Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

People sepculating that the PS3 will be priced in the 299-340 range are dead wrong.


  • Please log in to reply
54 replies to this topic

#31 b52

b52

Posted 26 July 2005 - 06:57 AM

People who do not understand financial statements and corporate finance should not pretend to understand such topics. And by the way, the word debt does not hold the same meaning in a corporation as it does in a everyday situation. So please let's not talk about any of the economics of these price speculations.

#32 sying

sying

    Speedy1961 Defense Force

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 26 July 2005 - 07:08 AM

Let's examine the situation from a financial POV.

The cost of one unit out the door comes to $500. This means if the PS3 is priced at 299 they will be losing $200 per unit sold. Say Sony sells 30 Million units during the launch period. 30M*$200= DEEP ASS IN RED for a already financially troubled company. There is no way that Sony could afford to a take hit of more than a $100 a unit. Even a $100 a unit loss is pushing it for this cheapass company.

I trust the economic side of science over the leak sources and rumors.

Take it to the Bank people I am right.


If you are sooooo smart why don't you give us the price of the PS3, and please back it up with the mounds and mounds of proof that you propose that you are privy to.





...While you are at it please tell me the winning Florida lotto numbers

#33 Drocket

Drocket

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 26 July 2005 - 08:36 PM

After doing some research......

"March '04 is $64 Billion, but their total assets as a company is valued at $87 Billion."

So it really doesn't matter.


In terms of whether or not Sony is going to go bankrupt and/or out of business, it doesn't matter. In terms of how Sony is going to operate their business, you better bet its going to matter. Sony is carrying a whole lot of debt right now and doesn't have much wiggle room left for losing money. They simply can't afford to lose money on console sales in order to build market share (whereas Microsoft has money to burn...)

#34 Drocket

Drocket

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 26 July 2005 - 08:39 PM

If you are sooooo smart why don't you give us the price of the PS3, and please back it up with the mounds and mounds of proof that you propose that you are privy to.

...While you are at it please tell me the winning Florida lotto numbers

Its possible to make a rough estimate of the cost to manufacture the PS3 (or any other system) once you know the components that are going to go into it. There's nothing magical about that: its simply a matter of knowing the market and the going costs of electrical equipment.

#35 sisco1986

sisco1986

    The Sleeper

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 26 July 2005 - 09:54 PM

Your forgeting one fact, the games. Consoles ALWAYS loose money when they first realease, if they market the a console at a good price and in this case being sony, knowing damn well it will sell like hot cakes, they will make it up with software sales and a dedicated consumer base. Gaining a big consumer base pays off more than trying to make back penny for penny what you spent in production. Money in console making isn't black and white as you make it seem, you also have to take into account what your competition is selling there consoles at, what will look better to buy first an xbox 360 at 299.99 or a PS3 at 499.99, I sure as hell wouldn't buy it if was 500 dollars. But you are right on one thing, a sepculation is nothing but sepculation no one knows what there going to be selling it at, so your topic and my reply are just wasted keystrokes.
If life give you lemons; cut the tree.

#36 Drocket

Drocket

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 26 July 2005 - 10:51 PM

Your forgeting one fact, the games. Consoles ALWAYS loose money when they first realease

Except Nintendo, who knows how to make an efficient game system (but not how to market one...)

if they market the a console at a good price and in this case being sony, knowing damn well it will sell like hot cakes, they will make it up with software sales and a dedicated consumer base.

That's the theory, at least. Whether or not it works is very much open to question. Microsoft lost money hand-over-fist with the release of the XBox, and all they managed was a rough tie with Nintendo for a distance second place. That's not really the question, though: even if it does make sense in the long-term to lose money on console sales, it doesn't mean that Sony is going to be able to afford it in the short-term. To put it in human terms, their credit cards are nearly maxed - they simply _can't_ go much further into debt. They make make money in the long-term doing so, but they may not make it to the long-term with that plan.

