Forums - Sony Discussion - Sony Q1 FY2020 (April-June) Results - PS4: 1.9m (LTD: 112.1m) | Best Quarter ever for PlayStation

BraLoD said:
Hardware numbers are abismal tho.
Seems like PS4 won't have legs like the PS3 didn't.
With the PS4 Pro the price actually didn't go down a cent this gen.
Seems like PS legs are a thing of the past now, keeping prices higher is what they want.

7 years out, and its still tracking ahead of the PS2 though.

If they had enough stock left, they could do a price drop.
Sadly, supposedly they dont. So its not likely to happend.

I wonder why they didn't produce more, and then lower prices, PS4 could have gone to higher heights if they had.



Around the Network
Barkley said:
OTBWY said:

No I am not, you are.

I am what? I'm so confused right now.

You are confused indeed.




Fei-Hung said:
I dint think the figures show the whole truth. I think digital sales are up mostly due to store sales and offers not day one purchases of brand new games.

It would be nice to see a breakdown of digital revenue split between brand new games and games bought on sale.

I'm 38 years old, love my physical media simply since I can trade it and get some credit back for my next purchase. However, PSN sales have been so good, I've bought more older games this gen than ever before.

I wonder if this is just me, or if this is so common it makes up a chunk of digital revenue.

I've been buying a lot on the PSN, but always smaller games.

Big games will always be physical.



JRPGfan said:
BraLoD said:
Hardware numbers are abismal tho.
Seems like PS4 won't have legs like the PS3 didn't.
With the PS4 Pro the price actually didn't go down a cent this gen.
Seems like PS legs are a thing of the past now, keeping prices higher is what they want.

7 years out, and its still tracking ahead of the PS2 though.

If they had enough stock left, they could do a price drop.
Sadly, supposedly they dont. So its not likely to happend.

I wonder why they didn't produce more, and then lower prices, PS4 could have gone to higher heights if they had.

I mean, why would they not want to let it sells to the people that won't be able to afford the PS5 for a good time?

Drop that price and get more PS+ subscribers that will move for the PS5 later already there.



BraLoD said:
JRPGfan said:

7 years out, and its still tracking ahead of the PS2 though.

If they had enough stock left, they could do a price drop.
Sadly, supposedly they dont. So its not likely to happend.

I wonder why they didn't produce more, and then lower prices, PS4 could have gone to higher heights if they had.

I mean, why would they not want to let it sells to the people that won't be able to afford the PS5 for a good time?

Drop that price and get more PS+ subscribers that will move for the PS5 later already there.

this... I have a hard time wrapping my head around the fact that there will be a PS5 (digital) for 399$, when the base PS4slim is still 299$.
It cant be real that theres only a 100$ differnce.

Sony need a super slim PS4 asap, and they need to set price to 149$.
And continue to make them, to sell to regions where they wont go for a 400$ or 500$ console.



Around the Network
JRPGfan said:
BraLoD said:
Hardware numbers are abismal tho.
Seems like PS4 won't have legs like the PS3 didn't.
With the PS4 Pro the price actually didn't go down a cent this gen.
Seems like PS legs are a thing of the past now, keeping prices higher is what they want.

7 years out, and its still tracking ahead of the PS2 though.

If they had enough stock left, they could do a price drop.
Sadly, supposedly they dont. So its not likely to happend.

I wonder why they didn't produce more, and then lower prices, PS4 could have gone to higher heights if they had.

Because they don't believe the increase in hardware sales will provide an increase in hardware revenue/ profit. 

They are clearly ok with sales as they are.



OTBWY said:
Barkley said:

I am what? I'm so confused right now.

You are confused indeed.

Seems more like you were confused and thought I was taking the side of people discrediting the DS's sales, when I was merely pointing out the "PS2 dropped to $99" was some BS argument in the validity of PS2 vs DS sales.

Both systems sold amazing, DS shouldn't be discredited because it was a handheld and PS2 shouldn't be discredited because of it's price or dvd.



Why are we having a silly discussion of sales of over 10 years ago on a financial report for the latest quarter?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

twintail said:
JRPGfan said:

7 years out, and its still tracking ahead of the PS2 though.

If they had enough stock left, they could do a price drop.
Sadly, supposedly they dont. So its not likely to happend.

I wonder why they didn't produce more, and then lower prices, PS4 could have gone to higher heights if they had.

Because they don't believe the increase in hardware sales will provide an increase in hardware revenue/ profit. 

They are clearly ok with sales as they are.

And why don't they believe that?

More PS+ subscribers is already enough reason to drop that price.

I can understand the PS3 as it was never that popular and PS+ was still small there, but now most sales come from PSN, and having a PS4 give people access to a whole lot of games to buy there.

I can't see why not just do it.



BraLoD said:
twintail said:

Because they don't believe the increase in hardware sales will provide an increase in hardware revenue/ profit. 

They are clearly ok with sales as they are.

And why don't they believe that?

More PS+ subscribers is already enough reason to drop that price.

I can understand the PS3 as it was never that popular and PS+ was still small there, but now most sales come from PSN, and having a PS4 give people access to a whole lot of games to buy there.

I can't see why not just do it.

I have given you the reasonable on how much more sales you would need to justify the cut in price, and that count showed that it would be hard.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994