Your Pokemon Go obsessions could make Apple an extra $3 billion over the next one to two years, an analyst says.
Nintendo’s insane hit Pokemon Go could add $3 billion to Apple’s sales over the next 12 to 24 months, financial analyst Laura Martin said Wednesday.
How did she reach that forecast, you might ask?
First, Apple is “THE global distribution platform for mobile content,” Martin, an analyst with investment banking firm Needham & Company, wrote in a note to investors. And second, she estimates Apple keeps 30 percent of Pokemon Go purchases made from an iPhone or iPad.
Pokemon Go makes money when users — who seem to be just about everyone, everywhere — buy lucky eggs, lures, incense, poke balls and extra storage. And you’re buying a lot, according to the report, citing research released last week from Slice Intelligence. According to Slice, Pokemon Go’s in-game sales on July 10 represented 47 percent of the “entire US mobile gaming ecosystem.”
More important, said Martin, 53 percent of the people buying those add-ons “had made zero mobile games purchases over the past 6 months.”
In others words, you’re hooked. That benefits Apple because two-thirds of all Pokemon Go downloads are on iOS devices.
“Because iOS owners are generally wealthier than Android owners, we estimate that over 80 percent of Pokemon Go’s in-app spending is on iOS devices,” she wrote.
Source: cnet.com
Another spin would be that iOS users are are more gullible.
@RannXeroxx “Gullible” because they decide to spend their money on this particular title when most of them haven’t bought IAP in the past half year? Makes zero sense, but hey, whatever you can do to make sure you don’t view this as a concept you failed to think of when you go and fix someone’s toner.
I’ve never made an in-app purchase since I get tired of games quickly, except for
Tap Baseball 2016, which I play all the time, but without spending $$$$.
Besides I don’t like PokeCrap anyways.
Wouldn’t Google make even more money since they own Niactic Labs?
Wouldn’t Niactic receive the other 70% that Apple doesn’t get?
Google would also get the 30% from the Play store revenue. Niactic also gets the 70% from Play store which would essential be Google’s since they own them?
Am I missing something here? Or is this bad journalism and/or financial analysis?
@CalGoldenBears Google, Nintendo, and The Pokémon Company invested $30 Million into Niantic to develop the game. Nintendo and The Pokémon Company each receive 30% of the profits with the remainder being split (not sure of the ratio) by Google and Niantic Labs. There is also some convoluted backend deals that I can’t quantify as Google, Nintendo, The Pokémon Company and outside shareholders all own a stake of Niantic Labs and Nintendo owns 33% of The Pokémon Company.
@VisualSeed @CalGoldenBears Now that would be information that a journalist should research and denote.
@CalGoldenBears It’s a news story about an analyst’s report on a company a lot of people are interested in. That analyst either doesn’t follow Google, or will release a separate investors note on it later.
(You don’t often seen investor notes covering multiple companies. The only exceptions I’ve seen as a financial reporter were notes that looked at an entire segment, or notes during earnings season when competitors release results within a week of each other.)
Something else to consider: Assuming Apple really does get a 30 percent cut (Apple doesn’t say, and analysts have their own estimates — hence the wording in the story), it doesn’t mean Google has the same conditions with its developers. Ditto for the Niantic/Nintendo financial relationship.
@rochelle.garner @CalGoldenBears I understand it is more complicated on the Google side and I know my numbers are off the cuff. It would’ve been nice to have more information.
@rochelle.garner @CalGoldenBears
Apple making $3 billion off of someone else game is absolutely astounding! Some might say even criminal!
I always liken it to Microsoft taking 30% of the paid amount for content bought on iTunes if iTunes was running on Windows when it was purchased. Or taking 30% of Steam game purchases.
Of course they don’t. The payments just go over the internet straight from the app. But Apple block every single method of payment from an app that they aren’t skimming 30% off. They even block apps that so much as inform their users that they can pay on the internet. They also don’t allow companies to raise their prices to compensate for the Apple skim, making them either cop the loss, or raise prices across the board. This allows Apple to open rival book, music, etc. stores that can undercut their competitors.
