures? Especially those as recent as after "Mountgate"... > > > > I musta missed the memo... > > I have no clue where they’re getting straight up numbers, I’m just speaking from what I’ve seen and heard from guildies, friends, and other players, and from what I’ve seen and what people are claiming number wise it makes sense and looks believable. I have no clue either... must be true then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STIHL.2489 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > Ok so in 2016, when HoT came out, GW2 was making around 17 - 30 Million a Quarter, with anywhere between 1.9 - 2.5 million players. So roughly, everyone was spending some where around at least 10+ quarter, Or put another way, **everyone** was buying at least a one 10 dollar/400 gem purchase a quarter. With a bit more being bought on occasion. Not bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in 2018, we have 3.3 million and an average of 13 million a quarter, which means on average everyone is spending around 4 dollars a quarter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That means player spending has been cut in over half over 2 years, while they have increased their overall player numbers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They released Q4 financials? > > > > > > > > > > > > Q4 would be heavily influenced by PoF expansion sales, so would not be a good metric. > > > > > > > > > > Forgive me then, but where is the 2018 number you're using coming from? > > > > > > > > I said _average_ so I was using the _Average_ spending over the last year. > > > > > > I'm sorry, now I'm really confused... so, you're only using 2017Q1 & 2017Q2 sales figures versus 2016Q1-4? And population estimates from? > > > > > > What I'm getting at is, and maybe I'm a bit slow on the uptake, but I'm not seeing the apples to apple comparison of financials. > > > > > > Ultimately, I'm not even seeing what an estimated average spend per user is supposed to demonstrate. It doesn't equate in anyway to the financial health of the company. > > > > Actually I am using 2016Q2 to 2017Q2 sales, because 2017Q3 was PoF pre-launch sales. > > > > It means in short.. we have more people playing and spending less. Draw from that whatever you want. > > > > > > It kinda, sorta, but not really, means that... for that period of time.... and by not really, I'm mean it doesn't. > > At the simplest level, account population is not 1-1 versus actual person. So, at best you have average sales per account, not customer... which offers even less insight from a financial perspective. > > And it doesn't really matter what I draw from it, you're the one putting it out there. What matters is you're throwing those statistics out there for interpretation. When in fact, those statistics don't represent what you're claiming they do. Well, here is what we have, Anet has more people playing and making less money. Draw from that, whatever you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mourningcry.9428 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > Ok so in 2016, when HoT came out, GW2 was making around 17 - 30 Million a Quarter, with anywhere between 1.9 - 2.5 million players. So roughly, everyone was spending some where around at least 10+ quarter, Or put another way, **everyone** was buying at least a one 10 dollar/400 gem purchase a quarter. With a bit more being bought on occasion. Not bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in 2018, we have 3.3 million and an average of 13 million a quarter, which means on average everyone is spending around 4 dollars a quarter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That means player spending has been cut in over half over 2 years, while they have increased their overall player numbers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They released Q4 financials? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Q4 would be heavily influenced by PoF expansion sales, so would not be a good metric. > > > > > > > > > > > > Forgive me then, but where is the 2018 number you're using coming from? > > > > > > > > > > I said _average_ so I was using the _Average_ spending over the last year. > > > > > > > > I'm sorry, now I'm really confused... so, you're only using 2017Q1 & 2017Q2 sales figures versus 2016Q1-4? And population estimates from? > > > > > > > > What I'm getting at is, and maybe I'm a bit slow on the uptake, but I'm not seeing the apples to apple comparison of financials. > > > > > > > > Ultimately, I'm not even seeing what an estimated average spend per user is supposed to demonstrate. It doesn't equate in anyway to the financial health of the company. > > > > > > Actually I am using 2016Q2 to 2017Q2 sales, because 2017Q3 was PoF pre-launch sales. > > > > > > It means in short.. we have more people playing and spending less. Draw from that whatever you want. > > > > > > > > > > It kinda, sorta, but not really, means that... for that period of time.... and by not really, I'm mean it doesn't. > > > > At the simplest level, account population is not 1-1 versus actual person. So, at best you have average sales per account, not customer... which offers even less insight from a financial perspective. > > > > And it doesn't really matter what I draw from it, you're the one putting it out there. What matters is you're throwing those statistics out there for interpretation. When in fact, those statistics don't represent what you're claiming they do. > > Well, here is what we have, Anet has more people playing and making less money. > > Draw from that, whatever you want. Actually, no... what we have is (1) more accounts for the period you provided (unclear how the population for that specific period was sourced) , and (2) less sales for that period (I did not verify) with no interesting correlation provided between the two. Still unclear what is supposed to be, much less can be, genuinely drawn from that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witcher.3197 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > Ok so in 2016, when HoT came out, GW2 was making around 17 - 30 Million a Quarter, with anywhere between 1.9 - 2.5 million players. So roughly, everyone was spending some where around at least 10+ quarter, Or put another way, **everyone** was buying at least a one 10 dollar/400 gem purchase a quarter. With a bit more being bought on occasion. Not bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in 2018, we have 3.3 million and an average of 13 million a quarter, which means on average everyone is spending around 4 dollars a quarter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That means player spending has been cut in over half over 2 years, while they have increased their overall player numbers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They released Q4 financials? