By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - is 360 price cut even relevant?

DarkisWR on 05 February 2010
dahuman said:
uh.... 2 things, America likes the 360, pewpewpew, and that a lot of people will buy at least 1-2 more 360s in their 360 owner time because of you know what. I personally would love to know how many total amount of 360 still works out of all that has sold personally, they also rip people off with xbox live, so they make money from that each month, I don't know why people defend live like it's their life blood, it really is no different than PSN besides cross game voice chat at this point in time, which is moot to me since I got skype on my iphone or computer for that.

You do realize that Sony is setting up a sub service aswell.

 

If you can't figure out the differnce atm between Live and PSN then...stay ignorant.



Around the Network
plb on 05 February 2010
DarkisWR said:
dahuman said:
uh.... 2 things, America likes the 360, pewpewpew, and that a lot of people will buy at least 1-2 more 360s in their 360 owner time because of you know what. I personally would love to know how many total amount of 360 still works out of all that has sold personally, they also rip people off with xbox live, so they make money from that each month, I don't know why people defend live like it's their life blood, it really is no different than PSN besides cross game voice chat at this point in time, which is moot to me since I got skype on my iphone or computer for that.

You do realize that Sony is setting up a sub service aswell.

 

If you can't figure out the differnce atm between Live and PSN then...stay ignorant.


Agreed, I have a PS3 and 360 and the 360 is for multiplayer games while I use the PS3 for its exclusives. LIVE is just so much better than PSN..no comparison.



dahuman on 05 February 2010
DarkisWR said:
dahuman said:
uh.... 2 things, America likes the 360, pewpewpew, and that a lot of people will buy at least 1-2 more 360s in their 360 owner time because of you know what. I personally would love to know how many total amount of 360 still works out of all that has sold personally, they also rip people off with xbox live, so they make money from that each month, I don't know why people defend live like it's their life blood, it really is no different than PSN besides cross game voice chat at this point in time, which is moot to me since I got skype on my iphone or computer for that.

You do realize that Sony is setting up a sub service aswell.

 

If you can't figure out the differnce atm between Live and PSN then...stay ignorant.

ignorant people are the ones that are only capable of looking at the surface and not the core, therefore blinded by value and standards set by other people.



Playingwithfirex on 05 February 2010
hudsoniscool said:
Playingwithfirex said:
theprof00 said:
hudsoniscool said:
come on dude.the ps3 was behind in sales agianst 360. then they cut there price and brought in the slim. so the ps3 will probably sell a steady 20k more units a week until 360 cuts its price. then 360 will outsell the ps3. the ps3 wont cut there price to counter it because they cant for now.(loosing way to much money on ps3) this time next year seams more likly.

that's doubtful... It will most likely be 40-50k per week until summer.

Im not talking about in America only, I'm talking WW so its more like 150-200k a week


150 k a week are you kidding. even 50k are you kidding. look at the last 4 weeks

ps3 beats 360 by 95k  WW

then

ps3 beats 360 by 60k WW

then

ps3 beats 360 by 47k WW

then

ps3 beats 360 by 36k WW

so 150k a week were have you been. even 30-50k

it should stay 20-35k above 360 untill 360 cuts its price.

I was saying how much PS3 would sell a week not how much more it would sell than the 360



2010 Hardware Sales Predictions

Wii: 20m- Sales will drop, but not by much.

PS3: 13.5m- It sold 12m in 2009, its only common sense it will sell more this year.

Xbox 360: 11m- It sold 11m in 2008 and 2009, I think it will sell the same.

My Fanboy Speech...

Why do you have to make excuses to defend a product that you purchased, but that's the only connection you have to it, you don't make it, you don't lose or gain money on it. I don't see where all of the defensiveness comes in, there is no reason for you or anybody else to feel obligated to defend it. Now I would understand if one of you were a developer for the product and you slaved over said product only to hear somebody call it stupid or a piece of junk. But none of you developed it, none of you are mature enough to realize that. Choosing a product all comes down to preference, you chose said product because it is best for you. Simple as that!

