Jump to content
Lord Mushroom

Would Atari had been better off if Bushnell hadn´t sold it?

Poll  

123 members have voted

  1. 1. Would Atari had been better off if Bushnell hadn´t sold it to Warner?

    • Probably yes
      49
    • Probably no
      38
    • I have no idea
      36


Recommended Posts

27 minutes ago, pacman000 said:

Back on topic, before this thread is shut down...

 

1) Would Atari have been better off if Nolan hadn’t sold it?

 

2) If he stayed involved after then sale?
 

For #1 I say no; he had too little business experience , & he has a bad track record with his later businesses.

 

Question 2 is more interesting, & I’m not sure what I think would happen. Any ideas?

 

I think #1, but Mr. Scabies is siding with #2 depending on how much control Nolan would have and for how long.  It was a pleasant discussion and we both respected each others' opinions. 

 

 

 

squir1.jpg

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Narcissim-731x1024.thumb.png.1f694ea0fab59182c15da7011b5e3b14.png

 

@Leeroy ST: Please show this to your therapist.  The two in the right column look like a good fit, with the one in the lower-left quadrant also applying to a lesser extent.  It'd be interesting to hear a professional opinion on that.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, x=usr(1536) said:

@Leeroy STPlease show this to your therapist.  The two in the right column look like a good fit, with the one in the lower-left quadrant also working out to a lesser extent.

Ahh, the last word type. Always the insecure ones who break down first and project. Still hasn't posted any evidence outside an "observation". 

 

Maybe you should have "observed" family members that know how discourse works, so you learn to address real evidence. (like say, news paper scans instead of skipping them for convenience.)

 

I wonder when the cursing will start? Is that the next step? You're going to try to get in the last word anyway, go on then. 

 

The lack of self awareness is baffling. 

 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, attempting to bring the thread on topic again:

 

So bringing up Fairchild again related to Nolan, Atari, and Warner 

 

I found this which can pose a case for how important Warner was for getting the 2600 to take off:

 

Brandenton herald 1978 24 DEC

clip_84980078.thumb.jpg.16b3710a44ac0a83263e471df4c3899f.jpg

 

So Fairchild outsold the VCS in 1977, but Warner picked things up and overshadowed them 3:1 in 1978 despite the Fairchilds earlier momentum and a $70 difference in favor of the Channel F.

 

It is possible if Nolan did NOT sell, Atari wouldn't have been able to pull the same jump ahead and things would have been more competitive.

 

We dont know exacts but I'm fairly certain Fairchild had more money than Atari pre-Warner sale. 

 

What's more is that Fairchild and Atari being competitive, may have changed how well the Mattel Intellivision performed.

 

As currently, Atari was alone gaining market share in a virtual monopoly with hit games like Asteroids and Mattel entered in with a steep hill to climb.

 

But with Atari and Fairchild competing, not only may Mattel be more successful, but it's power advantage and better graphics may have been appreciated more. As well as it's unique (for the time) game selection.

 

Dont think they (Mattel) would pull ahead, but that would change how things played out drastically. Unlike now where there was Atari near monopolistic domination until the CV.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Matt_B said:

Er... that's still running Windows CE though.

 

After all, you wouldn't say that the IBM PC didn't run DOS because you had to put a disk in and boot it.


Then again, maybe you would...

I would.  You could run other operating systems on an IBM PC.  So while Microsoft DOS was the one most people ended up running.  You wouldn't say Microsoft had a hand in making the hardware.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, leech said:

I would.  You could run other operating systems on an IBM PC.  So while Microsoft DOS was the one most people ended up running.  You wouldn't say Microsoft had a hand in making the hardware.

You're right. I wouldn't. Indeed I never did. 😃

 

My argument, lest you forget it, is that making a console OS is the hard bit. The hardware comes pretty easily in comparison, especially if you're just using off-the-shelf components made by other people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Xebec said:

Jack was unfortunately aging out of the market and his sons never drove Atari as hard as he would have, had he stayed around and hands on.  Separate discussion -- but I think it's fair to say that Warner Atari's specific type of failure (including having the cash supplies to pump into a dying company before sale) also led to Atari's (successful for several years) third act with Atari Corp.. 

Ha, now you have volunteered to create a thread of 'Would Atari have survived if Jack hadn't semi-retired.'

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Matt_B said:

You're right. I wouldn't. Indeed I never did. 😃

 

My argument, lest you forget it, is that making a console OS is the hard bit. The hardware comes pretty easily in comparison, especially if you're just using off-the-shelf components made by other people.