It is absolutely worthy of its own headline without reference to anything or anyone else!
They are always free to skip ios, and get 0% of the profits…
@amusal @calgoldenbears
Strawman!!
Ok, I’ll come and set up a stall in your uber popular shopping emporium, sell competing goods to your product at a much cheaper price and pay you zilch rent or commission or profit share gained by using your premises for my increased sales.
Are you anti capitalist?
@Amusal @rochelle.garner @CalGoldenBears Your analogy is flawed. itunes and Steam are distribution services and therefore they both get cuts. Microsoft Windows is not.
“
Because iOS owners are generally wealthier than Android owners, “
And more attractive..,, don’t leave that out. Not to rubi it in but generally wealthier and more attractive, and for that reason…. And so on….
@roblearns Way to be a tool. Represent those Apple users well.
@roblearns Since the vast majority of Android owners are non-western and non-white, are you saying white people are more attractive? Wow, what a racist comment.
The longevity of the Pokemon franchise notwithstanding, there’s still always the possibility that the popularity of this app will fizzle out in a few months, akin to other once-popular apps like Draw Something.
One thing that might help with the app’s longevity (aside from being a Pokemon game) would be updates with features and monsters from Niantic. If that doesn’t happen, do we really think this game will be able to sustain gameplay for that long?
@brief Draw something, however, absolutely required you to play with others. Pokemon, for better or worse, can be enjoyed alone as well by someone who enjoys just going outside and taking a simple walk.
As for updates, they already said they are going to be adding trading PvP, and more pokemon, so this one likely has legs for a while.
WTF! Does she really think iOS users are wealthier? Apple has conditioned them to pay telling them that is what it’s worth. Android users are like, “up, like, no.”
I don’t stay with money in my pocket by plopping $1-5 for a game, realizing it’s junk after the 15min window and losing that cash. That is why IAPs are cool with the freemium model. If you wish to try you can, like it and pay for extras.
Who paid her to talk?
Ps, “THE global distribution platform for mobile content”
Funny how I just read that Android soundly beats Apple in game downloads. Over 80% of game downloads are android based. Right here on CNET.
Clearly wealthier. Some android owners won’t pay $800 for a phone because they need to make rent, or eat.
Maybe that person shouldn’t get a smartphone… Go back to the flip phone…
Eating definitely > expensive phone
@roblearns And the tool continues with their flawed arguments.
@nikecar The wealth disparity the Needham analyst touches on is related to the fact that variants of Android are used in a *broad* swath of phones and markets. That includes hundreds of low-cost, barebones phone models few in the US have ever heard of, as well as the high end phones we do know. Looked at another way, the millions of buyers in developing markets (like India) skew the average incomes of Android owners to the low end.
Yes, some of those Androids being sold are not capable of playing Pokemon… Older version of the OS or the lower end BOGO Android gear
No one disputes 8/10 gaming downloading to be Android based. But those willing to shell out more $ is the point. It’s logical for us to find that if an Android user detests Apple’s price for an iPhone, it’s not out of the realm of possibility that the same person would prefer free apps…
In the end it’s what kind of spenders is the platform attracting?
Those of us who aren’t gamers, regardless of platform… I guess are saving a bunch of $… And maybe more importantly, time
@nikecar mike, why are you being so hostile when, as a while, Apple’s phones cost more, and therefore are priced out of the budget market that a large chunk of Android enjoys? Math isn’t hard.
Another spin would be that iOS users are are more gullible.
@RannXeroxx “Gullible” because they decide to spend their money on this particular title when most of them haven’t bought IAP in the past half year? Makes zero sense, but hey, whatever you can do to make sure you don’t view this as a concept you failed to think of when you go and fix someone’s toner.
I’ve never made an in-app purchase since I get tired of games quickly, except for
Tap Baseball 2016, which I play all the time, but without spending $$$$.
Besides I don’t like PokeCrap anyways.
Wouldn’t Google make even more money since they own Niactic Labs?
