| WereKitten said: I don't understand all this obsession with the profitability of the console hardware itself that some of you show. Basically, they know the statistics and the average numbers, thus as soon as the production cost reduction will be hefty enough to match the sale increase they projected, they'll cut the price. |
That's not how a cost/benefit analysis works (if I understood your post correctly).
First of all, we can ignore the manufacturing cost reduction of the slim, since that will happen with or without the price cut (it just confuses things to include it). Second, you should only count software and accessories from the PS3 buyers who bought the PS3 because of the price cut, the other buyers would have given that profit with or without the price cut.
Two scenarios to explain what I mean:
Baseline scenario: No price cut, and Sony sells 9 million PS3s, and getting a certain profit from software/accessory sales. Specific numbers don't matter for a comparison, hence "baseline".
Price cut: A $100 price cut halfway through the year, when 4 million PS3s have already been sold. After the price cut, for the rest of the year 9 million PS3s are sold instead of 5 million (for a total of 13 million). So Sony loses $900 million compared to scenario 1 on the hardware side (this is the "cost side" of the analysis). Of course, more software is sold during the fiscal year due to the higher HW sales. Let's take your $80 profit estimate for the year. The additional userbase gained from the price cut is 4 million, which has the benefit of generating 4 million * $80 = $320 million. The $80 from the remaining 9 million is not counted, since that's also in the baseline scenario.
As you can see, the difference between the two scenarios is a $580 million loss. Of course there might be some additional savings from raising HW production volume, but that will certainly not eliminate all this loss.
My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957