The opposite used to be true.  The consoles were only hardware and had no operating system.  Granted old computers were the same.  Like I would not consider the 400/800 having much of an operating system at all and would only boot into memo pad.  You ended up with a large variety of OSes and could just skip loading one and directly used the hardware.

 

The newer consoles are all more computer-like and there is no direct programming of the hardware, they all use APIs or game engines.

The last of the "Console hardware is hard" ones were basically the PS3 (which still had an OS mind you) and the Xbox 360 (same).  Everything now is just 'let's see what AMD has on offer...'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, pacman000 said:

For #1 I say no; he had too little business experience , & he has a bad track record with his later businesses.

agreed

13 hours ago, pacman000 said:

Question 2 is more interesting, & I’m not sure what I think would happen. Any ideas?

He had the foresight to start working on a 2600 replacement soon after the 2600 launched.   Maybe if he stayed on, he could have handled the 5200 product development and launch better than it was handled.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Xebec said:

The one common theme I see with Warner is they knew how to advertise, sell, and build the brand - but they did NOT know how to innovate.  Bushnell knew how to innovate, and ironically

Very true, but few mega-corporations are good at innovation, and usually get their asses kicked by start-ups on that front.

 

13 hours ago, Xebec said:

For Atari to have been more successful under Nolan, it would have needed to 1. Launch 2600,  2.  Launch 400/800 (was this in his vision?), and 3. Survive the 1983 crash (atleast).  Preferably #4 - successfully launch the 5200, 7800, or some kind of next gen decent computer prior to 1985.

I think a Warner Atari that survived the crash may have eventually ditched the computer lines.   Supposedly the 8-bit line wasn't ever profitable for them.   The higher-end computer market was going to be dominated by clones in a few short years and Atari had too much of a "Game company" image to be taken seriously there.  The Tramiels made a lot of effort to rebrand Atari as a serious computer company, but even then their success was held back by brand-perception.

 

  In the meantime a resurgent console market would have given them plenty of opportunities.   The Warner marketing machine would have given Nintendo a much harder time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Turbo-Torch said:

 

I think #1, but Mr. Scabies is siding with #2 depending on how much control Nolan would have and for how long.  It was a pleasant discussion and we both respected each others' opinions. 

 

 

 

squir1.jpg

 I think "Nolan Bushtail" would be a fine name for a squirrel.  Just saying :)

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, leech said:

The newer consoles are all more computer-like and there is no direct programming of the hardware, they all use APIs or game engines.

They still do direct "to the metal" programming when they need to squeeze extra performance out of the machine.

 

10 hours ago, leech said:

Like I would not consider the 400/800 having much of an operating system at all and would only boot into memo pad.

Hey!  Memo Pad is the ultimate user interface!   It doesn't judge you for making a typing mistake, unlike DOS :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, zzip said:

Supposedly the 8-bit line wasn't ever profitable for them.  

I mean it's really a trade off question.

 

Do you keep warner's large cash injections, marketing and distribution network. While keeping the massively unprofitable computer line.

 

Or do you keep Bushnell but kill the computer line, but you have almost all money put toward games and internal development, though starting from the bottom working the way up in money and distribution over time.

 

Issue is, Bushnell would still have to make the right business decisions for that gradual rise to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Leeroy ST said:

Brandenton herald 1978 24 DEC

clip_84980078.thumb.jpg.16b3710a44ac0a83263e471df4c3899f.jpg

 

So Fairchild outsold the VCS in 1977,

I am not sure the article claims they outsold Atari nationwide. It could be more local than that. Maybe even the case in a single store.

 

According to Wikipedia, the 2600 had more total sales than the Channel F by 1977:

By 1977, the Fairchild Channel F had sold 250,000 units, trailing behind sales of the VCS.[1]

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, pacman000 said:

2) If he stayed involved after then sale?
 

Question 2 is more interesting, & I’m not sure what I think would happen. Any ideas?

It depends what you mean by "stayed involved". If it means he would have remained as CEO and had the same influence as before he was fired, I think it would have worked out very well. If it means he would have stayed on as a director (whatever that means), I think things would have gone better than it historically did, but how much better all depends on how much influence he would have had.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Xebec said:

2.  Launch 400/800 (was this in his vision?)

No, he was actively against it. But the 8-bit computer line was unprofitable, so that was a good thing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Turbo-Torch said:

 

I encountered this guy in the recent tape vs disk topic which mirrors this one.