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Q4 would be heavily influenced by PoF expansion sales, so would not be a good metric. > > > > > > > > > > > > Forgive me then, but where is the 2018 number you're using coming from? > > > > > > > > > > I said _average_ so I was using the _Average_ spending over the last year. > > > > > > > > I'm sorry, now I'm really confused... so, you're only using 2017Q1 & 2017Q2 sales figures versus 2016Q1-4? And population estimates from? > > > > > > > > What I'm getting at is, and maybe I'm a bit slow on the uptake, but I'm not seeing the apples to apple comparison of financials. > > > > > > > > Ultimately, I'm not even seeing what an estimated average spend per user is supposed to demonstrate. It doesn't equate in anyway to the financial health of the company. > > > > > > Actually I am using 2016Q2 to 2017Q2 sales, because 2017Q3 was PoF pre-launch sales. > > > > > > It means in short.. we have more people playing and spending less. Draw from that whatever you want. > > > > > > > > > > It kinda, sorta, but not really, means that... for that period of time.... and by not really, I'm mean it doesn't. > > > > At the simplest level, account population is not 1-1 versus actual person. So, at best you have average sales per account, not customer... which offers even less insight from a financial perspective. > > > > And it doesn't really matter what I draw from it, you're the one putting it out there. What matters is you're throwing those statistics out there for interpretation. When in fact, those statistics don't represent what you're claiming they do. > > Well, here is what we have, Anet has more people playing and making less money. > > Draw from that, whatever you want. Your entire math is based on the assumption that OP's numbers are correct, which they absolutely aren't (as pointed out on reddit) and is little more than flawed speculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STIHL.2489 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"witcher.3197" said: > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > > Ok so in 2016, when HoT came out, GW2 was making around 17 - 30 Million a Quarter, with anywhere between 1.9 - 2.5 million players. So roughly, everyone was spending some where around at least 10+ quarter, Or put another way, **everyone** was buying at least a one 10 dollar/400 gem purchase a quarter. With a bit more being bought on occasion. Not bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in 2018, we have 3.3 million and an average of 13 million a quarter, which means on average everyone is spending around 4 dollars a quarter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That means player spending has been cut in over half over 2 years, while they have increased their overall player numbers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They released Q4 financials? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Q4 would be heavily influenced by PoF expansion sales, so would not be a good metric. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Forgive me then, but where is the 2018 number you're using coming from? > > > > > > > > > > > > I said _average_ so I was using the _Average_ spending over the last year. > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry, now I'm really confused... so, you're only using 2017Q1 & 2017Q2 sales figures versus 2016Q1-4? And population estimates from? > > > > > > > > > > What I'm getting at is, and maybe I'm a bit slow on the uptake, but I'm not seeing the apples to apple comparison of financials. > > > > > > > > > > Ultimately, I'm not even seeing what an estimated average spend per user is supposed to demonstrate. It doesn't equate in anyway to the financial health of the company. > > > > > > > > Actually I am using 2016Q2 to 2017Q2 sales, because 2017Q3 was PoF pre-launch sales. > > > > > > > > It means in short.. we have more people playing and spending less. Draw from that whatever you want. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It kinda, sorta, but not really, means that... for that period of time.... and by not really, I'm mean it doesn't. > > > > > > At the simplest level, account population is not 1-1 versus actual person. So, at best you have average sales per account, not customer... which offers even less insight from a financial perspective. > > > > > > And it doesn't really matter what I draw from it, you're the one putting it out there. What matters is you're throwing those statistics out there for interpretation. When in fact, those statistics don't represent what you're claiming they do. > > > > Well, here is what we have, Anet has more people playing and making less money. > > > > Draw from that, whatever you want. > > Your entire math is based on the assumption that OP's numbers are correct, which they absolutely aren't (as pointed out on reddit) and is little more than flawed speculation. I have no intention to discuss the merits of the OP's numbers, you can argue with them about that, not me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witcher.3197 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > @"witcher.3197" said: > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > > > Ok so in 2016, when HoT came out, GW2 was making around 17 - 30 Million a Quarter, with anywhere between 1.9 - 2.5 million players. So roughly, everyone was spending some where around at least 10+ quarter, Or put another way, **everyone** was buying at least a one 10 dollar/400 gem purchase a quarter. With a bit more being bought on occasion. Not bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in 2018, we have 3.3 million and an average of 13 million a quarter, which means on average everyone is spending around 4 dollars a quarter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That means player spending has been cut in over half over 2 years, while they have increased their overall player numbers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They released Q4 financials? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Q4 would be heavily influenced by PoF expansion sales, so would not be a good metric. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Forgive me then, but where is the 2018 number you're using coming from? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I said _average_ so I was using the _Average_ spending over the last year. > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry, now I'm really confused... so, you're only using 2017Q1 & 2017Q2 sales figures versus 2016Q1-4? And population estimates from? > > > > > > > > > > > > What I'm getting at is, and maybe I'm a bit slow on the uptake, but I'm not seeing the apples to apple comparison of financials. > > > > > > > > > > > > Ultimately, I'm not even seeing what an estimated average spend per user is supposed to demonstrate. It doesn't equate in anyway to the financial health of the company. > > > > > > > > > > Actually I am using 2016Q2 to 2017Q2 sales, because 2017Q3 was PoF pre-launch sales. > > > > > > > > > > It means in short.. we have more people playing and spending less. Draw from that whatever you want. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It kinda, sorta, but not really, means that... for that period of time.... and by not really, I'm mean it doesn't. > > > > > > > > At the simplest level, account population is not 1-1 versus actual person. So, at best you have average sales per account, not customer... which offers even less insight from a financial perspective. > > > > > > > > And it doesn't really matter what I draw from it, you're the one putting it out there. What matters is you're throwing those statistics out there for interpretation. When in fact, those statistics don't represent what you're claiming they do. > > > > > > Well, here is what we have, Anet has more people playing and making less money. > > > > > > Draw from that, whatever you want. > > > > Your entire math is based on the assumption that OP's numbers are correct, which they absolutely aren't (as pointed out on reddit) and is little more than flawed speculation. > > I have no intention to discuss the merits of the OP's numbers, you can argue with them about that, not me. Yes but it makes you conclude that we have more players spending less, when the obvious answer is that we just have fewer players:P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STIHL.2489 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"witcher.3197" said: > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > @"witcher.3197" said: > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok so in 2016, when HoT came out, GW2 was making around 17 - 30 Million a Quarter, with anywhere between 1.9 - 2.5 million players. So roughly, everyone was spending some where around at least 10+ quarter, Or put another way, **everyone** was buying at least a one 10 dollar/400 gem purchase a quarter. With a bit more being bought on occasion. Not bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in 2018, we have 3.3 million and an average of 13 million a quarter, which means on average everyone is spending around 4 dollars a quarter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That means player spending has been cut in over half over 2 years, while they have increased their overall player numbers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They released Q4 financials? