Sony Open to Considering PS3 Price Cuts

njkid1 writes with word that Sony is considering dropping the PS3's price. The Mercury news reports that Sony Senior Vice President Takao Yuhara has admitted they are investigating whether to drop the PlayStation 3 in price around the world, despite statements previously made that the 'lower' PS3 price in Japan is hurting Sony's bottom line. Profits for the company slipped some five percent in the October-December period, and the shortfall expected through March could be even worse than previously predicted. The article points out the possibly risky nature of a price cut for such an expensive item so early in its lifespan, and notes the stiff competition from the Xbox 360 and the Wii.

Comments

That's nice...

[__aaclcg7560]

But why would I buy a PS3 when the demo units at the stores are usually frozen and the demo game is unimpressive? There are better places to blow your money.

Re:That's nice...

[FinchWorld]

According to Sony its a "feature". Stops people playing too long... apparently.

Reminds me of some of the (orginal) xbox demo units that were sealed in so tight they got to hot and crashed:P

Re:That's nice...

[IcyNeko]

That's pretty much you own fault. If you weren't standing in the PS3's weak spot and attack for "massive damage", the PS3 would still be ok!

Re:That's nice...

[Lehk228]

that includes the automated demos... can't have people monopolizing those

Re:That's nice...

[Anonymous Coward]

Your response doesn't exactly help matters. In fact, it suggests that a "high-end computer" might not belong underneath the TV, or on the floor. Is the PS3 really designed to function properly only in a data center?

Not that it's really a "high-end computer" with merely 256MB of RAM which cannot be upgraded, but I digress.

Re:That's nice...

[McFadden]

But why would I buy a PS3 when the demo units at the stores are usually frozen and the demo game is unimpressive?

Furthermore, who the hell is going to buy one now, when it's now public knowledge that a price cut could be around the corner. In the short term, Sony have just ensured that no one (except the occasional fool) is going to want to part with their money.

Re:That's nice...

[nuzak]

> According to Sony its a "feature". Stops people playing too long... apparently.

Yeah, according to slashdot quoting some guy on his blog quoting an unnamed Sony rep. No, they overheated. In Sony's defense, those enclosures are pretty poorly ventilated.

But really, the demo game is unimpressive ... I don't get it, PS2's usually have a demo disc in them with a half-dozen or so games to choose from, and the same for xboxen. But no one at Sony is paying attention to the demo-ability of the PS3, judging from locked up units to the ho-hum single game offering. I guess they figured on having a fanatically loyal fanbase that would just snap up whatever Sony offered, sight unseen, at any price. As a PS2 owner who's sunk close to a grand on PS2 games, I'm quite happy to help teach them a lesson in humility.

Re:That's nice...

[__aaclcg7560]

Think about it... You go to the store to buy a video game console. You see one that's frozen solid when you try to play it. There's another console that's working just fine as you play it. Assuming that both consoles are in stock, which one would you buy? Do you buy the one that screams C-R-A-P or the one that works?

Sony is Going to Lose the Console War

[jakek812]

As much as I hate to say it, Sony has no chance, and the fact that they have to do a price drop on their console this early in its lifespan especially when they're taking a huge loss on it already, proves it.

Re:Sony is Going to Lose the Console War

[numbski]

Not neccessarily.

I think it all depends on how deep their pockets are, and how badly they want to win. If they were to do a serious price cut (as in 50%, bring it down to the $300 range), they would be hurting, and hurting BAD, however the units *would* start to sell. Market penetration is nearly as important as profit per unit sold. The main thing killing them right now is that Nintendo actually turns a profit on every Wii sold, Microsoft, I don't recall whether it's a loss-leader or not, but Microsoft's XBox360 simply can't hurt them badly enough for it to matter.

If Sony were to gamble big and drop the price low enough that mere mortals might consider buying, they could at very least make things interesting. Question is, how much of a loss can they afford to take per-unit to get there?

Re:Sony is Going to Lose the Console War

[asc99c]

Sony does have deep pockets. Remember that PS3 is currently hurting their profit margins, but they are still making profits - PS2 is continuing to bring in the money while XBox is now mostly dead for Microsoft. Their TV line is also hugely popular right now. For the first time, they've got a genuinely good range of LCD TVs that may restore some of the dominance they lost in the switch from CRTs.

