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

Forums - Sony - Was Leo-J right about the PS3 price-cut effect?

 

Was Leo-J right about the PS3 price-cut effect?

Yes, PS3 got back in the game on sept 09 158 47.88%
 
No, PS3 is still being outsold by Wii 26 7.88%
 
No, As long as its still ... 38 11.52%
 
Yes, PS3 has great sales and games now 82 24.85%
 
There was a price cut? 10 3.03%
 
Wii/PS3/Xbox 360 = D00M3D! 16 4.85%
 
Total:330
superchunk on 28 March 2010
Icyedge said:
superchunk said:
While it has been doing very well since it hit $299 / slim, I wouldn't call it a comeback as it is still 5m behind 360 and 1/2 of Wii. Essentially nothing really changed since launch.

Granted, that could be different a year from now, but for now its essentially the same.

Why are you using the lifetime sales number? It is not behind 360 ever since september.

Not using lifetime sales as a base indicator is what you would call cherry picking. If the PS3s current rate and the overall lifetime gap still suggest that it may never catch the 360, let alone even get to the 50% of the Wii's sales then it can't possibly be called a 'comeback' by any definition of he word.

PS3 has always had spurts that showed it could catch the 360 if it were able to continue that trend, yet it has always been broken by some 360 change up or price reduction.

PS3 has never outsold the Wii by any significant frame of time to be considered coming back from anything.

This is simply the normal spurt since PS3's price reduction/slim was a greater difference than the last reduction by 360 and that is by no significant amount. As soon as 360 cuts again it will regain lead for another short duration pushing the gap back up and erasing anything PS3 gained, just like after the last time PS3 was reduced.



Around the Network
Icyedge on 28 March 2010
superchunk said:
Icyedge said:
superchunk said:
While it has been doing very well since it hit $299 / slim, I wouldn't call it a comeback as it is still 5m behind 360 and 1/2 of Wii. Essentially nothing really changed since launch.

Granted, that could be different a year from now, but for now its essentially the same.

Why are you using the lifetime sales number? It is not behind 360 ever since september.

Not using lifetime sales as a base indicator is what you would call cherry picking. If the PS3s current rate and the overall lifetime gap still suggest that it may never catch the 360, let alone even get to the 50% of the Wii's sales then it can't possibly be called a 'comeback' by any definition of he word.

PS3 has always had spurts that showed it could catch the 360 if it were able to continue that trend, yet it has always been broken by some 360 change up or price reduction.

PS3 has never outsold the Wii by any significant frame of time to be considered coming back from anything.

This is simply the normal spurt since PS3's price reduction/slim was a greater difference than the last reduction by 360 and that is by no significant amount. As soon as 360 cuts again it will regain lead for another short duration pushing the gap back up and erasing anything PS3 gained, just like after the last time PS3 was reduced.

You dont even need competitor to use the term comeback. I clearly stated my point before, its not the biggest comeback ever, but still a comeback. I used as an example the image of the playstation brand.  The image of the playstation with the PS2 was very good, positive word of mouth, good press. Then PS3 was exact opposite, negative word of mouth and press. Then the slim and 299$ price point, initiate a strong comeback for the playstation image.

The problem is, we cannot say its not a comeback, because I have just demonstrated it is one. What you could say is, they werent able to do a comeback in their ranking. Theres a difference there.



superchunk on 28 March 2010
Icyedge said:
superchunk said:
Icyedge said:
superchunk said:
While it has been doing very well since it hit $299 / slim, I wouldn't call it a comeback as it is still 5m behind 360 and 1/2 of Wii. Essentially nothing really changed since launch.

Granted, that could be different a year from now, but for now its essentially the same.

Why are you using the lifetime sales number? It is not behind 360 ever since september.

Not using lifetime sales as a base indicator is what you would call cherry picking. If the PS3s current rate and the overall lifetime gap still suggest that it may never catch the 360, let alone even get to the 50% of the Wii's sales then it can't possibly be called a 'comeback' by any definition of he word.

PS3 has always had spurts that showed it could catch the 360 if it were able to continue that trend, yet it has always been broken by some 360 change up or price reduction.

PS3 has never outsold the Wii by any significant frame of time to be considered coming back from anything.

This is simply the normal spurt since PS3's price reduction/slim was a greater difference than the last reduction by 360 and that is by no significant amount. As soon as 360 cuts again it will regain lead for another short duration pushing the gap back up and erasing anything PS3 gained, just like after the last time PS3 was reduced.

You dont even need competitor to use the term comeback. I clearly stated my point before, its not the biggest comeback ever, but still a comeback. I used as an example the image of the playstation brand.  The image of the playstation with the PS2 was very good, positive word of mouth, good press. Then PS3 was exact opposite, negative word of mouth and press. Then the slim and 299$ price point, initiate a strong comeback for the playstation image.

