It may be too early to state this, but it SEEMS like something drastic has to happen with vita sales or PSV may be the first handheld claimed by the Smartphone Revolution...

With numbers like these, Vita will have a hard time rebounding;its lifetime sales are suffering as a result of inactivity. As it stands I can see it doing 65 million lifetime, and it is only that low because of this poor launch. Something makes me feel like Nintendo overpriced the 3DS on purpose so that this pricing issue would happen to Sony.

Japan has come through for the PSP with truly unbelievable support for the past 3 years. I'm not confident in a repeat of that, but maybe the 3DS will become saturated and the Vita can repeat what the PSP did again.

So you admit your view on Vita not selling at a profit because you want to believe it isn't. Rather ill willed if you ask me. I "believe" it is because of the data available points to it. A second hand breakdown of the costs is the best data available. Was the 3DS breakdown proven wrong? That being $100 gave the system a $70 coushion but Nintendo declared it was selling at a loss. Vita at $160 has a $90 and $140 cushion. Assuming identicle costs for both console to the sale 3DS would have to be selling at an over $70 loss which would make it's original price of $250 bring in less than $10.

From this it is hard pressed to think that at least the 3G Vita is not selling for a profit and there is no way to determine Vita's effect from the entire PlayStation division's quarterly figures. You would need a proper breakdown.

Like Kowen said the three years to achieve profitability is for the Vita project and was falsly reported as a loss per system by journalists who misinterpreted or "misenterpreted" the quotes. Unfortunetly if Vita sales remain slow that three year mark could drag out.

System loss or profit aside, Vita is bringing in profits from software, accessories, and memory cards. It would be difficult to determine Vita is causing Sony losses with these sales mixed in and Vita's low level of hardware sales.

I strongly doubt this sabatoge theory. Nintendo didn't really do itself many favors by having slow 3DS sales after launch. I suspect they anticipated better sales and aimed for more profit to offset the dropping Wii sales. There was also a strong anticipation that Sony's next handheld was going to be $300 or more. It is probably true the Vita's low price affected the 3DS price cut but it was reactionary.

With that said the 3DS should have been $200 from launch and remained so without a cut. Maybe if this was the case the handheld market wouldn't be so weak right now unless those smartphones are really taking over. Maybe this generation of young gamers are lost to the fads their parents experienced. I always thought the market would follow the advancement of tech but it seems we are in a strange place today.

Their expenses are more than just hardware and assembly for the consoles. They also pay people for marketing, accounting, legal, game development, supporting external game developers, developing new hardware and maintaining online. Any or all of those areas could be loss-making.

When we say hardware is profitable, surely it's sale price minus wholesale parts minus assembly and shipping costs. That doesn't preclude it making a loss as a business.

but you're Rol, so I suspect you know all that and I'm being trolled here.

The problem is that they're making console games on a portable system when they should be making portable games on a portable system. Do people want something like Pokemon or Mario Kart to take with them on the bus, or do they want a scaled down Uncharted?

R&D for new consoles, redesigns etc. as well. 

Simple example: Suppose all those extra expenses are, as you say, fixed. Say $150 to employ all those people.

Last year product made $200 profit on $400 revenue.
This year  product  made $100 profit on $200 revenue. (Same profit per unit)

Last year overall: $200 - $150 = $50 profit
This year overall: $100 - $150 = $50 loss

Same number of people employed in other departments, same product profit, less unit sales can turn profit to loss. I think that's what happened to Sony, lower hardware and software unit sales, same profit margin and same other expenses.

If Sony can't increase Vita sales, they need to cut marketing and other things to match the new, smaller size of their actual business.

OK. I'm not really arguing against you here. I have no idea whether Vita is profiting or not, just saying whether it does isn't likely to be a major contribution to Sony's huge losses.

The quarter we are looking at now is April through July. Did their gaming division post losses last quarter? During the Vita WW launch? Is it significantly different than this quarter?