DarkisWR on 06 February 2010
dahuman said:
DarkisWR said:
dahuman said:
uh.... 2 things, America likes the 360, pewpewpew, and that a lot of people will buy at least 1-2 more 360s in their 360 owner time because of you know what. I personally would love to know how many total amount of 360 still works out of all that has sold personally, they also rip people off with xbox live, so they make money from that each month, I don't know why people defend live like it's their life blood, it really is no different than PSN besides cross game voice chat at this point in time, which is moot to me since I got skype on my iphone or computer for that.

You do realize that Sony is setting up a sub service aswell.

 

If you can't figure out the differnce atm between Live and PSN then...stay ignorant.

ignorant people are the ones that are only capable of looking at the surface and not the core, therefore blinded by value and standards set by other people.

 

*sigh*

 

Go get live and then go get psn*like I have* and compare it...and then factor in what is coming with sony's paid sub set up.



Around the Network
jarrod on 07 February 2010
theprof00 said:
jarrod said:
ramses01 said:
Attoyou said:

 

NEW Report Says They are Only losing $18, Google it if you have not already seen it , They are getting the price of the ps3 down Every month ,  THEY CAN And if They WANT Will Cut the Price , We will have to wait and see .


Even if the $18 is correct, that doesn't mean they are losing $18 per console.  It means that material cost of the console is $18 higher the MSRP. Sony's loss is much greater than that as each consoles also has retailer margin, shipping, and FTE costs associated with it.  Using your $18 as the base.  Then Sony is probably losing 18 + 15-30 for retailer margin + 3-5 for shipping + FTE costs (maybe $5-10) 

$18 per console would only be correct if the $349 SKU didn't exist.  That's PlayStation University's fuzzy math at work, the original source says "six cents loss on the dollar for hardware".

actually the quote is

“Sony loses about six cents for every dollar of PlayStation 3 hardware sales.”

I only brought this up because it has a very different nuance from what yours says. People who are saying that the number doesn't include shipping and such could be right or could be wrong. But it's obvious from the quote that those people do not have factual support for their statements. The fuzzy math could be from an average of both SKU sales, on average. But if that is true, then it is likely that the number DOES actually include shipping and other costs. Why skew facts in order to reach another skew? It makes much more sense to find the best fact and spin the reasoning as to why we should use that number.

If the fuzzy math does not exist, I still think their number includes shipping and such because of the quote presented above. It says "for every dollar of ps3 hardware sales", not "for every dollar of ps3 hardware". The original quote is actually quite direct and simplistic. For this reason, I think that the fuzzy math does exist, and includes all extra costs, meaning, 18$ per 299$ and 21$ per 349$ console. This is recouperable with 2 software sales or 1 game + 1 controller. 

I think you misunderstood, the "fuzzy math" is in actually claiming a "$18 loss per unit", which is exactly what PlayStation University did (and the Wallstreet Journal didn't do).  A six cent loss per dollar doesn't mean you can just apply that point blank per pricepoint, it means that's what the overall loss works out to. In terms of assembly/production cost, the 120GB and 250GB cost about the same, the only difference is in HDD capacity (which would be a minor cost difference).  What's likely happening then is a greater loss at the $299 pricepoint and possibly a small profit at the $349, but until we have a ratio for distribtuon of 120GB/250GB (say 60/40), we can't figure out what the exact loss per unit is.



Cueil on 07 February 2010

is there any news on the current model for the 360's loss/profit? Also Microsoft could drop the price of the 360 by a fifty any time they wanted... my guess though if they get Valhalla out (GPU on CPU) Xbox Arcade will be 200 with Natal and Elite will be 200 with HDD. Also if they made the console smaller where would they put the HDD? They would have to keep the general thickness though they could bring it in considerably and maybe shorten it. Another though is putting the HDD on the back of the console or have a depression on top that you can put it in and then slide a piece over to hide it... though I would prefer SSD for new 360Slims



 
Get your Portable ID!

fastyxx on 07 February 2010

Let's see what X10 has in store first. We'll know more about where 360 is headed until then. Everyone has challenges. One thing the 360 still has going for it is more mainstream awareness yet than the PS3, and they survived their down year last year, title-wise.

We'll learn more next week.



