• radix@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    6 months ago

    OP did the right thing by using the linked headline, but that headline is incoherent.

    It cost an extra $200m in expense due to impairment (it wasn’t worth as much as they originally put on the books, so they had to write it down).

    The only revenue impact is a note that it didn’t sell as well as Hogwarts Legacy, which was released in the same quarter last year. The article conflates those two things into one for the headline, which is just wrong.

    • slaacaa@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I’m always baffled how little some journalists understand the topics they write about. Still, isn’t there an editor who have read WSJ once, to ask for a correction of the headline?