Then it just comes down to whether revenue from accessories can counterbalance advertising expenditure as to the division being profitable

SONY GO GO GO!

Then explain the miniscule amount of profit they made last quarter.... as I have stated before, the PS2 and PSP businesses are obviously a lot more profitable than for PS3.... and even each of them singularly should be making more than $50million even in slow quarters because:

-The games cost much much less to make (probably average of 1/10th of PS3 games) wheras the price of the games at retail is only halved.
-The hardware is at least somewhat profitable too, I would argue very profitable, but even with only $10 per console that would be $30mil+ from PSP and $15mil from PS2 last quarter.... that's $45million without adding what will be well over double that for software profits.

PS3 business needs more money put into each game for not much more return, so if (disc based) software alone is profitable for PS3 then it won't be by much. PSN games are likely good business, but it's not a huge business even if there is less risk... it's like comparing Wii shovelware (no risk and decent profit) to massive budget games on PS3 (massive risk, but if it pays off; massive profit like GTAIV) so while PSN games are probably the most profitable side of the PS3... it still won't be (and clearly isn't considering the last quarters profit) enough to negate PS3 hardware losses.
It also needs more expensive advertising to get these games to sell, as well as money put into running the online services etc.

Sony are doing ok... the PS division looks lke it should continue making profits from now on (unless they cut PS3 price again or PS2 business dies too soon) but that can't be atributed to PS3... yet.

My dad makes more money than your dad.

Everybody seems to pray the "PSP and PS2 have been making tons of money in the past quarters". Here is a little surprise for you: the PSP has probably become barely profitable _now_ and the PS2 doesn't really make any significant profits anymore. There are several reasons for this and I am not going to argue about them (believe it or don't, it's the sad truth and explains why Sony is continuing to sell the PS3 at maximum allowable price levels as long as possible - it has already turned into their primary cash cow now).

They didn't. They've been profitable for a full year. That comment just reeks of ignorance.

I agree that Sony could be getting a better profit for their division soon, but Microsoft has been for a while.

MS had 3 profitable quarters, they lost money in the last quarter. But combined, the entire year was still profitable.

You claim there are several reasons but you do not want to argue about them, but we have to believe you?

Yeah sure...

"whatever I say is true, believe it, dattebayo!"

I don't see that in the article. Link?

Again, where is the proof Microsoft's entertainment division lost money last quarter?