6 ms·

As expected. Pokemon Go proves that Nintendo has tremendous potential to monetize its IP on mobile in the coming years, but investors expected short term bang f

As expected. Pokemon Go proves that Nintendo has tremendous potential to monetize its IP on mobile in the coming years, but investors expected short term bang for the buck. I can guarantee you Nintendo, as a tightly controlled company, could care less about this volatility.

oatmale 10y ago
I doubt that they don't care about dropping 17% in a single day. Losing 6 billion dollars of valuation in a single day is enough to put heads on the chopping block. It is a staggering amount of money to lose especially with the possibility of getting de-listed in the Tokyo Stock Exchange
- umanwizard 10y ago
  They didn't lose any money or anything else of value. The wisdom-of-the-crowds appraisal of the value of their company changed. That's it. Nintendo didn't "lose" anything.
- lokedhs 10y ago
  But they didn't lose any money. The stock valuation did. Valuation that had recently been inflated due Pokemon Go. Until Pokemon, Nintendo had been hovering at 15k since the beginning of the year. As of this writing it's at 23220. All we can take away from this is that Nintendo is still in trouble, just like they have been since before the release of Pokemon Go.
  - Aloha 10y ago
    Was it in trouble before?
    - lokedhs 10y ago
      Yes, the release of the Wii U a few years ago turned out to be a failure, and the sales of the 3DS is dropping off. They have announced their new console, the Nintendo NX, but have released next to no information about it (people don't even know if it's a console or a handheld). Here's an article about it written before Pokemon Go came out: http://www.ign.com/articles/2016/04/27/why-nintendo-is-in-real-trouble http://www.ign.com/articles/2016/04/27/why-nintendo-is-in-re...
- hkmurakami 10y ago
  This is a Japanese Bigco we're talking about here. Literally no heads are on the chopping block with this.
ljk 10y ago
> I can guarantee you Nintendo, as a tightly controlled company, could care less about this volatility. couldn't* care less?
- nindalf 10y ago
  I usually send personal messages when I see this particular error. That's not possible on HN, so I guess a comment is the next best thing. Your downvotes, however, tell me we should just get used to seeing it "could care less" more often.
  - umanwizard 10y ago
    > I usually send personal messages why?? > this particular error It isn't an error, unless you think language has to be perfectly regular and logical with no warts. That's a fantasy. Language develops organically and as such we should expect contradictions and illogical constructions to arise from time to time. Everyone knows what "could care less" means. There's no external, objective standard by which you can say it's "incorrect". Stop worrying about it. An example of this type of inversion that has become widespread: in French, "pas" means "not", but originally meant "step", and came into its current meaning via (roughly) the following sequence: "Je ne marche" (I don't walk) -> "Je ne marche pas" (something like: I don't walk [even a single] step) -> "Je marche pas" (over time, "ne" became dropped in informal speech, and "pas" carries the negative meaning.)
    - scrollaway 10y ago
      You just blew my mind - never gave a thought to the etymology of "pas". I had to verify it because I simply couldn't believe it. Come to think of it it also explains how "point" is sometimes used instead of "pas".
      - umanwizard 10y ago
        Yep, and constructions like "il ne dit mot", "il ne boit goutte", etc., were once much more common than they are today. Not sure why "pas" became the canonical negation word out of all those choices.

oatmale 10y ago

I doubt that they don't care about dropping 17% in a single day. Losing 6 billion dollars of valuation in a single day is enough to put heads on the chopping block. It is a staggering amount of money to lose especially with the possibility of getting de-listed in the Tokyo Stock Exchange

umanwizard 10y ago
They didn't lose any money or anything else of value. The wisdom-of-the-crowds appraisal of the value of their company changed. That's it. Nintendo didn't "lose" anything.
lokedhs 10y ago
But they didn't lose any money. The stock valuation did. Valuation that had recently been inflated due Pokemon Go. Until Pokemon, Nintendo had been hovering at 15k since the beginning of the year. As of this writing it's at 23220. All we can take away from this is that Nintendo is still in trouble, just like they have been since before the release of Pokemon Go.
- Aloha 10y ago
  Was it in trouble before?
  - lokedhs 10y ago
    Yes, the release of the Wii U a few years ago turned out to be a failure, and the sales of the 3DS is dropping off. They have announced their new console, the Nintendo NX, but have released next to no information about it (people don't even know if it's a console or a handheld). Here's an article about it written before Pokemon Go came out: http://www.ign.com/articles/2016/04/27/why-nintendo-is-in-real-trouble http://www.ign.com/articles/2016/04/27/why-nintendo-is-in-re...
hkmurakami 10y ago
This is a Japanese Bigco we're talking about here. Literally no heads are on the chopping block with this.

ljk 10y ago

> I can guarantee you Nintendo, as a tightly controlled company, could care less about this volatility. couldn't* care less?

nindalf 10y ago
I usually send personal messages when I see this particular error. That's not possible on HN, so I guess a comment is the next best thing. Your downvotes, however, tell me we should just get used to seeing it "could care less" more often.
- umanwizard 10y ago
  > I usually send personal messages why?? > this particular error It isn't an error, unless you think language has to be perfectly regular and logical with no warts. That's a fantasy. Language develops organically and as such we should expect contradictions and illogical constructions to arise from time to time. Everyone knows what "could care less" means. There's no external, objective standard by which you can say it's "incorrect". Stop worrying about it. An example of this type of inversion that has become widespread: in French, "pas" means "not", but originally meant "step", and came into its current meaning via (roughly) the following sequence: "Je ne marche" (I don't walk) -> "Je ne marche pas" (something like: I don't walk [even a single] step) -> "Je marche pas" (over time, "ne" became dropped in informal speech, and "pas" carries the negative meaning.)
  - scrollaway 10y ago
    You just blew my mind - never gave a thought to the etymology of "pas". I had to verify it because I simply couldn't believe it. Come to think of it it also explains how "point" is sometimes used instead of "pas".
    - umanwizard 10y ago
      Yep, and constructions like "il ne dit mot", "il ne boit goutte", etc., were once much more common than they are today. Not sure why "pas" became the canonical negation word out of all those choices.