PS3 costs Sony $800 ?

[Plano Skywalker]

I agree that Sony will probably have to make the PS3 a loss leader and try to make up the difference with titles...they don't WANT to do that and they have never done it before but it is going to be mighty hard to deliver a premium product (Sony only sells premium products) and sell it above the magic price point (which is $400 or less for gaming consoles) with M$ doing that and, presumably, looking at a 360 price drop this Christmas.

[Gabrielle]

I'd be surprised if the PS3 was more than 400 dollars.

 

Sony wants to stay on top.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Go pay that much for a bloody game system.

 

R00fles!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hmm... I paid that much for my PC... and that's one of my gaming systems...

 

j00 l0ze n00b

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sorry babe but you lose.

 

You can get more out of your pc unlike a console. But i won't go into the console rant so I'll leave it at that, unless you push it of course.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

PCs PWN Consoles!!!

 

Deadly_Nightshade

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's what I keep preaching.

[Darque]

PCs PWN Consoles!!!

 

Deadly_Nightshade

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

ahahahahahahahaha.............

 

Oh, wait, were you trying to be serious?

 

Silly rabbit, tricks are for kids

[Gabrielle]

Sith Bunny says, no console for you.

[Darque]

Not according to my sig

[Gabrielle]

Sith bunny says no ugly, nasty console for you.

[Darque]

[Gabrielle]

:ph34r:

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Well I just worked out that if I bought the same number of games on the PS3 as I have on the PS2 I would spend

[BattleCookiee]

I agree that Sony will probably have to make the PS3 a loss leader and try to make up the difference with titles...they don't WANT to do that and they have never done it before [snap]

 

Wrong. Most PS2's were sold well under the production cost...

 

PS. And I agree with Gabrielle and Deadly_Nightshade on this one

Edited February 21, 2006 by BattleCookiee

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

I agree that Sony will probably have to make the PS3 a loss leader and try to make up the difference with titles...they don't WANT to do that and they have never done it before [snap]

 

Wrong. Most PS2's were sold well under the production cost...

 

PS. And I agree with Gabrielle and Deadly_Nightshade on this one)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Maybe he mixed them up with Nintendo. I cant think of any of the Sony consoles (or the PSP) that hasnt sold at a loss.

 

Took 2 years for the PS2 to become profitable overall if I'm recalling correctly.

[Oerwinde]

I think when the PS2 launched they were losing about 90 bucks per system. When the Xbox launched they were losing about 190 bucks per system, then SOny dropped the price of the PS2 so MS followed suit and were then losing about 250 per system. The gamecube was the only one that launched at a profit.

 

From what I've heard the PS3 will likely launch at the same price as the 360 because Sony is trying to push Blu-Ray. If they can get as many PS3s out there as there are PS2s, then they'll be bringing in cash from Blu-ray discs, as well as games. If Blu-Ray catches on as well as DVD has, then Sony has a huge cash cow on their hands.

[Darque]

That makes a lot of sense

[6 Foot Invisible Rabbit]

Sith bunny says no ugly, nasty console for you.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

[CoM_Solaufein]

Sith bunny says no ugly, nasty console for you.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Classic.

[Gabrielle]

Sith bunny says no ugly, nasty console for you.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[astr0creep]

That makes a lot of sense

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

What also makes sense is that the more you produce and sell, the lower your production costs are.

 

So even if any manufacturer sells the first batch at a manufacturing loss, if their consumer research results are favorable they will sell it "cheap" anyway, knowing full well they will cover their costs in the long run.

 

Also, I know that is more or less true that whatever we buy as consumers is at LEAST three times what it actually costs to make. They want to cover all the costs, they want 100% profit and then there are all the taxes and international fees, plus other "extras". That is on products that are already selling and have attained a decent "cruise speed". It is eventually the same for consoles. And they also make a large percentage of profits from games.

 

So leaking a price tag months before it is released is just for building hype.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

That makes a lot of sense

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

What also makes sense is that the more you produce and sell, the lower your production costs are.

 

So even if any manufacturer sells the first batch at a manufacturing loss, if their consumer research results are favorable they will sell it "cheap" anyway, knowing full well they will cover their costs in the long run.

 

Also, I know that is more or less true that whatever we buy as consumers is at LEAST three times what it actually costs to make. They want to cover all the costs, they want 100% profit and then there are all the taxes and international fees, plus other "extras". That is on products that are already selling and have attained a decent "cruise speed". It is eventually the same for consoles. And they also make a large percentage of profits from games.

 

So leaking a price tag months before it is released is just for building hype.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

According to the article the pricing is for the read/write blu ray. For obvious reasons the PS3 only needs a read only blu ray which is quite a bit cheaper.

