Slashdot Mirror
PS3 Price Cut To Follow End of Blu-ray Laser Shortage?
Via Ars Technica's Opposable Thumbs blog, a DigiTimes article reports that the shortage of Blue-ray lasers is ending. Back in April Sony Shiroishi Semiconductor, a maker of the blu-violet laser diodes needed to make the PlayStation 3, ramped up production to fully meet the needs of production for Sony's new console. As a result of more readily available components, the article theorizes that a price cut may be possible sometime later this year. "Until now, the question has been: how could Sony afford it? If the Blu-ray supply chain is indeed poised to pump out Blu-ray PUHs, perhaps this is the first major step to seeing $50 to $100 shaved off the cost of the console. Would $100 off the cost of the PS3 bring in more buyers? I don't think this can even be considered a serious question. With few exceptions, and leaving aside a handful of loyal fanboys, the PS3's biggest problem is its price. We look for a Sony price cut later this year if sales stay ho-hum."
I'd hope Sony is well aware of the disdain towards PS3 pricing and will cut prices sooner than later. A price cut before the release of GTA IV could help a lot, especially since the 360 will have a lot of momentum heading into the Halo 3 release.
So, one of those Egg Council creeps got to you too, huh?
In my area, there are plenty of PS3's on the shelf, waiting for someone to find them a home. They should've lowered the price long ago, if they were going to. The shortage of drives doesn't seem to have hurt the availability any, and a lower price would go a long way toward getting some people to buy it...maybe. There's still a lot about the PS3 I don't like (and price is one of them, even with a $100 price cut).
"It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." -Albert Einstein
I've had a quick google(TM) and couldn't find any prices for blu-violet laser diodes, do they really cost that much that sony could chop $100 off of the price of the PS3?
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
Agreed. Since when was it acceptable to sell these things at such ridiculous pricepoints? People love to throw up the inflation argument, but i'm better off now then I was when the SNES, Genesis and the 64 came out, but I still managed to buy them.
I think the prices will come down, but the U.S. version will probably omit the PS2 hardware emulation chip and go with the same emulation as the European chip.
The point is, the price will drop, but it won't be just due to a blue diode prices.
The big thing right now is the games. However, to be fair, Spring/Summer has always been a slow time for new game releases.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
Are we really supposed to believe that Sony's tiny diode-making division were charging Sony's huge games division $100 more than expected for the diodes because they were in short supply, when that short supply was entirely the diode division's fault?
Are Sony's internal purchasing systems really so screwed up that one department can make a huge unexpected profit out of their cock-up at the expense of potentially killing the PS3 by making the price ridiculous and pushing back the rest-of-world launch for many months?
This looks like an internal face-saving ploy to me, Sony's Games division knows it got the PS3 horribly wrong and are looking for a way to make some other division else carry the can.
You only have to walk into a games shop to see that there is no shortage, Sony's games division were simply far too optimistic about predicting sales figures. Compare the stacks of unsold PS3s to the real and continuing Wii shortage, which is due to people actually wanting to buy them, rather than the use of unobtainium in the manufacturing process.
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
GTAIV is the only next gen game that I really want to play, but £425 is to much. It's considerably more than what Americans are paying for. I'll buy a PS3 when it reaches £325, but if GTAIV comes before out and the Xbox doesn't limit the game well Sony you've lost yourself a sale.
...I'm hoping we can get some of those cool Blu-Ray laser pointers for cheap!
Paleotechnologist and connoisseur of pretty shiny things.
After Sony said so many times that they will not cut the cost of the PS3 anytime soon, it would be a bad move for them to do it now... Instead they would be better off using the cheaper blue laser diodes for new, cheaper Blu-Ray players. That way, they will still gain market share overall without breaking their word of not dropping the cost much.
Peter.
If Sony has managed to lower the cost of production all it means is that they're making less of a loss per console. If they really were making $300 loss per console as has been reported I'm sure they're more interested in cutting that loss than giving consumers a price cut.
I doubt very much that if they drop their loss per console to $150 that they'll consider dropping the price by even $50 back to a $200 loss.
The only reason I think they'll be able to justify a price cut is if they start racking it in via game sales as that's where the profit comes from with these systems, if they make enough profit by selling games then they can justify decreasing loss (or decreasing profit if they stop making a loss) with the hardware.
People need to think like a business to understand Sony's pricing. Sony built a machine that is a game console, a Blu-ray player, DVD player, computer (with a far more powerful processor than most people's home computers), music player, communications/chat server, web browser and much more. It does all this but is nearly silent. It does a lot for the price and it has plenty of room to be extended in the future. People complain about the fact that there are no games because developers haven't figured out the best way to code for the cell processor--shouldn't that be a good sign that the console has a future and won't become obsolete by year end?
