Rovio worth 5 billion

[pinkandpurple]

Story Rovio worth 5 billion pounds

Thats ridiculous
How can they be worth that?
FI so Then I will be very rich indeed

[Eli]

[EfratBarTal]

honestly i know nothing about how tech companies are valued. but to me it seems like a lot of companies are said to be worth way more than they actually do. BUT! rovio probably make a LOT of money from the AB franchise and the trademarks probably have a huge potential for revenue so yeah i don't know if 5 bil is realistic or not but a big amount they sure are worth it. i own all 4 versions of angry birds for the ios THEY ARE ALL GREAT GAMES especially the older version (original and seasons) with each covering 100s of levels by now after numerous updates and all. so i'm with Hodapp here, a big appluase to Rovio.

[30BelowStudios]

They have their games not only on mobile but also consoles like PSP etc. They have toys, t-shirts, tons of different things. Hell my son even has a pair of Angry Birds headphones. It all adds up to... a lot.

[jclardy]

Considering Instagram was bought for $1 billion, I can understand that.

But the thing is that Angry Birds is just a fad, and like all fads it will eventually fade out. So far Rovio hasn't really proven that they can create another hit title outside of the Angry Birds franchise. The games will still exist, but the surrounding popularity (candy, clothes, plush toys, etc.) will die off in the next year or so.

See the Pokemon franchise for an example. It still exists today, but has fallen far from its former popularity. The games still exist but you don't see pikachu dolls in every store window anymore.

[Royce]

It's a fad but it's a huge one. In addition to the what? Hundreds? Of knockoff games out there, I actually see knockoffs of these in stores constantly.

Originally Posted by jclardy

(candy, clothes, plush toys, etc.)

The merchandise for an iOS title is actually profitable enough that companies are making money selling cheap imitations. That's impressive. It's also referenced regularly on television and in movies.

I'm not even an angry birds fan btw. I only finished the first one. I just get bored with it.

[mr.Ugly]

@pink: congrats on your riches.. i hope you live happily ever after in your imaginary castle... cheers..


of course i don't understand how a company who did earn "only" $70 million in 2011 could be worth $9 billion..

i mean thats 70 vs 9000 ...

well i apparently don't understand a thing about imaginary worth being created out of thin air.. *shrug*

[Ovogame]

No-one have any memories of the past? Never heard of the bubble effect? It happens in the past (internet bubble anyone, but what about the housing market all other the world too: USA, Spain... even China) and it is still happening this time again with "social/internet/game" companies. Actually, this time, it is going to be worst because now companies are "worth" billions out of the blue instead of just 100's of millions. It is going to hurt badly for the industry when it all blow up (and it will).

JC

[pinkandpurple]

Is it worth doing a IOS game4 or can you do the sAme as Rovio jsut doing a Facebook game?

[Echoseven]

Originally Posted by mr.Ugly

of course i don't understand how a company who did earn "only" $70 million in 2011 could be worth $9 billion..

i mean thats 70 vs 9000 ...

well i apparently don't understand a thing about imaginary worth being created out of thin air.. *shrug*

Net worth and profits are different things. Net worth includes equity, brand name, trademarks, assets, etc. Profit is all income minus all the expenses.

Considering that they got NASA to feature in an ad for them says just how big they've gotten. On top of that, it would've cost a pretty penny too.

Sure, no one would be insane enough to pay $9b for EVERYTHING Rovio has, but in theory that's what everything they have is worth. Including intangible things like trademarks.


Of course, the worth will go down as soon as the strength of the brand diminishes (and from then on it will drown exponentially) but for now they're the hot thing.