"Sony cut the PS3 price twice" line is getting old... Read and find out why

[makingmusic476]

agabara said:

SeriousWB said:
I don't think anyone has said that they reduced price by $200 agabara, point me to a thread if I'm wrong.

What the common argument is, is that Sony had two price cuts to increase demand. The fact that both SKU's are now $100 cheaper has little to no relevance in my eyes. The argument is how many times the price was reduced, so you can't turn around and say what matters is the price, as that was not the argument put forth to begin with.

Two price cuts @ $100 each implies $200. However:

If you think the important thing is how many price cuts there were, then I disagree with you. I think the total decrease in price is the most important. Would you really consider Sony more "desperate" if they dropped the price by $50, and then later by $50, rather than $100 at once? I wouldn't.

Edit: as for people saying the price cut was $200, simply look at the post above yours.

^What he said. 

In the end, the price is $100 less than it was.  People who weren't willing to buy in a $500 but were at $400 have now bought in.

If Sony had dropped the price of the ps3 100 times, in increments of $1, would the demand have increased exponentially compared to a single pricecut of $100?  No. 

In the end, the result is the same.  $100 is $100.