Sony also backs the player as a quality company--the chances of a system failure are low because Sony makes quality equipment. They are selling a brand, not just a device. That is worth a certain amount of money.
Price is not everything, believe it or not, when you are selling something. People pay for brand, quality, and the knowledge that if they buy from you they are getting a valuable product. I might save a couple of hundred bucks on a different console, but does that console match the specs I desire and does the brand support the product?
Sony is selling below production costs--what more could people want? If I sold my products under what I paid for them my company would fold within a few months. Sony is counting on long-term profit from game licensing, peripherals, and Playstation Store purchases, all of which are the consumers choice to buy or not to buy.
Quit complaining about price--the reason you complain is that you want one badly but don't have the cash to pony up and buy the device. The price is what the price is. Either you buy it or you don't. Do what I did--accept that you want the device, check your budget, save up (it took me eight months of small odd job income), buy it and enjoy the device. I've found that straight out of the box and with an internet connection the thing is a blast for my wife and I and my two children (3 and 5 years old). I also bought Oblivion and am totally sucked in. I'm looking forward to the games and functionality to come.
Sony still hasn't demonstrated a good reason for me to buy a PS3 when the only console games I want to play are Guitar Hero and Guitar Hero 2, both of which I can play on a significantly cheaper PS2.
I really don't care how well the Wii is selling, that has no bearing whatsoever on the sales numbers for the PS3 itself. The PS3 has sold well, not astoundingly, but well enough to have a large installed base. Also, where's this $100 coming from they could save with blu-ray laser components getting cheaper? According to one breakdown, the entire Blu-Ray drive assembly is estimated at $125. Factoring in Sony eventually making a profit on PS3 sales after the initial loss-leader tactics, only removing the drive and having no replacement would save $100. What is most likely to save Sony money is manufacturing getting cheaper, and all components slowly dropping in price a little each.
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
Since always?
This isn't the first generation that had consoles launching at $400+, and it won't be the last.
Thunderclone: ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE! ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE!
If they lowered it to $299 (which they wont) I would buy one today and probably spend another $300 on games and accessories. $600 for the machine, one controller and nothing to play puts you about $1000 in the whole before you get any use out of it.
Make better games and I'll buy your console.
No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
You like Sony. You like the PS3. Good for you.
Some of us don't think the Sony name is worth paying a premium for. Either because of the bullshit coming out of their music and movie divisions (DRM, root kits, etc), or because (my reason) the Sony "quality" has dropped off considerably in the last few years. My old Sony Trinitron monitors were, and still are, great -- even going on 8 years. I've had a PS and a PS2 quit working after a couple years. I've had a Sony HDTV that had its IR reciever quit working after a month. The brand name they worked so hard to build up is crumbling around them and they're too focused on "right now" to realize it.
I could buy a PS3 today and not miss the $, but I still say a price that high for a game console of dubious quality is stupid. I don't need or want an all-in-one-does-everything-and-wipes-my-ass game console. All the extras that you like, I don't. The extra cost of all that stuff drives the price up, and for those of us who don't want the extras, paying that much for a game console is just stupid.
I think the same about the Xbox360 -- overpriced because its trying to be and do too much. The Xbox360 Elite certainly isn't helping my opinion of it being overpriced either. It does have a bunch of good games, but its been out a year longer so that is to be expected. It has some a huge system-seller in the form of Halo 3. It ties in with windows media center. HD-DVD is an extra $$ add-on.
The Wii is priced about where I think a game console should be priced, but its also not trying to be everything else either. Its game selection pretty much sucks right now, and probably will for another 9-12 months, since it'll take time for 3rd party devs to turn out good games for it. I have my doubts as to how well it will survive, although, as I've said in other threads, its priced right, and its seen as "simple" and even "cute" compared to the 360 and PS3. Sure its not as powerful, but "simple", priced right, and "cute" count for a LOT of consumer sales, which explains why its still hard to find in some places.
Today I was in my PC shop where I saw a PS3 with a racing game. I went up to it and studied the graphics from 8'' distance. Nice but not overwhelming graphics. The race cars didn't look very realistic and the racing was as unreal as in every game I played before (mainly GP3 and GP4 on a decent PC.) Hardware may be bleading edge, the game wasn't.
Just my $0.10
I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
How about you think like a consumer for a moment ...