Its questionable whether Sony would really even want to get into a price war with Microsoft: Microsoft simply has deeper pockets and will win the spending war. Sony needs to compete with its other attributes, not one in which they're guaranteed to lose.

#37 whoknows

whoknows

    TIme and Eternity #1 Fan

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 26 July 2005 - 11:19 PM

As long as its $400 or less its mine. I've already started put money on the side saving for it :)

you are a pillar of the video game/gaming community. 

 

 

Thanks you are truly a pillar of the community!

 

#38 mietha

mietha

Posted 26 July 2005 - 11:39 PM

You forgot to add in the fact that the Neo-Geo's games costed in the several hundred dollars to buy. They were damn pricey thats what killed it.

And that N64 third party games were $100 when the system first came out, and quite a few sold very well. No one really knows what will happen and what people will pay, until it has already happened. Yes, the Neo Geo failed. The system was $600 and the games were $100-200, but video games, in general were still considered toys back then. It was not the $10 billion business it is today. Will ps3 outsell xbox360 if it comes out at $500-600 or even more. Most likely no. Will they sell enough to be profitable and make continued marketing of the system and games worthwhile? Guess we'll see, but I would say yes. They are making and marketing it as a gaming COMPUTER, not a gaming console. They are VERY adament in this. That to me says they are planning on pricing it closer to PCs instead of the ps2. The PSP is not a very good system when you get right down to it (not durable, very short battery life, etc.), has 2 games worth playing (at least in the US) and is way overpriced. Yet somehow UMD movies have become one of the hottest things around. I don't think anyone thought the PSP sales would be driven by movies, not games. The point is sony has the name that people know (Playstation has become the new Nintendo-i.e. people that don't know what the hell they are talking about refer to all video games as such) and you never know what the hell is going to happen. Minidisk failed outright and DVD became HUGE. It will be really sad if both HD-DVD and Bluray fail, and UMD becomes the next big format. Guess we'll see. And for the record, I am a supporter of the best tech, not a company, whether that is TurboGrafx, MegaLD, 3DO or Xbox. The best system has NEVER won a console war. This generation is the closest it has been since the 16bit era. So sony is cripled by history, if nothing else.

#39 greendj27

greendj27

    MMMMMM....Turkey

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 26 July 2005 - 11:51 PM

And that N64 third party games were $100 when the system first came out, and quite a few sold very well. No one really knows what will happen and what people will pay, until it has already happened. Yes, the Neo Geo failed. The system was $600 and the games were $100-200, but video games, in general were still considered toys back then. It was not the $10 billion business it is today. Will ps3 outsell xbox360 if it comes out at $500-600 or even more. Most likely no. Will they sell enough to be profitable and make continued marketing of the system and games worthwhile? Guess we'll see, but I would say yes. They are making and marketing it as a gaming COMPUTER, not a gaming console. They are VERY adament in this. That to me says they are planning on pricing it closer to PCs instead of the ps2. The PSP is not a very good system when you get right down to it (not durable, very short battery life, etc.), has 2 games worth playing (at least in the US) and is way overpriced. Yet somehow UMD movies have become one of the hottest things around. I don't think anyone thought the PSP sales would be driven by movies, not games. The point is sony has the name that people know (Playstation has become the new Nintendo-i.e. people that don't know what the hell they are talking about refer to all video games as such) and you never know what the hell is going to happen. Minidisk failed outright and DVD became HUGE. It will be really sad if both HD-DVD and Bluray fail, and UMD becomes the next big format. Guess we'll see. And for the record, I am a supporter of the best tech, not a company, whether that is TurboGrafx, MegaLD, 3DO or Xbox. The best system has NEVER won a console war. This generation is the closest it has been since the 16bit era. So sony is cripled by history, if nothing else.


Are you sure N64 games were $100? I remember a few being $60-$70 but I really don't remember a single game being $100.