Wouldn’t Niactic receive the other 70% that Apple doesn’t get?
Google would also get the 30% from the Play store revenue. Niactic also gets the 70% from Play store which would essential be Google’s since they own them?
Am I missing something here? Or is this bad journalism and/or financial analysis?
@CalGoldenBears It’s a news story about an analyst’s report on a company a lot of people are interested in. That analyst either doesn’t follow Google, or will release a separate investors note on it later.
(You don’t often seen investor notes covering multiple companies. The only exceptions I’ve seen as a financial reporter were notes that looked at an entire segment, or notes during earnings season when competitors release results within a week of each other.)
Something else to consider: Assuming Apple really does get a 30 percent cut (Apple doesn’t say, and analysts have their own estimates — hence the wording in the story), it doesn’t mean Google has the same conditions with its developers. Ditto for the Niantic/Nintendo financial relationship.
@rochelle.garner @CalGoldenBears I understand it is more complicated on the Google side and I know my numbers are off the cuff. It would’ve been nice to have more information.
@rochelle.garner @CalGoldenBears
Apple making $3 billion off of someone else game is absolutely astounding! Some might say even criminal!
I always liken it to Microsoft taking 30% of the paid amount for content bought on iTunes if iTunes was running on Windows when it was purchased. Or taking 30% of Steam game purchases.
Of course they don’t. The payments just go over the internet straight from the app. But Apple block every single method of payment from an app that they aren’t skimming 30% off. They even block apps that so much as inform their users that they can pay on the internet. They also don’t allow companies to raise their prices to compensate for the Apple skim, making them either cop the loss, or raise prices across the board. This allows Apple to open rival book, music, etc. stores that can undercut their competitors.
It is absolutely worthy of its own headline without reference to anything or anyone else!
They are always free to skip ios, and get 0% of the profits…
@amusal @calgoldenbears
Strawman!!
Ok, I’ll come and set up a stall in your uber popular shopping emporium, sell competing goods to your product at a much cheaper price and pay you zilch rent or commission or profit share gained by using your premises for my increased sales.
Are you anti capitalist?
@Amusal @rochelle.garner @CalGoldenBears Your analogy is flawed. itunes and Steam are distribution services and therefore they both get cuts. Microsoft Windows is not.
@CalGoldenBears Google, Nintendo, and The Pokémon Company invested $30 Million into Niantic to develop the game. Nintendo and The Pokémon Company each receive 30% of the profits with the remainder being split (not sure of the ratio) by Google and Niantic Labs. There is also some convoluted backend deals that I can’t quantify as Google, Nintendo, The Pokémon Company and outside shareholders all own a stake of Niantic Labs and Nintendo owns 33% of The Pokémon Company.
@VisualSeed @CalGoldenBears Now that would be information that a journalist should research and denote.
“
Because iOS owners are generally wealthier than Android owners, “
And more attractive..,, don’t leave that out. Not to rubi it in but generally wealthier and more attractive, and for that reason…. And so on….
@roblearns Way to be a tool. Represent those Apple users well.
@cantex2 @RannXeroxx Sarcasm must be a foreign language to you two… Geez
@roblearns Since the vast majority of Android owners are non-western and non-white, are you saying white people are more attractive? Wow, what a racist comment.
The longevity of the Pokemon franchise notwithstanding, there’s still always the possibility that the popularity of this app will fizzle out in a few months, akin to other once-popular apps like Draw Something.
One thing that might help with the app’s longevity (aside from being a Pokemon game) would be updates with features and monsters from Niantic. If that doesn’t happen, do we really think this game will be able to sustain gameplay for that long?
@brief Draw something, however, absolutely required you to play with others. Pokemon, for better or worse, can be enjoyed alone as well by someone who enjoys just going outside and taking a simple walk.
As for updates, they already said they are going to be adding trading PvP, and more pokemon, so this one likely has legs for a while.
WTF! Does she really think iOS users are wealthier? Apple has conditioned them to pay telling them that is what it’s worth. Android users are like, “up, like, no.”
