PS3 a faster money sink than the Xbox? I can see why no price cuts soon.

[starcraft]

NJ5 said:

BengaBenga said:

That's why companies develop strategies. Usually you have to choose. In this case it's Profit vs Marketshare/Brandname.
I'm pretty sure Sony overestimated the PlayStation brandname. When you have two consoles selling over 100 million and all of a sudden something called Wii (for $&^%& sake) takes your crown must have been an eye-opener.

So it looks like Sony's strategy is profitability. Of course they have taken into acount long-term prospects etc. but they probably feel that enough is enough.
Again: Shareholders don't like losses. They don't care about the PlayStation brand or videogames. They want the company to be as efficient as possible. If they have to give up market share on PS3 they don't care. Really.

It's not that simple BengaBenga... After all, we could have used the same argument last year to justify the impossibility of a huge price cuts, which ended up happening anyway much to my surprise.

Shareholders do put up with massive losses of money, as long as the environment and the company's explanations justify it...

Having said that, I have no idea whether shareholders would put up with another big price cut. If Sony buttered them up real well, saying they need the market share to prepare for the next generation, maybe that would do the trick?

Oh I should clarify, I'm only talking about a small (perhaps $50) price cut.  I agree that a large price cut (some people still believe a $299 PS3 this year is possible) is completely unrealistic anytime soon.  I just think that the company will be able to sell a moderate price cut to the shareholders come the end of the year when the damage it would do will be less substantial.  A $50 price cut on the PS3 would easily be enough to prevent the Xbox 360 from gaining any sort of strong advantage over the Sony machine.