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Q4 would be heavily influenced by PoF expansion sales, so would not be a good metric. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Forgive me then, but where is the 2018 number you're using coming from? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I said _average_ so I was using the _Average_ spending over the last year. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry, now I'm really confused... so, you're only using 2017Q1 & 2017Q2 sales figures versus 2016Q1-4? And population estimates from? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What I'm getting at is, and maybe I'm a bit slow on the uptake, but I'm not seeing the apples to apple comparison of financials. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ultimately, I'm not even seeing what an estimated average spend per user is supposed to demonstrate. It doesn't equate in anyway to the financial health of the company. > > > > > > > > > > > > Actually I am using 2016Q2 to 2017Q2 sales, because 2017Q3 was PoF pre-launch sales. > > > > > > > > > > > > It means in short.. we have more people playing and spending less. Draw from that whatever you want. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It kinda, sorta, but not really, means that... for that period of time.... and by not really, I'm mean it doesn't. > > > > > > > > > > At the simplest level, account population is not 1-1 versus actual person. So, at best you have average sales per account, not customer... which offers even less insight from a financial perspective. > > > > > > > > > > And it doesn't really matter what I draw from it, you're the one putting it out there. What matters is you're throwing those statistics out there for interpretation. When in fact, those statistics don't represent what you're claiming they do. > > > > > > > > Well, here is what we have, Anet has more people playing and making less money. > > > > > > > > Draw from that, whatever you want. > > > > > > Your entire math is based on the assumption that OP's numbers are correct, which they absolutely aren't (as pointed out on reddit) and is little more than flawed speculation. > > > > I have no intention to discuss the merits of the OP's numbers, you can argue with them about that, not me. > > Yes but it makes you conclude that we have more players spending less, when the obvious answer is that we just have fewer players:P irrelevant, if you have an issue with their numbers, you bring that up with them. My choice to accept their numbers is not open for you to debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STIHL.2489 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > > Ok so in 2016, when HoT came out, GW2 was making around 17 - 30 Million a Quarter, with anywhere between 1.9 - 2.5 million players. So roughly, everyone was spending some where around at least 10+ quarter, Or put another way, **everyone** was buying at least a one 10 dollar/400 gem purchase a quarter. With a bit more being bought on occasion. Not bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in 2018, we have 3.3 million and an average of 13 million a quarter, which means on average everyone is spending around 4 dollars a quarter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That means player spending has been cut in over half over 2 years, while they have increased their overall player numbers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They released Q4 financials? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Q4 would be heavily influenced by PoF expansion sales, so would not be a good metric. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Forgive me then, but where is the 2018 number you're using coming from? > > > > > > > > > > > > I said _average_ so I was using the _Average_ spending over the last year. > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry, now I'm really confused... so, you're only using 2017Q1 & 2017Q2 sales figures versus 2016Q1-4? And population estimates from? > > > > > > > > > > What I'm getting at is, and maybe I'm a bit slow on the uptake, but I'm not seeing the apples to apple comparison of financials. > > > > > > > > > > Ultimately, I'm not even seeing what an estimated average spend per user is supposed to demonstrate. It doesn't equate in anyway to the financial health of the company. > > > > > > > > Actually I am using 2016Q2 to 2017Q2 sales, because 2017Q3 was PoF pre-launch sales. > > > > > > > > It means in short.. we have more people playing and spending less. Draw from that whatever you want. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It kinda, sorta, but not really, means that... for that period of time.... and by not really, I'm mean it doesn't. > > > > > > At the simplest level, account population is not 1-1 versus actual person. So, at best you have average sales per account, not customer... which offers even less insight from a financial perspective. > > > > > > And it doesn't really matter what I draw from it, you're the one putting it out there. What matters is you're throwing those statistics out there for interpretation. When in fact, those statistics don't represent what you're claiming they do. > > > > Well, here is what we have, Anet has more people playing and making less money. > > > > Draw from that, whatever you want. > > Actually, no... what we have is (1) more accounts for the period you provided (unclear how the population for that specific period was sourced) , and (2) less sales for that period (I did not verify) with no interesting correlation provided between the two. > > Still unclear what is supposed to be, much less can be, genuinely drawn from that. > No. What we have, is * Population Growth, based on a lot more research then anyone else in this discussion has done. * Income Decline. Direct from NCsoft earnings report, which anyone can look up. Now we can conclude a few things from that. For example, + We could conclude that people are spending less. And while this would be true on average, it does not mean that any individual player is spending less, but that the population as a whole is spending less, which is true based on the numbers we have open to us. + We could conclude that the population of paying players decreased and the people looking for a free game has gone up. This is the counter point to the above conclusion, that it is not that players individually are spending less, but that are less