I don’t stay with money in my pocket by plopping $1-5 for a game, realizing it’s junk after the 15min window and losing that cash. That is why IAPs are cool with the freemium model. If you wish to try you can, like it and pay for extras.
Who paid her to talk?
Ps, “THE global distribution platform for mobile content”
Funny how I just read that Android soundly beats Apple in game downloads. Over 80% of game downloads are android based. Right here on CNET.
Clearly wealthier. Some android owners won’t pay $800 for a phone because they need to make rent, or eat.
Maybe that person shouldn’t get a smartphone… Go back to the flip phone…
Eating definitely > expensive phone
@roblearns And the tool continues with their flawed arguments.
@nikecar The wealth disparity the Needham analyst touches on is related to the fact that variants of Android are used in a *broad* swath of phones and markets. That includes hundreds of low-cost, barebones phone models few in the US have ever heard of, as well as the high end phones we do know. Looked at another way, the millions of buyers in developing markets (like India) skew the average incomes of Android owners to the low end.
Yes, some of those Androids being sold are not capable of playing Pokemon… Older version of the OS or the lower end BOGO Android gear
No one disputes 8/10 gaming downloading to be Android based. But those willing to shell out more $ is the point. It’s logical for us to find that if an Android user detests Apple’s price for an iPhone, it’s not out of the realm of possibility that the same person would prefer free apps…
In the end it’s what kind of spenders is the platform attracting?
Those of us who aren’t gamers, regardless of platform… I guess are saving a bunch of $… And maybe more importantly, time
@nikecar mike, why are you being so hostile when, as a while, Apple’s phones cost more, and therefore are priced out of the budget market that a large chunk of Android enjoys? Math isn’t hard.
Another spin would be that iOS users are are more gullible.
@RannXeroxx “Gullible” because they decide to spend their money on this particular title when most of them haven’t bought IAP in the past half year? Makes zero sense, but hey, whatever you can do to make sure you don’t view this as a concept you failed to think of when you go and fix someone’s toner.
I’ve never made an in-app purchase since I get tired of games quickly, except for
Tap Baseball 2016, which I play all the time, but without spending $$$$.
Besides I don’t like PokeCrap anyways.
Wouldn’t Google make even more money since they own Niactic Labs?
Wouldn’t Niactic receive the other 70% that Apple doesn’t get?
Google would also get the 30% from the Play store revenue. Niactic also gets the 70% from Play store which would essential be Google’s since they own them?
Am I missing something here? Or is this bad journalism and/or financial analysis?
@CalGoldenBears It’s a news story about an analyst’s report on a company a lot of people are interested in. That analyst either doesn’t follow Google, or will release a separate investors note on it later.
(You don’t often seen investor notes covering multiple companies. The only exceptions I’ve seen as a financial reporter were notes that looked at an entire segment, or notes during earnings season when competitors release results within a week of each other.)
Something else to consider: Assuming Apple really does get a 30 percent cut (Apple doesn’t say, and analysts have their own estimates — hence the wording in the story), it doesn’t mean Google has the same conditions with its developers. Ditto for the Niantic/Nintendo financial relationship.
@rochelle.garner @CalGoldenBears I understand it is more complicated on the Google side and I know my numbers are off the cuff. It would’ve been nice to have more information.
@rochelle.garner @CalGoldenBears
Apple making $3 billion off of someone else game is absolutely astounding! Some might say even criminal!
I always liken it to Microsoft taking 30% of the paid amount for content bought on iTunes if iTunes was running on Windows when it was purchased. Or taking 30% of Steam game purchases.
Of course they don’t. The payments just go over the internet straight from the app. But Apple block every single method of payment from an app that they aren’t skimming 30% off. They even block apps that so much as inform their users that they can pay on the internet. They also don’t allow companies to raise their prices to compensate for the Apple skim, making them either cop the loss, or raise prices across the board. This allows Apple to open rival book, music, etc. stores that can undercut their competitors.
It is absolutely worthy of its own headline without reference to anything or anyone else!