... The only games the PS3 has are (mostly) 1 year old ports of XBox 360 games, the graphics don't look any better than the XBox 360 games, and the games don't play any differently. At the same time the Wii may not be able to produce the graphics of the PS3/XBox 360 it provides a new gameplay experience which everyone describes as "Fun" (who would have thought "Fun" would be more important than "pretty" to some people?).
... Not exactly the way you want people thinking of your product
You want to buy a gaming machine to put under your TV and (shockingly) play videogames on; you don't care about multimedia functionality, or about "Linux". You can buy a $600 PS3, a $400 XBox 360 or a $250 Wii
Basically the PS3 offers less value for more money
(1) Live is already a heavy profit margin for them, and one they should continue to play up - but you don't have to pay for it. So long as you are buying games that have live functionality, look for the ones that come with three month trials, create an account with the code in the game box, play your three months, and then loose the account. You lose the name, the friends, and the points - but people that bitch about live are supposed to think those are silly anyway right?
(2) as the hardware comes closer to breaking even and profits from live rise - selling the razor cheap to profit on the blades becomes more feasible - which means lower hardware and game prices for us.
-GiH
More likely they'll see it as a god sent way to finally almost break even on the cost of the box.
"Sir we're almost not hemorrhaging money thanks to that blueray deal!"
"Excellent James, quick drop the price again!"
There's no fooling you, huh? Stock on shelves = not selling. Who are Apple fooling with those fabricated iPod sales statistics? They're never out of stock, they're clearly not selling. I'm not sure how it works elsewhere in this ball we live on, we have have some retail witchcraft in the UK that we call "RE-stocking". It's er like.. you have some stock, and some muppets buy some stock and you er.. like.. you get some MORE stock. Stop me if I'm going too quick for you.
Quit complaining about price--the reason you complain is that you want one badly but don't have the cash to pony up and buy the device.
Hardly. I can easily afford one, but that doesn't mean I check my brain at the door. It's still too much for a game console.
I'd guess that the average income on slashdot is high enough that a PS3 is well within the means of most of us. I impulse-bought a set of software tools last week that came to more than that.
I was considering waiting for the PS3 but the price put me way off the idea. Then boxing day came around and I picked up the full XBox360 (Hard drive, etc.) with a Ghost Recon game and the XBOX Live Arcade pack for $360US.
Value is about how much you spend versus what you perceive to be the quality/usefulness of the product. Only a fool disregards that evaluation simply because he can "afford it".
Even a $100 price cut won't do much for the PS3. Even the 360 Elite would still be cheaper - and let's not forget the games.
Even if Sony managed to drop the price of the PS3 to $400 - matching the 360 Premium - I still have doubts that it will sell as anything more than a dedicated blu-ray player to the ignorant and impaitent.
Sony still has the problem that there just aren't many good exclusive games for the PS3 and what we've seen so far has just been "OK" to "Good" at best. There isn't a "SSX" in terms of gameplay, or a "DOA2" in terms of graphics for the PS3. Worse still is the fact that many of the PS3's games are also available on the 360, with virtually no difference in graphics, gameplay or content. When there are differences, the advantage almost always goes to the 360.
Finally, there's strong rumors that Microsoft has gotten their manufacturing costs down to the point where they may actually be making a small profit on each 360 they sell. If this is true, they could easily match any price drop by Sony, if not exceed it.
Which is about right. Amazon has the best prices on New HD DVD's and they are $20 each instead of $25. The combo disks are $28 instead of $40. They are IMHO doing what needs to be done to promote adoption. I've also had some luck with Gamestop for the used section. I just got a few combo disks for $18 each, buy 2 get 1 free.
Personally I look for these types of deals because I am an HD enthusiast. Most people are not. If Universal (the single remaining HD DVD exclusive studio) wants to push the format, then they should sell the Combo disks for $20, (and not the Stupid high price of $40) and not put any new movie on DVD without the HD DVD on the other side. More people will have these HD versions 'for free' so they will be encouraged to buy the player to utilize it.
Sony / Disney / Fox could do the same thing and end the 'format war' real quick.
Yeah, because, $600 is a bargin so you can play Mortal Kombat again...
Don't forget that the 360 and Wii also have their own game download services.
Each one has it's interesting titles, but seriously? $250-600 is a lot to pay for the right to download old video/console games for $2-5 a pop.
Some companies declare a "sale" when they ship a unit to a retail store. It doesn't matter at that point whether the store sticks it on a shelf for a consumer to buy, or if they stick in their warehouse. The manufacturer (Sony, Apple, etc.) use that number to declare how many they've sold, and declare their revenue.
