I remember there use to be a whole bunch of charts about sony, ms, and Nintendo with their revenues, R&D costs, profits, etc.

All I know, Nintendo was the only one in the green with Sony and MS in the red. So Sony did make "Nintendo like" revenue but don't think Sony profited from PS2 much.

that chart showed that SONY was profiting just under Nintendo's profits in the PS1 and PS2 era and losing in PS3 era and MICROSOFT was just losing until last year

Near the end of the GameCube generation Nintendo released R&D numbers. They said they spent over 250-mill a year R&D on both their home and handheld consoles. Thats 500-million dollars a year in R&D. Don't think for a second that they don't invest as much if not more then Sony does in R&D.

Keep in mind the Wiimote has been in the works since the NES. Nintendo also had their own 3D technology at GameCube's launch. Nintendo obviously invested heavily in 3D since they have the 3DS and no other company beat them too it, even Sony's executives don't think its possible I remember Pachter saying if Sony couldn't do it Nintendo definatly couldn't, well they did and are.Also remember when Natal was announced, Nintendo stated at the time that they had also worked on camera technology similiar to Natal but didn't think the technology worked and chose to go with the Wiimote.

Think about it a second , even the batteries that go into the DS and such, why do they have like 10x the lasting power of the PSP? Did Nintendo just wish upon a star. Also up until the Wii Nintendo pioneered all their own media formats developing their own cartridges and mini-disks, that costs alot of money that Sony saved by going CD, DVD then BluRay.Lets not forget the gyroscopes, tilt sensors, balance board...vitality sensor.....WiiMotionPlus...... All these peripherals cost money to develope. Think of the amount of R&D that went into creating the vitality sensor for example.

Who knows what Nintendo has been developing without our knowledge. I know Sony spends alot on R&D but Nintendo probubly spends just as much if not more.

Right, i'm sure the PS2 and PSP had no R&D whatsoever.  In 2005 the dip was because of the PSP, in 2006 it was because of PS3, but it doesn't take a genius to see that Sony made way more money in the PS1 era YEAR AFTER YEAR.  The PS2 was the first step in the wrong direction, they needed to dominate to make a profit and they did.  PS1 would have made them a nice profit even if they were a distant second place. 

i was talking about the PS3 R&D not PS2

PS1 wouldn't have made nice profit if they were a distant second as they were new in console business then not Nintendo with handheld to save them

Nobody said there wasn't a handheld, of course there was a handheld.  Nobody is claiming the gamecube made more money than the PS2.  Nintendo has always owned the handheld market and that isn't changing soon. 

I don't know how you can say PS1 wouldn't have made a profit when it's clear they made money on each console sold, they made 1.13 billion in a year even though they didn't sell nearly as much software or hardware as PS2 in its peak year.  I can only imagine how much money they could have made in the PS2 era if they had followed the same strategy as the PS1.  Actually i can, it would have been close to the wii profits. 

Sony paid IBM to research the CELL? That's new to me.

Anything could happen. Just 6 years  ago, Microsoft wanted to buy Nintendo.

Nintendo is all about gaming and they only have two products on the market. Sure they are successful, but this is risky. Sony and Microsoft have some other markets to back them up. Imagine Nintendos next console will bomb like the PS3 does (financially). Nintendos shares would drop like a stone.

Every new gen, the market gets mixed up 100%. A PSP / PS3 situation would be deadly for Nintendo. And no, Nintendo is not invincible.

Sure, the 3DS looks great and I doubt they will get in a situation like the PSP, but you never know.

The Gamecube is not that long ago, isn't it?

So you're suggesting Sony set out to lose market share and damage the Playstation brand on purpose in order to make more money off the PS4, which will have a hard time, thanks to the Playstation name being dragged through the mud, and to get a percentage of a new format which, going by current tech rates won't be around for all that long anyway.

Is it April fools day already?

After E3 it is obvious that Sony and MS has NOTHING to match Nintendo. It was a pain to look at MS/Sonys press conference and see all this stuff that nintendo has done 4 years ago, and MS/Sony acted as if it was new and could be bother anyone.

At the moment there is no company in the video gaming industrie that can conquer nintendo. Not in therms of hardware and not in terms of games.