speculation is just speculation, but this guy obvisiously did enough research and effort to explain in 207 pages how the ps3 failed, and assuming it will sell better the next year, wasn't the psp's best year it's first?

LMAo what a moronic book, i cant believe japanese are stupid enough to buy crap like that.

I am going to join the rest it is too early too make suck a book. Come on it have not even gone a year.

 at least they're staying away from the PS3...gotta give em credit for that...lol...sorry, i had to.

so the japanese are moronic for reading a book analysis a bad business move,
seems more of a smart thing to do, probably sony execs should be first in line to read it so they don't repeat their mistakes

oh and another things stop running that tired the wii is only on top due to price tag
if that was true the dreamcast would have been number 1
same with the 64 (well this is more of a grey area due to the pricey cartridges)
same with the 7800
garbage joke systems and portables like the Watara Supervision would have made repectable showings
their is more to sucess and failure then just price
marketing (remeber the original ps1 commercials URnot(red)E and all those other slick subliminal message lined ads and time magazine's "THE PS2 WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE AND THE WORLD")
presentation of the product, every thing from appealing packaging to form factor ( the PS3 is the physically largest system sony has ever produced and I think that it means something to people with little space, were as the wii is the smallest system at launch outside of the pc engine)
broad appeal of the software regardless of quality (guess what a 100000 people that will buy a console to get some garbage like the latest billy bob's hunting and fishin are just as deserable of purcahses as 100000 people that want the latest entry in a reacurring well repected series)
customer support (companies like dell use this as thier backbone, people do care about quality service )
there is so much more than just cost and I know there are legions of other things to be considered on what makes something successful

 If you "can't believe japanese are stupid" then what do you believe they are? I'd really like to know.

Wow what a stupid book. Way too early. And expecially given the last few months have been an improvement on the PS3 stature with the American price cut and an improvement in Japanese sales with some big games there's light at the end of the tunnel. Sony still has a ways to go to making the PS3 a real success, but making a book why the PS3 failed makes about as much sense as making a book when the 360 failed. I mean Microsoft still hasn't come close to making one cent in profit off the 360 almost two years after launch.

Gran Turismo you have the worst case of foot in mouth disease I have ever seen. Firstly, Nintendo was very bad in the home console market for 10 years. The N64 launched in 1996, the Wii launched in 2006. You may want to think of brushing up on your math.

As for your last comment. The GC and X-box were both failures. Both Nintendo and MS has sales expectations of 50 million units after five years, neither reached that goal. The PS3 selling more than both the GC and X-box combined is not a given at this point. The PS3 has yet to crack 5 million units, so to assume that it will sell more than 46 million is foolish at this point. 

A book about the Xbox's failure would be uninteresting because no one expected it to make a profit. Microsoft considered it an entry product into the lukrative home-console market where billions were being made. The sequel to the original Xbox, that's the one Microsoft assured would generate significant profits and turn any left-over costs from the original Xbox into profits.

It was really a huge series of bad business moves and bad business communication. Releasing the PS3 at $599 was most likely due to a communication breakdown between Sony authority and Kutagari, who never cared much for authority.

There is probably a lot of interesting analysis in this book. There is already no denying that the PS3 is a relative failure -- it was a foregone conclusion that the system would come out and sell like hotcakes, not come out and struggle for third place especially against a hamstrung opponent like the Xbox 360, which has literally had millions of hardware replacements and repairs. If I was a betting man, I'd literally bet that Microsoft has had at least 10 million repairs or replacements so far. I don't know a single person with their original xbox or their original repair. Everyone I know has had at least two repairs.

Just a couple of years ago you would have been called insane if you were to predict that the PS3 would only sell 4.5 million units world wide 10 months after its introduction.  No one would've predicted that.  People are *still* predicting the PS3 will have great numbers despite all of the contrary evidence we've seen. 

Could it recover?  yes, it is still early enough to recover and sell well.  But there is a lot of distance and time and a lot of critical business decisions to make between how the PS3 has sold so far and it finishing the console race in a respectable position.  And the statements Sony makes about the PS3 being a 10 year product are silly -- the PS2 may be a ten year product because of its /cost/ against the the PS3's price.  I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the PS3 won't be $129 or $100 6 years into its life cycle.   In fact, I'd be surprised if, six years in, the PS3 was less than $200.  At that point, the PS4 will have been on the market for a bit and won't likely have been released north of $400.  The high cost is not a mistake Sony will likely repeat. 

The PS2/PS3 cost discrepancy today forces Sony to price these two consoles for the PS2's continued success, and even the PS2's level of success world wide continues to drop drastically year on year.

I strongly disagree with you, kind sir.  Of course we could merely bring the point that Sony DOMINATED the last generation in marketshare, and to come in with such a small showing this generation - that in itself is a failure.

But more importantly, Sony's business strategy depends on selling a high volume of consoles, since they are selling their consoles at a monetary loss, they need to make up those losses through software sales.  To get a lot of software sales, you need 3rd party support.  To get 3rd party support, you need a lot of hardware out on the market.  Although Sony does have some 1st party developments, they are no where near the likes of something like.... hmmm.. Nintendo's.  Therefore, it is NOT ok for Sony to sell less than its competitors  - The gamecube could get away with a 20-21 million generation since the console was sold for a profit right out of the gate.  Also, Nintendo depends only upon itself, as it has such a strong 1st party showing.  Of course 3rd parties help, but Nintendo doesn't DEPEND on them like Sony's business model does.

I think your cell processor arguement is quite weak.  What if developers have no reason to even get familiar with the cell processor (ie. no marketshare)?  How do we even know the PS4 will use a cell processor?  Even if it does, how do we know development for it will even be significantly similar? How do we even know a PS4 will come out?  How do we know that all other issues can be taken care of to bring out the PS4(assuming it even comes out) to ensure it would arrive 2 years earlier?  Even if it does arrive 2 years earlier, so what?  Look at the 360, it had a year head start, and the Wii is already ahead.  And by the way,  I thought the PS3 was supposed to have a 10 year lifecycle, or something like that...