Activision-Blizzard September results reveals box sales paradigm
Activision-Blizzard released September quarter results yesterday. Most of the document is pretty dry and won't mean much to the majority of their devoted fans. They reaffirm the 11 million subscriber base of World of Warcraft and remind us that Guitar Hero's doing pretty well. Yeah, and they have an expansion coming up.
There is an interesting gem, however, to be found in their discussion of Wrath box sales:
"Revenues related to the sale of World of Warcraft boxed software, including the sale of expansion packs and other ancillary revenues will continue to be deferred and recognized ratably over the estimated customer life beginning upon activation of the software and delivery of the services."
That's a pretty packed statement. In summary, it means that the money Blizzard makes from selling the game box isn't immediately counted in their performance metrics at the time of sale. (There's no December "bump" to revenue directly from the 50ish dollars you pay for an expansion.)
Instead, they count the revenue gains throughout your customer lifetime. Doesn't sound like a big deal, does it? Let's talk about why that's such a significant notion.
First, this statement resoundingly debunks the occasional detracting statement that "They just want you to buy the game." While they do want you to do so, Blizzard's aim is to extend your customer lifetime -- they want you to be a long-term subscriber. Yeah, that does include your 15.00 a month, but that's not even the end result. They want you to have fun, and stick around for the whole ride.
Second, the value of box sales are vastly deprecated against your customer lifetime. Again, they want you to have fun and stick around. This is true to such a degree that they don't even count your box-sales money against their revenue, except as a bolster over the life of your subscription.
Of course, there's other reasons Activision-Blizzard measures box sales this way. It reduces fluctuation between quarters, because each quarter is resultingly comparable. (For example, "expansion quarters" would always be vastly more profitable than "non-expansion quarters." By valuating box sales over a customer lifetime, they keep each quarter relatively similar.)
It's important not to read too much into this, but it's still good information. It's a peek into some of the thought of what happens at Blizzard, and how they place value on their customers. Bottom line is they don't just want a lump sum, they want you around for the long haul. Hey, that's a good thing for us -- they're aiming to keep us entertained.
EDIT: And as many posters point out (and I should have made clear myself), this sort of thing is also part of GAAP, the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. This is why I said it was important not to read too much into this. However, I remain certain that the execution of this principle still supports Blizzard's interest in customer lifetime, not just single-point sales.
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Blizzard, News items






Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
DOOMdoctor Nov 6th 2008 3:07PM
it's just their way of attempting to insulate their stock price from fluctuating...which can cause sell offs and or investor panic and or difficulty raising money thru their investment banking relationships...BTW 1st!
Manatank Nov 6th 2008 3:07PM
It basically means that they wont get push back from investors to try to release expansions more regularly to have huge quarters.
amdir Nov 6th 2008 3:08PM
Nice analysis. I've tried to explain this on countless forums, albeit with less success. But I guess people will always try to construe blizz as being profit hungry corporate demons...
MEchChef Nov 7th 2008 7:25AM
I'm sure there are some, but not all of them spec 51 points into demonology.
Piper Nov 6th 2008 3:09PM
Doesn't Sarbanes-Oxley (sp) or some such play into that as well? I know there is an issue of providing free upgrades if you aren't spreading the fee over time for computer companies. Yes, I know we pay a monthly fee, but that fee could be considered (for accounting purposes) for access to the servers, Whereas the initial purchase price gets spread over time to cover Blizzard's legal obligations about content, etc. upgrades?
Am I being daft here? :)
Durrn Nov 6th 2008 7:55PM
It's a tax thing.
If you don't recognize the profits in the 2008-09 tax year you don't pay taxes on that profit till next year (which gives you a little bit more time to invest that money that you will have to pay in taxes and gin up some interest payments).
Piper Nov 6th 2008 3:09PM
Doesn't Sarbanes-Oxley (sp) or some such play into that as well? I know there is an issue of providing free upgrades if you aren't spreading the fee over time for computer companies. Yes, I know we pay a monthly fee, but that fee could be considered (for accounting purposes) for access to the servers, Whereas the initial purchase price gets spread over time to cover Blizzard's legal obligations about content, etc. upgrades?
Am I being daft here? :)
Rallik Nov 6th 2008 3:13PM
Assuming that Activision does things because Blizzard tells them to do it is false. Activision handles the box releases in this manner because they like their profit margin to be as smooth and predictable as possible. They're a publicly traded company, and public companies abhor stock fluctuation. They want it to go up, at a predictable rate. Investors do too.