I'd like to know the sort of royalties they will make on both games and Blu-Ray technology. If it's high enough, maybe they really can afford to drop the price. Microsoft only has one of those revenue streams coming in - AFAIK they are supporting HD-DVD but have no stake in the hardware technology.

Also, Microsoft has the home advantage in the US, so this will skew sales figures somewhat. Europe is a bigger market and a level playing field for the companies. When the console launches over here, I'd expect sales figures to be looking better.

Well...

[Dave Parrish]

The Wii is selling like hotcakes and the PS3 is already requiring a price drop.

Anyone else betting that Sony learns nothing from this?

They seriously need to figure out that, when someone buys a game system, we want to PLAY GAMES ON IT. We don't need to watch movies, listen to MP3s, view images, surf the web, do our dishes, and drive to work using the same machine.

Re:Well...

[CronoCloud]

They seriously need to figure out that, when someone buys a game system, we want to PLAY GAMES ON IT. We don't need to watch movies, listen to MP3s, view images, surf the web, do our dishes, and drive to work using the same machine.

Ahh but mostly likely when Sony's people asked people if they would use those extra features if they put them in there, those people said yes. So Sony did that, both the with the PSP and now the PS3.

And then consumers whined. "They cost too much"

and then Sony said, "But you told us you wanted those features when we asked you about them so we put them in there. You had to know that would raise the price."

Consumers: "Waaaah it costs too much we just want to play puzzle games and casual games"

Sony: "But you said you wanted games that were more like those you played at home on your portables. You wanted 3D games rather than stripped down 2D travesties of 3D games like what happened on the Gameboy Color ports of 3D games.

You said you wanted higher resolutions on your home machines like you have on PC's. You wanted built in wireless so you wouldn't have to buy a wireless bridge, you wanted us to use standard memory cards. and now you complain about having to buy an HDTV, having to pay for the built in wireless, and having to pay for an adapter for the old cards? You people are hypocrites and don't know what you want."

Here's what Sony needs to learn:

Consumers don't know what they want, will whine anyway when they get what they said they wanted, and sometimes lie

Re:Well...

[dynamo]

They seriously need to figure out that, when someone buys a game system, we want to PLAY GAMES ON IT. We don't need to watch movies, listen to MP3s, view images, surf the web, do our dishes, and drive to work using the same machine. Ahh but mostly likely when Sony's people asked people if they would use those extra features if they put them in there, those people said yes. So Sony did that, both the with the PSP and now the PS3.

And then consumers whined. "They cost too much"

and then Sony said, "But you told us you wanted those features when we asked you about them so we put them in there. You had to know that would raise the price." BIG difference between wanting a feature and being willing to use it if it's there anyway. Sony had to know they had no business asking about the extra features if they couldn't do them cheap or free. Now they are stuck having to wait a little longer for everyone to buy PS3s. Waaaaaah.

Re:Well...

[CokeBear]

Didn't they see the episode of the Simpsons where Homer built the car?

Re:Well...

[MemoryDragon]

Nobody asked for yet another proprietary Sony movie format in the PSP, nobody asked for yet another disk format which could not be copied with movie prices three times as much as on the copyable DVD. But those things drove up the price of the PSP significantly and in the end were doomed to fail from day zero. The only ones asking for those things was the paranoid Sony movie division. See a scheme here, the same happens now to the PS3, it would have been out a year earlier and probably 200-250 dollars less with equal gaming capabilties if it would not have been misused as vehicle for the Blue Ray drive, and it certainly was not the Sony gaming division trying to shove yet another format onto the customers to raise movie prices. Nintendo is right with their assumption, HDTV on a console is interesting but only in 2-3 years, for the mass market a lower price is more important. Microsoft also was wiser in this aspect. Sorry to say that, not market research on the customers was the dooming force, it was simply Sonys internal politics and the ignorance about past mistakes and past successes.

Drop the price?!

[Threni]

You'd be mad not to want to pay £700 or whatever it's going to cost in the uk, for a games console! Why not round it up to £1000, and charge £100 a game!

