| Bodhesatva said: The problem isn't that the strategy is ineffective -- it's that Microsoft can play the same game, only better. Their pockets are much deeper, and it shows. Nintendo has differentiated themselves by making a very distinct system with a unique strategy: in contrast, both Microsoft and Sony seem to be playing the game called "burn as much money as possible to earn market share," and Sony simply cannot win that battle long term. |
Why not? The competition isn't over pockets, it's over cash registers. Nintendo is pursuing a different strategy, and more power to them, but Sony has far more ways to make money off the PS3 than Microsoft can vis-a-vis the 360. Camera pix? Put 'em on the PS3. Downloadable games? Got 60 GB of space. Next-gen media? Blu-Ray. (I still think the 360's lack of next-gen media is one of the worst business decisions in corporate history.) Online services? Powering up fast. HD display devices? Bravia. Portable devices? PSP. Content? Movies galore plus studios capable of producing marvels like Shadow of the Colossus and God of War 1 and 2. And of course the PS2 continues to sell like hotcakes. For every dollar Sony loses on a PS3, they'll make five dollars elsewhere. All Sony needs to do is reduce the PS3 to $500 this fall, and to $400 by 2008, and they'll do just fine as the Mercedes of gaming.
