There are basically two schools of thought in business. One is the financial approach, and the other is the brute-force approach.
The financial approach has you considering expenses carefully, and only expending capital when the investment will have a rapid and considerable return. The focus in this model is on the bottom line (ie. profit, not revenue). Under this business model, products are never sold for anything less than what they cost to make, and production is streamlined to match demand at all times (or come as close to this as possible). Success under this model is rarely huge (save for when a successful Blue Ocean Strategy is employed). However, it is all but assured that a profit will be made. This is the business model adopted mostly by small businesses and ones that survive for a long time.
The brute-force approach, on the other hand, is pretty much the opposite. With brute-force tactics, all that matters is the top line (ie. revenue, not profit). Any and every expense towards getting a higher revenue is taken, and financial risks of extreme natures are engaged in with the hopes of drawing in more revenue. Ideally this method results in significant profits over a middle-term period (ie. about 10 years). The problem with it is that if the risk fails, your company is suddenly saddled with a lot of debt and has a very big problem on its hand. Large businesses tend to adopt brute-force methods, as do short-lived ones.
Nintendo uses the financial method and focuses on the bottom line. Sony and Microsoft use the brute-force method and focus on the top line. It's not hard to see which tactic works out better in the long run.
Sky Render - Sanity is for the weak.
