Xbox 360 Vs. Playstation 3 2012 - *February* Update

[Alby_da_Wolf]

Seece said:

Adinnieken said:

thismeintiel said:

ZaneWane said:

Alby_da_Wolf said:
Losses of Sony division that makes, amongst other things, PS3, aren't due to PS3 price cut, but to TVs losses and expensive acquisitions.

what would u call this then   http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/38323/PS3_Price_Drop_Leads_To_Sony_Q2_Losses.php 

I would call that a site taking one sentence in Sony's financial statement and spinning it for a headline, hoping for more hits.  If you actually read it, it states the main reasons for the losses in bold at the beginning, which are the foreign exchange rate, the flood, and poor LCD TV sales.  There's only one mention of the PS3 price drop later, which leads me to believe it only decreased profit, and was not a major cause of any losses.

This is why reading the financials is fundemental to understanding.  Sony specically states that the Game division LOST 7.7% in a 3 month period and 9.6%  in a 6 month period, both ending Sept. 30, 2011 (30/9/2011).  Granted, the loss that SCE suffered was the least of the Consumer Products and Services division, but their loss was greater than half of the total revenue of the Professional Device and Solutions division, and it could completely erase all of or the majority of the Music and Pictures divisions revenue.  So it IS a substantial loss.

Sony is the one who attributed their losses to the price cut.  Sony is stated that they suffered losses in related to their gaming business in their financials.  This has nothing to do with anything being taken out of context, it has to do with facts. 

http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/financial/fr/11q2_sony.pdf (Page 20 of the PDF / Page F-8 of the document)

Thismeintiel doesn't even understand the meaning of impossible, and you expect him to swallow this?

You should have read the document he linked before agreeing with Adinnieken: Sony wrote in a note (elsewhere in the same document, easy to find as it's the only part in which Playstation is named) lower REVENUE from games sector contributed to increased losses, but nowhere it wrote games sector turned again from profit to loss. Adinnieken is confusing 7.7% lower revenue with 7.7% loss, quite an embarrassing reading failure. Lower revenue may, and most probably does, imply lower profit, but it doesn't necessarily imply loss. While losses from TVs and PCs and high costs of acquisitions, added to reduced revenues and profits from profiting sectors, perfectly explain the overall loss.