I'm talking longer term than that.
Nintendo is the kind of company that has managed to last 124 (will turn 125 later this year) years because of thinking in the very long term. Going mobile would make them some fast money, as in a few months' or even years' worth (i.e., what investors are looking for), but it compromises the long-term (decade or more) profits or even future of the company.
That platitude and conjecture requires citation. Nintendo was certainly not thinking of video games at the outset or even in the first 80 years of their existence, just as an example, nor could they possibly have planned for multiple decades, because the world changes. Nintendo has had to respond to market conditions and failures in both short and long term, and those responses have shaped who they are today.
You go on to later say that they may need to add or shift businesses, and there's where I agree and have said multiple times that they need to find additional revenue streams, they haven't always been a gaming company and there's no need to believe they always will (exclusively) be. Where I differ is that you apparently rule out mobile as being any part of that. I don't want to lump you in, but others rule out third party as being any part of that. But if they can't make what they're doing work (and
I'm not ruling
that out), then third party and/or mobile are the closest logical steps to what they're doing now. But maybe they try something completely different, or leverage what they know about software and electronics and try to get into (or create) a new business. Either way, whatever it takes, they have to get back to profitability for
both the short and long term.
Not to go off on a digression here, but contrary to what is popularly stated around here as a latched-onto meme based on some absurd caricature, investors are not (only) interested in short term prospects. Institutional investors aren't universally vulture capitalists trying to "maximize wealth now and who cares if it kills the company later." That model is not sustainable. When they encourage change, it is most usually with the mid- and long-term interests of the company in mind (they can't predict reality 100 or even 20 years into the future, but they certainly want to position the company beyond the next 3 to 5), while obviously trying to mitigate losses in the near term if only to ensure there's a mid- and long-term where the company still exists. No company and no investor wants to repeatedly go through chaos and upheaval, so acting like investors just want to make money now and forget the consequences later is simply misguided.
Also guess it depends what others are thinking nintendo will do - I hope they arent expecting nintendo to go mobile still.
