Activision: 70 Percent of Income Comes From Non-Console Games

June 22, 2010 -

Speaking to the Wall Street Journal, Activision CEO Bobby Kotick said that he is confident that the company's online strategy will help it to weather the storm as sales models shift from disc-based to digital. He also added that 70 percent of the company's operating profit comes from "non-console based video games."

For a better understanding of what that means, a quote:

"Today, probably 70 percent of our operating profit comes from non-console-based video games. So, while you might see a month-to-month change or volatility against expectations, that doesn't really get us too concerned." Operating income for Activision's January-March 2010 quarter alone was $511 million.

While one might want to tie that number to DLC sales from games like Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2, but a spokesperson for the company told Gamasutra that Kotick's statement doesn't include console based content of any kind. Maryanne Lataif, VP of corporate communications for Activision Blizzard, told Gamasutra in a phone call that "non-console-based video games" means just that.

So, as you have probably already guess 70 percent of Activision's operating profits comes from World of Warcraft.

There are other "non-console-based" Activision games that might be counted in this category like iPhone titles and PC games, but those pale in comparison to the juggernaut that is World of Warcraft. Lataif added that merely five years ago DLC and subscription-based services weren’t as popular as they are today, and that monthly volatility at retail is now less impactful than in the past."

Kotick is keen to bring some of the company's biggest franchises online and repeat the wild success of World of WarCraft. If he has his way we may eventually see the company's second biggest franchise, Call of Duty, coming to a computer near you - for a monthly fee. But in the interim the company is preparing for Blizzard's next big game, StarCraft II, complete with a revamped Battle.net. That will surely add to the company's "non-console game" profit.

Source: Gamasutra


Comments

Re: Activision: 70 Percent of Income Comes From Non-Console ...

Well jeez, maybe they had beter stop proclaiming the death of PC gaming and embrace pc gamers instead of treating them all like criminals with overbearing DRM schemes that do nothing but punish their prescious 70%.

But I'm not bitter, no sir!

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MattsworknameWilson: how? Im still waiting for my upgrade notice07/29/2015 - 3:44am
Matthew WilsonI updated to a clean instill of windows 10.07/29/2015 - 2:36am
Mattsworknameargue that it's wrong, but then please admit it's wrong on ALL Fronts07/29/2015 - 2:06am
MattsworknameTechnoGeek: It's actually NOT, but it is a method used all across the specturm. See Rush limbaugh, MSNBC, Shawn hannity, etc etc, how many compagns have been brought up to try and shut them down by going after there advertisers. It's fine if you wanna07/29/2015 - 2:05am
Mattsworknamediscussed, while not what I liked and not the methods I wanted to see used, were , in a sense, the effort of thsoe game consuming masses to hold what they felt was supposed to be there press accountable for what many of them felt was Betrayal07/29/2015 - 2:03am
MattsworknameAs we say, the gamers are dead article set of a firestorm among the game consuming populace, who, ideally, were the intended audiance for sites like Kotaku, Polygon, Et all. As such, the turn about on them and the attacking of them, via the metods07/29/2015 - 2:03am
MattsworknameAndrew: Thats kind fo the issue at hand, Accountable is a matter of context. For a media group, it means accountable to its reader. to a goverment, to it's voters and tax payer, to a company, to it's share holders.07/29/2015 - 2:02am
Andrew EisenAnd again, you keep saying "accountable." What exactly does that mean? How is Gamasutra not accounting for the editorial it published?07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - I disagree with your 9:12 and 9:16 comment. There are myriad ways to address content you don't like. And they're far easier to execute in the online space.07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - Banning in the legal sense? Not that I'm aware but there have certainly been groups of gamers who have worked towards getting content they don't like removed.07/28/2015 - 11:45pm
DanJAlexander's editorial was and continues to be grossly misrepresented by her opponents. And if you don't like a site, you stop reading it - same as not watching a tv show. They get your first click, but not your second.07/28/2015 - 11:40pm
TechnogeekYes, because actively trying to convince advertisers to influence the editorial content of media is a perfectly acceptable thing to do, especially for a movement that's ostensibly about journalistic ethics.07/28/2015 - 11:02pm
Mattsworknameanother07/28/2015 - 9:16pm
Mattsworknameyou HAVE TO click on it. So they get the click revenue weather you like what it says or not. as such, the targeting of advertisers most likely seemed like a good course of action to those who wanted to hold those media groups accountable for one reason07/28/2015 - 9:16pm
MattsworknameBut, when you look at online media, it's completely different, with far more options, but far few ways to address issues that the consumers may have. In tv, you don't like what they show, you don't watch. But in order to see if you like something online07/28/2015 - 9:12pm
MattsworknameIn tv, and radio, ratings are how it works. your ratings determine how well you do and how much money you an charge.07/28/2015 - 9:02pm
Mattsworknameexpect to do so without someone wanting to hold you to task for it07/28/2015 - 9:00pm
MattsworknameMecha: I don't think anyone was asking for Editoral changes, what they wanted was to show those media groups that if they were gonna bash there own audiance, the audiance was not gonna take it sitting down. you can write what you want, but you can't07/28/2015 - 8:56pm
MattsworknameAndrew, Im asking as a practical question, Have gamers, as a group, ever asked for a game, or other item, to be banned. Im trying to see if theres any cases anyone else remembers cause I cant find or remember any.07/28/2015 - 8:55pm
Andrew EisenAs mentioned, Gamasutra isn't a gaming site, it's a game industry site. I don't feel it's changed its focus at all. Also, I don't get the sense that the majority of the people who took issue with that one opinion piece were regular readers anyway.07/28/2015 - 8:43pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician