| RolStoppable said:
When the PlayStation home console is at its worst, it loses $5 billion despite getting all the third party support. When the Nintendo home console is at its worst, it is still profitable despite being shunned by third parties. Now do the math. If Nintendo had decided to give away GameCubes for free after things went downhill, how many could they have given away, if they ran their business at a $5 billion loss? $5 billion divided by $100 is 50 million. |
The PS3 did its best after breaking even. I'll try to find the numbers to support that. Also, cell wasn't required for the PS3 to bolster great graphics, as the 360 would show.
So the 5billion$ loss argument is a cop-out to deride how great Sony did regardless of its mistakes. The power of the brand is something to be considered, we could NOT say the same thing about Nintendo's Gamecube or Nintendo64, as fantastic as they were.
Edit: Dec 11 2009, an article on how the PS3 is near breaking even (roughly as much as the GC sold at a loss for at first, some 30-40$). http://news.cnet.com/8301-13772_3-10414022-52.html
Looking at the numbers, we have that PS3 sold 30M by Dec 12 2009. -> http://www.vgchartz.com/weekly/40160/Global/
So 37M were sold at 300$ or less breaking even or making profit. And even so, 30M bought it at 300$ or more (some 600$), which is a huge testament to the power of the brand, regardless of how you may spin it.
Backtrack 2 years, and its sold 10M at 600$, that's half of what the GC sold in its lifetime. http://www.vgchartz.com/weekly/39446/Global/
At a loss or not, selling a console at 600$ is a big deal. That's above and beyond the fact that cell was not needed and they could have 1) sold at a profit without it and 2) sold at a more affordable price without it.
Sony's PS3 survived and did very well despite Sony's blatant mistakes. That's testament to brand power.
Essay Pro