| mii-gamer said: The brand had nothing to do with it. Sony had to blow so much money to turn things around. I think the numbers are in the billions, and I believe they were never close to recovering those losses back. http://forum.videohelp.com/threads/291299-Sony-has-lost-over-3-billion-on-the-PS3 A little outdated, but it should paint a good picture on what a financial disaster the ps3 was, 2010 was the year the ps3 becam profitable. http://kotaku.com/5575994/after-nearly-four-years-the-ps3-finally-turns-a-profit |
| Sevengen said: what on earth are you talking about, the PS3 did die at $599, how do you think the 360 won the USA against it by such a wide margin if not for those intitial missteps made by Sony; price, games, and price. Maybe you'd like to rethink your argument because the PS3 didn't stay at $599 very long and the only reason it came back to beat the 360 world wide is because it lowered it's price. that's it. if you're going to revise history, at least do it with a modicum of objectivity and veiled deciet... this way people don't quite catch on to what you're doing. "Not the PS3 though".... lol |
I don't think some people understand what I meant with "branding power". It's not some magical thing that makes your system sell.
I never said the PS3 recovered on brand power ALONE - but if it was an unknown console, all that money Sony spent would have been for nothing. People were willing to give the thing a second chance because it was the PlayStation 3. Also, no price cuts would have sparked consumer's interest if it was an unknown system. Hence why any other console would have died - literally died, faded into obscurity.
So yeah, brand power. It matters.
