280: The Crystal Ball of Michael Pachter
- Thread starter Tracey John
- Start date
Before you start praising him, keep in mind that he conveniently does not mention the fact that he apologised for saying that:DTWolfwood said:
Source: IndustryGamers [http://www.industrygamers.com/news/pachters-podium-ps3-price-cut-iphone-3g-s-and-a-sincere-apology/]Michael Pachter said:
On topic...was this a bad article? Not necessarily. However, there are individuals that are far more deserving of attention than Pachter. While I am sure he is not a terrible person in his private life, as a gaming industry analyst, he preety much qualifies as an overpaid viral marketeer. Afterall, it is no coincidence that he has consistently predicted poor results for Nintendo and great results for Sony (except when doing so would make him look ridiculous even by his own standards) in the face of all logic and facts. His "Wii HD" prediction is particularly hilarious. He maintained, with absolute certainty, for a very long time that Nintendo would release a HD version of the Wii, even when Nintendo representatives flat-out rejected the notion on many ocassions. Now, he has even gone so far as to try and spin the statement into meaning that the Move is the "Wii HD" he has been talking about all along. Dear heavens...
To put it simply, Pachter has done nothing to earn the amount of attention that he enjoys from the press. Infact, considering the topic of this Weekly issue, I think the direction chosen for this article was an entirely wrong one. Rather than shed light on someone who is well known, but is most consistent in making predictions that are either entirely false or are blatantly obvious, it would have been much better if the Escapist presented someone who is less known, but who's predictions have been most consistently correct. Not only would the readers of the Escapist (potentially) be introduced to an entirely new personality, we might have also ended up learning why their predictions end up being more spot on than the rest. One thing is clear; it certainly would have ended up being a much more informative read than what we ended up getting.
Don't misunderstand, my intention is not to criticise Tracey John. I am sure she wrote this article with the best of intentions. But the direction that was taken is unfortunate.
I hate Micheal Pachter so much.
You know why? It's in this article "you can bet Pachter's shared his opinion about it on some gaming blog, and he's probably pissed off both publishers and gamers alike." He shared his OPINION and everyone takes him seriously, remember when he predicted Sony and Microsoft consoles to fall through when Nintendo had apparently "Won" the conole war that was apparently going on?
There are so many things wrong with this, it's the equivalent of me saying: "So what do you think Michael?" and then publishing it every where.
Edit: I forgot to mention how when he does get things right, he only parrotes the graphs that he reads.
Another Edit: I realize the purpose of this article was to tell you about him and then make you see things from his point of view, but there is a big difference between liking somebody because of their back/lifestory, and liking somebody because of what they do, and I can't believe that this guy works so hard at his job, only to get things so wrong. It seems like he interviews people for five hours, and then tells only what he took away from the experience as opposed to any notes.
Have you ever heard of George Wood and "Gaming in the Clinton Years?" this guy is the modern day equivalent.
You know why? It's in this article "you can bet Pachter's shared his opinion about it on some gaming blog, and he's probably pissed off both publishers and gamers alike." He shared his OPINION and everyone takes him seriously, remember when he predicted Sony and Microsoft consoles to fall through when Nintendo had apparently "Won" the conole war that was apparently going on?
There are so many things wrong with this, it's the equivalent of me saying: "So what do you think Michael?" and then publishing it every where.
Edit: I forgot to mention how when he does get things right, he only parrotes the graphs that he reads.
Another Edit: I realize the purpose of this article was to tell you about him and then make you see things from his point of view, but there is a big difference between liking somebody because of their back/lifestory, and liking somebody because of what they do, and I can't believe that this guy works so hard at his job, only to get things so wrong. It seems like he interviews people for five hours, and then tells only what he took away from the experience as opposed to any notes.
Have you ever heard of George Wood and "Gaming in the Clinton Years?" this guy is the modern day equivalent.
its not the point. he apologized for the same reason EA apologized for the taliban, the man has to eat. He isn't about to bite the hand that feeds him for something as trivial as choosing the wrong set of words to describe something without at least making amends.Tom Phoenix said:
Im speaking specifically what was said here and now on the article.
