Stringer: PS3 [losses] probably won't be recovered; "as long as I live"

[michealo]

Originally Posted by Coren

This. It's quite clear they plan for the loss to be made through software/etc. Just not from hardware sales.

And I think we all knew this (or should have known this, the facts were there) in 2006.

apparently not everyone.......

[diggumsmax]

Originally Posted by Stranger Danger

So by trojan horse you mean the people who bought it were hurt by it? I bought mine for games and blu-ray. Who was hurt by it? If Sony sent it in it won't be them. What the heck are you talking about?

No, not the people that bought it. It was a great deal at the time with all things considered (stand alone Blu-Ray players launch at 1K while the PS3 launched at $600). It really only hurt Sony. Because Blu-Ray was so new they were losing quite a lot at launch for an already very expensive game console. Blu-Ray is probably the biggest contributing factor to these loses. Like I said, it helped them win the format war but it hurt their gaming division.

[BBM128]

Originally Posted by Badger3920

You never know. You guys like to throw around blu-ray a lot to somehow try and embarrass the console - and if you're going to stick to those guns, you have to accept that some of the blu-ray royalties are definitely due, in-part, to the ps3. That, plus software, plus video and psn downloads, plus advertising revenue, plus (as bbm said) mildly profitable hardware.... Who knows.

I won't make any assumptions. It's very interesting to be mid-gen and many people are trying to treat it as if it's already over. Very odd. To make an analogy, many races are won, lost, and defined in the second half. It's good to be fast out of the gate, but you have to finish. How many of you watched the racing in the olympics??

Another thing to consider is that Sony is still supporting the PS2 and PSP, which are both sold at a gain, IIRC. Sony has three platforms generating revenue. Obviously, the PS3 is currently acting like an anchor but the situation with the PS3 is so much better now than it was last year. Sony has posted what, two or three profittable quarters in a row WITH the PS3 on the market? Yeah, that sounds good. No it doesn't erase the total investment in the PS3, but that means that the $3.3 billion loss is shrinking, to some degree.

Microsoft obviously has A LOT more ground to cover but it's clear that they've got a business model that's also finally starting to turn around and spit out some black ink, on a quarterly basis.

Both are still in the red, but they are recovering those losses, slowly but surely.

[Stranger Danger]

Originally Posted by diggumsmax

No, not the people that bought it. It was a great deal at the time with all things considered (stand alone Blu-Ray players launch at 1K while the PS3 launched at $600). It really only hurt Sony. Because Blu-Ray was so new they were losing quite a lot at launch for an already very expensive game console. Blu-Ray is probably the biggest contributing factor to these loses. Like I said, it helped them win the format war but it hurt their gaming division.

The Trojan horse generally mean something slip in and hurts the recipient like a virus or the Greek story itself not the person sending it,. I'll agree with you to a point. It may have hurt them but then again if they had a dvd drive and a lower price would the sales be through the roof? MS got a huge push before Sony did and I believe contributed to the RROD but great sales. They knew it but it was a calculated risk that payed off well.

[capnmonkey]

Dakrfalz, I'm pretty sure I've seen you post recently your belief that the PS3 still sells for a net loss at it's $399 price point.

So I guess the question is, how many PS3's does Sony have to sell at a net loss in order to make up $3 billion dollars in development cost? This thread seems redundant if you still believe that the PS3 sells at a net loss.

Or you can just factor in Software sales, Blu-Ray and game royalties, cross marketing opportunities, rental services, other online services, accessory sales, etc. etc. etc. etc.

I'm not accusing you of making a misleading thread, but you could change the title to include the full quote indicating that he is speaking about hardware sales alone if you don't want to be accused of misquoting with intent to trollbait.

[Ergo-Proxy]

Originally Posted by diggumsmax

This is what happens when you try to trojan horse your game console to win movie format war. Sure, it one the format war for them but at what cost to their gaming division? I'm really glad MS didn't wait a year to launch the 360 with HD DVD. They would have suffered the same fate (although it might have given them time to hammer out those pesky hardware issues).

Well, what would have happened if they didnt put BR in PS3 and lost the format war. In other words how much would have they lost then

They may be losing money from the PS3 but they are gaining from BR

[goatmother]

Originally Posted by Stranger Danger

So by trojan horse you mean the people who bought it were hurt by it? I bought mine for games and blu-ray. Who was hurt by it? If Sony sent it in it won't be them. What the heck are you talking about?

