← Back to list
Colossus (Invest Like the Best / Business Breakdowns)Podcast26 Jan 2021Source: joincolossus.comHost: Patrick O'Shaughnessy

Joost van Dreunen – Unlocking Value in Gaming – [Invest Like the Best, EP.210]

In plain words

This piece says the gaming industry's real edge isn't tech but business model innovation—like Nintendo's strict platform rules or Apple's free-to-play with in-app purchases. Author Joost van Dreunen is bullish on Nintendo (immune to market cycles, Switch a hit) and Epic Games (Fortnite free-to-play, Unreal Engine used for filming), but warns GameStop (used to thrive on used games, but missed the digital shift, risks bankruptcy or Amazon buyout).

AI SummaryAI-generated · may contain errors · verify against the original

This report focuses on value creation in the gaming industry. Its core argument is that within the gaming value chain, platform operators (such as Steam and Epic) and publishers (such as Tencent and Activision Blizzard) capture the largest share of profits, while physical retailers like GameStop are

~15 min full read · 9 sections
Deep Analysis

At a Glance

Joost van Dreunen (NYU Stern professor, co-founder of SuperData Research, and game industry investor) discusses with host Patrick O'Shaughnessy the history, current state, and future of value creation in the gaming industry. Core thesis: The strongest competitive moat in the gaming industry is not technology, but business model innovation—from Nintendo's third-party platform model to Apple's free-to-play plus in-app purchase model, every value explosion has stemmed from a redesign of the business model, not a hardware breakthrough.


1. How Nintendo Wrote the "Platform Blueprint" for the Gaming Industry

Joost van Dreunen argues that the true starting point of the modern gaming industry was Nintendo's entry into the market in 1985, which created the prototype for the "platform + third-party content" business model.

In 1983, the North American gaming market collapsed due to oversupply—plummeting from $2 billion to $200 million. Nintendo entered the market against the tide and rebuilt the ecosystem with a strict set of rules: content creators could release a maximum of five games per platform, a two-year exclusivity period, a requirement to purchase 30,000 units for marketing, and payment of licensing fees to Nintendo. The core of this mechanism was artificially constraining supply to ensure quality, a stark contrast to the chaos of the Atari era, where "anyone could make anything and sell everything."

"From the early days, because the industry was under pressure from a previous bad economic model, it set very high standards in production, development, and marketing. This became the blueprint for how everything operated later." (Meaning: Nintendo drafted the standard operating procedures for the gaming industry in the 1980s.)

Nintendo also innovated the "razor-and-blades" business model: selling hardware at a loss and profiting from software. This required the platform holder to continuously provide high-quality content to expand the installed base, creating a virtuous cycle.


2. GameStop’s Rise and Fall: The Peak and Blind Spots of Physical Retail

2.1 Why GameStop Was Once So Successful

Joost argues that GameStop’s success stemmed from three differentiating advantages: knowledgeable staff, user insight, and the used-game economy.

  • Knowledgeable Staff: GameStop employees’ expertise in gaming far surpassed that of general retailers like Walmart. Joost’s classroom exercise at NYU was “go to GameStop and see if you can know more about a game than the staff,” and students almost never won.
  • User Insight: GameStop recognized that a 14-year-old boy has no money, but his mother does—and she pushes a stroller. Therefore, all stores were equipped with ramps and wide aisles—not for wheelchairs, but for strollers.
  • Used-Game Economy: This was GameStop’s core competitive moat. Physical game discs do not depreciate like cars, allowing GameStop to resell the same game an average of six times. Used games contributed 25% of annual revenue. Publishers, who only profit from the first sale, were deeply dissatisfied but could not replicate GameStop’s inventory management capabilities—they had a dedicated team of 400 people handling logistics and pricing for used games.

2.2 Fatal Blind Spots in Digital Transformation

Joost points out that GameStop’s management suffered from severe “mental inertia,” unable to acknowledge the fundamental shift toward digitalization.

Management described digitalization as “prepaid game cards”—merely another item to sell in stores. Joost likens this to the decline of Tower Records: “CDs came, and it held on for a while; iTunes and Napster ultimately killed it because the owner refused to acknowledge the change.”

GameStop’s struggles were not caused by COVID-19, but the pandemic “ultimately exposed its weaknesses.” Joost has predicted for the past five years that GameStop would either go bankrupt or be acquired by Amazon.


3. From Product to Service: How Free-to-Play Reshaped the Industry

3.1 The Shifting Balance Among the Three Platforms

Joost describes the evolution of PC, console, and mobile platforms: from 95% console dominance, to a PC resurgence driven by Steam, and finally to a mobile explosion triggered by Apple's free-to-play model.

