By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sales Discussion - Why this generation has already been decided

Munkeh said:
For Sony, they made huge amounts of money from the PS2

Link?

Note that a couple billion dollars is not a huge amount of money.

 



Around the Network
ZZetaAlec said:
wow...you made a thread as controversial as this as your first post!?...that takes guts.

 It doesn't take guts to post anything on the internet anonymously :P



Thanks to Blacksaber for the sig!

mrstickball said:
For consumers though, the Sony/MS is better in the fact that we gain where they lose. We get systems that are far more powerful for the dollar than the Wii. Which might mean, or not mean anything to various gamers (to me it does though).



That's just plain wrong. The consumer doesn't gain anything if he buys sth that is more powerful for the dollar.

The consumer gains when the perceived VALUE of what he buys is at least equal to the price, or better.

Thinking that buying a $600 product is better for the consumer because the products actually cost $800 is nonsense, if the buying consumer sees no value in it. And to make profit, you actually have to make the perceived value above the price. That's one of the goals of ads BTW.



deadhorse said:
Munkeh said:
For Sony, they made huge amounts of money from the PS2

Link?

Note that a couple billion dollars is not a huge amount of money.

 Sony last time it was announced makes $7 profit every PS2 sold. So, taking that into account. The PS2 sells what 11k - 60k a week in Japan. so take 11k time $7 equals $77 profit.



PC gaming is better than console gaming. Always.     We are Anonymous, We are Legion    Kick-ass interview   Great Flash Series Here    Anime Ratings     Make and Play Please
Amazing discussion about being wrong
Official VGChartz Folding@Home Team #109453
 
ssj12 said:
deadhorse said:
Munkeh said:
For Sony, they made huge amounts of money from the PS2

Link?

Note that a couple billion dollars is not a huge amount of money.

Sony last time it was announced makes $7 profit every PS2 sold. So, taking that into account. The PS2 sells what 11k - 60k a week in Japan. so take 11k time $7 equals $77 profit.


I think what many people are getting at is Sony spends a lot of money on Marketing and Research and Development, and the money that they put into the PS3 and PSP (pretty much) eliminated all profits that Sony had made from the life of the PS2.

I think the interesting question is whether the PSP-2 or PS4 will exist (or what will they be like) if the PSP and PS3 do not become a lot more profitable. Nintendo has survived and had the resources to continue hardware development even though they did not have the dominant position in the home console market by always dominating the handheld market and selling more games than almost every other publisher in the world. Sony may not have these luxuries and could potentially have difficulty gaining access to the quantity of resources needed to build a videogame console. 



Around the Network

you make many good points there, but i don't think Sony or Microsoft will leave so easily. As long as Microsoft can continue to take less losses, and they have since the xbox they will stay in it. Sony isn't going anywhere for a while, certainly a PS4 will happen.



currently playing: Skyward Sword, Mario Sunshine, Xenoblade Chronicles X

what I don't get is why are people still using the PS3 has a blu-ray player also excuse. Blue ray players are gonna drop next year and will be below cost of a PS3 so what makes everyone thing that PS3 is the BIG cheap blu-ray player everyone wants.

Personally I rather a stand alone player as i'm sure most people do. The quality in a stand alone player superseeds over any gaming console. This included PS2. Sure the thing might of been better then a $30 dvd player but if you have a $400 dvd player it comes nowere near the visual quality.

Another thing is how do we know the PS3 will play more then dual layer blu-ray discs. Reason I ask is because there are really old dvd players out ther which only play single layer discs (crazy as it sounds).


Anyway the point being I wouldn't be using the PS3 has a blu-ray player excuse and that is what will save them and make sony profits. If they do get profits from blu-ray movies it will be well down the future when stand alone players are cheap and are far more better value for money with more features and better visual quality then a PS3.



Game_boy said:

It's all very well discussing unit sales, projections and price points, but in truth the seventh generation of video game consoles has already been decided.

Microsoft and Sony are massive corporations with over forty billion dollars of annal revenue and massive profits. In contrast, however, their game divisions each show significant and sustained losses - Microsoft ever since it entered the console market and Sony since the PS3 started to lose them $200 on each one sold and the PSP was a virtual flop against the DS.

This means that if it weren't for their other business, both companies would be dead and bankrupt already.

Nintendo, on the other hand, has always turned a large profit and has had their share value (and therefore how much money the market expects them to make) triple in 18 months due to the DS and Wii.

Result: If the market was fair and Sony and Microsoft couldn't afford to lose billions of dollars every year just to stay in the game market, Nintendo would be the only major competitor left.

I believe if sales continue their current trends Sony and Microsoft will give up and pull out of the console market altogether. I see no financial reason to stay in it for either company.

 

 


The common sense is strong in this one.

Thank you for detailing the reality of this situation to those who may refuse to hear it. It is a foregone conclusion. I've remarked similarly in my time here.

And keep up the good work.

John Lucas 



Words from the Official VGChartz Idiot

WE ARE THE NATION...OF DOMINATION!

