So I think I’ve just figured something out that might explain [to me at least] why for the first time Nintendo seems to be going off on a slightly questionable tangent in terms of its core business and competencies, as I see it, with this whole out-of-left-field Quality of Life (QOL) thing.
On the following page of the CSR Report 2015 you can see how Nintendo has shown its history as a company in terms of the products and services it has created:
http://www.nintendo.co.jp/csr/en/report2015/history/index.html
1889 – Card Games
1966 – Toys
1980 – Video Games (One Hardware-One Software)
1983 – Video Game Platforms
2015 -QOL Platform
Also note the first line of the expanded details below the 1889 date: “Birth of Nintendo – Aiming to be a World Leader in Entertainment”
So, up until 2015 it has always been primarily a company creating pretty obvious entertainment products, such as toys and video games, but suddenly from 2015 onwards it now has a strong focus on QOL products and services, which if you read the expanded details just below the 2015 date it describes “health” as being the first theme in this new platform.
Is is not rather coincidental that as the CEO of Nintendo, Iwata, who was suffering from serious health problems, severe enough that they eventually killed him (prematurely), was inclined to push the company in the direction of “health”?
My point being, that I don’t think going off into health related products is really in-fitting with the type of company Nintendo is and in my opinion should continue to be—which as I see it is an entertainment company more along the lines of Disney than some health, fitness and wellbeing brand—and is rather a slightly misguided business decision that was made by a man who maybe pushed the company more in a direction that reflected his changing personal priorities and values in life in general than what made proper sense in terms of the type of company Nintendo is and the type of products and services that are more suited to it.
So what I am really saying, and indeed repeating, is that I don’t think Nintendo getting into “health” is the right move for the company. I think it’s actually kind of obvious why the decision was made, and maybe it really wasn’t made with the best path for this world leading entertainment company in mind.
While still having a major focus on video games, I think it would be much better to broaden and expand Nintendo’s future business endeavours further into the entertainment industry by doing things like creating live action movies, feature films, cartoons and TV shows around its IP; continuing to create cards as well as board games and more toy lines around its popular games, producing comics based on its characters and franchises; open Nintendo stores that sell its consoles, games, toys, cards, board games and movies, etc.; and even expanding into the likes of Nintendo theme parks—all things that still fit very snugly within that ‘entertainment’ bracket and I believe would only strengthen the brand and secure future success, continued customer satisfaction and consumer loyalty (without changing the consumer base rather drastically), and profitability going forward.
Just saying; I think I’d make a great CEO for Nintendo 
iNCEPTIONAL 