I see people bring up financials as a risk. like selling at a loss and how nintendo does a ton of reasearch before selling somethin gat a profit and thus are not taking risks

um are you guys morons, to me it sounds like nintendo is a smart business, and sony are morons.


taking a risk does not mean who is dumber. Now trying to impliment dual screens/touch play, and motion controls -HD is a risk. They could have just continued by increasing pixels like everyone else and every gen did. But no they tried an entirely different concept. that is a risk.

being dumb with your money is not a risk, and should not be complimented

that is not being risky either, that can be considered financial misleading and is a crime.  If sony didn't truly believe they would get those numbers then that is a crime and you can't mislead investors like that.

this isn't like betting on sports teams and you be risky by betting that they will score some super high number for extra money.  That is a risk, but what sony is doing is a crime.  sony can not faultily predict numbers.  

Uhm then how does your comments about the cost of the system relate to that specific gripe?  The statement was talking about they take more risk to market to the masses, the OP related it to risk involving innovation (which can relate to marketing to the masses), and you're relating it to risk involving cost which is more related to business risk than a risk marketing to masses. 

New ideas are a big risk since they're untested on the mass level, while the idea "stronger console over last gen sold for a loss" is the same old system Sony has always used, though if you're trying to debate is Sony more willing to sacrifice profits and in the long run possibly their whole gaming business (if they lose too much money corporations cut sections that lose them money), then yes Sony would trump Nintendo in business risks.

Perhaps it is a crime, take them to court over it and sit through the most tedious, year long discussion where their lawyers argue that it is optimism and yours argue it is criminal deceit. Won't that be fun...

And it is not LKE gambling at all, is IS gambling.

Sony's method has a 100% chance of gaining money (when their high predictions net them investors), and then a lower chance of losing a larger amount of money than they originally gained (if they fail to even get close to their targets there's a backfire)

Just because it's not in a casino, doesn't mean it ain't gambling

I think after the success of the ps2 sony could afford to take a hit from the price of the ps3, but with the failure that was the gamecube, nintendo couldn't afford to fail again but they still went out to innovate with the wii. So i think nintendo took a bigger risk.

Not actually going to read through the 150-post fanboy spaz attack which just took place, but it is possible that Tretton, as a CEO, was talking about risk as in financial risk-versus-reward?

jack tretton is a fucking deutsh bag. SCEA needs to fire him and get someone who can do their job without insulting everyone else

Actually, Nintendo has far more cash in reserves than the entire Sony corporation. I believe Nintendo has over $10 billion in their war chest (and by that I mean money that's just sitting around gathering interest, not their market cap). I once heard that Nintendo could literally keep making the exact same amount of payments to their employees, partners, and creditors, not sell a single product, and still stay in business for fifteen years. For all its size and divisions, Sony doesn't even come close to Nintendo's financial strength.

I don't think there's much exaggeration in saying that Nintendo can take more risks than nearly any other company in the world. They can certainly do more than Sony as a whole, let alone Sony Computer Entertainment.

it even took more then 800$, Sony took by far the most risk this gen, Nintendo was the most innovative but releasing a console that makes lots of profit does not take much risk..

If ol' Jack was discussing financial risk you'd have a great point, as I've stated Nintendo doesn't take financial risks and you'd hit the nail on the head, the statement in question says they take more risks to market to the masses and made a direct swipe at Nintendo in the process. Jack presents an arguement that Sony markets to a wider audience "young and old, male and female" while stats would utterly destroy this claim and he claims they do this better than anyone *que swipe at Nintendo*

It's best to read the article, realize what Jack actually claims before assuming it's financial risk, cause pretty much everyone knows Sony sells their console for a loss.