#40 ryanbph

ryanbph

Posted 26 July 2005 - 11:59 PM

With Kutagi, or whatever his name is, saying it will be expensive I would be surprised it if it came in under $400

#41 Graystone

Graystone

Posted 27 July 2005 - 03:02 AM

1.) This should definitely, definitely NOT be in this forum.
2.) Microsoft was reportedly taking a loss of $125 per Xbox sold. Sony doesn't have the same resources, but it has been done before.



Trust me sony has the resources. They have more then they Playstation. Which I am sure you knew. Sony is the M$ of electronics.

#42 Drocket

Drocket

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 27 July 2005 - 05:24 AM

Trust me sony has the resources. They have more then they Playstation. Which I am sure you knew. Sony is the M$ of electronics.

Sony also has a massive debt, which you would know if you read before posting. Meanwhile, at Microsoft, employees are regularly crushed to death when the piles of money they can't figure out what to do with collapse. Ok, I exaggerating there a bit, but not by that much. My point is that at this point in time, Microsoft is in much better position than Sony, cash-wise. Losing money on console systems is something Sony would have to approach carefully because they're already in a bad position. For Microsoft, losing money would be a convenient way of getting rid of a fire hazzard.

#43 R1V3R5

R1V3R5

    No Pussy McNeverSexes

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 27 July 2005 - 05:33 AM

Don't forget that Microsoft's entertainment division (which includes Xbox) has always been in the red. Yet, Microsoft is doing fine. I don't see Sony going under anytime soon but I do see the PS3 selling for more than the Xbox 360 and still being a major competitor. The "playstation" name is still a leading brand name and that alone will guarantee they can sell it for more than an Xbox 360.
Posted Image
"All wars are civil wars, because all men are brothers."
-Francois Fenelont

#44 camoor

camoor

    Jams on foot fires

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 27 July 2005 - 11:46 AM

Trust me sony has the resources. They have more then they Playstation. Which I am sure you knew. Sony is the M$ of electronics.


!You're grammur make brain hurt!

Because it invests in music, not to mention it's failing PC business, Sony is not in a great financial position.

Microsoft however, through ridiculous government-granted patents for everyday technology and a monopolistic hold on the Op Sys business, has basically been granted the right to print American money.

#45 dafoomie

dafoomie

Posted 27 July 2005 - 12:02 PM

I would be very surprised if it launched for under $399. I would not be surprised to see it launch for even more, but I doubt it.

Don't forget about the huge licensing fees for the controllers... The Australians invented the boomerang long before Sony ever did.

#46 camoor

camoor

    Jams on foot fires

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 27 July 2005 - 12:45 PM

Don't forget about the huge licensing fees for the controllers... The Australians invented the boomerang long before Sony ever did.


:lol:

#47 alongx

alongx

    Soy loco por el Cornball

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 27 July 2005 - 01:24 PM

Trust me sony has the resources. They have more then they Playstation. Which I am sure you knew. Sony is the M$ of electronics.


No they are not. Sony Computer Entertainment has been one of the only divisions to turn a profit for the company in a while. Their computer division isn't doing so hot at the moment and, although I don't know its current state, Sony television sets didn't sell particularly well when they were primarily producing the WEGA series of televisions.
My gaming tally:
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009

Posted Image

#48 Quackzilla

Quackzilla

Posted 27 July 2005 - 01:27 PM

LOL at all you fucking retarded fanboys responging to this lame assed flamebait topic.

Bitch 1: Sony sucks!
Bitch 2: No it doesn't!
Bitch 3: t3h b00merang!

GO Fuck YOURSELVES!

This isn't gamefaqs, motherfuckers!

#49 the3rdkey

the3rdkey

    Foot Cheap Ass

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 27 July 2005 - 01:34 PM

LOL at all you fucking retarded fanboys responging to this lame assed flamebait topic.