They are always free to skip ios, and get 0% of the profits…
@amusal @calgoldenbears
Strawman!!
Ok, I’ll come and set up a stall in your uber popular shopping emporium, sell competing goods to your product at a much cheaper price and pay you zilch rent or commission or profit share gained by using your premises for my increased sales.
Are you anti capitalist?
@Amusal @rochelle.garner @CalGoldenBears Your analogy is flawed. itunes and Steam are distribution services and therefore they both get cuts. Microsoft Windows is not.
@CalGoldenBears Google, Nintendo, and The Pokémon Company invested $30 Million into Niantic to develop the game. Nintendo and The Pokémon Company each receive 30% of the profits with the remainder being split (not sure of the ratio) by Google and Niantic Labs. There is also some convoluted backend deals that I can’t quantify as Google, Nintendo, The Pokémon Company and outside shareholders all own a stake of Niantic Labs and Nintendo owns 33% of The Pokémon Company.
@VisualSeed @CalGoldenBears Now that would be information that a journalist should research and denote.
@CalGoldenBears Many journalists are Apple biased. Like this crap. #Never #Again
“
Because iOS owners are generally wealthier than Android owners, “
And more attractive..,, don’t leave that out. Not to rubi it in but generally wealthier and more attractive, and for that reason…. And so on….
@roblearns Way to be a tool. Represent those Apple users well.
@cantex2 @RannXeroxx Sarcasm must be a foreign language to you two… Geez
@roblearns Since the vast majority of Android owners are non-western and non-white, are you saying white people are more attractive? Wow, what a racist comment.
The longevity of the Pokemon franchise notwithstanding, there’s still always the possibility that the popularity of this app will fizzle out in a few months, akin to other once-popular apps like Draw Something.
One thing that might help with the app’s longevity (aside from being a Pokemon game) would be updates with features and monsters from Niantic. If that doesn’t happen, do we really think this game will be able to sustain gameplay for that long?
@brief Draw something, however, absolutely required you to play with others. Pokemon, for better or worse, can be enjoyed alone as well by someone who enjoys just going outside and taking a simple walk.
As for updates, they already said they are going to be adding trading PvP, and more pokemon, so this one likely has legs for a while.
WTF! Does she really think iOS users are wealthier? Apple has conditioned them to pay telling them that is what it’s worth. Android users are like, “up, like, no.”
I don’t stay with money in my pocket by plopping $1-5 for a game, realizing it’s junk after the 15min window and losing that cash. That is why IAPs are cool with the freemium model. If you wish to try you can, like it and pay for extras.
Who paid her to talk?
Ps, “THE global distribution platform for mobile content”
Funny how I just read that Android soundly beats Apple in game downloads. Over 80% of game downloads are android based. Right here on CNET.
Clearly wealthier. Some android owners won’t pay $800 for a phone because they need to make rent, or eat.
Maybe that person shouldn’t get a smartphone… Go back to the flip phone…
Eating definitely > expensive phone
@roblearns And the tool continues with their flawed arguments.
@nikecar The wealth disparity the Needham analyst touches on is related to the fact that variants of Android are used in a *broad* swath of phones and markets. That includes hundreds of low-cost, barebones phone models few in the US have ever heard of, as well as the high end phones we do know. Looked at another way, the millions of buyers in developing markets (like India) skew the average incomes of Android owners to the low end.
Yes, some of those Androids being sold are not capable of playing Pokemon… Older version of the OS or the lower end BOGO Android gear
No one disputes 8/10 gaming downloading to be Android based. But those willing to shell out more $ is the point. It’s logical for us to find that if an Android user detests Apple’s price for an iPhone, it’s not out of the realm of possibility that the same person would prefer free apps…
In the end it’s what kind of spenders is the platform attracting?
Those of us who aren’t gamers, regardless of platform… I guess are saving a bunch of $… And maybe more importantly, time
@nikecar mike, why are you being so hostile when, as a while, Apple’s phones cost more, and therefore are priced out of the budget market that a large chunk of Android enjoys? Math isn’t hard.