| LordTheNightKnight said: "and it doesn't prove that the model can't be viable with current numbers." Yes, it does. These numbers are still coming after losing $3 billion. Pretending that somehow doesn't count now won't work. |
I'm not understanding your point though. Doesn't count for what?
And you yourself brought up the fixed costs. R&D for redesigning the slim, for mantaining the network, for software updates and toolkits, for the PSPGo. All of them contributed to the $3B losses and none of them scales with the sales of the PS3. Then I quote you:
"But knowing they still lose money if I bought it right now doesn't make me feel as though I would be supporting Sony. It would just be me supporting SCE continuing this loss strategy after it's been shown how bad an idea it is this generation."
As for your first sentence: if you buy a slim, an extra controller, a couple of retail games and a few pieces of DLC you're probably starting to support Sony with your money. It's pretty guaranteed that you will with some extra retail games in a matter of months.
As for your second sentence: the numbers have shown that the strategy can work now because the loss per hardware unit is most probably low enough. There's nothing wrong with the idea per se in this or any "generation", it's about the actual numbers you put in. Would it be all that different if each slim PS3 gave Sony a profit of $1? Because you make it sound like it would, but in practice there's no almost no difference between a console that makes a dollar profit and one that causes a dollar of loss, when there's $60 of profit in the first six month of ownership gained through other channels.
So, what is your point? That you're not buying today a product that would give Sony money to punish them for strategies that costed them a lot of their money in the past? It's a choice you're free to make but it seems to have little to do with actually "supporting" them.