 

After some back and forth, I decided to look back at his post history...holy crap does this guy have issues!  He knows everything and he is right 100% of the time.

If you disagree in the least with anything he says: he'll talk down on you, say you have no clue, your comment is irrelevant, can't comprehend what he's saying, grasping at straws, twisting his words, you're confused or your claims are just your opinion while his are facts.  His facts are often general marketing newspaper articles, never something like a scan from a magazine, Computer Shopper or a sales flyer back in the day with actual products and pricing.

 

Instead of replying to him, you're better off going into your backyard and telling it to a squirrel instead.  It'll comprehend you more and the chatter you get back from it will make more sense.

 

This is just a quick random sample of his typical posts on Atari Age and it seriously just goes on and on:

 

 

 

 

Yeah, there's another here :

 

 

He claimed the XEGS outsold the NES in the UK, I foolishly disagreed, cue article spam and more bullshit.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Muddyfunster said:

Yeah, there's another here :

 

 

He claimed the XEGS outsold the NES in the UK, I foolishly disagreed, cue article spam and more bullshit. (And also that if it didn't, they wouldn't be far apart, but I forgot to add this part because being dishonest is apparently ok)

 

Oh you mean the thread where you came in with contradicting bad sources, told me upfront they were bad, then attacked me for pointing out that they were bad because you already said they were?

 

Yep

1 hour ago, Muddyfunster said:

I don't get why you are attacking the reliability of the sources that I already said couldn't be validated. Pointless to argue back with you on that. I repeatedly noted the sources were not great. If you have better information, great, share it. Knowledge is good.

 

 

Then doing a 180 on all of that and now you are attacking me acting like your sources are suddenly valid and dont contradict each other?

 

Remember when you said the XEGS only sold 130k world wide even though XEGS sold 100k in US alone at launch?

 

I do.

 

Also part of that "article spam" was another user, Lost Dragon, who kindly provided scans to attempt to clarify things but only some information was posted unfortunately. But he tried to find what he could.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Leeroy ST
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow you really are tilted. You accuse me of attacking you? hah the irony.

 

2 minutes ago, Leeroy ST said:

Remember when you said the XEGS only sold 130k world wide even though XEGS sold 100k in US alone at launch?

 

No because I didn't say that. If you are going to paraphrase, then at least do it correctly.

 

Remember when you said the XEGS outsold the NES? Find your evidence yet? a bunch of adverts for the XEGS don't really count unfortunately.

 

 

Edited by Muddyfunster
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Multiple users off topic over useless debate. Let us go back.

 

 

Answer? No. Atari had old generation of pong machines with complete domination and they had no reserves and no parallel products to support Pong success. 

 

I say he got lucky first time, and he knowed it. So he acted accordingly and sold.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, James Vontor said:

Answer? No. Atari had old generation of pong machines with complete domination and they had no reserves and no parallel products to support Pong success. 

 

I say he got lucky first time, and he knowed it. So he acted accordingly and sold.

Home Pong was not a lucky first idea, it was the second successful idea after inventing arcade games. And they were developing the 2600. An idea with much more potential than Home Pong. So two confirmed good ideas, and a third on the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Lord Mushroom said:

I am not sure the article claims they outsold Atari nationwide. It could be more local than that. Maybe even the case in a single store.

 

According to Wikipedia, the 2600 had more total sales than the Channel F by 1977:

By 1977, the Fairchild Channel F had sold 250,000 units, trailing behind sales of the VCS.[1]

 

 

 

I considered that but they seem to be talking generally.

 

Here's an unrelated article from October that hints at things being even:

 

clip_85043719.thumb.jpg.7a95f8ae87ac21384c6f2b1a2303fbdf.jpg

 

It's possibly Fairchild pulled ahead temporarily in Dec to end the year with a win.

 

There seemed to be generally better coverage of Fairchild at the time to.

Edited by Leeroy ST

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Leeroy ST said:

Here's an unrelated article from October that hints at things being even:

 

clip_85043719.thumb.jpg.7a95f8ae87ac21384c6f2b1a2303fbdf.jpg

Perhaps the 2600 was available in more stores.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Lord Mushroom said:

Perhaps the 2600 was available in more stores.

The 2600 likely would have sold more if it was in more stores.

 

Unless you meant Fairchild.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...