The Activision annual financial report is out, and some rather curious numbers appear regarding the profitability of Activision overall. Of course, these figures include Activision’s most profitable sub-branch, Blizzard Entertainment.
So what do the numbers say? Two interesting things. First, Activision overall had a very good year. They’re raking in well over 2 billion dollars a year in net revenue (i.e., profits) behind big games/sequels like Guitar Hero and Call of Duty. Further, let’s not forget that Activision publishes countless smaller titles each year, too.
The other interesting thing is Blizzard’s contribution to the mix: their net revenue is 1.3 billion dollars. That’s right, Blizz profits 1.3 billion a year. The overwhelming portion of this is from World of Warcraft, of course. However, WoW is now four years old, the Diablo, Warcraft III, and Starcraft series continue to sell well, and Blizzard’s operating costs are tiny. Hence, they’re hugely profitable.
While on this subject, let’s consider overal stability. Activision is an up and down affair; profits in 2008 were eight times what they were in 2007. Blizzard? Not so much. In 2007, Blizzard’s profits were about the same, coming in at just over a billion dollars. Thus while Activision has good years and bad years, Blizzard only has good years. Heck, they only have utterly fantastically profitable years, and every year things become even more fantastically profitable.
For a brief sense of perspective, consider that Blizzard’s net revenue is comparable to the GDP of a number of smaller countries. Of course, the profitability of the Activision-Blizzard combo (net revenues of nearly 3.5b) is even substantially greater than that.
[Source 1, Source 2, Source 3, Source 4]
~~~
If you enjoyed this post, visit our illustrious Wandering Goblin main page. There’s lots more tomfoolery just like this. 
Is that really fair to compare a company that cashes in several billion dollars every month on addicted fatasses, to a third-world-country where people are people are starving to death and where clean water is not the obvious. Shame on you for not showing a little respect!
Edit: several hundred millions*
Um, what?
It’s not about what’s fair, Eric. It’s about who is more profitable, who makes more money. Facts aren’t supposed to be \fair\.
Wow Nick you sound just like a fatass american bastard who only cares about his money.
Eric, I’m not sure how you’re reading some sort of offensive statement into this. It’s inherently inoffensive. The author is pointing out that one game company, with one big game, makes more money than an entire country.
It’s also obvious hyperbole, and it’s looking like that got completely past you.
Their revenue is 1.3 billion, not their profit.
It’s net revenue, not gross. Net=profit (I think).
the blizzard/zimbabwe net revenue comparison is misleading because zimbabwe is suffering from a terrible inflation crisis. furthermore, you group it with \a lot of other countries\ without mentioning any of them. i can see this article being offensive to many people because you purposefully avoid the circumstances of a grief-stricken nation to make your point clearer, even though your comparison immediately loses perspective once one takes into account inflation, the evil dictator mugabe, etc.
compare apples to apples, not to oranges rotting from the inside
the blizzard/zimbabwe net revenue comparison is misleading because zimbabwe is suffering from a terrible inflation crisis. furthermore, you group it with \a lot of other countries\ without mentioning any of them. i can see this article being offensive to many people because you purposefully avoid the circumstances of a grief-stricken nation to make your point clearer, even though your comparison immediately loses perspective once one takes into account inflation, the evil dictator mugabe, etc.
speaking of mugabe… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pxy0ico_AGM
compare apples to apples, not to oranges rotting from the inside