and the key word here is "coud be". they "could also be" speaking of total losses including R&D + manufacturing/production costs + fixed overhead cost + what ever costs they could have incurred with the ps3. 1. keep in mind that at the time of the announcement of this $3.3B lose, sony had already gone through multiple skus each with varying production costs. we have the 20gig, 40gig, 60gig, and 80gig. i'm guessing and an emphasis on guessing that the 40gig is the sku which is losing the least amount of money for sony, followed by the 80gig, 20gig and 60gig. which is probably why sony discontinued the 20gig and 60gig. of the 11m units, how many are actually 80gig models? 60gig? 20gig? 40gig? we cannat assume an average net loss of $300 per ps3 as there are multiple skus. I'm not sure if there ever was an announcement that PS3 directly lost $3.3B. It may be that the PS3 caused the game division to lose 3.3B. There is a difference. As per the multiple SKUs, again, the net loss figure is more of an average. If I took into account the multiple SKUs, given the same other set of assumptions for the PS2 and PSP, then the TOTAL LOSS NUMBER would still be the SAME, though the individual loss per SKU may be different. to further explain my point, uppon launch of the 40gig sku (oct 07 iirc), the ps3 install base was at around 4.9m (launch - sept 07), then sales took a giant step forward from an average of 60k-70k/week to 150k/week. so, of the 11m install base, the 1st 4.9m is comprised of 20gig, 60gig and 80gig models. then the remaining 6m is comprised of 20gig, 60gig, 40gig and 80gig models. now, judging from the sales boost that the ps3 experienced, plus the fact that the 20gig and 60gig and the 80gig (to some extent, japan for example) were discontinued, we can assume that majority of the 6m are 40gig skus. this would significantly bring down average net loss per unit of ps3 sold. 2. it goes hand in hand, if bumidan over estimated ps3 loses, then obviously, he would have also have underestimated the ps3/psp profits.
|
