| ils411 said: this would have been a good read, unfortunately, you had too many assumed values for my taste. an assumption or two wouldn't be that bad, but you assumed almost all of your figures which = inaccurate analysis i'm not denying that sony lost billions on the ps3. i believe that they announced that they lost about $3.3billion or something to that extent. while your "analysis" indicates that the loss is over $5billion. i would assume that you over estimated ps3 loses and at the same time under estimated the gaming devisions profits. |
ils411,
Sony has announced that their production costs of the PS3 are now less than the sales price. Unfortunately, too many believe that means they are making profits on the PS3 hardware, which after adding in the non-production costs (fixed overhead, costs of getting the unit to the retailer), they are not making a profit on the PS3 hardware.
In a similar manner, their announcement of $3.3B in losses for the PS3 could be speaking of production cost losses, i.e., average cost life to date of a PS3 is $800, average sales price to the retailer is $500, net loss of $300 per unit, times the 11M units at the time of the announcement would be $3.3B.
But bumidan could still be correct if the addition non-production cost were added in, to get to the total $5.5B overall loss.
"i would assume that you over estimated ps3 loses and at the same time under estimated the gaming devisions profits."
That would be impossible for bumidan to be doing both of those. He knows based on Sony financial reports the operating income of the game division overall for the last 4 years. The operating income = the gaming divisions profits (of PSP, PS2, PS3 software, misc.) plus the PS3 hardware losses. If the losses of the PS3 are not as much as bumidan's numbers, then his estimate of the gaming division HAS to be OVER-estimated.
Torturing the numbers. Hear them scream.
