Kotaku link for dolemit3's post is here.

Dude...US doesn't mean the whole America...get it now?NPD=US numbers   VGChartz=American numbers

BIG difference...

He's talking about the USA numbers in the OP.

Well, Sony is still losing money on each PS3 is being sold. Sony can make a given amount of PS3's for a given cost. If they increase production, it increase costs which increases losses for sony.

Edit below, is the reasoning there would be shortages... But, it is always possible sony is lying about shortages. But below is something about economics.

here's something I copied from somewhere which is basically correct.

Why didn't Sony increase production of PS3 before FF13 and GOW3?"

That would be a good point if it made any sense whatsoever.

This will likely go over your head, but there's this thing. It's called 'the law of supply'. And what it means is that at a given price point, Sony can make a given number of PS3s at a given speed. It's not a matter of pushing some button that magically produces PS3s out of thin air and instantly transports them to store shelves near you. Increasing production means increasing costs, and considering that Sony already loses money on every PS3 sold, increased costs would mean that they would have to raise the price. Or eat an even bigger loss.

"Did they honestly didn't see shortage happening?"

It's not a matter of seeing shortages happening, it's a matter of fundamental economic principles. The PS3 costs $300. That pricepoint limits how many consoles Sony, or any other company for that matter, can produce, how fast, and how efficiently they can ship them. Companies always produce the maximum number of units possible at the available price point. Any more than that is a physical impossibility.

"If they didn't they they are plain and simple are stupid and they should fire those responsible."

Yes, the smart move here would clearly be to balloon production costs to absurd levels, and then, even though Sony is already losing money, not pass *any* of those increased costs to the consumer.

"Its basic common sense."

No, basic common sense says 'PS3s are not being manufactured by magical elves at the North Pole, so making more of them would involve raising production costs, which raises the price'.

"If you have a big heavy hitter make sure you have enough consoles to meet demand"

And they could very easily make sure they have enough consoles to meet demand -- by raising the price. Higher price means they can supply more of them while consumers demand less of them. Presto, no more shortages.

Oh jesus. Macro economic theory has nothing to do with the supply of PS3s.

The real reason goes something like this:

1. Components used to make the PS3 are in short supply.

2. Therefore Sony cannot make the PS3 in the numbers they want.

So you are saying practically 26% - 53% money is lost by Sony. :O so MS having i think XBOX around 129 Pounds.. so its only 60 Pound at the day end.. :O.. Europeans r quite tight on 

Anyway if i remember correctly the store margin for PS3 in US on $300 is around $8 - 12.. Yup, around 3 - 4%.. 

(i will look for the source)

kindly give me your source also.. One is definitely wayyy off. :S

OK here is a link i found for japanese retailer.. which are getting $7.40 (Yen 700) for each PS3 sold..

http://www.destructoid.com/one-japanese-retailer-claims-7-profit-on-ps3-slim-145641.phtml

That's the same thing only simplified. yes. Surely theres enough resources to create more components to create more ps3's. Thus Sony would have to invest more money into creating components at a faster rate costing more money.

Nope.

They had production difficulties with their 45nm RSX chips. As it takes something like 10 weeks to get chips back from fabrication, they are pretty much supply limited by what chips they had at hand.

But you are aware that the slims CECH-2000B (FW3.15) were manufactured with 65nm RSX? Available in almost unlimited quantities, and ordered _months_ in advance of actual need. Any problems with 45nm would not have played any role in the fy that just ended.

CECH-2100B (FW3.20) are manufactured with 45nm RSX. Also ordered _months_  before actual use. And Sony would not care whether Toshiba/whoever makes the RSX chips now has diffculties. They do not buy risk wafers, they have contracts with the chip manufacturer. If the chip foundry suddenly has yield problems (unlikely since 45nm lines have been in use for 2+ years now), they have to use more wafers than planned to fulfil the contract with Sony.

They have every incentive to not produce too many of the 65nm RSX chips as moving quickly to 45nm versions would likely save them considerable money. Its the most likely explanation because the switch over coincides with shortages.