What they are saying to investors is that they do not want people to devalue their stock after the Christmas season. Activision has a stable source of income in World of Warcraft.
Magdalen Nov 6th 2008 3:15PM
Michael, you missed the big reason that this is the accounting policy. It is a little thing called revenue recognition and it is based on GAAP (generally accepted accounting principles). Activision-Blizzard realizes if revenue is recognized at time of sale, it is not an accurate presentation of when the actual earning of the revenue occurs. I really don't think that statement has anything to do with whether or not they want you to have fun.
Also remember, cash is king. Although the statement of operations is important, a huge performance indicator is cash flows from operations.
aw232 Nov 6th 2008 3:26PM
Additionally in the GAAP rules they can't recognize the retail sales of WotLK in September because they haven't actually given you your box yet. Essentially thier commitment to you hasn't been fulfilled until after you have the box, can no longer return it to the store, and you cancel your subscription. Under GAAP they can't recognize all the revenue from the sale of the box until after all of their possible commitments associated with the sale are completed. This includes customer service regarding the sale. There are standard forumlas that accountants use to recognize revenue over time for such a sale and this is another reason why the revenue is spread over a period and is reported in this way. Standardized business practices FTW.
Kevin Nov 6th 2008 3:33PM
^ This is the truth.
The do it that way because the HAVE to... not because they want to.
Mathoni Nov 6th 2008 5:11PM
Yeah I am with you. This is just an accepted accounting move. I doubt that top management wants to show how much fun they want us to have through their accounting principles. I wonder how long they defer a portion of the boxed sales? I doubt its longer than a year or two.
Verata Nov 6th 2008 3:18PM
As an Accountant, I will tell you this is apart of US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) - not just a greedy malevolent corporation trying to bleed customers dry. Software sales, especially, with any degree of possible return of product, have to have the revenue deferred over the "average life" of the product (and, yes, management then has to justify how they calculate the average life to their auditors).
The risk isn't, initially, to keep shareholders happy but to properly align revenue with the risks associated with the return of the product. This also keeps ANY company from issuing a complete P.O.S. product which has huge initial sales and then has all those bogus items returned.
Just an FYI for one of those people who would understand all that boring stuff in the Financial Statements.
Magdalen Nov 6th 2008 3:19PM
No. SOx has to do with mainly internal control and such things as auditor independence.
Kitchen Nov 6th 2008 3:19PM
give me one!
James Nov 6th 2008 3:21PM
Yup this is just GAAP. Its a subscriptions service and retail box sales are just the start of the subscription.
Gormakr Nov 6th 2008 3:33PM
This is standard accounting practice. Revenues and expenses are generally spread over the related use of a product (oversimplified, but that's about it.)
While it does have the benefit of reducing volatility of earnings (and presumably stock prices) which is desirable, it's also common and appropriate. Their auditors would likely force this treatment in any case.
It's not related to Sarbanes Oxley - it's just GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Practices).
I do think that they want us to stick around and play for the long term and have fun, but the accounting is not an indication of this.
Chris
- CPA, CFA
Angel Nov 6th 2008 4:14PM
True, but aren't revenues suppose to be recognized as they are earned?
If anything I believe this is related more to the P&L impact on the financials from revenue expenses.
BTW, Chris im currently studying for first my CPA exam (finance) on Nov 29.... it's killing me that WOTLK comes out this month as i can't touch it or else its bye-bye CPA study lol
Magdalen Nov 6th 2008 4:20PM
@Angel, you have to give up EVERYTHING to study for the exam. It sucks hard. I took my television and main computer to my friends house so I would have no distractions. I also had 2,800 charge-hour year. Good luck.
Pcatt Nov 6th 2008 3:57PM
As a public auditor, thank you to the two previous posts of Magdalen and Verata. This article attempts to inform the reader that Activision (or Blizzard for that matter) is acting in some way with respect to thier financial reporting strategies to help better their relationship with their customers. I personally (and professionally) cannot see any direct relationship here. As was already stated Activision is simply following GAAP rules and regulations that are in line with the SEC's policies on publicly traded companies. If they were to report each box sale as P.O.S. revenue and recognize it right away they would skew their numbers and their reporting numbers would no longer prove to be relevant to the actual happenings of the company.
I like that WoW Insider is trying to tie in the financial aspect of this game, but this has absolutely NOTHING to do with any sort of corporate greed or benevolence. An informed reader will read this article (as I did) and say to themselves "Hey, Activision is reporting their sales correctly on their Financial Statements. Sweet, no SEC fines for them."