The Pokemon Company doubles their annual profit compared to last fiscal year


(I tried to find the original source in Japanese but could only find data going back to 2018: https://kanpo.tremolo.work/company/8128)

TPC's fiscal years go from March 1 to February 28, so the most recent year is from 2021-03-01 to 2022-02-28.

So apparently they made over €300 million in profit last fiscal year, compared to under €150 million every year before that. I can only assume it's because they released two core series games this fiscal year instead of one?

Other things:
  • According to Joe, TPC's profit is only 20% of their revenue.
  • There's an enormous 10x increase the moment Pokemon Go releases that sticks around.
  • TPC actually lost money between Mar 2009 - Feb 2010, and between Mar 2011 - Feb 2012. Neither of these were gap years, as both English Platinum and Japanese HGSS were released during the former, and English B/W was released during the latter.
  • You can still see the gap year effect between Mar 2015 - Feb 2016, which looks like their worst year other than the above two years.
 
The fact TPC registered losses in the fiscal years where the often-considered best games in the franchise were released can explain so many things about their recent behaviour...
Yeah, Go is the big moneyspinner, and the main series games have changed to reflect that. Max raids were the big feature of Sword and Shield, clearly based on Go's raids. Even the DLC was mostly just two new wild areas.

Still I am sort of hoping they do a good job with Unova remakes. Even if its another one that's more remaster than re-make, I haven't played them as much as I did Gen IV.
 
Yeah, Go is the big moneyspinner, and the main series games have changed to reflect that. Max raids were the big feature of Sword and Shield, clearly based on Go's raids. Even the DLC was mostly just two new wild areas.

Still I am sort of hoping they do a good job with Unova remakes. Even if its another one that's more remaster than re-make, I haven't played them as much as I did Gen IV.
Also Let's Go
Also having Meltan/Melmetal premiere in it/made for it
Also having Go-styled raids in the anime
Also having a character named Go(u/h) in said anime
Also getting an entire set dedicated to it in the TCG, a thing that just does not happen with spin offs. Even the anime typically only gets little promotional card sets!

the fact Legends Arceus didn't have something Go actively pushed onto it is stunning, really. Maybe they got it out of their system. Now let me take a big sip of water for the next 16 and a half hours
 
I think it's safe to say that money speaks, and the money says we won't be getting a HGSS, Platinum, or BW2 style Pokémon game ever again. The franchise I loved died a decade ago.

On the other hand I can play Renegade Platinum randomized nuzlocke at 2x speed on my phone while I take a shit, so maybe we are in a way still in the golden age of Pokémon.
 

KaenSoul

Shared:Power Little Knight
is a Community Leaderis a Community Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a member of the Battle Simulator Staff
Community Leader
Isnt this about TPC as a whole and not just GF? We shouldnt just focus on one thing.
It shouldnt have much to do with how much the main games sell, but all the merchandise and now mobile games microtransactions (like Go), as those numbers are usually much higher than what core games give.
 
Last edited:

Pikachu315111

Ranting & Raving!
is a Community Contributoris a Top Smogon Media Contributor
The fact TPC registered losses in the fiscal years where the often-considered best games in the franchise were released can explain so many things about their recent behaviour...
I think it's safe to say that money speaks, and the money says we won't be getting a HGSS, Platinum, or BW2 style Pokémon game ever again. The franchise I loved died a decade ago.
... You know what, I'm gonna be the positive one this time. While I agree that them having a down year when late Gen IV and Gen V would effect their behavior, I'm going to disagree it's that we're never going to see a game on the scope of Platinum or story-driven as Gen V ever again.

Instead, what I think GF learned from those down years, the following up years, and the recent years skyrocketing is that it doesn't matter what they do. Story-driven, content-packed, bare-bones, remakes; there's just no predicting on their part when the games are gonna sell well or there's going to be a down period. So, you know what they said?

"F*** IT! We'll do what we want!"

And thus we've pretty much entertained a period of Pokemon where GF is more interested in experimenting with what they can do with the base mechanics. Sun & Moon tossed out having a traditional Pokemon League for the unique Island Challenge. USUM tried combining the advanced version concept of Emerald/Platinum with the duel "sequel" concept of BW2. Let's Go was both a remake of Yellow Pikachu Version and a tie-in with GO. Sword and Shield made the Pokemon League even MORE of the main plot than before by turning it into a sporting event like Soccer plus having the Wild Area concept. Sword & Shield further expanded the Wild Area concepts via its DLCs, one specifically that was exploration-focused and the other story-focused. BDSP in particular was a big test for them because it's not that they wanted to see if they could make a 1:1 remake and see if it would sell, but rather they wanted to see if given the blueprints could another game company make a Pokemon game (and as much problems we've heard about the development of BDSP was, it ultimately was still made, functional, and sold really well; so yes another game company can make a main series Pokemon game). Finally Legends: Arceus is GF really stretching their wings to see how far can they take the Pokemon concept and keep it feeling like a Pokemon game.

Though, as I said, there is another lesson that GF learned from these sales which explains their behavior as of late: to strike when the iron's hot. All of the sudden, not since its popularity, Pokemon has become a major selling franchise again in recent years. A likely confused GF, having decided to do whatever they want, also decided that if people are buying the games now they better make sure there are games to buy. Thus, they've been focused on releasing a game once-a-year (or major game content once-a-year) to keep the money train on rolling. They get to do whatever experiment they want, the franchise is making lots of money, and fans are constantly getting new stuff. Seems like a win-win-win*, right?

