| NJ5 said: Interesting data, but I'm not sure I understand the point here. So people spent more money on PS3 hardware than PS2 hardware while buying less consoles? How is that a good thing? It seems to me like it's a bad thing both for gamers and Sony. For gamers it's obvious why... For Sony, hardware is loss-leading so making more revenue on that means losing more money selling less consoles and consequently less software, which is what they really want to sell. |
If we look at the 360 in comparison to the xbox, we can easily see that revenue has gone up. Whether they sold 10x the previous amount at 1/5th of the price, or sold the same with a higher price, it shows that there is more support, correct?
"Both these figures are useful in determining the financial strength of a company, but they are not interchangeable. Bottom line describes how efficient a company is with its spending and operating costs and how effectively it has been controlling total costs. Top line, on the other hand, only indicates how effective a company is at generating sales and does not take into consideration operating efficiencies which could have a dramatic impact on the bottom line. "
So, in response Sony is effectively generating sales at LEAST as well as with the ps2, when you take pricing into consideration. WHat that means in plain English, is that ps2 would like be at the same place lifetime as the ps3 had it released at 499-599 (or the equivalent)
