📚 Series 5/6: Pearl Abyss × Crimson Desert Thesis — series hub →

This post is the fifth entry in the series. Previously: 5M milestone and franchise re-rating, sell-side consensus gap, initial thesis, and the BDO second-order catalyst the market missed. This entry is the forward-looking one: what should the 1Q26 consolidated print actually look like, given the official sales milestones and the 4Q25 cost base we already know?

TL;DR

• Central estimate: Pearl Abyss 1Q26 consolidated revenue KRW 395.0B, operating profit KRW 205.0B, OPM 51.9%.
• Core logic: Given the company’s official “4 million units by April 1” headline, the most reasonable 1Q-recognized unit count is ~3.95 million, and legacy IP (BDO + EVE) lands around KRW 97.0B reflecting the steady base shown in 4Q25. But the real 1Q26 swing variable is not the unit count — it’s revenue-recognition frame (principal vs. agent), realized ASP, and the marketing / commission expense lines.
• Key uncertainty: Until the 1Q26 quarterly report footnotes confirm principal/agent treatment, actual platform mix, and actual marketing expense, the estimate retains error bands. This is the most defensible externally-shareable central case, not a point forecast.

1. Bottom line

Final 1Q26 consolidated estimate:

Lower than the aggressive gross-only framing (KRW 430B / 223B) but meaningfully above a purely conservative mixed-recognition read (KRW 385B / 195B). The central value is chosen for external defensibility: it survives the widest range of footnote outcomes without being embarrassed in either direction.

2. Facts — externally verifiable anchors

2.1 Base from the legacy business

For FY2025 (consolidated): revenue KRW 365.6B, operating loss KRW 14.8B. 4Q25: revenue KRW 95.5B, operating loss KRW 8.4B. Legacy IP revenue in 4Q25 was Black Desert KRW 63.0B + EVE KRW 27.3B. 4Q25 operating-cost composition: labor KRW 50.7B, commissions KRW 19.2B, marketing KRW 12.3B. Those numbers are the direct base for the 1Q26 cost stack.

2.2 Crimson Desert official milestones

Crimson Desert launched March 20, 2026, and Pearl Abyss officially announced 4M units by April 1 and 5M units by April 15. These two official figures are the most important anchors for the 1Q26 estimate. “4M by April 1” means cumulative sales had reached very near 4M at the March 31 accounting cutoff.

2.3 User metrics and long-tail state

After launch, Crimson Desert held up meaningfully on Steam concurrency, reviews, and sales rank. Steam CCU peak 276,261 on March 30. April 9–13 data showed sustained Global top rankings, sustained US/China sales-rank presence, and improving recent-review positivity. By April 17: 24h peak 111.4K, current CCU 79.4K, global sales rank #4 — this is not a “collapse,” it is normal decay from an exceptional opening. The 1Q26 print will be strong; annualizing 1Q into an FY model is a separate, more cautious judgment.

2.4 Accounting-treatment facts and open items

Internal project notes and external references lean toward the view that Pearl Abyss treats platform commissions as a separately-booked Commissions expense and reports revenue closer to a gross basis. There is also prior analysis citing that console revenue recognition has been switched from gross to net in a past precedent. The R&D capitalization trail (FY2024 R&D KRW 132.9B; 1H25 R&D KRW 61.2B; intangibles drawdown) supports the view that the bulk of Crimson Desert development cost is already embedded in historical P&L. These are directional reads, not confirmed footnote facts for 1Q26.

3. Assumptions — the actual premises behind this estimate

Not facts. These are the premises reviewers should agree or disagree with.

3.1 Crimson Desert 1Q recognized units: 3.95M

Against the April 1 official print of 4M, placing cutoff-day cumulative sales closer to 3.95M than to 3.90M is the most reasonable read. A 4.00M full adoption is aggressive; 3.85M is too conservative. Central case: 3.95M.

3.2 Platform mix: PC 52% / Console 48%

No disclosure exists. The most contested assumption. PS Store top-ranking evidence argues for higher console weight; SteamDB CCU and review volume argue for higher PC weight. Rather than force one side, the central case uses PC 52% / Console 48% — enough to respect “PC-leaning likely” without discarding “strong console signal.”

3.3 Realized ASP (accounting basis): ~KRW 79.8k

The aggressive gross-only frame puts ASP at KRW 83.5k. The mixed-recognition conservative view drops realized ASP into the low KRW 70k’s. The central case is neither: weighting units, platform mix, and regional pricing, ~KRW 79.8k (effectively ≈KRW 80k) — “keep a gross-leaning reported revenue stance, but don’t take the full KRW 83.5k full adoption.”

3.4 Legacy IP revenue: KRW 97.0B

4Q25 legacy revenue was KRW 95.5B. BDO 10th-anniversary events and EVE’s steady base put KRW 93.0B slightly low and KRW 100.0B near the upper end. Central case: KRW 97.0B.