* as long as you don't care too much about the content...

Only question is now, what experiment are they doing with Scarlet & Violet?
 
I think it's safe to say that money speaks, and the money says we won't be getting a HGSS, Platinum, or BW2 style Pokémon game ever again. The franchise I loved died a decade ago.

On the other hand I can play Renegade Platinum randomized nuzlocke at 2x speed on my phone while I take a shit, so maybe we are in a way still in the golden age of Pokémon.
/thread
 
Last edited:

bdt2002

Pokémon Ranger: Guardian Signs superfan
is a Pre-Contributor
The fact TPC registered losses in the fiscal years where the often-considered best games in the franchise were released can explain so many things about their recent behaviour...
This.
I think it's safe to say that money speaks, and the money says we won't be getting a HGSS, Platinum, or BW2 style Pokémon game ever again. The franchise I loved died a decade ago.

On the other hand I can play Renegade Platinum randomized nuzlocke at 2x speed on my phone while I take a shit, so maybe we are in a way still in the golden age of Pokémon.
And this.
Isnt this about TPC as a whole and not just GF? We shouldnt just focus on one thing.
It shouldnt have much to do with how much the main games sell, but all the merchandise and now mobile games microtransactions (like Go), as those numbers are usually much higher than what core games give.
And also this.

On one hand, I can definitely see where these points are coming from. Pokémon as a franchise has changed over the past 10+ years. A franchise as successful as Pokémon definitely has the ability to put out better quality products than what they have been. On the other hand, we need to also consider that it's not just the games that Pokémon creates revenue off of. Most of Pokémon's profit comes from general merchandise that appeals to a different audience than what most of us fall into. I think what's going on here isn't actually a Game Freak issue, but rather an issue with TPC's marketing philosophies. Whoever these higher-ups are seem to be under the impression that the video games that are put out, core series and spinoff alike, need to "appeal" more to that casual audience to produce a more steady income as opposed to appealing to the "hardcore" fans, making money off of us but less off of newer fans.
 
Whoever these higher-ups are seem to be under the impression that the video games that are put out, core series and spinoff alike, need to "appeal" more to that casual audience to produce a more steady income as opposed to appealing to the "hardcore" fans, making money off of us but less off of newer fans.
Which is actually the correct thinking, since what interests the main buyers (aka, kids) is direct opposite to what interests actual hardcore fans and pvp players who are still upset about Beedrill not being available in SwSh.
 
My hang up with the mentality being discussed is that there is a point at which trying to go for mass appeal might not be to quality or financial benefit overall for the games.

As discussed a lot, Pokemon is a multimedia franchise, of which the games are just one part, and (in terms of main-series) arguably not even the primary one any more despite being the inception. Things like Go, the Anime, other Mobile Games, the TCG, Collectable Merchandise all are tied together by the IP and the Creatures, but the concepts themselves intrinsically appeal to different tastes. This is not to say one is more worthy of attention than the other, but one of the delicate balances you have to strike is giving something specialized to the specific sub-franchise you're creating while keeping it inline with the larger scale IP and image.

This is where my contention with things like LGPE or SwSh (or at least what they push to sell SwSh) stems/stemmed from. I don't inherently dislike a lot of QoL options Go added like non-Battle Capture mechanics, Raid bosses, full Overworld visible counters, and generally streamlining the Capture aspect of Pokemon. My issue is that alongside these improvements, games integrating them feel as if they are stagnating or cutting back on other features that help form their identity, with the thinning amount of Single Player Post-Game engagement, undercooked story/supporting cast, and significantly greater emphasis on Go as the Spin-off rather than just the mechanics of it easing newcomers into other entries.

I can't speak too well first-hand, but I also have heard some contention about Goh in the anime (who's obviously there to represent that side of the franchise next to Ash as the Battler) kind of stepping on toes and being used/pushed into episodes focused on Ash's Coronation challenge significantly more often than the reverse happens. Friends of mine who usually enjoy the anime have been watching less because they're tired of Goh being more present than they feel he needs to be over mainstay elements they watch the show for, which is sort of the issue I describe in microcosm: If I wanted the experience of Pokemon Go, at some point it becomes better for me to just play Go rather than play/watch other entries do "Go but with a different medium's MO to contend with", at which point integrating those changes can lose sales/engagement rather than increase it if the Hardcores drop off and the "casuals" don't adopt it enough to compensate (as opposed to simply continuing with the media entries they already like).

Pokemon is by no means there yet from a marketing standpoint given the sales on SwSh, but I do think it's a concern to be wary of with future projects to not dive headfirst into yet more Mobile/Go practices and homogenize the Multimedia despite that wide-reaching variety being a major point behind said multiple formats in the first place
 
Which is actually the correct thinking, since what interests the main buyers (aka, kids) is direct opposite to what interests actual hardcore fans and pvp players who are still upset about Beedrill not being available in SwSh.
Do we really know whether kids are actually the main buyers though? I feel pokemon go was largely responsible for the resurgence of the franchise and that mainly attracted older players. Older players also have much more expendable income and will be the types of people to buy 2 3ds’s and 5 copies of a game to play with.
 
Do we really know whether kids are actually the main buyers though? I feel pokemon go was largely responsible for the resurgence of the franchise and that mainly attracted older players. Older players also have much more expendable income and will be the types of people to buy 2 3ds’s and 5 copies of a game to play with.
Its the merch that makes most of the money. Go is good at driving casual players, adults and children, to the merch.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top