Bitch 1: Sony sucks!
Bitch 2: No it doesn't!
Bitch 3: t3h b00merang!

GO Fuck YOURSELVES!

This isn't gamefaqs, motherfuckers!


I actually agree with you and what is with all these losers correcting grammar? I bet they all want to be English teachers with they get lives.
Posted Image

#50 Broccoli Storm

Broccoli Storm

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 27 July 2005 - 01:34 PM

On the more technical side of things...

Like someone mentioned before, debt to a corp. like Sony is a lot different than it is to a normal person like you and me. First off, financial statements can be a very tricky thing to base a company's profits/losses off of. Companies and their accountants often move numbers around to get certain benefits, make certain areas of the company look more profitable, etc. Second, for a company as big as Sony, even if they are making a loss every year, if they stopped production, they might be making an even bigger loss, so staying in business is the lesser of the two losses. With a company as huge as Sony, there are plenty of fixed costs. These costs are there whether they're making money and products or not.

#51 TurkeyOnRye

TurkeyOnRye

    Hey? Is this velvet?

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 27 July 2005 - 01:43 PM

Here's something you can take to the bank: Regardless of price, the PS3 will sell. You'll buy one, your mama will buy one.

What you need to be doing is taking bets on important matters such as:
1. number of people trampled to death in the resulting frenzy
2. number of fights breaking out between disgruntled parents soured by tickle-me-elmo/furby experiences
3. prices going for empty PS3 boxes on eBay

#52 Kastides

Kastides

Posted 27 July 2005 - 07:30 PM

Apparently alot of people dont know the state of Sony's finances. PS is their only "bread" maker at this point. Their PC division loses more money than a gambling degenerate and their Movies bomb harder than terrorist.

Remember the mini CD???? Another failed project and we all know ipod is kicking the shit out of people in the MP3 market. Also, Sony TVs are not selling like they use to.

One more thing Sony is not the M$ of electronics. ARE YOU ON CRACK? They arent even the biggest Electronics company in Japan.
Posted Image

#53 dafoomie

dafoomie

Posted 28 July 2005 - 06:10 AM

LOL at all you fucking retarded fanboys responging to this lame assed flamebait topic.

Bitch 1: Sony sucks!
Bitch 2: No it doesn't!
Bitch 3: t3h b00merang!

GO Fuck YOURSELVES!

This isn't gamefaqs, motherfuckers!

1. Kutaragi has said that it'll be more expensive.
2. Learn how to take a joke. You'll lead a much happier life. Alternatively, you could grow a thicker skin, and not get angry when people crack jokes about the system you like.

The OP isn't offering any solid information, but given the multiple quotes from Kutaragi and the cost analysis from Merrill Lynch, its not unreasonable to say that $399 is the likely price for PS3. Is that a bad thing? I dunno. Where the fanboyism comes into play is when people say childish things about it.

#54 Chacrana

Chacrana

    You wa Cock

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 01 August 2005 - 01:48 AM

My guess is still $400 or $450.

it was probably in there because I'm a flaming homosexual.


#55 Photomotoz

Photomotoz

    Magic Missile!!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 27 August 2005 - 08:53 AM

I think people awlayws forget about the keyword : Bulk. When bought in bulk everything is cheaper, and when an item is sold to one company on enourmas scale it becomes even cheaper. Ofcoures a single component such as the processors would cost a lot. A P4 3.0 processor costs around $180 retail, Dell has the exact same processor in a desktop priced at $350. And by no means is Dell losing money instead they profit quite nicley from selling such computers becuase they buy everything in obcene amounts. In the end I think retail cost for a PS3 might be around 300-450. I doubt that anyone would drop half a grond to play videogames even if the console is meant to be used for 10 years.

Also I read that Sony's saying that the PS3 might be price might have a trick to make MS put thier price up high so they would think thier console is cheaper. If that is true than it certainly worked. I dont think Sony would be dumb enough to charge over 450 for a video game console.