The man is as irrelevant to me as anyone who makes a living 'predicting' things. The same attitude i have towards psychics, i give to this man. But i don't hate the man simply because its his job to worry about his constituents rather than say niceties to fanboys and the press. Plus the man, as far as i know, have no affect on the industry so why the hostility? He isn't a Kotick.
What really dumbfounds me is that you think this article would have been best served on someone less known. Who wants to read about joe schmo who makes predictions? The fact its gotten you here on the thread to post about it has proved this article was well worth writing.
Keep up the good work Tracey John. don't listen to all them haters! cause haters gotta hate!
Susan Arendt said:
Apologies. Yes I read the article but my comment wasn't a very constructive. I dislike hearing about Pachter because he tends to very manipulative in what he says (ie Wii HD) and gaming media tends to let him get away with it. The article itself wasn't bad but seemed it like its goal was to cast Pachter in an overly positive light rather then giving us the information and letting us come to our own conclusions.beddo said:
"My method is, I say what I think, and I spend all of my time looking for reasons why I'm wrong"
Hey! That's how science works! +1 for you!
Hey! That's how science works! +1 for you!
Yet, in this article, he still ends up bragging how he stuck it to Sony.DTWolfwood said:
Besides, he is a business analyst. He is suppose to be a neutral party that assesses the state of the industry and tries to figure out how things will go in the future. As such, Sony isn't the hand that feeds him...or, at the very least, it shouldn't be. But considering how he has been trying to paint a rosy picture for Sony for years, I honestly wouldn't be suprised if they really do partially feed him.
Who is talking about hostility? I am criticising Pacther's professional conduct as an analyst. I am criticising the fact that he is pushing a specific agenda rather than trying to do his job. You say that "its his job to worry about his constituents rather than say niceties to fanboys and the press", which is fine...except that he is saying niceties to fanboys and the press. That's precisely the part of the problem.
Just like Kotick deserves criticism for being a poor CEO, so does Pachter deserve criticism for being a poor analyst.
Likewise, who wants to read about someone who is payed to make predictions, but, intentionally or unintentionally, gets them completely wrong most of the time? At least the "joe schmo" I am suggesting would be someone who has a proven track record.
Of course, it's impossible to be always correct when it comes to predictions due to their very nature. But there are individuals that have been almost clairvoyant about it and who are well worthy of being known about....Pachter is not one of them, especially since the press graces him with attention all the time as it is.
People post about articles of various kinds all the time and the Escapist is not an exception to this rule. That doesn't mean they were worth writing or that they serve much purpose.
But even if we take your stance that this article was worth writing, my entire point is that there are individuals far more worthier than Pachter of being written about. Had the Escapist chosen someone else, they would have introduced someone entirely new to their readership and they would have sparked an entirely new and interesting debate on that person and the subjects that they cover. Debate on Pachter is neither new nor interesting; it has practically occured in some shape or another every time there is a news piece about one of his predictions for a while now. This article doesn't end up contributing much to the debate. All it does is make people cover old ground.
Why do people hate this guy? I mean, really? What impact does he have on your daily life? None, I'm willing to bet. He's a guy who looks at the numbers, follows trends, and makes predictions about the business primarily for shareholders, not a bunch of nerds who sit around posting on video game forums. And he uses all of his press to generate more business. Shame on him with his fancy degrees and knowledge and success.
Obviously this article is not as heavy-hitting as the Costikyan two-parter rant that brought me to this site many years ago but at least a little insight into one of the most ubiquitous names in the outside, non-development/publishing part of the industry.
Obviously this article is not as heavy-hitting as the Costikyan two-parter rant that brought me to this site many years ago but at least a little insight into one of the most ubiquitous names in the outside, non-development/publishing part of the industry.
I think the thing is he appears to be making tonnes of money from spouting nonsense about the gaming industry. Which technically he is, but it's more like making outrageous ill-founded claims increases his notoriety which gets him more work rather than Microsoft are paying him millions to say "Nintendo are making the Virtual Boy 2!"
