GameAnalyser said:
Viper1 said:
selnor said:
Viper1 said:
selnor said:
IamAwsome said:
The PS3's price was far too high for Sony to get hit with any antitrust laws and stuff. If MS launches their next console at an insanely low price, they might get in trouble.
|
????
PS3 dropped 130 GBP in 7 months of release in UK. It was disgusting and desperate to say the least.
It went from 429 GBP on March 27 2007 to 299GBP on October 4 2007.
|
Was 299GBP for the PS3 far cheaper than the X360? If not, then you are missing the point.
|
I'm not actually. He is referring to antitrust laws. Whether or not the PS3 was cheaper than 360 has got nothing to do with antitrust laws.
Its to do wit unfair competitive advantage. For example making PS3 costs 600 GBP to make but is sold for 299 GBP. Thats pushing the antitrust laws.
|
Not really. Because MS did the same thing with their pricing. It cost a lot more to make than they sold it for and it was still cheaper than the PS3.
Did the PS3's pricing cause harm to MS? No.
Now (in the context of the current situation) if MS designed the Next X and it cost $700 to manufacture yet they sold it for $100 and Sony couldn't match anywhere near that price without practically going out of business, then you'd have a violation of the anti-trust laws.
|
A king has the reign for a while and then dies. MS begins. Sony will prefer to stay simply out rather die.
|
Not quite.
Microsoft chose to not do HDDVD or BluRay due to costs. Because it would have meant tje console costing 600GBP or more to manufacture.
The fact that PS3 and Sony chose to have all the latest components yet sell at a massive loss, even though slightly more expensive tan the 360 at 299GBP it looked alot more worth it then due to Bluray and in built wifi.
MS were selling nearly on par with manufacturer costs. Sony was selling a god 3-400GBP lower.
It was borderline antitrust laws. And very desperate measures.
