January's potential sales numbers lessened due to missing week |
Ó
One week may not matter much to some people, but for the gaming industry, one week makes all the difference. According to financial analysts, since this year's January only has four weeks compared to 2007s' five-week January, the industry lost a potential 18 percent increase in profits.According to Jesse Divnich of simExchange, a fifth week in this year's January would have meant that the gaming industry will yield a sales total of US$ 648 million, as opposed to the projected sales number of US$ 519 million for January 2008.
Colin Sebastian of Lazard Capital Markets noted that software sales for this month will only be slightly up, also due to the fact that January 2008 only has four weeks. Games that are slated to be the top January performers are (drumroll) Super Mario Galaxy, Wii Play, Call of Duty 4 (PC, Xbox 360, PS3), Guitar Hero 3: Legends of Rock (Xbox 360, Wii, PS2, PS3, PC), and Rock Band (Xbox 360, PS3, PS2).
As for hardware sales, Nintendo's Wii console still has problems with supply, while Microsoft's Xbox 360 also has tight supply numbers due to the console replacement program stemming from repeated console failures.
Via Next Generation
Contact Us:
The QJ.net Network |
 |
| Site | Feed |
| QJ.NET | RSS |
| Nintendo DS | RSS |
| PlayStation 3 | RSS |
| PSP Updates | RSS |
| Wii | RSS |
| Xbox 360 | RSS |
| MMORPG | RSS |
| Personal Computer Games | RSS |
| iPhone - iPod Touch | RSS |
| QJ.NET Forums | RSS |
Add QJ.NET
User Favorites - December
User Favorites - December
Categories
Archives
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
Comments [refresh]
considering the only difference about the "week" is the fact that Jan 07 started on a monday, where as Jan 08 started on a Tuesday...
what did they say about Dec 07 vs Dec 06? since essentially, that's where the the "week" of Jan went. Dec 06 had 4 "mondays" while Dec 07 had 5.
This is just a dumb non-story, moving along....
Wow! People will report ANYTHING!!! One week means nothing. One month means nothing.
Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4....those are numbers to look at.
Eether way, what kind of nonsense is this? The last time I checked January has 31 days in it...PERIOD.
31 divided by 7 equals 4.43...no matter what!
There is absolutly NO SUCH THING as 5 weeks in any month. Janurary of 07 had a missing Sunday the first week and a missing Thurs-Sat the last week. What ever IDIOT called the last week in Janurary of 07 a full week is a complete moron.
Janurary had 4 weeks and three days just like it always does.
while i agree that, regardless of how you look at it, jan has 31 days... or 4 and 1/2 weeks.
but the issue is when businesses report their weekly sales. are those sale based on when the business week started or when it ended?
again, if you look at the two years, they both ended in the middle of the week, before anything close to the "end" (fri, sat or sun). but Jan 07 started on the BEGINNING of the week, a monday.
btw, did you know Q1 of a fiscal year isn't jan-mar? it's really the previous oct-dec.
anyway, i also agree that the quarter earnings are the numbers to really look at... but you know, these "analysts" need to do something to make themselves look usefull (as much as it is BS).
It doesn't mater how you look at it. In 07, the last "week" only had 4 days. So their entire argument about how a FIFTH WEEK threw them off is a bunch of BS. When did they start? When did they start this year?
They're just making excuses.
When we pull sales data we pull the MONTH not some dynamic, floating, we choose when to start the week, week statistics.
Q1 of a fiscal year is different then Q1 of a given year. No one said anything about a companies fiscal year.
"it's really the previous oct-dec."
That's false and depends on the company/organization.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_year
you're dealing with money and business, are you not?
again, you are still ignoring how BUSINESSES report their MONEY. some businesses report a "week" bases on the monday as the start, and it "belongs" to whatever month it is in.
just because "you" don't use weekly reports doesn't mean others don't.
no one chooses "when" to start a week, it always starts on monday. but when you do accounting, which month does that week belong to?
different companies (and small time shops) have different ways of reporting it. some rely heavily on daily reports, others use weekly/monthly. major corps use quarterly.
they weren't counting that "last" week of jan. it was the FIRST week that changed.
jan 07 started on a monday, so they counted that entire week as jan. however, jan 08 started on a TUES. so they counted that ENTIRE week as Dec 07. the "first" week of jan became the week starting on the 7th. and they are only counting "weeks."
they're not doing actual monthly reports.
""it's really the previous oct-dec."
That's false and depends on the company/organization."
yes, it is true that it depends... but if you look around, you'll see that most companies use that fiscal year... starting in OCT.
what are you getting upset for? like i said, these "analysts" are only trying to look important. do you know why they're using these "weekly" reports? because again, they're not doing actual monthly reports... and why is that? simple. they have access to the weekly sales reports, but not the daily reports to do a correct monthly report. so they have no idea what data belongs to a given month for those weeks that start in one month but end in another.