The problem is, we cannot say its not a comeback, because I have just demonstrated it is one. What you could say is, they werent able to do a comeback in their ranking. Theres a difference there.

If you don't compare it to its competition then what does it have to have a comback against? Your point  seems silly and not realistic.



Icyedge on 28 March 2010
superchunk said:
Icyedge said:

You dont even need competitor to use the term comeback. I clearly stated my point before, its not the biggest comeback ever, but still a comeback. I used as an example the image of the playstation brand.  The image of the playstation with the PS2 was very good, positive word of mouth, good press. Then PS3 was exact opposite, negative word of mouth and press. Then the slim and 299$ price point, initiate a strong comeback for the playstation image.

The problem is, we cannot say its not a comeback, because I have just demonstrated it is one. What you could say is, they werent able to do a comeback in their ranking. Theres a difference there.

If you don't compare it to its competition then what does it have to have a comback against? Your point  seems silly and not realistic.

Like ive just explain you can compare playstation popularity to 5 years ago to 3 years ago to now. And then say it did a comeback.

comeback [ˈkʌmˌbæk]

n Informal
1. a return to a former position, status, etc.
2. a return or response, esp recriminatory
3. a quick reply; retort
In this case im talking about it popularity status. Like I said previously you could say that it didnt make a comeback in ranking against his competitor. That was your point I think. My point was still good tho.


superchunk on 28 March 2010
Icyedge said:
superchunk said:
Icyedge said:
 

You dont even need competitor to use the term comeback. I clearly stated my point before, its not the biggest comeback ever, but still a comeback. I used as an example the image of the playstation brand.  The image of the playstation with the PS2 was very good, positive word of mouth, good press. Then PS3 was exact opposite, negative word of mouth and press. Then the slim and 299$ price point, initiate a strong comeback for the playstation image.

The problem is, we cannot say its not a comeback, because I have just demonstrated it is one. What you could say is, they werent able to do a comeback in their ranking. Theres a difference there.

If you don't compare it to its competition then what does it have to have a comback against? Your point  seems silly and not realistic.

Like ive just explain you can compare playstation popularity to 5 years ago to 3 years ago to now. And then say it did a comeback.

comeback [ˈkʌmˌbæk]

n Informal
1. a return to a former position, status, etc.
2. a return or response, esp recriminatory
3. a quick reply; retort
In this case im talking about it popularity status. Like I said previously you could say that it didnt make a comeback in ranking against his competitor. That was your point I think. My point was still good tho.

I understood your idea about a comeback of the brand. I just think that was silly and clearly not what someone would expect if you asked them if PS3 had made a comeback. Question should have been has Playstation made a comeback. Single out the PS3 and you must be referring to its position in this generation which is largly unchanged and thus the answer is still no.



Around the Network
bumblejr2 on 28 March 2010


Icyedge on 28 March 2010
superchunk said:
Icyedge said:
superchunk said:
Icyedge said:
 

You dont even need competitor to use the term comeback. I clearly stated my point before, its not the biggest comeback ever, but still a comeback. I used as an example the image of the playstation brand.  The image of the playstation with the PS2 was very good, positive word of mouth, good press. Then PS3 was exact opposite, negative word of mouth and press. Then the slim and 299$ price point, initiate a strong comeback for the playstation image.

The problem is, we cannot say its not a comeback, because I have just demonstrated it is one. What you could say is, they werent able to do a comeback in their ranking. Theres a difference there.

If you don't compare it to its competition then what does it have to have a comback against? Your point  seems silly and not realistic.

Like ive just explain you can compare playstation popularity to 5 years ago to 3 years ago to now. And then say it did a comeback.

comeback [ˈkʌmˌbæk]

n Informal
1. a return to a former position, status, etc.
2. a return or response, esp recriminatory
3. a quick reply; retort
In this case im talking about it popularity status. Like I said previously you could say that it didnt make a comeback in ranking against his competitor. That was your point I think. My point was still good tho.

I understood your idea about a comeback of the brand. I just think that was silly and clearly not what someone would expect if you asked them if PS3 had made a comeback. Question should have been has Playstation made a comeback. Single out the PS3 and you must be referring to its position in this generation which is largly unchanged and thus the answer is still no.

The vote says something else.



greenmedic88 on 28 March 2010
RolStoppable said:
No, leo-j was wrong and he admitted it already. Kudos for that.

A $299 PS3 was supposed to consistently beat the Wii. It didn't. This is a clear case of a failed prediction.

THAT was his prediction?!

Wow. If that's the definition of a comeback for the PS3, it would be almost as bad as predicting Palm to return to relevance over Apple in the smart phone market with the notable distinction that Sony still has its market while Apple basically ate Palm's.



superchunk on 29 March 2010
Icyedge said:
superchunk said:
Icyedge said:
superchunk said:
Icyedge said:
 

You dont even need competitor to use the term comeback. I clearly stated my point before, its not the biggest comeback ever, but still a comeback. I used as an example the image of the playstation brand.  The image of the playstation with the PS2 was very good, positive word of mouth, good press. Then PS3 was exact opposite, negative word of mouth and press. Then the slim and 299$ price point, initiate a strong comeback for the playstation image.