I must have been reading the wrong article cause at what point was he bragging that he stuck it Sony? Stating the obvious doesn't count as bragging to me. I don't listen to his 'analysis' enough to pass judgment on their validity but specifically in this article he was very right about the PSP Go. Also the few times i have watched his segment on GT, what he said made sense, in the financial stand point, like his case for a subscription based Call of Duty.Tom Phoenix said:Yet, in this article, he still ends up bragging how he stuck it to Sony.DTWolfwood said:
Besides, he is a business analyst. He is suppose to be a neutral party that assesses the state of the industry and tries to figure out how things will go in the future. As such, Sony isn't the hand that feeds him...or, at the very least, it shouldn't be. But considering how he has been trying to paint a rosy picture for Sony for years, I honestly wouldn't be suprised if they really do partially feed him.
Who is talking about hostility? I am criticising Pacther's professional conduct as an analyst. I am criticising the fact that he is pushing a specific agenda rather than trying to do his job. You say that "its his job to worry about his constituents rather than say niceties to fanboys and the press", which is fine...except that he is saying niceties to fanboys and the press. That's precisely the part of the problem.
Just like Kotick deserves criticism for being a poor CEO, so does Pachter deserve criticism for being a poor analyst.
Likewise, who wants to read about someone who is payed to make predictions, but, intentionally or unintentionally, gets them completely wrong most of the time? At least the "joe schmo" I am suggesting would be someone who has a proven track record.
Of course, it's impossible to be always correct when it comes to predictions due to their very nature. But there are individuals that have been almost clairvoyant about it and who are well worthy of being known about....Pachter is not one of them, especially since the press graces him with attention all the time as it is.
People post about articles of various kinds all the time and the Escapist is not an exception to this rule. That doesn't mean they were worth writing or that they serve much purpose.
But even if we take your stance that this article was worth writing, my entire point is that there are individuals far more worthier than Pachter of being written about. Had the Escapist chosen someone else, they would have introduced someone entirely new to their readership and they would have sparked an entirely new and interesting debate on that person and the subjects that they cover. Debate on Pachter is neither new nor interesting; it has practically occured in some shape or another every time there is a news piece about one of his predictions for a while now. This article doesn't end up contributing much to the debate. All it does is make people cover old ground.
Being neutral in his business gets you zero notoriety. He is the perfect case study for that. Also, i guess the fact that most of the posts on this thread is openly hostile towards this man means what he was playing nice to gamers and fanboys. <.< The press, well they just love a provocateur.
If there is an analyst who has a high success rate in prediction please by all means tell me who this man is. I'll be buying stock with that man. Otherwise i wouldn't be assuming.
But you know what the guy above said it best.
Thanks Doc.DrRosenRosen said:
Hi there! Who would you have suggested we cover instead for the "Psychics" issue? We went with Pachter because he's simply the most well-known and outspoken analyst, not because he's more or less accurate than others. Most people don't know exactly what he does or how he makes his predictions, and I wanted to try to shed some light on that.Tom Phoenix said:
My goal certainly wasn't to cast him in a positive or negative light, though a profile can be seem one-sided when you're only talking to that person. I'm sure it would've seemed more negative had I scrutinized every prediction he's made, but that wasn't the aim of the piece. Again, we just wanted to learn "the methods to his madness." And it doesn't seem like you guys have trouble coming to your own conclusions.Bloodeye said:
Thanks for reading!
I think you're reading something into it that isn't there. No article containing a quote about how Pachter uses the media to make himself more money is trying to "cast him in an overly positive light."Bloodeye said:
Well he sure know a lot about games.DTWolfwood said:I changed my mind about this guy! He is alright by me! XD
In all fairness he is right, that he is the only analyst I can name and that is something to his credit. Sometimes I don't see the trends he sees but in all honesty I can see where it comes from.
Also like the fact he was candid about y he does what he doesp.s. yall really should read it, remember never judge a book by its cover
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07Hf4i7XtSs (some part are from other people of gametrailer)
Sure...
RTS is turned based...
RTS is single player...
I don't have anything against Michael Pachter as a person. I *do* have a problem with the tremendous amount of attention he gets, this article included.
