It's pretty clear that you're just an MBA fanboy.

(While I'm here)

The bail out was one of the dumbest ideas congress ever thought up (and proves not a single one of them understand how economy works). This is why I beleive Obama will be more likely to kill the economy rather then repair it.

The bail out can not work for many reasons, but namely, it throws the competition out of wack. A market can run becuase all of the businesses in the market are competing. Competing is the best thign becuase it can do things such as keep prices low and develop new ideas (such as the Blue Ocean Strategy). Monopolies are bad becuase they destroy competition. This screws the consumer while making the company rich. It is worse when the product has a high nessesity.

The bail out ruins competition buy placing a big handicap on one company. The company is paid by the government. It does not need to worry about competing heavily becuase it gets extra money from the government. This means it does not pay for it's actions; there is no concequence. Make a bad business decision? Oh well, here is 100 billion dollars (this is basically what was going on in the auto industry). Additionally, it nulls the need for other companies to compete. They will either give up or ask the government for money too (the door-in-the-foot phenomenon states the government will soon give out money like candy). The companies can't compete becuase their good ideas and leg ups are null and void since one company can do what ever it wants with no penalty (the government will just give them money despite their mistakes). It's a delicate system. If toyed with too much, it will go out of wack.

There is a lot to it. You can't throw money at problems and expect them to get better. One of my fears with Obama and the democratic congress (and the former's fixation with fixing everything) is they will get these brilliant ideas and implement them. They don't realize they don't know the first thing about how the economy works (besides "It prints money" or "It eats money") and will screw it up. The last time the government got involved without screwing everyting up and doing some good was the reforms and trust bust of the 1900, 1910s.

Damnation is that a lot of money.

When do we expect to hear information on cuts to the business being made?

Wow that is a huge loss. Price cut of PS3 console will be unlikely in 2009.

@ Kasz - you are correct. I have had an awesome opportunity - when I started in the biz, I wanted to work in the major leagues - one of the top 10 papers in the country. I not only accomplished that goal, but I am doing video game reviews for the paper, started a small biz and have earned mad respect with developers, PR firms and the like. However, I fully understand ethics and how a journalist could be tempted to spin it but being blackballed in this biz is no joke. (Google Jason Blair)

I can tell you this - I have seen folks piss on other folks in this biz and regret it soon enough. As influential and massive as this biz is, it's really a small biz. At every paper I have worked at, I've met other folks who know people I worked with or worked at papers I have worked at. You are bound to meet folks who will know someone who knows you.

Burn bridges at a paper and folks in the biz will soon find out.

OT: You'll see another round of stories when Sony actually starts trimming jobs.

 So are you the same guy as on the Houston Chronicle Game Hacks blog?

Mad to the Skillz ... in the flesh. I'm here at the Chron right now, about to post a couple blog entries.

Out of interest, have MS ever approached you offering money to bad mouth Sony?

That is actually pretty cool, I occasionally read that. The local paper for me in the summers.

Never ... and if they did, I'd do a news story and a blog post. As a journalist, you can not be swayed by outside forces. Otherwise, I am writing press releases. I have two mindsets - the one here and other sites and my journalistic approach. I see good and bad in all the consoles. As a writer, I have to be unbiased and report the truth, regardless of how much I prefer a certain console over another. I review games and tell gamers of all consoles if spending $50-$60 for a game is worth it.

Oh, some game devs will offer some sweet swag, review guides, even trips for some writers, though I'd never do the trips. The swag is innocent enough, but still, you have to report all of it to the paper if you get it. Most times, we give back the swag to the newspaper and they sell it for a charity. Papers have different policies, but I want my reviews to be unbiased, honest and most of all, truthful.

That is why I really just SMH when I see uninformed fanbots confused about the mainstream media's role and stories. Honestly, they have no personal stake in the downfall of Sony. We are all customers of Sony at one point or another. Folks need to be informed about Sony's losses, especially when you are considering buying a console from a company that just reported a huge loss. No one knows what the future will hold - but the media is required to do stories like this. Say a person buys a PS3. Within months, Sony loses key 3rd party support. If the media didn't do their job, if folks here didn't post it, and that person was informed, it would really be bad all around. The person would definitely feel shafted. In the end, it's the consumer's responsiblity to research consoles and games and determine what fits their needs.

A long rant, but the only time I got close to bending ethics was when a minor league hockey team PR dude offered me a free authentic jersey. I was an intern, said 'Sure!' and got so lectured on media law - a class I had slept through. Went home and boned up on it. Fortunately, that was in 1996.

If a game dev or publisher wants me to write for them, I will consider the offer, but my services are not cheap. And if I did accept, I would be out of newspapers.