Sorry I did not meant to. I have no grudge against him at all. But wherever his posts something it is bullshiting Sony, and I don´t think that posts like this contribute anything to this discussion. It is more like "Look at me I don´t like SONY and SONY exclusives look at me here..."

Isn´t this the definition of trolling?

Actually this is a VGC exclusive.

The rest of the world sees this in a different way. Just read my sig.

Yes it was worth it, 1.4 million units more than the X360. How is that not worth it?

Well there's a rumored PS3 "super slim" that may launch at $199, so if that turns into reailty, I think the previous price cut will be seen as the paving to dominace.

Well, this is a case of the seen vs the unseen. You might say that the gap is flat, but who's to say that the gap would have been smaller without the price cut?

Honestly, this is an incredibly hard discussion to have. In order to gain an accurate answer, you'd need to perform studies on the purchasing decisions on those who bought the console before and after the price cut, and also to study those people who still decided against buying the console before and after.

There were also millions of other alternatives that Sony could have taken. If Kyne's numbers are right and it's cost Sony $700m, we should consider everything else Sony could have done with that money. Cut the price of software/accessories? Increased funding to advertising campaigns? Spent that money securing exclusive content? We'd need to analyse all of these situations, and what that would have done for Sony's net financials.

Also, Sony is about so much more than Playstation... should they have spent more of that money on R&D for smartphones and TVs? Should they have spent that money rebranding Vaio? And so many other alternatives... any of these could have helped Sony turn to profitability in the long run.

Hell, they could have just done nothing with the money, and used it to improve their numbers.

What I'm getting at, here, is that it's impossible to really know what Sony should have done with that money... in fact, it would probably cost us more money than it cost them to work out what they should have done with it. Normally, the best people to make the decision are the people at Sony themselves - I say normally, because looking at Sony's performance in recent years, it may be the case that they need to change who makes these decisions.

No theyt shouldn't because at this point in time it's not important anymore who wins or loses the console war. Sony would have benefited from those $50 in profits instead.

No it would have made more sense a year later. Sales were pretty good and the cut wasn't that drastic.

I remmember people saying that the Wii price cut was bad timing... And everyone was saying that the Ps3 pricut was bombastic. 

Where is this 6 million coming from because as of right now, according to VGChartz, the gap is only 2 million.  Unless you mean xbox leading by 6 million if sony would have not cut the ps3 price.