Aren't their enough GIF's of Microsoft + Money?

So what then is blowing the rest of the entertainment divisions profits?

When there is nothing else that is losing them money?

That it can wipe out all profits from... everything.

actually, Nintendo just said "screw you green peace" and refused to give them any information you couldn't redily find on their website. And since green peace is so freaking lazy they gave them a 0, even though there is enough info on their website to at least give them a 1

Why are you yammering on about supposed losses from a hypothetical quarter which hasn't been posted yet?  I mentioned that all PS3 models currently on the market have 65nm CPU and GPUs, which wasn't the case last quarter, and I mentioned that blue laser diodes have dropped a ton recently, and that has been mentioned in a huge number of articles as one of the major factors (often the major factor) in the price of the PS3.

I said I doubted that Sony was losing money on the current PS3 models.  I didn't say "I doubt that Sony lost money in the past"...

?

I looked into it a little bit when that happened.  From what I could tell, the reason they got a low score is because they didn't have a specific, written "Green" policy.  There was no mention of the actual practices of any of the companies, which is what actually matters.

So you expect huge profit this quarter then?

Why do you think the whole article is BS... yet they're right on the PS3's price?

It's silly.

The 160G bundle is identical to the 80G bundle except for the harddisk. Technologcally, the 80G is a two platter longitudinal drive, the 160G is a single platter perpendicular drive, so the 160G PS3 costs about $3 more to manufacture than a 80G PS3. Contrary to what most people seem to take for granted, neither the manufacturing of the PS2 nor the PSP are profitable on the manufacturing level for units ordered now (mostly due to the current exchange rate turmoil). The PS3 is not profitable either (with current manufacturing costs of around $350), except possibly in PAL regions where it still sells around $550.

The last quarter report showed a massive increase in the deficit compared to the previous quarter. All logic would have indicated exactly the opposite behaviour, so there is a mystery involved here (massive inrease in R&D (PSP 2?, more bad-stuff writing off?).

As I stated above, I mentioned that I believe the information regarding the $300 cost-to-make of the PS3 was probably correct.  I also said that I highly suspected that Sony was no longer losing money on the PS3.

Are you trolling with the bolded statement above?  Just a question.

I stopped believing anything this article had to say after reading the Wii has been out three years now. I know we've passed the two years mark but when you round up two years and two weeks to three years, you can't be right on much else.

Not at all.  Looking for an honest answer.  Afterall with PS3 making a profit there should be nothing costing them any money meaning large profit.

When the numbers come in if they make an modest profit or lose money... it's fairly obvious your wrong... no?