 

RolStoppable said:
mrstickball said:
1) They aren't the only company based on simple economics. Microsoft and Sony are in the video game markets for reasons far bigger than just videogames, therefor just using "they are losing money" as an excuse is dumb.

2) For Sony, they've almost always made a profit until they decided to push more online functions and Blu-Ray technology. As I've said, and will say again, Sony is pushing a machine to push Blu-Ray, therefore the actual benefit of the PS3 to Sony (as a corporation) isn't entirely in gaming. Therefore, their true profits off of videogames isn't entirely disclosed in mere P&L statements for the PS3, nor console losses. So what if the PS3 looses $200? The PS2 lost $120 per system @ launch (give or take), and ended up making Sony billions of dollars.

3) For Microsoft, they are taking the route of pushing alot of DLC, addons, content upgrades, and such. Consoles aren't their bread and butter, which is why they lose so much. However, their bread and butter are from vista/office sales, and software. Secondarily, they make lots off of servers, to which MS is using their servers for XBL content. For all we know, profits for the H&E division are less because sales of MS Points and XBL Gold subscripts. aren't included.

4) Nintendo is the only game company because thats all they are. For them, if Nintendo ever lost money, they'd go bankrupt. Sony and MS have the advantage of being able to lose money, and being able to recoup it.

5) You can extrapolate "oh, if Sony/MS were just videogame companies, they'd be bankrupt" thats just faulty logic. Your assuming that if both companies just made videogame systems, they'd pursue the same stratagies, but they wouldn't. They wouldn't have the massive bits of cash to invest in things that Nintendo can't even invest in. Theres a reason the Wii uses rehashed GC technology - it's cheap. Theres a reason Nintendo can't invest in a fully functioning online network - it costs money Nintendo is unwilling to pony up for quickly, as its alot of money. This is a plus and minus.

6) For consumers though, the Sony/MS is better in the fact that we gain where they lose. We get systems that are far more powerful for the dollar than the Wii. Which might mean, or not mean anything to various gamers (to me it does though).

7) Ultimately, your trying to make a hypothetical point thats totally invalid. MS and Sony aren't video game companies. Thats why they sell systems, and what they do works for them.

1) Yes, Sony and Microsoft are in the videogame business for more reasons than just making money from videogames, but they have to understand that the primarly selling point for a console are videogames. It doesn't look like that they will be making money from videogames this generation and they will probably also fail to make profits off of the other things they offer for their consoles (Bluray, DLC), because first and foremost you have to sell your machine as videogame system to reach massmarket penetration.

2) The PS2 made a cumulative profit of $2.3 billion for Sony's game division. The PS3 lost close to $2 billion in its first year and Sony projects another $500 million loss for this fiscal year. Everything the PS2 made in profits is already lost. The PS3 is a huge gamble, if Bluray doesn't become the successor of the DVD, Sony will not only have lost their reputation in the videogames business, they will also lose money on yet another failed new format they wanted to push in people's homes (Betamax, MiniDisc, UMD).

3) As of now, Microsoft's H&E division hasn't made a single cent of profit. In fact, they lost about $5.5 billion on the Xbox line. The Xbox exists to stop the Playstation line from becoming a convergence box for the living room which would cut into Microsoft's main business, Windows.

4) Nintendo has about $5-7 billion cash reserves, they could afford to make an Xbox like failure and would still be in the business. The Wii clearly shows that it isn't necessary to sell hardware at a loss in this business if you have a great product. Lossleading is a risky business, if you don't become dominant, you will lose billions (see Xbox, 360, PS3). Nintendo knows how to make money in this business, Sony and Microsoft obviously don't know.

5) Whether a company can or cannot afford to lose money isn't relevant. The strategies of Sony and Microsoft are stupid, they are betting the farm on their current consoles and therefore become desperate to have a huge hit. There's a reason why Nintendo invested in rehashed (but clearly improved) GC technology - graphics are perceived as good enough already by the majority of consumers. There's a reason why Nintendo didn't invest in an online network like Live - it simply can't be a profitable business (Microsoft is charging a fee and still losing money on it).

6) Stop believing that Microsoft and Sony are running their videogames divisions at a loss because they care for their customers. They are not charity companies. In fact they care far less about the videogame market as Nintendo. Nintendo has to care, because it's their only business. Microsoft and Sony give a rats ass.

7) If Sony won't be able to make money in this business anymore (which is likely seeing how the PS3 and PSP are doing) and doesn't see a possibility to make money in the future they will leave the market. If Sony leaves, Microsoft's primary reason to enter the market has gone. If the Xbox line hasn't become a profitable business (which was their secondary reason to enter the market) by then, Microsoft will leave to. Business is about money.


More common sense from RolStoppable. Facts and simple logic win out everytime.

John Lucas 



Words from the Official VGChartz Idiot

WE ARE THE NATION...OF DOMINATION!

 

I honestly don't understand why Microsoft is still in the console business after taking a $5 billion dollar hit on the origional X-box. There must have been easier ways in which to increase the sales of their operating systems. They should have continued doing what they did with the Dreamcast, or leased out servers and server software to Nintendo and Sony for their online systems.