Now the problem with this is that it's possible to "over sell" - also called stuffing the channel. When this happens, stores stop ordering units - which means no revenue. Worse, if the product really isn't moving, the store may ship stuff back to the manufacturer for a refund, which can cause the company to have to restate their earnings, since that 10,000 unit sale they had back in March suddenly turned into a 7000 unit refund in May...
If this is any indication of what sort of premium the blue laser diode is worth, it's a shock to me that we can get a blu-ray capable anything for under $1000, nevermind ~ $600.
Windows has more viruses because linux has more virus coders.
Since the factories making the Blu-Ray disk now have spare capacity, maybe they could build a few Wii's. :-)
[Insert pithy quote here]
You could say the price is the price but Sony doesn't cut prices out of the kindness of their own heart. They do it becuase they have to. By complaining consumers let Sony know that there are potential customers who they are missing out on because of the price. The media has pretty much supported the consumer on this one. Complaining about this is probably a good thing for the consumer. At the very least it sends a strong message that there is a limit to what the masses will pay for. There is no need for cunsumers to think like a business. If its too expensive they will buy a Wii or a 360. Its really not our problem its Sony's. If the console is too expensive and they can't lower the price because the loss would be too great then they failed at making a competetive product. Everyone is selling below production costs so its up to those companies to be resourcefull and find that balance. Production costs are transparent to the consumer. The life cycle of consoles isn't all that long. By the time devs figure it out the console war will probably already be won by Nintendo with MS as the runner up and big losses for Sony to eat at the end. Sony does not make quality equipment. They make mediocre equipment with good form factor and try to sell it at high end prices. Just look at their laptops. You pay for style, not performance or craftsmanship. A $3000 laptop with 4200rpm hard drives. Those frail and fragile things sell at Alienware prices. Yet and Alienware laptops are far more rugged and much more powerfull.
how many of you are playing a PS3 on a 1080p plasma? don't argue graphics. the wii supports 720p at it's best and the 360 doesn't come close. also, early adopters of the 360 pro who want the extra hard drive space are going to end up spending $200 more on an external drive now, shooting the cost over your PS3. granted, this is still cheaper considering you have to buy games for the PS3. also consider that as wonderful as the wii is, there isn't a lot out for it. right now i'm playing metroid prime 2 again using my wii, yay! why? because i beat spiderman 3 in 9 hours. don't even talk to me about redsteel. i returned it on november 19th. another thing: if the price isn't what's deterring people from buying these consoles, why are they sitting on the shelf? you can still buy it and sign up for a gamefly or equivalent service and save your money that way. considering most of the games available right now for PS3 and Wii are under 20 hours (super paper mario, cough.. 12 hours if you're not in a coma). why not pick up a system and drop $20 a month on games that you're not going to play for that long anyway, instead of spending $50+ a week on something that's going to collect dust after one lonely weekend? why? because you're afraid of the price. what do i say to this? get used to it. you're going to have to buy a car and your own house someday. $600 is nothing compared to these purchases. if you've got disposable income, flaunt it.
oh marmalade.
The key word there is "needless." If Microsoft thinks that they can marginalize the PS3, driving game developers away from that box and dominating the console world, then losing another couple hundred million on cheap 360s might be well worth the price.
There's not a doubt in my mind that if Sony drops the price of their box, there will be one of the following two reactions from Microsoft:
1. Microsoft drops the prices of all three 360 SKUs by the same amount as the Sony price drop (which probably can't be more than $100).
2. Microsoft drops the prices of the "Premium" and "Elite" SKUs by the same amount of the Sony price drop and eliminates the "Core" SKU.
The first option would obviously place the "Core" unit into the same price territory as the Wii. The second option would maintain a large price advantage over Sony and have the secondary effect of reducing the number of units in play without a hard drive - this could benefit both developers (if MS changes their policy of not allowing developers to require the presence of an HD, reducing the advantage of Blu-ray) and could benefit Xbox Live sales with potentially more folks downloading content to fill their hard drives.
I simply meant that Microsoft is selling the 360 for slightly more than what it costs them to make. While not a ton of money, at least they aren't bleeding money each time they build a 360 - unlike Sony who is losing an estimated $200-300 for each PS3 they sell to a retailer.
This also means that even if Sony comes up with a way to drop the PS3's price $100 or even $200, Microsoft could still comfortably lower their price, even if it meant losing a little money on each console again.
I doubt Microsoft will initiate a price drop, however. They have no reason to do so since the PS3 is still more expensive, still isn't selling as well as the 360, and the 360 continues to sell well.