Platform 2021 Software Revenue (Estimated) Market Share Ratio
Mobile ~$85B 4
PC ~$35B 2
Console ~$20B 1

Key turning points:

  • 2004: Valve launched Steam, initially only for updating its own games, later opened to third-party content, sparking a PC market recovery.
  • 2007: The iPhone was released, standardizing mobile hardware (previously, games had to be developed for 400 different phone models).
  • 2009: Apple opened up the free-to-play plus in-app purchase model, triggering an explosion in the mobile gaming market.

3.2 Why the Free-to-Play Model Caught Traditional Publishers Off Guard

Joost argues that the free-to-play model is completely perpendicular to the traditional "Hollywood-style" AAA blockbuster economic model, leading to a collective misjudgment by traditional publishers.

A traditional AAA title like Grand Theft Auto V had a development and marketing cost of $260 million and generated $1 billion in revenue within three days of release. This "big investment, big return" mindset led traditional publishers like Take-Two and EA to look down on mobile free-to-play games — "these 99-cent or free games on small screens meant nothing to them."

Joost draws an analogy to the impact of television on Hollywood: early filmmakers dismissed TV as "low-resolution, black-and-white garbage," yet today everyone is vying for Netflix's investment.

The key innovation of the free-to-play model is: selling not the game, but "vanity" — primarily cosmetics and decorative items (e.g., Valve's Team Fortress 2 saw a surge in revenue after switching from a $30 price tag to free, by selling "silly hats"). Users can choose not to spend money, but those who do pay gain an enhanced experience rather than an unbeatable advantage.

3.3 The Hidden Concerns of Free-to-Play: Rising Customer Acquisition Costs and "Squeeze" Design

Joost points out that the core contradiction facing the free-to-play model is: rising customer acquisition costs force designers to set more aggressive "bottlenecks" to encourage spending, which harms the user experience.

"As customer acquisition costs rise, I would instruct designers to set more aggressive bottlenecks to encourage spending... This starts to squeeze users, and of course, it becomes off-putting." This "squeeze" model gives traditional publishers ammunition for criticism: "Look, they only care about making money. This isn't art or culture; it's squeezing money out of grandmothers' pockets."

The real solution lies in network effects and social layers — as seen in League of Legends, which never aggressively pushes microtransactions but instead builds a community, esports, and shared experiences. When a game evolves from "something in a box" to "a social experience both online and offline," the true value of free-to-play is unlocked.


4. Who Is Making Money? Value Distribution in the Modern Gaming Industry

4.1 From the "$60 Game" to Ecosystem Value Transfer

Joost compares the shift in value distribution between the traditional product model and the modern digital model.

Under the traditional product model ($60 game):

Role Revenue Share Function
Developer 20% Creativity, programming, art
Publisher 40% Capital, legal, HR, channel relationships
Platform (e.g., Nintendo) 15% Hardware, licensing fees
Distributor 5% Logistics
Retailer (e.g., GameStop) 20% Storefront, marketing, second-hand sales

Publishers captured twice the developer's share because they bore capital risk and owned channel relationships—developers had to cede most of the value in exchange for funding and market access.

3.2 Modern Winners: IP Holders, Chinese Capital, Platform Ecosystems

Joost argues that today's winners are companies that own IP and capital, while the geographic center of gravity has shifted from Japan → the United States → China.

  • Nintendo: Demonstrates "immunity to market cycles." The Wii sold 140 million units, the Wii U sold only 14 million (deemed "finished"), yet the Switch achieved massive success and entered the Chinese market.
  • Tencent: Penetrates the entire ecosystem through capital and IP via acquisitions of Supercell, Riot Games, and others.
  • New Entrants: Chinese company miHoYo's Genshin Impact—free-to-play, mobile, open-world—resembles Nintendo's The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, but without requiring a $60 purchase of dedicated hardware.

Two platform-level players worth watching:

  • Epic Games: Owns Fortnite, the Epic Games Store, and Unreal Engine (already used to film The Mandalorian), forming a flywheel of "game + engine + distribution."
  • Roblox: Valued at $29.5 billion, with user-generated content (UGC) at its core. Joost believes Roblox will "put user-generated content on the map"—"every other company will be asked: what are you doing with user creativity?"

5. Four Future Investment Directions

Joost identifies four business model innovation directions for future value creation in the gaming industry:

Direction Core Logic Representative Examples
Subscription Model Consumers gain access to a content buffet, while companies secure predictable recurring revenue (higher valuation) Xbox Game Pass (16-17 million subscribers), EA Play, Ubisoft+
Advertising/Indirect Revenue Monetize the large number of free-to-play users who never pay through ads; advertisers are eager to reach younger consumers Traditional TV ad budgets ($70 billion in the U.S.) are seeking entry points into gaming
User-Generated Content (UGC) Allow users to create content themselves, reducing development costs and extending user retention Roblox, Minecraft — "Traditional creative companies cannot produce as many digital assets as their user base"
Crypto/Digital Assets In-game virtual items hold real value (e.g., the Black Lotus card from Magic: The Gathering is worth thousands of dollars); blockchain enables a trading system free from international tax and exchange rate constraints A direction for 2-5 years from now

Joost's cautious stance on Roblox: "Valued at $30 billion, but losing $200 million annually. I hope they succeed, but it would be more convincing if they were already profitable."