PS 3 sales prediction cut by 25%

[frakir]

Sony Corp. will reach only 75% of its global target for PlayStation 3 sales this fiscal year through March, according to a Nomura report released 15th Jan.
They originally planned 6 mil, adjusted to 4.5 mil now. more...

Re:PS 3 sales prediction cut by 25%

[Baldrake]

While these numbers indicate that the PS3's sales are below expectation, there is another interesting interpretation. Microsoft had sold 10 million Xbox 360's by the end of 2006. If Sony genuinely sells 4.5 million by end of March, they will have almost half the user base of the 360. Given all the doomcasting we've been hearing, that is not actually that bad a place to be after only three months in the market.

(And yes, yes, Microsoft is also selling 360's during the same period, but while sales may have been steady, I can't imagine they were flying off the shelves in a January when there were two shiny competitors on the market.)

Enough!

[Ecuador]

Enough with this PS3 talk. The numbers show the consumers don't care, and there are more interesting things to talk about on /.
That is at least until the (unlikely) event that the non-fanboi consumer starts getting interested in Sony's nexgen child.

better to lose a little on the sale

[Shivetya]

instead of having no sale. The real money is in the games and add-ons after they sell the console. Sure it might hurt them more near term, but not getting into the living room will cost them more down the road.

of course since you can still buy PS2s many might opt that route if they don't like WII or XBOX360

Re:better to lose a little on the sale

[Mr. Hankey]

That's true, but it would probably be better for them to keep the console's price down in the design phase. I realize they're pushing for Blu-Ray, but I couldn't even conceive of spending much more than $200 on a console primarily intended for games. I've typically spent less than $150 per console in the past, and that includes the PS2. I really don't care how powerful a game system is, I already have a few PCs and don't need another device claiming to be one. I don't even want a Blu-Ray player. I just want a platform that plays fun games, without the hiccups or conflicts that can happen on a PC.

The Wii price point was marginal despite the interesting input devices, oddly enough it was the price of the competition that caused me to view it in a favorable light and purchase one. The Xbox 360 price was out of line IMO, although it can no doubt come down over time. The PS3 at this point is a ridiculous joke. The 360 going down in price might find me purchasing one, but I'm not sure if Sony can make back through licensing what they're likely to lose on the PS3 with further price cuts. If they can bring it to around $200, I might buy one. I don't see it happening within the next few years.

Computers and their components become faster over time, and the price for components generally goes down when they have been in production for some time. Ideally, a console would consist of parts which are favorable to reasonably priced mass production while providing good performance. Sony has thrown balance out the window and attempted to make the most powerful console. This sounds nice in theory, but they're using parts that are difficult to manufacture, expensive, and unproven (in the case of Cell.) Passing the costs on to consumers obviously doesn't work in this case, but how much of the cost can Sony eat? What if someone gets one and uses it as e.g. a Linux box without playing games on it? They may never receive software licensing revenue for that unit, so each instance is a net loss.

20GB Model

[the dark hero]

Im not thrilled about getting a PS3 anytime soon, but at $600 you really are getting a great deal. I think they should lower the price of their largely inferior 20GB model to $300-$400 in order to sell them. A person willing to spend that much on the 20GB model will surely want it for gaming and that can bring up sells in the software dept.

Re:20GB Model

[Pojut]

"getting a great deal" is subjective.

Millionares think 900,000 dollars for a home is a great deal, whereas mr. and mrs. joe shmo can think 500 bucks a month for a one room apartment is a great deal.

Unless you have a burning desire to have blu-ray in your home, there really is no good reason beyond a personal opinion to spend 600 dollars on a PS3. the 360 has the same graphics (in some cases, better) and still uses "old" dual-layer dvd technology.

Had sony stayed out of the media market (which they have failed in time after time after time) and just stuck with what works, they would be in a much better position.

Stupid

[rlp]

By announcing that they're considering a price drop - they'll kill sales for a while. Anyone considering buying a PS/3 will hold off till after the price drop. Except for people who MUST have one now. Given the dearth of launch titles and the slackening of demand - those folks already have a PS/3.

Now they have to drop prices and quickly.

Re:Stupid

[CerebusUS]

Bingo.

Yet another stupid move on Sony's part. They were better off continuing to deny that a price drop was even being discussed, and then picking a random day and just lowering the price.