Best part is reading the movie watchers who have gotten back into gaming as well.

The entire idea of the Trojan Horse was not knowing what is inside. Who doesn't know that the PS3 plays games and movies before buying?


I always enjoy reading short-sighted comments

[BBM128]

Originally Posted by Ergo-Proxy

Well, what would have happened if they didnt put BR in PS3 and lost the format war

They may be losing money from the PS3 but they are gaining from BR

Well it's going to be sluggish gains for Sony for the time being because the PS3, while providing an EXCELLENT value, is still expensive. Blu-ray is in the same boat at the moment. Undoubtedly, the PS3 will continue to improve it's hardware and software sales and undoubtedly, Blu-ray will continue to gain steam. But it will take time.

[Shadow1019]

This is not a surprise. That's the cost of pushing a new format for adoption by the public. You make it up in software sales when (well, if) Blu-ray becomes the standard physical media over time.

This isn't the Wii we're talking about.

[Ergo-Proxy]

Originally Posted by BBM128

Well it's going to be sluggish gains for Sony for the time being because the PS3, while providing an EXCELLENT value, is still expensive. Blu-ray is in the same boat at the moment. Undoubtedly, the PS3 will continue to improve it's hardware and software sales and undoubtedly, Blu-ray will continue to gain steam. But it will take time.

True but what I am saying is that they are probably better off as they are now than if they did not include it in the PS3 and lost the format war especially in the long run.

[Stranger Danger]

Originally Posted by goatmother

Best part is reading the movie watchers who have gotten back into gaming as well.

The entire idea of the Trojan Horse was not knowing what is inside. Who doesn't know that the PS3 plays games and movies before buying?


I always enjoy reading short-sighted comments

I own
Atari 2600
Mattel Intelavision
NES
N64
Nintendo DS
Sega Genesis
PS1
PS2
PS3
PSP
A converted arcade machine I custom built to play mame games on.
A 6600 quad core 2 with a 8800gt video card.
So I'm just getting back into gaming?

[goatmother]

Originally Posted by Stranger Danger

I own
NES
N64
Nintendo DS
Sega Genesis
PS1
PS2
PS3
PSP
A converted arcade machine I custom built to play mame games on.
A 6600 quad core 2 with a 8800gt video card.
So I'm just getting back into gaming?

Doesn't sound like you've been away from gaming to me.

[Darkfalz]

Originally Posted by james

Sorry to bring another conversation into this thread, but I am surprised you have not responded to this post or the subsequent posts:

http://forums.highdefdigest.com/1155178-post56.html

So by you not responding, I am forced to believe you do not disagree with his assertions. Please stop stating the 360 has ANA/HANA scaler if you know it to be untrue.

His assertions are false. I didn't reply because I can't prove it... but his claims are false.

The ANA chip was built as a video processing/scaling chip. Whomever claims otherwise is mistaken/wrong... but again, I can't prove it... and it's not worth my time to try to dispute. Ultimately, I don't care what he beleives and I'm not going to waste my time to try to persuade him or anyone else about something I can't prove.

Please don't use other threads to bring this up. If you want more information, or you want me to respond to a certain post/topic - PM me - don't derail another thread.

Thanks.

[AnimalMother]

Originally Posted by sholmes1019

This is not a surprise. That's the cost of pushing a new format for adoption by the public. You make it up in software sales when (well, if) Blu-ray becomes the standard physical media over time.

This isn't the Wii we're talking about.

The PS3 as a multi-revenue generator really worked out. Software sales from games. Software sales from Blu-ray. Software sales from PSN. Software sales from the video store.

The first two are like having current gen two game consoles on the market at once.

[HamsterDance]

Originally Posted by BBM128

I think the wording is key. It's entirely possible that the PS3 hardware itself will never sell enough to make up for the investment. However, software and accessory sales, along with mildly profittable hardware, could ultimately erase the $3.3 billion loss. Obviously, we're looking long term, though.

With that being said, though, perhaps it's not as grey a question as I'd like it to be... Who knows, ya know?

I can see this happining in the next 7-9 years. But only if the ps3 starts selling more.