Can someone clarify this " less than 1mill subs"

[AzakaTonnerre]

Please read the IGN article you linked to properly, I have already posted on this and ignoring my post makes me sad. All the information in that IGN article is quoted from the report, nothing was said THIS week, it was a quote from a report written in March.!

Why on God's green earth would multiple sources put out articles this week on information from 9 months ago. Answer: they would not. SE released their "2014 annual report" this week as he said. Here is the link to it:

http://www.hd.square-enix.com/eng/ir/library/ar.html


There are dozens of articles in the gaming and business environment covering the release. All you had to do was look it up. One of them even starts with... "On January 1, 2015, Square Enix has released the annual report, which covers financial and corporate details from the past year and then toward 2015 plans."

http://www.gamerheadlines.com/2015/0...l-report-2014/]


Here is another from the business community:

http://www.business2community.com/te...tails-01111664


So yes some of the numbers are from the year ending March 2014. However, the report is from this week and also covers 2014 information (before and after March) and 2015 plans, so no one know when the subscription numbers are from because he doesn't specify, and it doesn't directly reference it in the report. Additionally, Matsuda's quotes were from a letter this week in conjunction with the release of this report (pictured in one of the articles I linked).


to quote you:

I think it's interesting that people will blatantly misinterpret news articles to suit their own purposes. Can you please stop posting inaccurate comments? Thanks!

Ya pretty much this. If you're going to call someone out for something, look it up first so you aren't doing exactly what you are being an ass about. Google isn't just a search engine... it is also your friend.

[Stumpedify]

Why on God's green earth would multiple sources put out articles this week on information from 9 months ago. Answer: they would not. SE released their "2014 annual report" this week as he said. Here is the link to it:

http://www.hd.square-enix.com/eng/ir/library/ar.htmlThere are dozens of articles in the gaming and business environment covering the release. All you had to do was look it up. One of them even starts with... "On January 1, 2015, Square Enix has released the annual report, which covers financial and corporate details from the past year and then toward 2015 plans."

http://www.gamerheadlines.com/2015/0...l-report-2014/]

I did look it up. And I appreciate the attempt to defend previous posters, but what you're stating is different to what was being discussed, and I have no argument at all with the date SE chose to release the document for us to read. The point I was making was that the quotes from the president were not written this week like the previous poster was trying to tell us they were.

Follow the link to the Square page and the title you see at the top above the download links is:

"Fiscal Year ended March 31 2014."

And as for the second link you posted, look at the comments, where the writer of the article herself agrees that the information is outdated yet argues that it can still be useful to us. Which is why SE has released it now, because it still contains useful information -- it's also required of them to release it. Why SE chose so long to wait before releasing the document we'll never know but I suspect they thought it would be a good idea, or maybe it's just protocol to release it to the public at the end of the calendar year. Probably wasn't a good idea, in hindsight.

That Square chose to release the outdated report so late is the fault, and to paraphrase the writer of that Gamer Headlines blog you linked, Jalane Farrington, who said "It should be considered news when the public can finally read [it]." is the answer to your question. They can only write about it now, because they were only given the information now... but the information they were given is old and when confronted with it, not one of the blog authors are contesting that fact.

Additionally, Matsuda's quotes were from a letter this week in conjunction with the release of this report (pictured in one of the articles I linked).

No they weren't. The quotes were pulled directly from the report, not his end of year letter. Open the doc and read it, they are there. And if further evidence is required, here is that letter that was released in conjunction with the report. It's a different letter to the one in the report. In the report he mentions plans to expand the game into China. In the letter he talks about their strong partners that helped the China version debut. Clearly written at two different points in time. And considering that the China version launched in August last year, then we know for a fact that the message in the report was written prior to August 2014.


Please don't accuse me of not doing my research. This is my last reply, I'm beyond caring who gets the last word. The correct answer was given in the very first response to the thread.

/endthread ... please, just let it stop.

[ApolloGenX]

Why on God's green earth would multiple sources put out articles this week on information from 9 months ago. Answer: they would not. SE released their "2014 annual report" this week as he said. Here is the link to it:

It doesn't matter. People here obviously aren't capable of a simple Google search, and since a financial report from the prior year is discussed, completely turn off their brains and refuse to accept a reality that doesn't jive with what they want to hear.

(Even though 600+ k subs was traditionally a success)

There's no point trying to educate people that are clearly willfully ignorant.

They could easily verify the comments were made this week, but refuse to do so, because it's not what they want to hear. These comments were made for the benefit of educated investors that would call into question the actual revenue vs. the expected revenue based on prior year statements.

If anything, this just clearly demonstrates the difference in financial understanding between the two audiences.

I understand that these things can confuse people, but you have my respect for understanding and at least trying to help others. It's not about "doom and gloom", it's about managing expectations, and accepting reality.