"just because "you" don't use weekly reports doesn't mean others don't."
I didn't say they DON'T. I said those numbers are worthless. A weeks sales might be useful to them INTERNALLY but as for a bottom line to a product it tells consumers NOTHING.
"no one chooses "when" to start a week, it always starts on monday. but when you do accounting, which month does that week belong to?"
If they included Feb 1, 2, 3 and 4 in their Jan sales then that's there problem. It has NOTHING to do with them getting cheated out a week or how they farm their data to determine exactly what they sold in Jan. The bottom line here is one bad week directly equals an overly productive week on the next round. So in the end it's all a bunch of BS.
It is bogus to claim you had 5 weeks to sell product in any month and only 4 weeks in the same month a year later. That's an INTERNAL PROBLEM with your accounting system or business process. It is not "something" that happened to you. Just because their business process is modeled on a bogus structure, again, that has nothing to do something that happened to them.
"different companies (and small time shops) have different ways of reporting it."
Exactly! That's the key. DIFFERENT WAYS. Just because your their sucks, doesn't mean they get cry about FICTIONAL missed time in a month.
"so they counted that ENTIRE week as Dec 07. "
That's their problem! Because they "did that" they DO NOT get to complain about missed time in Jan. It's not MISSED or MISSING, they f-ed it up.
"yes, it is true that it depends... but if you look around, you'll see that most companies use that fiscal year... starting in OCT."
Nope, most companies I deal with do not. Especially outside the US. For example, in HK, good luck finding a company that uses OCT.
"what are you getting upset for?"
HAHAHA!!!!!!!!! ! Emotion...good one.
"like i said, these "analysts" are only trying to look important."
That's about all we agree on.
"so they have no idea what data belongs to a given month for those weeks that start in one month but end in another."
Again, their bad! You want Week1 for Jan from my company? I'll give you Jan 1-7. Want Week2? Jan 8-17.
Either way, these WEEKLY sales figures have no business getting to the consumer. They are worthless. You need at least a quarter to start painting a picture.
are you saying all these weekly sales reports from NPD and whoever are useless? these are the SAME weekly sales reports that are showing whether or not the PS3 is gaining ground, the Xbox is doing anything other than stalling in Japan... and if the Wii is showing any signs of people coming to their senses finally stopped buying them. these reports are not worthless to the millions of people that look on websites like QJ to look at "sales data."
again, let me reiterate, i'm NOT talking about the last week of Jan. in BOTH years they are counted as a "week" of jan. in the beginning of Jan that counts differently.
INTERNALLY, i'm betting the weekly sales aren't anywhere near as important as these analysts make them to be. daily and monthly reports (and quarterly) are the only things that don't conflict or cause confusion with other sales data (they could all conflict with certain weekly reports).
again, let me also repeat. the only reason the weekly sales reports seem important to these "masses" is because a DAILY report would be both tedious to release to the public, and it could potentially reveal certain things the company in question wants to keep "secret." monthly and quarterly would take too long to satisfy these same masses.
"It is bogus to claim you had 5 weeks to sell product in any month and only 4 weeks in the same month a year later."
no company actually claimed that. it's the analysts.
even though companies like the NPD, that provide the actual reports to the public, HAVE access to the private reports, they can't PROVIDE daily reports to the public or to these "analysts." the analysts can only make use of PUBLIC reports, that being these weekly reports.
and as i say this, i tire of this so called "debate" with you (which it obviously isn't)... i'm done. bye.
"are you saying all these weekly sales reports from NPD and whoever are useless?"
See the word ALL? NO, I am not saying ALL of them are useless. ALL of them together give us REAL data. A single week snapshot is worthless. Put together THREE months worth of these one week figures and you no longer have a fictional missing week.
Idiot news sites look at these one week figures and if for some reason a console has a bad week for example a 50% shift from it's competitors then they report that console has DIED. It's ridiculous.
" i'm betting the weekly sales aren't anywhere near as important as these analysts make them to be."
They are VERY important. Just not for the same reasons those moronic analysts report on. They are important for internal reasons. Weekly reports tell vendors where their product is at, how much is left, who's ran out or who's not moving product.
"no company actually claimed that. it's the analysts."
By all means let me "fix" my comment:
It is bogus FOR ANY ANALYST to claim you had 5 weeks to sell product in any month and only 4 weeks in the same month a year later.
You are so far out in left field it's ridiculous. My initial comment is about THIS NEWS STORY. Did you ever read the title? Do you even know what you are commenting on?
"January's potential sales numbers lessened due to missing week"
You see where it says MISSING WEEK? That is what I attack. See the word potential? THAT IS LAME! There is no potential LOSS from a fictional missing WEEK. It's so utterly ridiculously simple this entire convo with you has been nothing more then humorous.