The problem is, we cannot say its not a comeback, because I have just demonstrated it is one. What you could say is, they werent able to do a comeback in their ranking. Theres a difference there.

If you don't compare it to its competition then what does it have to have a comback against? Your point  seems silly and not realistic.

Like ive just explain you can compare playstation popularity to 5 years ago to 3 years ago to now. And then say it did a comeback.

comeback [ˈkʌmˌbæk]

n Informal
1. a return to a former position, status, etc.
2. a return or response, esp recriminatory
3. a quick reply; retort
In this case im talking about it popularity status. Like I said previously you could say that it didnt make a comeback in ranking against his competitor. That was your point I think. My point was still good tho.

I understood your idea about a comeback of the brand. I just think that was silly and clearly not what someone would expect if you asked them if PS3 had made a comeback. Question should have been has Playstation made a comeback. Single out the PS3 and you must be referring to its position in this generation which is largly unchanged and thus the answer is still no.

The vote says something else.

ha haha, the vote is simply a popularity contest.



fighter on 29 March 2010

  
CGI-Quality said:
fighter said:
CGI-Quality said:
fighter said:
CGI-Quality said:
fighter said:
CGI-Quality said:

Depends on the context of the word: Comeback.

- Is it now a viable machine with a healthy library at an affordable price: Yes.

does a healthy library or a decent price have anything to do with a comeback ? no

- Is it outselling it's closest rival on the road to take 2nd Place: Yes.

now that's a very slow comeback, and there are many turns ahead on that road

- Is it bringing money to the company who so ever poured billions into it's research/construction: Not yet.

so by that context : no

- Does it offer anything different from it's closest rival to be considered fairly different: Yes, though it took a while.

what does that have to do with a comeback ?

- Will it be as successful as it's two older brothers: (PS1) - Probably not. (PS2) - No.

at least we agree it's no coming back to that

If you put all those in place, it has made good headway and has become a healthy machine with a more than stellar line-up of titles. It's done itself a service by jumping out of that dark hole we called "doomed". However, it will fail at capturing the success of past PlayStation consoles, which in turn is it's biggest flukes of all.

exactly, the slim + price cut had a positive effect (how could it be otherwise?)

From a personal standpoint, it's one of the most enjoyable pieces of technology that I've ever had the pleasure of acquiring. But from a business standpoint, it hasn't made strong enough progress to be considered a full blown: "Comeback Kid" just yet.

Just my opinion.

 

- So a healthy library of a console that was deemed "the system with no games" isn't considered a comback

not in this thread no. Here it's about the slimming of the PS3 and the cutting of its' entry price. And before you start protesting, your first sentence being "Depends on the context of the word: Comeback" you defined yourself you were answering relatively to Leo-Js criterias.

- Ok pal. Also, it's price has everything to do with a comback. You think it could have made ANY headway at the price it was?

have i stated otherwise ? read more carefully please

- Many people didn't see the PS3 as any different than the 360, and so saw no need to buy it. Therefore, differentiating itself was a need. You can't make a comeback and be pretty much the same as your main competition.

 have i stated otherwise ? read more carefully please

My first sentence was something you obviously ignored/don't comprehend. Depending on the context, it is/isn't a comeback. If you were so bent on proving your distaste for the PS3, you would know that I agreed that it's has made no significant comeback.

Let's takeyour first sentence again :  "Depends on the context of the word: Comeback"

What depends on the context of the word comeback ? The answer to the OP's question.

Therefore, most of your points being attemps to define contexts of comebacks in general instead of answers to the op's question itself you are the one contradicting your own first sentence.

 

My goodness.....

"does a healthy library or decent price have anything to do with a comeback? no"

That would be stating otherwise. Read more carefully please.

As for the talk of differentiating, you asked what it had to do with a comeback: "what does that have to do with a comeback"?

You were given an answer. It seems the person who's comprehension is in question here is you.

You missed the point of my initial post entirely though. I agreed that the PS3 hasn't made a significant comeback. Drop the condescending approach and pay attention.

 

Again, you have to consider the kind of comeback we are talking about (the one understood by your own first sentence if you read more carefully).

The way you desperately try to find a way around your own mistake(s) is kind of laughable and scary at the same time.

 

Really? If I made mistakes, you sure haven't pointed them out, as I pointed yours out? You had no reason to quote me to begin with, I wasn't making points to prove leo-j's theory correct. I was giving examples of how it could/would be perceived that the PS3 has made some sort of game-changing, significant comeback. I agreed that it dug itself out of a hole, but also agreed that it hasn't made enough progress for it to be considered a comeback.

Nobody but you has argued with me and I'm the one who's outlook closely resemble yours.

Are you for real ?