6. Portable Lessons from the Gaming Industry: Let Go of Ego, Focus on the Problem

Joost believes that the most valuable lesson the gaming industry offers other sectors is not technology, but culture—"check your ego at the door."

"The gaming industry has always been the quiet kid in the room culturally, tinkering away in the corner. It has retained much of that character. Tim Sweeney (founder of Epic) looks like a programmer who has spent 20 years in a windowless office—wearing overalls, carrying a big backpack, with a nerdy demeanor. That guy is a billionaire and has been doing this since childhood."

Joost suggests that other entertainment industries (music, film) learn from this "low-key genius" culture: do not chase 50 minutes of fame; focus on solving problems and building cool experiences. From an investment perspective, this culture is more profitable in the long run.


Mentioned Positions

Position Guest Stance Key Data
Nintendo Bullish ("immune to market cycles") Wii 140M units → Wii U 14M units → Switch massive success
GameStop Risk warning ("has been predicted to go bankrupt or be acquired by Amazon for the past 5 years") Used games account for 25% of annual revenue; the same game is resold an average of 6 times
Valve/Steam Neutral (historical innovator) Launched Steam in 2004; Team Fortress 2 switched from $30 to free-to-play, then saw a surge in revenue from selling cosmetic items
Epic Games Bullish (platform ecosystem) Fortnite is free-to-play; Unreal Engine used in the production of The Mandalorian
Roblox Bullish but cautious ("valued at $29.5B but loses $200M annually") Series H valuation at $29.5B; UGC model
Tencent Bullish (capital + IP penetration) Acquired Supercell, Riot Games
Take-Two Interactive Neutral (representative of traditional publishers) Grand Theft Auto V cost $260M to develop, generated $1B in revenue in 3 days; stock price rose from $9 to $200+
Apple Bullish (business model innovator) Opened up the free-to-play model in 2009, leading to a mobile gaming boom
Twitch Bullish (social viewing) Acquired by Amazon for ~$1B (2013/14)
Discord Bullish (social connection) Most recent valuation at $7B
miHoYo Bullish (new entrant) Genshin Impact is free-to-play, mobile, open-world
Supercell Neutral (acquired by Tencent) Pioneer of the free-to-play model
Riot Games Neutral (acquired by Tencent) League of Legends — does not aggressively push microtransactions, relies on community and esports

Judgments Worth Remembering

1. Nintendo created the "platform blueprint" for the gaming industry (Joost van Dreunen) — By artificially constraining supply (a maximum of 5 games per platform, 2-year exclusivity periods, licensing fees) to ensure quality, it reversed the 1983 market crash. This mechanism remains the template for platform economics to this day.

2. GameStop's used-game economy is both its deepest moat and its biggest blind spot (Joost van Dreunen) — The same game is resold an average of 6 times, contributing 25% of revenue; but management interprets digitalization as "selling prepaid cards" and cannot acknowledge the fundamental shift, much like Tower Records ignoring iTunes.

3. The free-to-play model is not "pricing a game at $0," but "giving the choice to the user" (Joost van Dreunen) — After Valve's Team Fortress 2 switched from $30 to free, revenue surged by selling "silly hats." The key is not being free, but letting users decide when and why to pay.

4. Traditional publishers' disdain for free-to-play mirrors Hollywood's early contempt for television (Joost van Dreunen) — "Low resolution, black-and-white, garbage" → now everyone scrambles for Netflix investment. This "perpendicular" thinking allowed new entrants (Tencent, Supercell) to capture the greatest value.

5. The strongest competitive moat in the gaming industry is the business model, not technology (Joost van Dreunen) — The iPhone's success was not hardware, but the business model of free-to-play plus in-app purchases. Investors should focus on "business model innovation" rather than "new devices."

6. Four future investment directions: subscription, advertising, UGC, crypto assets (Joost van Dreunen) — Subscriptions provide predictable revenue (higher valuations); advertising reaches young consumers ($70 billion in traditional TV budgets shifting); UGC lets users create content (Roblox model); crypto assets create digital economies unbound by national borders (2-5 years).

7. "Pioneers get arrows in their backs, settlers get rich" (Joost van Dreunen) — PUBG created the "battle royale" genre but charged $30; Epic captured the market with Fortnite's free-to-play + cartoon style + smoother experience. Investors should focus on "who enters a proven category at the right time with a better business model."

8. The most transferable lesson from the gaming industry: leave your ego at the door (Joost van Dreunen) — Tim Sweeney (Epic founder) wears coveralls, carries a big backpack, and looks like a nerd, but he is a billionaire with a vision to change the world. Other entertainment industries should learn this "humble genius" culture, focusing on solving problems rather than chasing fame.