3.5 Labor: KRW 52.0B

4Q25 labor was KRW 50.7B including one-off restructuring and QA-staffing expansion; 1Q25 was KRW 49.0B. 1Q26 is a launch quarter with ops / CS / patch-response staffing, but overshooting 4Q materially would be aggressive. Central case: KRW 52.0B — realistic vs. 49.0B, conservative vs. 54.5B.

3.6 Marketing: KRW 30.0B

This is the single biggest OP swing factor. A KRW 14.0B assumption is clearly too low; KRW 34.0B is the upper end. A KRW 25.0B plausible mid-case is reasonable, but vs. 4Q25’s 12.3B and 1Q25’s 7.3B, a AAA launch quarter can easily run above that. Central case: KRW 30.0B — the most defensible mid-value.

3.7 Commissions: KRW 76.0B

This line swings strongly with the recognition frame. Under gross-only, it can reach KRW 87.5B; under heavier mixed-recognition, it drops to ~KRW 70.0B. Crucially, the OP impact is partially offset by the revenue-recognition choice — commissions and reported revenue move together. Central case: KRW 76.0B, between the gross-only and mixed views.

3.8 D&A + other: KRW 32.0B

4Q25: D&A KRW 5.9B + other KRW 15.8B = KRW 21.7B. A launch quarter adds server, CS, logistics, outsourcing, and patch-response costs, but pushing to KRW 34.5B is aggressive; KRW 23.0B is too low. Central case: KRW 32.0B.

4. The math

4.1 Crimson Desert revenue

• Recognized units: 3.95M
• Realized ASP: KRW 79.8k

→ 3.95M × 79.8k = KRW 315.2B

4.2 Total revenue (gross calculation)

• Crimson Desert: KRW 315.2B
• Legacy IP: KRW 97.0B
• Calculated: KRW 412.2B

For an externally-shareable central case, a ~KRW 17.2B safety margin is subtracted to reflect the March 31 cutoff cadence and principal/agent uncertainty:

→ KRW 412.2B calc → KRW 395.0B central case

The distinction matters: the calculated upper is the “book math on gross-leaning premises”; the central case is the externally-defensible number.

4.3 Operating costs

• Labor: KRW 52.0B
• Marketing: KRW 30.0B
• Commissions: KRW 76.0B
• D&A + other: KRW 32.0B
• Total: KRW 190.0B

4.4 Operating profit

• Revenue: KRW 395.0B
• Costs: KRW 190.0B
• OP: KRW 205.0B

4.5 OPM

205.0 ÷ 395.0 = 51.9%

Final central case:

• Revenue: KRW 395.0B
• Operating profit: KRW 205.0B
• OPM: 51.9%

5. Why this frame

5.1 Accounting structure matters more than the unit count

The 1Q26 print is less about “is the game good” than about which accounting frame captures revenue, and where the costs land. Some internal models land at KRW 430B / 223B, but the more important driver is revenue-recognition treatment and the actual levels of commissions and marketing — not the headline unit number.

5.2 Neither gross-only nor mixed is forced as the answer

Gross-only is simple and easy to explain, but aggressive. Mixed-recognition has precedent support but is unconfirmed in the 1Q26 footnotes. The central case therefore keeps reported revenue gross-leaning while applying conservative discounts to ASP and costs — the most defensible middle path.

5.3 Operating profit clears KRW 200B but KRW 225B is still the upper zone

Project aggressive base cases sit near KRW 223B; one external calculation reaches KRW 225.8B but drops to ~KRW 210B on risk adjustment. A pure conservative read of KRW 195.0B is not wrong, but lower-bound. The most defensible central value is near KRW 205B.

6. Sensitivity and framing

6.1 Defensive band

6.2 Suggested framing when sharing externally

“Base 1Q26 at KRW 395B revenue and KRW 205B OP as the central case, but treat the operating-profit range as KRW 195–225B until footnotes and actual cost lines are disclosed.”

That phrasing is the most defensible.

7. Open uncertainties

Not yet confirmed as facts — all to be resolved at the May earnings release / quarterly filing:

1. 1Q26 principal/agent footnote treatment
2. Platform-level sold units
3. Actual refund rate
4. Actual marketing expense
5. Actual commission expense
6. March 31 cutoff recognized units

The current central case is the best-available midpoint before these six are published.

8. Final sentence

Pearl Abyss 1Q26 central case: revenue KRW 395.0B, operating profit KRW 205.0B, OPM 51.9%.

The figure is grounded in the two official Crimson Desert milestones (4M by April 1, 5M by April 15) and the 4Q25 cost structure, with conservative adjustments for accounting-frame uncertainty and marketing/commission opacity. It sits below the aggressive gross-only cases and above the most conservative mixed-recognition reads — the number that is currently the most explainable and the most defensible.

This is research and commentary only, not investment advice. Positioning may change without notice. Data as of 2026-04-21 KST.