I certainly wouldn't buy a $600 console knowing that the price could be $500 in a month or two.

That's a free second controller and a game....

Which is the other way they could go, I guess... Bundle a second sixaxis and resistance:fall of man with every 60GB unit for the same price.

Re:Stupid

[J-Doggqx]

"Bundle a second sixaxis and resistance:fall of man with every 60GB unit for the same price."

But I thought they could sell 5 million without any games?

Not selling hurts more

[AnswerIs42]

X-Play was right.. the way to save the PS3 is to not let Sony exces speak at all..

the 'lower' PS3 price in Japan is hurting Sony's bottom line

NOT selling a PS3 hurts the bottom line even more.

Re:Not selling hurts more

[Grave]

To be quite honest, selling the PS3 hurts the bottom line more than not selling right now. The last estimate I heard was that 30 software titles or accessories must be sold per system to break even (on the 60GB). This would require purchasing every single title currently available, three extra controllers, and a dozen Blu-Ray movies.

While the long-term view says that they need to sell as many PS3s as possible before the 360 runs away with the game, there is a need to see production costs come down to prevent very substantial financial loss.

Personally, I think that Sony is in serious trouble this year. There are so many very highly anticipated titles coming for the 360 that will almost certainly be system sellers (Halo 3 being the ultimate), and so few coming this year for the PS3. If it takes another year for a system-selling title to come out on PS3, Sony might not even be able to get close to the market share of the 360.

(I don't consider the Wii to be a direct competitor, as it will almost certainly be the #1 selling system by the end of the year. However, for many people it will be a second system. For blockbuster games, the 360 and PS3 are the competitors.)

Re:Not selling hurts more

[CastrTroy]

Lets just say it costs them $700 to make the system, and it costs $600 for the person to buy it. This means if someone buys it, they lose $100. If nobody buys it they lose $700. If somebody buys it after a price drop at $500, then they have lost $100. Unless they find some way to sell the PS3 at $700 or more at some later date, then selling it now for a loss of $100 is still the best they can do for the already manufactured units. As far as building new consoles, I'm not sure if it's more worth their money to stop production, or to continue producing them and selling at a loss, hoping to eventually make a profit.

Re:Not selling hurts more

[HappySqurriel]

As much as people would like to believe that a PS3 price reduction would be about pleasing consumers the reality is that if Sony cared about what the customers thought they would have dropped the price after E3 when everyone said "WTF?"

Right now, somewhere in Sony of America an executive is talking to a third party publisher and is trying to respond to the threat "If the PS3 doesn't start to sell more software we won't release any exclusive games for it!"

As dumb as Sony is they still know that EA, Activision, Ubisoft, Konami, Namco, and Square-Enix had a far greater impact on creating the Playstation brand than Sony ever did; I'm certain that every major third party developer has talked to Sony and brought up the poor sales of their products, the poor sales of the PS3 and the rumored lack of demand for the PS3 and is wondering why they should continue to spend $5,000,000-$10,000,000 per year to continue developing a game exclusively for the PS3. A price drop would be Sony's way of giving into the developers to ensure that they still had exclusive content that the XBox 360 didn't have.

Sony doesn't control WB, Paramount, Disney, Fox

[tepples]

Does [a Sony Blu-ray Disc player] let you watch blueray movies with any HDTV you want?

Yes. In titles without the image constraint token, the resolution far exceeds that of DVD-Video in both luma and chroma. Even with the image constraint token, the chroma resolution is double that of DVD-Video in each dimension. The major American movie studios that have adopted Blu-ray Disc have agreed not to use the image constraint token for the first few years of releases. But whether Warner Bros., Paramount, Disney, and Fox use the image constraint token in future Blu-ray Disc titles is not Sony's to control.

Bitterness

[Nerdfest]

I probably sound quite bitter, but I hope they don't do it. I _want_ them to get thoroughly boned for their rampant anti-consumer bahavior. Yes, I'm still pissed about rookits, yes, I'm still pissed about fake advertisements. Peoples memories are too damn short, and companies have been getting exploiting that fact for too long. Nothing beats a good financial thrashing for keeping corporations honest.

Re:Bitterness

[the_B0fh]

So, when are you going to do whatever you're going to do, to Microsoft? You know, the company that LIED UNDER OATH IN COURT?

