Where Sony went wrong with the ps3!!

[megaman2]

senatorpjt said:

It makes more sense to me now than it did then. Pricing the console at $600 on release had two effects. The most obvious was dismal sales, the other is creating a more subtle perception of it being "better" because "more expensive = better."
Sony was taking a loss even selling them at $600. This makes it look even better because it's not just "overpriced" like a Louis Vuitton handbag, it actually costs that much to make. It would have been even worse if it were $300 - they'd have definitely outsold the 360 - but if you look at how much money Sony lost in the first year, selling more consoles at a lower price only increases that loss. Then, when the price drops to $250 there's also the idea that you're getting something that "used to cost $600 a few years ago".

People gave a lot of shit to the PS3 and it developed a "bad reputation" but when you think about it, this "bad reputation" isn't really that bad at all. They may have developed a reputation for poor marketing, bad business strategy, but in the meantime the PS brand isn't really damaged at all as people thought - the worst that people generally say is "The PS3 isn't better enough than the 360 to justify the price", not "the 360 is better."

It's unlikely that most current 360 owners will eventually get a PS3 (for the reason mentioned, it's not much better than the 360). However, the total number of consoles out so far isn't really that much compared to previous generations, so there's a lot of marketshare left to capture by the end - when profits are highest.

i agree with this