By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
TRios_Zen on 11 January 2010
Edit Thread
supercat said:
TRios_Zen said:

Sony had >75% share of the video game market.  You are suggesting that they willingly decided to give up thier strangle hold on that market to get the advantage in another sector?

I would completely disagree with that sorry.  They did not expect to drop to 25% of the market by this move or they never would've done it.

Sony will decide to do whatever it wants to make Sony as a whole as wealthy as possible that's finance theory and if adding a costly component to the PS3 will give success w/ Blu-ray, and help w/ the 3D initiative even while limiting the PS3 for 3 years or so, big deal right?  Also, keep in mind that they had much better competition this round anyway with the Wii and 360 so try to look at the whole picture.  Also, keep in mind that no division of Sony's is worth more than Sony as a whole.  Sony's performance as a whole over the long term is the only thing that matters to stockholders, so that is really the only thing that matters. 

 

Sorry dude, in my BBA and MBA, they didn't teach the finance theory that stated, lose 50% guaranteed market share with the hope that you might make money somewhere else.

Now, it's cool that you believe what you believe, but don't quote "finance theory" as if that is some golden pass.  Unless you are calling out a specific theory, and then please, share that.

Sony's Playstation division was long the bread winner of the Sony family and helped support thier failing divisions in times of need, that's pretty evident from previous annual reports.

Now I agree they wanted another arm of thier company to perform well and having a stake in the format winner is a boon for them.  I simply do not agree that they ever thought they would lose so much market share in the process.