That's not their revenue. They don't get the 75 million and then pay people off.

Their revenue is what they charge stores for the game. It possibly has shown profit but i wouldn't say you could call it a gurantee, it depends how much of the advertising Sony picked up.

National TV advertising is ghastly expensive... and that's only counting the US not counting all the other advertising budget. On the big name games advertising is probably sufficently more expensive then development.

I don't even want to know how much Halo 3's advertising campaign cost. I bet that game made a lot less profit then people think.

Sure, because shops don't want to earn any money on games, and transport companies ship it for free, advertisement doesn't cost a thing.

It's more like 1.25 milion * $20,- = $ 25 million. Is $5,- million profit. Not bad, but definitely not good either (especially considered a lot of copies were packed in with the PS3 in Europe).

The profit is only if the advertisement is NOT taken into account. Let's say advertisement costs were $10 miilion, that will make a $ million LOSS.

1.25(sold) x 60(price) = 75mil(revenue) - costs = profit.

75mil - 20mil(budget) = 55mil.

55mil - advertising = 45mil (that 10 million is generious and i doubt they spent that much)

really you think there is more than 45mil in expenses(distribution/manufacturing)? along with HS and R&C. the point of this posy was beacuse people were saying those three games havent made profit yet.

You have to remember, this game will have moved some PS3s, so there are other factors to consider when you are thinking whether or not it was a success

I'd say 10 million is way undercutting advertising cost. Once again unless sony picked it up. I mean you live in the US how many uncharted commercials did you see the month it came out? I saw about 6-7 a day.

Let alone other countries advertising and non television advertising.

The average advertising budget is about half the cost of what the game costs.  You need to take in account this is an average... and that most games receive no advertising, or the very least very little, which means it's likely that advertising equals if not exceeds the costs of development on the "big games" like Uncharted.

I saw none.... I have 2,5,7,9,23,26,32,50 are the channels i get.

I saw plenty in the UK, but not many posters or anything other than on TV

Well lets put it this way.

Say i've seen every single Uncharted Television add they've made. 6 a day, for about 30 days. At 50,000 a pop. (About half of what the cost really is for most non primetime advertisments)

That's $9,000,000 for telvision advertising. For just the US.

Assuming that i've seen every single add... and that there were no adds when i was doing something else or sleeping or whatever.

I get around 300 or so channels i'd guess. 

In general I think people underestimate marketing costs ...

A single slot on a national network durring primetime can cost between $250,000 and $1,000,000 (maybe more, last time I checked was a couple years ago when American Idol and Survivor were getting $1,000,000 per 30 second slot); a more inexpensive slot on a lesser national network at an awful time (3:00 am for example) can be as little as $10,000 (maybe more, last time I checked was years ago when I was working for a start-up company who was looking into national advertizements).

A company can litterally go through $100,000,000 in an amazingly short period of time if they're not careful ...

I thought Sony's strategy was to make money on the software and lose it on the hardware. 

Of course more hardware means more software, but if it is doubtful that they made money on Uncharted, one of the best games ever and certainly on PS3, when will they make money on software???

FF, GT and MGS won't make a lot of money for Sony, they have to earn on 1st and 2nd party games.