Where are they?

[blackmonday]

If I were interested in buying a PS3 (I'm not), I wouldn't be able to get one. I live in Southern California, and have never seen one on a shelf. I've heard anecdotes of people seing a ton at a best buy somewhere, but I just haven't seen this. I shop regularly at Fry's, Target, Best Buy, Costco, etc. I've never seen one in stock. Maybe they'd sell more units if they could get them out the door.

they aren't Coke

[OutOnARock]

In America at least, we by nature forgive and forget. IANAL, but only when we feel we've been "made whole" does this occur. That the transgression before us has been repaired to our satisfaction.

Take Coke. We were told by the company that their newest was the greatest shit on earth and all other colas might as well pack it in. They even took away Coke. The Coke we all knew and loved. A Coke that all they had to do was not fuck it up.

And they fucked it up.

And there was outrage. More importantly, there were no sales of this New Coke. Yet people as I recall were selling two liters of old, or Classic Coke for hundreds of dollars.

And they saw this outrage and maybe cared, maybe not. But they saw the sales in those markets. And their New Coke had a short, painful life, and a quiet death. I don't even know if they promoted when the sliver stripe on the cans disappeared and Classic Coke was just Coke again.

Because they could. Because THEIR product does not have to evolve and is unique within their domain. They were smart enough, God help me, to realize that they had a great product in their domain, and their customers were willing to fight for it; all they had to do is not fuck it up.

THEY could say they fucked up, go back to the Classic taste we all loved, and sure, even drop the price if they wanted to to sweeten the deal a little, slight pun intended. And we would forgive them because they made us whole, we had our Coke again and the world was right.

Their product allowed for a fuck up of such massive proportions. A gig in management there must be sweet.

Sony assumes that the BRANDNAME "Playstation" carries all the attributes of a Classic Coke. No. Their product does have to evolve and becomes less and less unique by the day. They cannot just apologize, with their tails between their legs go back to what they had, drop the price a little, and make us all whole and happy with their product again.

Sony must make their "New Coke" fly.....and now they must try to repair the injury to their fans and make them whole again. A price drop alone cannot accomplish this, I wonder if anything they do really can. I wish them luck but I'm betting this will be another how not to succeed example in business classes across the globe in a few years.

Re:they aren't Coke

[Anonymous Coward]

No, no, no. This had NOTHING to do with consumer demand. They wanted to swap the formulation from the old "expensive" formula to a newer less expensive (read more profitable) formula. The problem, the taste wasn't EXACTLY the same as the old. So, you release "New Coke", let people get "un-used" to the taste of your original product, then, release the newer low cost, ALMOST tastes the same "Coke Classic", the customers think that they somehow influenced your decision, you get to make more money per unit sold, everybody wins!

It was a BRILLIANT strategy.

Re:they aren't Coke

[CokeBear]

Urban Legend.

The change you are talking about is the switch from real sugar to high fructose corn syrup, and it happened almost a year before the introduction of New Coke. It was pretty uneventful, since there were no blogs back then. A few people complained, but they were ignored.

Re:they aren't Coke

[Golias]

I find your ideas intriguing and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

No, but seriously, there were far less crafty and conspiratorial reasons behind New Coke.

It started with the invention of NutraSweet. Diet Coke pushed Tab and all other sugar-free colas into total obscurity. It not only became the #1 diet soda, it became the #3 soda overall.

The crucial difference between the flavors of Coke and Pepsi is the choice of citrus used. Coke has always used lemon, while Pepsi uses lime. That's why Coke has that "snap" that hard-core Coke fans crave, while Pepsi tastes slightly sweeter (which led to them winning all those "Pepsi Challenge" taste tests... If you just have a sip of each back-to-back, the sweeter one will taste "better.")

Diet Coke has a formula which is extremely sweet, like Pepsi.

Younger people tend to prefer the sweeter taste of Pepsi, while older folks like Coke... generally speaking.

This created a demographic scare for Coke execs in the 1980s. They saw that a whole generation was growing up on Pepsi, and feared for their market-share dominance. Not considering that some of these Pepsi-drinking kids might gradually change their preference, they panicked.