players overall spending money and the population of players coming here expecting everything for free has increased. Both those could be debated back and forth ad nauseam, which is all you are trying to do at this point. But is shows one very solid point, that is not open for debate, that _Population does not correlate to Profit_. If you don' like the OP's numbers, you can cry to them and find a better source, trying to debate that with me, is a pointless, as I don't care if you don't like their numbers, they are better then anything you have to provide and I am more then willing to trust they did their research on the subject matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witcher.3197 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > > > Ok so in 2016, when HoT came out, GW2 was making around 17 - 30 Million a Quarter, with anywhere between 1.9 - 2.5 million players. So roughly, everyone was spending some where around at least 10+ quarter, Or put another way, **everyone** was buying at least a one 10 dollar/400 gem purchase a quarter. With a bit more being bought on occasion. Not bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in 2018, we have 3.3 million and an average of 13 million a quarter, which means on average everyone is spending around 4 dollars a quarter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That means player spending has been cut in over half over 2 years, while they have increased their overall player numbers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They released Q4 financials? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Q4 would be heavily influenced by PoF expansion sales, so would not be a good metric. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Forgive me then, but where is the 2018 number you're using coming from? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I said _average_ so I was using the _Average_ spending over the last year. > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry, now I'm really confused... so, you're only using 2017Q1 & 2017Q2 sales figures versus 2016Q1-4? And population estimates from? > > > > > > > > > > > > What I'm getting at is, and maybe I'm a bit slow on the uptake, but I'm not seeing the apples to apple comparison of financials. > > > > > > > > > > > > Ultimately, I'm not even seeing what an estimated average spend per user is supposed to demonstrate. It doesn't equate in anyway to the financial health of the company. > > > > > > > > > > Actually I am using 2016Q2 to 2017Q2 sales, because 2017Q3 was PoF pre-launch sales. > > > > > > > > > > It means in short.. we have more people playing and spending less. Draw from that whatever you want. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It kinda, sorta, but not really, means that... for that period of time.... and by not really, I'm mean it doesn't. > > > > > > > > At the simplest level, account population is not 1-1 versus actual person. So, at best you have average sales per account, not customer... which offers even less insight from a financial perspective. > > > > > > > > And it doesn't really matter what I draw from it, you're the one putting it out there. What matters is you're throwing those statistics out there for interpretation. When in fact, those statistics don't represent what you're claiming they do. > > > > > > Well, here is what we have, Anet has more people playing and making less money. > > > > > > Draw from that, whatever you want. > > > > Actually, no... what we have is (1) more accounts for the period you provided (unclear how the population for that specific period was sourced) , and (2) less sales for that period (I did not verify) with no interesting correlation provided between the two. > > > > Still unclear what is supposed to be, much less can be, genuinely drawn from that. > > > > No. > > What we have, is > * Population Growth, based on a lot more research then anyone else in this discussion has done. > * Income Decline. Direct from NCsoft earnings report, which anyone can look up. > > Now we can conclude a few things from that. > > For example, > > + We could conclude that people are spending less. And while this would be true on average, it does not mean that any individual player is spending less, but that the population as a whole is spending less, which is true based on the numbers we have open to us. > + We could conclude that the population of paying players decreased and the people looking for a free game has gone up. This is the counter point to the above conclusion, that it is not that players individually are spending less, but that are less players overall spending money and the population of players coming here expecting everything for free has increased. > > Both those could be debated back and forth ad nauseam, which is all you are trying to do at this point. > > But is shows one very solid point, that is not open for debate, that _Population does not correlate to Profit_. > > If you don' like the OP's numbers, you can cry to them and find a better source, trying to debate that with me, is a pointless, as I don't care if you don't like their numbers, they are better then anything you have to provide and I am more then willing to trust they did their research on the subject matter. Of course I can't find a better source bcause there is no source, OP is just grasping at straws. GW2 efficiency and reddit numbers going up means nothing, absolutely nothing, because there's nothing that wipes inactive users from either of them so it's only natural that the number keeps going up. Let's say a subreddit has 100 subscribers, 80 stops playing the game and 8 of them takes the effort to unsub from that subreddit, then 20 new players come in so the total count is now 112. Do we have more active players? No, we have 60 fewer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mourningcry.9428 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > > > Ok so in 2016, when HoT came out, GW2 was making around 17 - 30 Million a Quarter, with anywhere between 1.9 - 2.5 million players. So roughly, everyone was spending some where around at least 10+ quarter, Or put another way, **everyone** was buying at least a one 10 dollar/400 gem purchase a quarter. With a bit more being bought on occasion. Not bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in 2018, we have 3.3 million and an average of 13 million a quarter, which means on average everyone is spending around 4 dollars a quarter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That means player spending has been cut in over half over 2 years, while they have increased their overall player numbers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They released Q4 financials? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Q4 would be heavily influenced by PoF expansion sales, so would not be a good metric. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Forgive me then, but where is the 2018 number you're using coming from? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I said _average_ so I was using the _Average_ spending over the last year. > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry, now I'm really confused... so, you're only using 2017Q1 & 2017Q2 sales figures versus 2016Q1-4? And population estimates from? > > > > > > > > > > > > What I'm getting at is, and maybe I'm a bit slow on the uptake, but I'm not seeing the apples to apple comparison of financials. > > > > > > > > > > > > Ultimately, I'm not even seeing what an estimated average spend per user is supposed to demonstrate. It doesn't equate in anyway to the financial health of the company. > > > > > > > > > > Actually I am using 2016Q2 to 2017Q2 sales, because 2017Q3 was PoF pre-launch sales. > > > > > > > > > > It means in short.. we have more people playing and spending less. Draw from that whatever you want. