Acti financials better than expected

By Kyle Orland Published 6 May, 2010

Sees Blizzard driving PC market growth.

Activision Blizzard has announced stronger than expected financial results for the first quarter of 2010.

The company brought in $1.3 billion in quarterly revenue, beating previously announced expectations of $1.1 billion for the three month period. The result is up nearly 25 per cent from first quarter revenue of $981 million in 2009.

The strong performance was primarily the result of excellent performance by the company's two biggest franchises: Call of Duty and World of Warcraft. In particular, Activision cited one million Xbox Live sales of the Call of Duty Stimulus Pack in just two days and a stable base of over 11.5 million World of Warcraft players as major reasons for the heightened revenues.

For the industry as a whole, Activision said they expect software sales for the Xbox 360, PS3 and Wii to increase slightly for the year, while PS2, PSP and DS sales should decrease substantially. The company also said they expect industry-wide PC sales to increase for the first time in almost a decade, primarily on the strength of Blizzard's releases.

Looking forward, Activision did not change its expectation of $4.2 billion in revenues for the calendar year.

Picture of Kyle.

About Kyle Orland

Read more articles from Kyle by visiting the Kyle Orland archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (15) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • sfp_noodle #1 2 years ago

    Stronger than expected? After the sales of MW2? I think Kotick knew all along how much cash gamers threw into his wallet. He just likes to whip out his fancy financial report made from billion dollar notes.

  • arcam #2 2 years ago

    $4.2 billion? Jesus.

  • M4RV #3 2 years ago

    Whenever I see these reports, I honestly feel we're nothing more than sheep. Back to Animals I guess... :\

  • dutzan #4 2 years ago

    "If we don't pay high prices and support the poor game developers they won't have resources to make more." Bah, most of the profits go to investors that most probably never played an RTS/FPS/RPG in their life and only a small portion of that to the actual studios who employ the ppl making them. Not to mention that games are getting ever shorter and cost progressively more. And most of that isn't because of large developent costs that need to be covered, but for highly increased profit.

  • kangarootoo #5 2 years ago

    Man, those are big numbers.


    @dutzan

    With respect, the clue is in the title. Without investors, nobody would be making or playing games, at all, anywhere (exageration). You can't really blame them for wanting a profit in return for their investment, otherwise why would they bother investing?

    Its the same situation in every business, not just games. And its always been that way, and will likely continue to be so. Unless you have an alternative suggestion on where the development money should come from?
    Edited by 1 at 07/05/10 @ 09:40

  • Spekingur #6 2 years ago

    The "investors" were originally just the people who bought the game.

  • geeza2020 #7 2 years ago

    Those figures made me feel physically sick. Well at least there arent people starving in the world eh Mr Kotick? Oh wait.....

    Bobby needs a brand new solid gold car and house.

  • kangarootoo #8 2 years ago

    "The "investors" were originally just the people who bought the game"

    Not true. There has always been the odd bit of shareware made by one person who had an income from working in a super market or something, but ever since making games has been paid employment, there has been investors. The first arcade cabinets weren't made for free, they were funded in advance by people who wanted their money back, plus a bit, once the cabinests were sold... which is investment.

  • TitusCrow #9 2 years ago

    Ill tell you what kept up this quarters end - that damned winged horse being sold for 20£ on wow.

  • hiddenranbir #10 2 years ago

    Stronger than expected, after not having to pay out those bonuses!

  • darth_paul #11 2 years ago

    how much will Kotick pocket in bonuses?
    Edited by 1 at 07/05/10 @ 13:08

  • kangarootoo #12 2 years ago

    The unpaid bonuses account for about 1/10 of the increase over expectations. Not insignificant mind.

  • dingo75 #13 2 years ago

    Starcraft 2 + WoW - Cataclysm in 2010 and the new CoD.
    Don't need to be a fortune teller to predict that 2010 will be a good year for them again.

  • dutzan #14 2 years ago

    @kangarootoo
    I'm not against them making profit, but they're not satisfied with just making a big profit, they keep pushing for huge profit. I'd rather buy 2 games for 30 euros than one game for 50. If a game is good and successful, the difference between what was invested in it (production costs) and the returns is quite big usuallly. Many times when games don't break even or have a small profit margin it's because they're simply too bad, not because the're not priced high enough. We're constantly being trained to accept less for more.

  • kangarootoo #15 2 years ago

    @dutzan

    I was picking in partuclar on the suggestion that investors getting paid is a bad thing.

    However...

    "We're constantly being trained to accept less for more"

    If we are truly being trained, like dogs desperate for scraps, then we deserve everything we get. I too would prefer to buy 2 games for £30 than 1 game for £50.... so I do exactly that. I can't even remember the last time I paid £50 for a game.

    All Activision are doing, just like every other business (games related or otherwise) is pricing their product at the highest rate the market will bear. This is usually the point where someone says "if they halved the price, they would sell 3 times as many", but (unsurprisingly) Acti know this apparent gem of wisdom too and if it were truly that simple you can bet they would be doing exactly that.

    If we keep buying games for £50, they will sell them at that rate (the profit for them on one gams sold at £50 is higher than on 2 games sold at £30, by miles). If we allow ourselves to be trained, as you put it, things will stay just as they are. If we refuse to buy games for £50, the price WILL come down.

    What always seem to escape people in these discussions is that Activision are in the business of selling games. So if they are making billions of dollars, it is ONLY because we the gaming masses are buying the damn things. Put simply, its OUR FAULT Bobby Kotick acts the way he does and its our fault he has so much money. If we can't take responsibilty for our own spending habits, well... I really don't know what to say.

    P.s. I am not in any way calling you a dob btw. My training reference sprang to mind, but it certainly wasn't targetted at you personally, or intended as an insult to anyone.

    p.p.s It would appear I can't spell the word dog :(
    Edited by 2 at 07/05/10 @ 14:35