New Coke was an effort to capture the younger market, by making a sugar-based cola which tasted pretty much the same as the startlingly popular Diet Coke, and compete with Pepsi on the basis of sweetness.

The problem was, people who drink Coke exclusively don't like the ultra-sweet taste of Pepsi.

If it was an on-purpose maneuver, it was a terribly risky one. The ONLY reason their old customers came back for "Classic" Coke was because there was, and is, nobody making anything that tastes quite like Coca-Cola. (Actually, there may have been, since the patent on Coke's old formula has long since run out, but nobody is calling their attention to it.)

As for why Classic doesn't *quite* taste the same to picky cola drinkers: Coke keeps most of the formula the same, but uses whatever sweetner is cheapest at the time for the region which is making it, which in almost all cases is either high fructose corn syrup or beet sugar. They figure most people won't care, and they are mostly right.

If you are one of those hard-core Coke fans and miss "the real thing", go shopping in April.

For the Passover, Coke makes a limited batch of Kosher Coke, so kids from traditional Jewish families can have a little Coke with their feast. The thing is, there is only one Coke formula which has been approved as Kosher, and that's the original formula using cane sugar for sweetener.

You can identify the Kosher cans of Coke by looking for the triangle-shaped seal of the Rabbinical Council near the base of the can. I don't drink Coke anymore (all that sugar is bad for you), but back in the day I used to buy it by the crate-load out of local supermarkets and hoard enough to get me through as much of the year as I could.

Re:they aren't Coke

[Erwos]

You're somewhat inaccurate at the end. Both Coke and Pepsi, at least in the US, are kosher year-round. You can't use corn syrup on Passover because it's a corn-derivative. So, nicely enough, the companies allow a run with real sugar.

So, it's not really "kosher" coke that's the issue - it's that "chametz-free" coke is what's needed at Passover.

Re:they aren't Coke

[Control Group]

(Actually, there may have been, since the patent on Coke's old formula has long since run out, but nobody is calling their attention to it.)

I was under the impression they never patented it, so the formula isn't public; they've always protected it as a trade secret.

Re:I spent $647.99

[PyroMosh]

They do though! But they planned much better for it.

The Cell processor uses 7 cores, but each one has 8 physical cores on it.

The reason for this is that they expect a roughly 1 in 8 failure rate of the cores (or close to it). By having 8 cores, many chip yields will have one bad core, but it's okay. They test them, disable the bad core, and ship the chip with the dead portion disabled.

When they happen to have a good chip with all cores good, it'e either used for other applications, or it has a random core disabled anyway and goes into a ps3.

When there's more than one core dead, I'm not sure what they do. I'd guess they either scrap it, or use it in less demanding applications.

It's a somewhat clever model. But it makes me wonder if they're releasing chips with cores that might me marginal into the market.

Unfortunate wording

[thatguywhoiam]

"Stiff competition from the Wii..."

Someone mentioned a huge throbbing joke in there somewhere, but I'm boned if I can find it.

Clarification. Wii CAN play movies, not DVDs.

[trdrstv]

actually, no..it can't. this feature was taken out shortly before release

Yes it can play movies. It cannot play DVD's , but it can play motion Jpeg (a Quicktime format) which I have used (My Nikon CoolPix records in that format) in the Photo Channel.

They've set themselves up for it...

[ravyne]

Sony has done absolutely *nothing* right this generation. They're too late, with technology to match their intended launch date of last year. They threw in a GPU too late to the game because they thought their wonderfull cell processor would make a powerfull enough GPU. The cell is nice in theory, but there's too many restrictions and memory-wrangling in practice. They're up against the 360, with a 10+ million installed base, second-gen games, and a lower price point - Oh and Halo 3 is due out this holiday season or there about. They're up against the Wii at less than half the price, and cheaper games they can't match on innovation. The launch catalog was anemic with no real stand-outs, and there's nothing big on the radar except MGS4. They're losing exclusive third-party titles left and right to the 360.

Devs are comfortable on their competitors' machines - The Wii is just a faster gamecube (literally) with a neat controller, and while the 360 is relatively complex they've got wonderful top-notch tools to support development and an architecture thats doesn't have a split memory model or hobbled assymetric CPU.