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It kinda, sorta, but not really, means that... for that period of time.... and by not really, I'm mean it doesn't. > > > > > > > > At the simplest level, account population is not 1-1 versus actual person. So, at best you have average sales per account, not customer... which offers even less insight from a financial perspective. > > > > > > > > And it doesn't really matter what I draw from it, you're the one putting it out there. What matters is you're throwing those statistics out there for interpretation. When in fact, those statistics don't represent what you're claiming they do. > > > > > > Well, here is what we have, Anet has more people playing and making less money. > > > > > > Draw from that, whatever you want. > > > > Actually, no... what we have is (1) more accounts for the period you provided (unclear how the population for that specific period was sourced) , and (2) less sales for that period (I did not verify) with no interesting correlation provided between the two. > > > > Still unclear what is supposed to be, much less can be, genuinely drawn from that. > > > > No. > > What we have, is > * Population Growth, based on a lot more research then anyone else in this discussion has done. > * Income Decline. Direct from NCsoft earnings report, which anyone can look up. > > Now we can conclude a few things from that. > > For example, > > + We could conclude that people are spending less. And while this would be true on average, it does not mean that any individual player is spending less, but that the population as a whole is spending less, which is true based on the numbers we have open to us. > + We could conclude that the population of paying players decreased and the people looking for a free game has gone up. This is the counter point to the above conclusion, that it is not that players individually are spending less, but that are less players overall spending money and the population of players coming here expecting everything for free has increased. > > Both those could be debated back and forth ad nauseam, which is all you are trying to do at this point. > > But is shows one very solid point, that is not open for debate, that _Population does not correlate to Profit_. > > If you don' like the OP's numbers, you can cry to them and find a better source, trying to debate that with me, is a pointless, as I don't care if you don't like their numbers, they are better then anything you have to provide and I am more then willing to trust they did their research on the subject matter. Ok... first, the accuracy of the population numbers is irrelevant... it's your methodology and conclusions that are flawed. In a nutshell: * The population numbers for base 2016 were as of ~September 2016, not the full year. * The population numbers for current were as of January 2018 - These 2018 numbers include the population of PoF * The 2016 sales numbers you provided, you claimed were 2016Q2-2017Q2 - However, you included 2016Q1 sales, of ~30M KRW - Average sales for your specified range (16Q2,16Q3,17Q1,17Q2) would have been ~15M KRW * You do not include 2017Q3 sales numbers of ~20M KRW, yet take into account population for that same period. * 2017Q4 numbers are not available yet, but should be included if those current population numbers are to be used. In short, you took a population sample from one period, and then sales numbers from a different period, while removing relevant values for that period. Thus skewing your results. If you really want to go further, you're drawing conclusions based on pure speculation and conjecture off of this flawed data. I could go into a better methodology, but again, sales to population metrics are pretty much useless in a vacume for determining any meaningful financial conclusion. If you believe otherwise, please elaborate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STIHL.2489 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"witcher.3197" said: > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok so in 2016, when HoT came out, GW2 was making around 17 - 30 Million a Quarter, with anywhere between 1.9 - 2.5 million players. So roughly, everyone was spending some where around at least 10+ quarter, Or put another way, **everyone** was buying at least a one 10 dollar/400 gem purchase a quarter. With a bit more being bought on occasion. Not bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in 2018, we have 3.3 million and an average of 13 million a quarter, which means on average everyone is spending around 4 dollars a quarter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That means player spending has been cut in over half over 2 years, while they have increased their overall player numbers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They released Q4 financials? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Q4 would be heavily influenced by PoF expansion sales, so would not be a good metric. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Forgive me then, but where is the 2018 number you're using coming from? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I said _average_ so I was using the _Average_ spending over the last year. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry, now I'm really confused... so, you're only using 2017Q1 & 2017Q2 sales figures versus 2016Q1-4? And population estimates from? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What I'm getting at is, and maybe I'm a bit slow on the uptake, but I'm not seeing the apples to apple comparison of financials. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ultimately, I'm not even seeing what an estimated average spend per user is supposed to demonstrate. It doesn't equate in anyway to the financial health of the company. > > > > > > > > > > > > Actually I am using 2016Q2 to 2017Q2 sales, because 2017Q3 was PoF pre-launch sales. > > > > > > > > > > > > It means in short.. we have more people playing and spending less. Draw from that whatever you want. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It kinda, sorta, but not really, means that... for that period of time.... and by not really, I'm mean it doesn't. > > > > > > > > > > At the simplest level, account population is not 1-1 versus actual person. So, at best you have average sales per account, not customer... which offers even less insight from a financial perspective. > > > > > > > > > > And it doesn't really matter what I draw from it, you're the one putting it out there. What matters is you're throwing those statistics out there for interpretation. When in fact, those statistics don't represent what you're claiming they do. > > > > > > > > Well, here is what we have, Anet has more people playing and making less money. > > > > > > > > Draw from that, whatever you want. > > > > > > Actually, no... what we have is (1) more accounts for the period you provided (unclear how the population for that specific period was sourced) , and (2) less sales for that period (I did not verify) with no interesting correlation provided between the two. > > > > > > Still unclear what is supposed to be, much less can be, genuinely drawn from that. > > > > > > > No. > > > > What we have, is > > * Population Growth, based on a lot more research then anyone else in this discussion has done. > > * Income Decline. Direct from NCsoft earnings report, which anyone can look up. > > > > Now we can conclude a few things from that. > > > > For example, > > > > + We could conclude that people are spending less. And while this would be true on average, it does not mean that any individual player is spending less, but that the population as a whole is spending less, which is true based on the numbers we have open to us. > > + We could conclude that the population of paying players decreased and the people looking for a free game has gone up. This is the counter point to the above conclusion, that it is not that players individually are spending less, but that are less players overall spending money and the population of players coming here expecting everything for free has increased. > > > > Both those could be debated back and forth ad nauseam, which is all you are trying to do at this point. > > > > But is shows one very solid point, that is not open for debate, that _Population does not correlate to Profit_. > > > > If you don' like the OP's numbers, you can cry to them and find a better source, trying to debate that with me, is a pointless, as I don't care if you don't like their numbers, they are better then anything you have to provide and I am more then willing to trust they did their research on the subject matter. > > Of course I can't find a better source bcause there is no source, OP is just grasping at straws. GW2 efficiency and reddit numbers going up means nothing, absolutely nothing, because there's nothing that wipes inactive users from either of them so it's only natural that the number keeps going up. Let's say a subreddit has 100 subscribers, 80 stops playing the game and 8 of them takes the effort to unsub from that subreddit, then 20 new players come in so the total count is now 112. Do we have more active players? No, we have 60 fewer. Do you have anything better to put into the discussion other then this hyperbole? Like, anything actual at all, something we can work with that can back up your claim of a decreased population? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Durzlla.6295 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"witcher.3197" said: > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok so in 2016, when HoT came out, GW2 was making around 17 - 30 Million a Quarter, with anywhere between 1.9 - 2.5 million players. So roughly, everyone was spending some where around at least 10+ quarter, Or put another way, **everyone** was buying at least a one 10 dollar/400 gem purchase a quarter. With a bit more being bought on occasion. Not bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in 2018, we have 3.3 million and an average of 13 million a quarter, which means on average everyone is spending around 4 dollars a quarter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That means player spending has been cut in over half over 2 years, while they have increased their overall player numbers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They released Q4 financials? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Q4 would be heavily influenced by PoF expansion sales, so would not be a good metric. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Forgive me then, but where is the 2018 number you're using coming from? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I said _average_ so I was using the _Average_ spending over the last year. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry, now I'm really confused... so, you're only using 2017Q1 & 2017Q2 sales figures versus 2016Q1-4? And population estimates from? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What I'm getting at is, and maybe I'm a bit slow on the uptake, but I'm not seeing the apples to apple comparison of financials. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ultimately, I'm not even seeing what an estimated average spend per user is supposed to demonstrate. It doesn't equate in anyway to the financial health of the company. > > > > > > > > > > > > Actually I am using 2016Q2 to 2017Q2 sales, because 2017Q3 was PoF pre-launch sales. > > > > > > > > > > > > It means in short.. we have more people playing and spending less. Draw from that whatever you want. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It kinda, sorta, but not really, means that... for that period of time.... and by not really, I'm mean it doesn't. > > > > > > > > > > At the simplest level, account population is not 1-1 versus actual person. So, at best you have average sales per account, not customer... which offers even less insight from a financial perspective. > > > > > > > > > > And it doesn't really matter what I draw from it, you're the one putting it out there. What matters is you're throwing those statistics out there for interpretation. When in fact, those statistics don't represent what you're claiming they do. > > > > > > > > Well, here is what we have, Anet has more people playing and making less money. > > > > > > > > Draw from that, whatever you want. > > > > > > Actually, no... what we have is (1) more accounts for the period you provided (unclear how the population for that specific period was sourced) , and (2) less sales for that period (I did not verify) with no interesting correlation provided between the two. > > > > > > Still unclear what is supposed to be, much less can be, genuinely drawn from that. > > > > > > > No. > > > > What we have, is > > * Population Growth, based on a lot more research then anyone else in this discussion has done. > > * Income Decline. Direct from NCsoft earnings report, which anyone can look up. > > > > Now we can conclude a few things from that. > > > > For example, > > > > + We could conclude that people are spending less. And while this would be true on average, it does not mean that any individual player is spending less, but that the population as a whole is spending less, which is true based on the numbers we have open to us. > > + We could conclude that the population of paying players decreased and the people looking for a free game has gone up. This is the counter point to the above conclusion, that it is not that players individually are spending less, but that are less players overall spending money and the population of players coming here expecting everything for free has increased. > > > > Both those could be debated back and forth ad nauseam, which is all you are trying to do at this point. > > > > But is shows one very solid point, that is not open for debate, that _Population does not correlate to Profit_. > > > > If you don' like the OP's numbers, you can cry to them and find a better source, trying to debate that with me, is a pointless, as I don't care if you don't like their numbers, they are better then anything you have to provide and I am more then willing to trust they did their research on the subject matter. > > Of course I can't find a better source bcause there is no source, OP is just grasping at straws. GW2 efficiency and reddit numbers going up means nothing, absolutely nothing, because there's nothing that wipes inactive users from either of them so it's only natural that the number keeps going up. Let's say a subreddit has 100 subscribers, 80 stops playing the game and 8 of them takes the effort to unsub from that subreddit, then 20 new players come in so the total count is now 112. Do we have more active players? No, we have 60 fewer. The edit2 in OPs post make it sound like they checked the people who go to the reddit per month, and if that’s true would make the example you provided not fit the actual testing method. But I could just be reading the OP wrong or w/e. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STIHL.2489 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok so in 2016, when HoT came out, GW2 was making around 17 - 30 Million a Quarter, with anywhere between 1.9 - 2.5 million players. So roughly, everyone was spending some where around at least 10+ quarter, Or put another way, **everyone** was buying at least a one 10 dollar/400 gem purchase a quarter. With a bit more being bought on occasion. Not bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in 2018, we have 3.3 million and an average of 13 million a quarter, which means on average everyone is spending around 4 dollars a quarter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That means player spending has been cut in over half over 2 years, while they have increased their overall player numbers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They released Q4 financials? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Q4 would be heavily influenced by PoF expansion sales, so would not be a good metric. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Forgive me then, but where is the 2018 number you're using coming from? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I said _average_ so I was using the _Average_ spending over the last year. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry, now I'm really confused... so, you're only using 2017Q1 & 2017Q2 sales figures versus 2016Q1-4? And population estimates from? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What I'm getting at is, and maybe I'm a bit slow on the uptake, but I'm not seeing the apples to apple comparison of financials. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ultimately, I'm not even seeing what an estimated average spend per user is supposed to demonstrate. It doesn't equate in anyway to the financial health of the company. > > > > > > > > > > > > Actually I am using 2016Q2 to 2017Q2 sales, because 2017Q3 was PoF pre-launch sales. > > > > > > > > > > > > It means in short.. we have more people playing and spending less. Draw from that whatever you want. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It kinda, sorta, but not really, means that... for that period of time.... and by not really, I'm mean it doesn't. > > > > > > > > > > At the simplest level, account population is not 1-1 versus actual person. So, at best you have average sales per account, not customer... which offers even less insight from a financial perspective. > > > > > > > > > > And it doesn't really matter what I draw from it, you're the one putting it out there. What matters is you're throwing those statistics out there for interpretation. When in fact, those statistics don't represent what you're claiming they do. > > > > > > > > Well, here is what we have, Anet has more people playing and making less money. > > > > > > > > Draw from that, whatever you want. > > > > > > Actually, no... what we have is (1) more accounts for the period you provided (unclear how the population for that specific period was sourced) , and (2) less sales for that period (I did not verify) with no interesting correlation provided between the two. > > > > > > Still unclear what is supposed to be, much less can be, genuinely drawn from that. > > > > > > > No. > > > > What we have, is > > * Population Growth, based on a lot more research then anyone else in this discussion has done. > > * Income Decline. Direct from NCsoft earnings report, which anyone can look up. > > > > Now we can conclude a few things from that. > > > > For example, > > > > + We could conclude that people are spending less. And while this would be true on average, it does not mean that any individual player is spending less, but that the population as a whole is spending less, which is true based on the numbers we have open to us. > > + We could conclude that the population of paying players decreased and the people looking for a free game has gone up. This is the counter point to the above conclusion, that it is not that players individually are spending less, but that are less players overall spending money and the population of players coming here expecting everything for free has increased. > > > > Both those could be debated back and forth ad nauseam, which is all you are trying to do at this point. > > > > But is shows one very solid point, that is not open for debate, that _Population does not correlate to Profit_. > > > > If you don' like the OP's numbers, you can cry to them and find a better source, trying to debate that with me, is a pointless, as I don't care if you don't like their numbers, they are better then anything you have to provide and I am more then willing to trust they did their research on the subject matter. > > Ok... first, the accuracy of the population numbers is irrelevant... it's your methodology and conclusions that are flawed. > > In a nutshell: > > * The population numbers for base 2016 were as of ~September 2016, not the full year. > * The population numbers for current were as of January 2018 > - These 2018 numbers include the population of PoF > > * The 2016 sales numbers you provided, you claimed were 2016Q2-2017Q2 > - However, you included 2016Q1 sales, of ~30M KRW > - Average sales for your specified range (16Q2,16Q3,17Q1,17Q2) would have been ~15M KRW > > * You do not include 2017Q3 sales numbers of ~20M KRW, yet take into account population for that same period. > > * 2017Q4 numbers are not available yet, but should be included if those current population numbers are to be used. > No, I used 2014 - 2015 sales number for the 2016 population, just like I used the 2016 - 2017 numbers for the 2018 population, also, I didn't use the 33 Million Surge numbers from HoT pre-launch sales, nor did I include the HoT auctual launch sales, as expansions mess up calculations of average sales, as such to be fair, I didn't use the 16 million surge on 2017Q3 Pre-launch and the 2017Q4 Launch Sales from PoF to keep things fair. I have already explained this to you once before. > In short, you took a population sample from one period, and then sales numbers from a different period, while removing relevant > values for that period. Thus skewing your results. > I used numbers that would not be influenced by expansion sales, which is how you find more exact numbers when dealing with average player purchases. Which, again, I already explained this. > If you really want to go further, you're drawing conclusions based on pure speculation and conjecture off of this flawed data. > I am simply using the data I have available to me. > I could go into a better methodology, but again, sales to population metrics are pretty much useless in a vacume for determining any meaningful financial conclusion. If you believe otherwise, please elaborate. > I could also try to flap my arms to get to the moon, but I'll take the word of scientist that tell it won't work. I am simply using what I have, don't like that, please provide better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mourningcry.9428 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok so in 2016, when HoT came out, GW2 was making around 17 - 30 Million a Quarter, with anywhere between 1.9 - 2.5 million players. So roughly, everyone was spending some where around at least 10+ quarter, Or put another way, **everyone** was buying at least a one 10 dollar/400 gem purchase a quarter. With a bit more being bought on occasion. Not bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in 2018, we have 3.3 million and an average of 13 million a quarter, which means on average everyone is spending around 4 dollars a quarter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That means player spending has been cut in over half over 2 years, while they have increased their overall player numbers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They released Q4 financials? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Q4 would be heavily influenced by PoF expansion sales, so would not be a good metric. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Forgive me then, but where is the 2018 number you're using coming from? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I said _average_ so I was using the _Average_ spending over the last year. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry, now I'm really confused... so, you're only using 2017Q1 & 2017Q2 sales figures versus 2016Q1-4? And population estimates from? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What I'm getting at is, and maybe I'm a bit slow on the uptake, but I'm not seeing the apples to apple comparison of financials. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ultimately, I'm not even seeing what an estimated average spend per user is supposed to demonstrate. It doesn't equate in anyway to the financial health of the company. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Actually I am using 2016Q2 to 2017Q2 sales, because 2017Q3 was PoF pre-launch sales. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It means in short.. we have more people playing and spending less. Draw from that whatever you want. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It kinda, sorta, but not really, means that... for that period of time.... and by not really, I'm mean it doesn't. > > > > > > > > > > > > At the simplest level, account population is not 1-1 versus actual person. So, at best you have average sales per account, not customer... which offers even less insight from a financial perspective. > > > > > > > > > > > > And it doesn't really matter what I draw from it, you're the one putting it out there. What matters is you're throwing those statistics out there for interpretation. When in fact, those statistics don't represent what you're claiming they do. > > > > > > > > > > Well, here is what we have, Anet has more people playing and making less money. > > > > > > > > > > Draw from that, whatever you want. > > > > > > > > Actually, no... what we have is (1) more accounts for the period you provided (unclear how the population for that specific period was sourced) , and (2) less sales for that period (I did not verify) with no interesting correlation provided between the two. > > > > > > > > Still unclear what is supposed to be, much less can be, genuinely drawn from that. > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > What we have, is > > > * Population Growth, based on a lot more research then anyone else in this discussion has done. > > > * Income Decline. Direct from NCsoft earnings report, which anyone can look up. > > > > > > Now we can conclude a few things from that. > > > > > > For example, > > > > > > + We could conclude that people are spending less. And while this would be true on average, it does not mean that any individual player is spending less, but that the population as a whole is spending less, which is true based on the numbers we have open to us. > > > + We could conclude that the population of paying players decreased and the people looking for a free game has gone up. This is the counter point to the above conclusion, that it is not that players individually are spending less, but that are less players overall spending money and the population of players coming here expecting everything for free has increased. > > > > > > Both those could be debated back and forth ad nauseam, which is all you are trying to do at this point. > > > > > > But is shows one very solid point, that is not open for debate, that _Population does not correlate to Profit_. > > > > > > If you don' like the OP's numbers, you can cry to them and find a better source, trying to debate that with me, is a pointless, as I don't care if you don't like their numbers, they are better then anything you have to provide and I am more then willing to trust they did their research on the subject matter. > > > > Ok... first, the accuracy of the population numbers is irrelevant... it's your methodology and conclusions that are flawed. > > > > In a nutshell: > > > > * The population numbers for base 2016 were as of ~September 2016, not the full year. > > * The population numbers for current were as of January 2018 > > - These 2018 numbers include the population of PoF > > > > * The 2016 sales numbers you provided, you claimed were 2016Q2-2017Q2 > > - However, you included 2016Q1 sales, of ~30M KRW > > - Average sales for your specified range (16Q2,16Q3,17Q1,17Q2) would have been ~15M KRW > > > > * You do not include 2017Q3 sales numbers of ~20M KRW, yet take into account population for that same period. > > > > * 2017Q4 numbers are not available yet, but should be included if those current population numbers are to be used. > > > > > No, I used 2014 - 2015 sales number for the 2016 population, just like I used the 2016 - 2017 numbers for the 2018 population, also, I didn't use the 33 Million Surge numbers from HoT pre-launch sales, nor did I include the HoT auctual launch sales, as expansions mess up calculations of average sales, as such to be fair, I didn't use the 16 million surge on 2017Q3 Pre-launch and the 2017Q4 Launch Sales from PoF to keep things fair. > > I have already explained this to you once before. > > > In short, you took a population sample from one period, and then sales numbers from a different period, while removing relevant > > values for that period. Thus skewing your results. > > > > I used numbers that would not be influenced by expansion sales, which is how you find more exact numbers when dealing with average player purchases. Which, again, I already explained this. > > > If you really want to go further, you're drawing conclusions based on pure speculation and conjecture off of this flawed data. > > > > I am simply using the data I have available to me. > > > I could go into a better methodology, but again, sales to population metrics are pretty much useless in a vacume for determining any meaningful financial conclusion. If you believe otherwise, please elaborate. > > > I could also try to flap my arms to get to the moon, but I'll take the word of scientist that tell it won't work. I am simply using what I have, don't like that, please provide better. Ok, for clarity's _sake_, let's assume your numbers for both population and sales are bang on. _(Edit Note: I am not conceding to the methodology, if for no other reason, surges of population due to expansions are included, while surges of sales are excluded. At the very least, sales data for the corresponding periods would be more comparative since population surges cannot be excluded. )_ Now, explain to me in simple terms, what the correlation between population (customer base) and sales alone is as it relates to any measure of a company's financial health. Much less an average across these factors. I'll save you the time, there is no such ratio used in any meaningful analysis. So again, what conclusion is the reader supposed to draw? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now