"why? because you're afraid of the price. what do i say to this? get used to it. you're going to have to buy a car and your own house someday. $600 is nothing compared to these purchases. if you've got disposable income, flaunt it."
I bought a home this year and I'm on my fourth new car. My "disposable" income isn't huge, but it's a comfortable $3000 per month. But part of being responsible with money is knowing when you're wasting it. Apparently you haven't learned that how you spend smaller amounts of money is very indicative of how you spend larger amounts. Good luck in your future role as debt-laden house-poor guy.
If they lowered the price to $400 that would be a fantastic discount from where they are now, and would be so wonderful for the people who are waiting to buy one that Sony won't do it. There are some people waiting who would buy after a much smaller discount, so Sony would be losing lots of money if they make an immediate $200 cut.
For example: I _loved_ the first Xbox, own a 360, want a Wii badly, and have a great distaste for Sony's marketing/PR practices and the company in general. But if Sony lowered the $600 PS3 to $400, I would buy one as soon as I possibly could. I'd probably even ignore their previous actions long enough to buy a few games.
Am I the only one who thinks that speculating that the PS3 price will drop based on this is absolutely ludacris?
Seriously though, who in their right mind would think a price drop will come right now?
1.) Sony drops price $100.
2.) Sony is back to square one, still losing as much money as before, but it's cheaper for the consomer.
3.) The price drop still leaves the price at an ungodly $500
Results? Slightly increased sales, with an increase in losses (due to more sales). It's *not* going to happen.
I think it's going to have to get to $200 before it can possibly achieve the sort of success that the PS2 had. You can claim that Sony is targetting a different demographic all you want, but the bulk of all consoles are still sold to/for children and teens. Parents have limits on what they are either willing or able to spend on something that may or may not spoil their children and once you go over $200 you're beginning to encroach upon these limits. Many (maybe even most) children and teens also lack the capability and/or discipline to save up more than $200 (there are, of course, exceptions).
This applies to all three of the new consoles. They all have to reduce their prices to $200 or less before many of their potential consumers will even consider making a purchase.
My only political goal is to see to it that no political party achieves its goals.
These would be great options if Microsoft's Entertainment and Home Division (primarily, Xbox, Live, Zune and Microsoft Marketplace) weren't several billion down and, as far as the Xbox venture goes, the last quarterly filing showing no sign of profit turn-around. On the [highly speculative] subject of cutting losses some - and which itself is no guarantee of profit - investors are unlikely going to sanction any decisions which leads to further losses. What I can't fathom is how Microsoft are failing to make profit on Xbox? It's far from cutting edge, Live! must be bringing in a fair amount, Microsoft have to be one, if not THE, largest software publisher in the world so 360 games publishing must be dirt cheap, they are selling peripherals (memory cards, hard drives) way about high street retail prices for such technology, so where is all this money going? Advertising, at least here in the UK, is low key. Are they smoking it?
The PS3 is actually a really, really nice console. Internet capability, free online multiplayer, Linux compatibility, keyboard/mouse support, upgradable HDD (get any SATA drive!), USB mass storage support, tilt controllers, good graphics, HDMI, Blu-Ray, and Folding@Home. It's tough not to love this little box - it's more open than the 360 (particularly since you can run Linux) too.
But, at the end of the day, it comes down to two factors for most people - games and price. The PS3 doesn't have a big enough library yet, although it's getting there fast. And $500 is too much for a video-game console.
Right now, the PS3 is an excellent value. Adding a rechargable battery, the HD-DVD drive, and WiFi to the 360 "Elite" pushes it way past the price of the PS3's high-end model. But the 360 gives you the choice. Maybe I don't need WiFi, and maybe I don't need HD-DVD or Blu-Ray.
$400 is a lot easier to manage. $350 would be even better.
Any non-fanboys sick of reading the same tired comments over and over again? This is the problem with Slashdot, it fosters group-think. All you need is a group of fanatics with a common agenda and the system is destroyed.
If Slashdot was around in Nazi Germany, all anti-Jewish comments would be +5 Insightful, while any dissenters would be modded down as trolls.
The story is most likely an anti-Sony piece to lower sales for the PS3. Sony has repeatedly denied a price cut, as recently as last month, but these stories keep popping back up speculating a price-cut. It's reasonable to believe that Microsoft is planting these stories to influence potential PS3 buyers to wait...and wait. After all, Microsoft's XBox 360 hasn't enjoyed a price cut even after over a year, despite it's hardware problems and a new model.