Despite the high price, they're loosing about $175 - $225 per unit (depending on the model) while their competotors' machines are already profitable hardware. Nintendo has never sold an unprofitable machine, and right now, Microsoft could give consumers a $50 price drop and take each new owner out to lunch before they would go back into the red.

Mark my words -- If the earth doesn't shake for Sony real soon they'll be a distant third this time around, and may be foreced to drop from the race early or even for good, and if Sony's game division fails its going to make a huge hit on the entire company's bottom line.

They're arrogant over an overpriced architecture that hurts more than it helps, all in the name of pushing their BluRay format.

No one gets it yet.

[popo]

Sony will be Japan's General Motors.

Like GM is to the US, Sony is the poster child of Japan's industrial growth -- and in ten years
they will be in a desperate struggle for survival.

Think that's too grim?

Watch.

The tried too hard with this one.

[kodec]

I already have a DVD player to watch movies with, and I will get an HD-DVD or Blu-Ray player if I want someday (though I would prefer a direct download service instead). I already have a computer to handle my internet-related interests. I already have a toaster, a fridge and a vaccuum cleaner.

Just give me a game machine that plays games and doesn't rival my car in sticker price.

Sony Just RAISED the Price of the PS3 in Canada

[SAN66]

About a week and a half ago Sony actually raised the Price of the PS3 in Canada which forced retailers to raise their prices or sell out the rest of their inventory at the old price. The PS3 is currently sitting at a Price of $700 at Future Shop and Best Buy.

PS3 Price Drop = Xbox 360 Price Drop

[goodenoughnickname]

The original Xbox dropped $100 5 months after its launch, 1 day after Sony dropped $100 from the price of the PS2 (both down to $199). Let's hope one of them budges and history repeats itself, because I am really interested in Gears of War and Crackdown, and the triumphant return of co-op play.

I will never buy another Sony product...

[jgercken]

... Because my memory is good and I remember the crap Sony inflicted upon us.

Sheep we are apparently.

Planned from the start

[roaddemon]

This was probably planned from the start. It would be stupid to start at their target price when the market is willing to pay much more. Start high, wait for manufacturing to pass demand, drop price to initial target.

an offset troll for your amusment

[wardk]

I had an xbox, but it caught my house on fire. so I got another one, but it cracked open and spilled battery acid on mom's new rug.

then I got another one, and it broke the TV, make the cat crazy and insulted my parakeet.

and it doesn't even have blue-ray

Let's make a deal Sony

[elrous0]

Well, I *AM* looking for a cheap Blu-Ray player to compliment my HD-DVD 360 add-on. So, I tell you what, Sony. You lower the price down to $300 for the base model and I'll buy one. Think of it like this: It's 2 a.m. and you're the ugly girl alone in the bar. Well, I'm willing to take you home and give you a sympathy fuck. No need to even thank me in the morning.

-Eric

I'm smiling...

[dmcooper]

Sony is the only company I can think of off the top of my head in which I feel personal glee and satisfaction whenever their "next best thing" in (pick your area of entertainment) flops.

From the times I've been burned by their customer service, to the times in which I've watched others get burned - I find that I am honestly amazed that these morons even run a profit.

Re:I'm smiling...

[MemoryDragon]

Actually add Microsoft to the list, and Apple rapidly is approaching this state as is...

This reminds me of something...

[ceconix]

Oh yeah! The 3DO! Amazing system, but it cost way to much. $700 back when it came out in the mid to late 90s.

Re:A better way to make money

[GNious]

While I'd be nice and ignore the Shill statement made by another poster, I'd like you to go into details why finding the PS3 worth buying makes me the village idiot? Seems like a pretty large village, with lots of them then.

/G - being curious.

Re:I dont quite agree there.

[MemoryDragon]

Ahem the 2015 lifespan is rather doubtful, even now, the PS3 cell is at the bottom of performance, the integrated graphical processor is currently mid end. The lifespan of the PS3 even if it sells well is probably ended by 2011 the rest is Sony marketing mumbo jumbo. Sorry, but Sony splills out a lot of verbal garbage, I just want to remind you about the things they said about the PS2. Once Microsoft comes out with their next XBOX which will be around 2010-2011 you will see the PS3s lifespan shrink down to months! Also Nintendos next gen console is probably dated for 2012.