| TheSource said: I figured 15m PS3s on a worldwide October $100 price cut vs. 12.5m PS3s on a $50 price cut or a targetted $100 price cut. Honestly though I don't think Sony feels it needs to cut price in any region but the Americas. Obviously the revenue calculations vary based on how many games they sell to make up for it. Their game software projections for PS3 may be lower than I suggested because the PAL launch in March 2007 lifted game usage rates a tiny bit worldwide in the March 2008 year...without that kind of oomph, there would have been a drop to 4 games bought per PS3 user in the year/90m games instead or rising to 105m and 4.6 from 4.5. So if the rate drops harder than usual, to say 3.5 then they'll only ship ~125m PS3 games on 12.5m PS3s in the year. |
But I think your calculation is a bit misleading, if I understood it correctly. You're calculating the loss of revenue on just the units which are sold directly due to the price cut, when in fact the loss of revenue from a price cut happens across all the units sold after the price cut.
If we want to compare a $50 price cut vs a $100 price (both before the holiday season), the lost revenue between those two scenarios is $50 times the number of units sold between then and the end of the fiscal year (or, if you want to, until the point where the same price cut would have happened otherwise; that looks like a good way to do the cost-benefit analysis, but more complicated).
My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957