Can't we all just get along and play our games in peace?

dahuman on 07 February 2010
DarkisWR said:
dahuman said:
DarkisWR said:
dahuman said:
uh.... 2 things, America likes the 360, pewpewpew, and that a lot of people will buy at least 1-2 more 360s in their 360 owner time because of you know what. I personally would love to know how many total amount of 360 still works out of all that has sold personally, they also rip people off with xbox live, so they make money from that each month, I don't know why people defend live like it's their life blood, it really is no different than PSN besides cross game voice chat at this point in time, which is moot to me since I got skype on my iphone or computer for that.

You do realize that Sony is setting up a sub service aswell.

 

If you can't figure out the differnce atm between Live and PSN then...stay ignorant.

ignorant people are the ones that are only capable of looking at the surface and not the core, therefore blinded by value and standards set by other people.

 

*sigh*

 

Go get live and then go get psn*like I have* and compare it...and then factor in what is coming with sony's paid sub set up.

All current features will still be free on PSN, I've used XBL before, it's nothing special at all especially considering that I'm mainly a PC gamer. I don't use netflix, and I sure as hell don't use last.fm when I can have shoutcast at any time on my computer or on my iphone dock. Why do you pay for XBL if not for playing video games online? can't be for general use since the thing doesn't even have a web browser right? it doesn't even cost anything to get access to netflix on the PC, the PS3 or soon the Nintendo Wii, you just pay the monthly netflix fee, how the fuck do you justify paying for ads and services that cost nothing on other platforms? the experience? mii rip off? 5 dollar light sabers? windows media center layout that's worked like garbage since day 1? microsoft points bull shit on the market place? sounds like crack coaine to me.



theprof00 on 07 February 2010
jarrod said:
theprof00 said:
jarrod said:
ramses01 said:
Attoyou said:

 

NEW Report Says They are Only losing $18, Google it if you have not already seen it , They are getting the price of the ps3 down Every month ,  THEY CAN And if They WANT Will Cut the Price , We will have to wait and see .


Even if the $18 is correct, that doesn't mean they are losing $18 per console.  It means that material cost of the console is $18 higher the MSRP. Sony's loss is much greater than that as each consoles also has retailer margin, shipping, and FTE costs associated with it.  Using your $18 as the base.  Then Sony is probably losing 18 + 15-30 for retailer margin + 3-5 for shipping + FTE costs (maybe $5-10) 

$18 per console would only be correct if the $349 SKU didn't exist.  That's PlayStation University's fuzzy math at work, the original source says "six cents loss on the dollar for hardware".

actually the quote is

“Sony loses about six cents for every dollar of PlayStation 3 hardware sales.”

I only brought this up because it has a very different nuance from what yours says. People who are saying that the number doesn't include shipping and such could be right or could be wrong. But it's obvious from the quote that those people do not have factual support for their statements. The fuzzy math could be from an average of both SKU sales, on average. But if that is true, then it is likely that the number DOES actually include shipping and other costs. Why skew facts in order to reach another skew? It makes much more sense to find the best fact and spin the reasoning as to why we should use that number.

If the fuzzy math does not exist, I still think their number includes shipping and such because of the quote presented above. It says "for every dollar of ps3 hardware sales", not "for every dollar of ps3 hardware". The original quote is actually quite direct and simplistic. For this reason, I think that the fuzzy math does exist, and includes all extra costs, meaning, 18$ per 299$ and 21$ per 349$ console. This is recouperable with 2 software sales or 1 game + 1 controller. 

I think you misunderstood, the "fuzzy math" is in actually claiming a "$18 loss per unit", which is exactly what PlayStation University did (and the Wallstreet Journal didn't do).  A six cent loss per dollar doesn't mean you can just apply that point blank per pricepoint, it means that's what the overall loss works out to. In terms of assembly/production cost, the 120GB and 250GB cost about the same, the only difference is in HDD capacity (which would be a minor cost difference).  What's likely happening then is a greater loss at the $299 pricepoint and possibly a small profit at the $349, but until we have a ratio for distribtuon of 120GB/250GB (say 60/40), we can't figure out what the exact loss per unit is.

lol, thats what I said. From an average of both SKU.