Compare

The template only earns its keep if you actually put two cases next to each other.

This is the reason every teardown answers the same questions in the same order. Put a luxury house beside a console platform and the differences stop being vibes — one is refusing sales to protect a price, the other is selling below cost to collect a toll, and both are defending a moat.

Case ACase B

Gaming · NASDAQ: MSFT

Xbox

Microsoft's gaming business: a console platform that has largely stopped competing on consoles, and now sells subscriptions, owns the largest publishing catalogue in games, and ships its own exclusives on a rival's hardware.

Technology · NASDAQ: AMZN

Amazon

Runs a near-breakeven retail operation at enormous scale, and earns essentially all of its profit from renting out the two things that operation forced it to build — computing capacity and shelf placement.

The thesis in one line

Xbox spent twenty years defending the razor, then bought the blades and started selling them to the man holding the other razor.

The store is not the business. The store is the customer acquisition cost for the businesses.

Verdict

Watch it

Own it

Moat

Eroding

Switching costs · Scale economics · Distribution · Brand

Wide

Scale economics · Network effects · Process power · Switching costs

Porter's five forces

Competitive rivalry

Threat of new entrants

Threat of substitutes

Buyer power

Supplier power

Competitive rivalry

Threat of new entrants

Threat of substitutes

Buyer power

Supplier power

Headline figures

Activision Blizzard: $68.7B
Game Pass subscribers: 34M
Xbox segment profit: Not disclosed
Total gaming M&A: $76B

Net sales: $638B
AWS share of operating income: ~58%
Retail operating margin: ~5.4%
Third-party share of units: ~60%

Unit economics

One Xbox player over a console generation, old model versus new (illustrative estimates)

Game Pass can collect more gross revenue per player than the old model, but it pays third-party publishers for catalogue rights out of that revenue and cannibalises the $70 sale that used to arrive at full margin. Meanwhile every Microsoft title sold on a PS5 hands Sony a 30% cut. Xbox has swapped a business it controlled end to end for one where it is a tenant on someone else's platform — with a much larger addressable market.

One $50 third-party item sold through Amazon

Amazon captures roughly 38% of the sale price and carries none of the inventory risk. The seller took the risk, paid for the warehouse, and then paid again to be found in a search of Amazon's own catalogue.

What would change her mind

If Microsoft discloses Game Pass subscribers again and the figure is meaningfully above 34 million after the October 2025 repricing, the subscription business has pricing power and I would move to Own it. If instead Microsoft continues to withhold the number through 2026 while gaming headcount falls further, I will read that as confirmation that Game Pass revenue is not covering its content cost and move to Pass. A separate, cleaner falsifier for the platform question: if a major third-party publisher ships a AAA title on PlayStation and PC but skips Xbox entirely, the console platform is finished as a commercial proposition regardless of what Game Pass does.

If AWS revenue growth falls below 15% for two consecutive quarters while segment operating margin also declines, the cloud business is being commoditised rather than merely contested, and the capex is being spent defending share rather than buying growth. That combination — decelerating growth and compressing margin at the same time — breaks the thesis outright. A single weak quarter on either measure alone does not.

2 mechanisms in common

subsidise hardware platform flywheel