I think a large part of his problem is that he looks too much at numbers, sales figures, corporate structure, and other things like that, but doesn't really understand the consumers. In a sense, he's like Michael Eisner, the man responsible for some of the worst travesties to disgrace Disney (think direct-to-video sequels). The thing is, this is a common trap to fall into, forgetting that underneath all the business jargon and sales charts, in ANY INDUSTRY, is a human element. You can look at trends all you want, but you've gotta understand how the consumers think, WHY they buy what they buy, WHY certain products are popular, in order to be a great analyst. Pachter has repeatedly shown he doesn't get this.
The movie Trading Places had a good example of this in action:
"Okay, pork belly prices have been dropping all morning, which means that everybody is waiting for it to hit rock bottom, so they can buy low. Which means that the people who own the pork belly contracts are saying, "Hey, we're losing all our damn money, and Christmas is around the corner, and I ain't gonna have no money to buy my son the G.I. Joe with the kung-fu grip! And my wife ain't gonna f... my wife ain't gonna make love to me if I got no money!" So they're panicking right now, they're screaming "SELL! SELL!" to get out before the price keeps dropping. They're panicking out there right now, I can feel it."
P.S. Thanks
I think a large part of his problem is that he looks too much at numbers, sales figures, corporate structure, and other things like that, but doesn't really understand the consumers. In a sense, he's like Michael Eisner, the man responsible for some of the worst travesties to disgrace Disney (think direct-to-video sequels). The thing is, this is a common trap to fall into, forgetting that underneath all the business jargon and sales charts, in ANY INDUSTRY, is a human element. You can look at trends all you want, but you've gotta understand how the consumers think, WHY they buy what they buy, WHY certain products are popular, in order to be a great analyst. Pachter has repeatedly shown he doesn't get this.
The movie Trading Places had a good example of this in action:
"Okay, pork belly prices have been dropping all morning, which means that everybody is waiting for it to hit rock bottom, so they can buy low. Which means that the people who own the pork belly contracts are saying, "Hey, we're losing all our damn money, and Christmas is around the corner, and I ain't gonna have no money to buy my son the G.I. Joe with the kung-fu grip! And my wife ain't gonna f... my wife ain't gonna make love to me if I got no money!" So they're panicking right now, they're screaming "SELL! SELL!" to get out before the price keeps dropping. They're panicking out there right now, I can feel it."
P.S. Thanks
lol guess he isn't a gamer. He knows the business side of gaming. i would never assumed he was a gamer. Plus these are cases where i'd lol at his error and giggle like a school girl. Like seeing someone step on poop. XDExort said:Well he sure know a lot about games.DTWolfwood said:I changed my mind about this guy! He is alright by me! XD
In all fairness he is right, that he is the only analyst I can name and that is something to his credit. Sometimes I don't see the trends he sees but in all honesty I can see where it comes from.
Also like the fact he was candid about y he does what he doesp.s. yall really should read it, remember never judge a book by its cover
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07Hf4i7XtSs (some part are from other people of gametrailer)
Sure...
RTS is turned based...
RTS is single player...
Thanks for the article, regardless of what the others say, I found it interesting and it gave me some new insights on Pachter (who knew he actually spends a fair amount actually playing games?).
I would like to add one comment, however: I think the article is nice, but I think it would have been even better if there would have been some comments from colleagues or competitors, or something like that. A view from some guys inside the companies Pachter writes about (maybe PR people from Nintendo, Activision or whoever else there may be) on how they see (and handle) him would have been interesting for me as well.
And finally, I think some comments from some of his clients and what they value about his opinions would have been the icing on the cake. I believe that would have given a much broader and even more interesting picture about Michael Pachter, maybe you guys can try a follow-up in the future with some of those ideas, that would be great
I would like to add one comment, however: I think the article is nice, but I think it would have been even better if there would have been some comments from colleagues or competitors, or something like that. A view from some guys inside the companies Pachter writes about (maybe PR people from Nintendo, Activision or whoever else there may be) on how they see (and handle) him would have been interesting for me as well.
And finally, I think some comments from some of his clients and what they value about his opinions would have been the icing on the cake. I believe that would have given a much broader and even more interesting picture about Michael Pachter, maybe you guys can try a follow-up in the future with some of those ideas, that would be great