 

Have to agree though if you think that your paying $400 for something that cost them $800 you have to feel you are getting good value.

[BattleCookiee]

What also makes sense is that the more you produce and sell, the lower your production costs are.

 

Nope. Me buying Product X won't make it cheaper for manufacturer X to make product X. The reduction of prices is because in the begin they sell at

[astr0creep]

What also makes sense is that the more you produce and sell, the lower your production costs are.

 

Nope. Me buying Product X won't make it cheaper for manufacturer X to make product X. The reduction of prices is because in the begin they sell at

[BattleCookiee]

Sorry but the more you sell, the lower your production costs(to a certain point, it never becomes free), thats basic knowledge.  Offer and demand. They charge you the same though...

 

Nope. If you sell more production does not become cheaper. How would that exactly go working. Do (in game-development) developers give back part of their loan if a game sells well?

It can become cheaper if other ways of production are found... but that never happens with ALL productions in the world, nor would actually be fast after the first produced unit.

 

EDIT; Ofcourse there is the "fixed" cost in a process. When you make more products these fixed costs gets spread over more items making an item "cheaper" in the process. But it has nothing to do with the sales... more with the amount of items produced. And if there IS a way to produce cheaper wouldn't you think there is a reason why they don't mass-produce right in the start (like; RISK)?

Also even if there is mass-production it doesn't make an item so cheaper in production as price reductions makes it cheaper for the consumer...

EDIT2; And besides... that is totally irrelivant for the PS3 price discussion here. Sony damn well knows PS3 is popular... so they wouldn't go to produce a low amount of units... and then later make more for... eh... a price battle with X-Box 360/Gamecube making the loss even bigger!

 

I didnt say they are making profit NOW but they know they will eventually so they can sell below production costs and take a hit at the beginning.

 

Sorry. But you are wrong. X-Box 360 and PS3 will NEVER bring in profit on their own sales. Nor did the X-Box or PS2 did.

As said before; the profit comes from the XX% per game sold tax, but never from a sold unit of the console itself...

 

Consoles are no different than any other product. they are built and sold to a target consumer group, just like cars, clothing, houses, etc.

 

Wrong... again.

The "other objects" you call are produced to make profit itself. A console is made to make profit with the extra side-products made for it. Exactly tell me what stuff is made for clothes, or what a construction company sells to add to your house's interior?

 

No company sells at top prices at the beginning and then drop the price. If anything, it's the other way around.

 

Actually, almost every company does it this way. WHY do you think Blu Ray is so expensive now? Would it still cost this much next year? Not a chance! Why did DVD-players sold for $500 in the begin, and $50 now?

 

They start cheap to build a base of consumers and once everybody wants some they raise the retail price. Usually prices stay the same with some "specials" at key periods of a year/cycle.

 

Nope. The reverse. They first make it expensive so people who really wan't it pay alot of cash then lower prices when interest takes off. You see it everywhere... with games, electronics, furniture, cars etc. Don't tell me you can sell a house cheap now because "later you can make them pay more"

 

Console prices change only when a competitor drops their price or when the five year cycle is over and even then they don't officially go below 50% of the original retail price.

 

Wrong... AGAIN . Just compare early PS2/X-box prices to the current ones (sorry I do not have numbers spare...)

 

In any sector, prices for manufacturing products stay the same throughout the production cycle. Even with consoles.

 

Yes. Then why do you claim otherwise in the all of your posts?

Edited February 21, 2006 by BattleCookiee

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Actually production costs do change. There is a benifit in large production runs for obvious reasons. But that needs to be balanced against other factors like storage costs.

 

The current PS2 is quite different from the launch version and the costs are likewise lower (to offset the lower retail price point).

 

Obviously as X technology becomes the norm the prices decrease mainly because the initial price is over inflated and artificial although justified in terms of R&D costs. Because consoles dont actually rely on the hardware for the main profit this isnt the case which is what makes them different from PC's.

 

Nintendo on the other hand tends to like less flashy but more cost effective hardware. Innovation taking the place of raw power much like you can see when you compare a DS to a PSP.

 

The benifit of thinking the PS3 will cost Sony $800 is pretty obvious if it goes on sale for $400. On the other hand if some people. Like Karka for instance confuse the manufacturing cost with the retail cost they may get a 360 or revolution instead.

 

Sony manufactures a lot of their own stuff which is another benifit to them in the cost department.

[6 Foot Invisible Rabbit]

I will never get the console market. Why make a product that will lose you money? Makes no sense to me. I will tell you this much no console is worth more than $100 to me. There are very very very few console titles that I am interested in and spending anything more than that would be a waste.

 

If I am going to spend anything more than a $100 its going into my PC.

Edited February 21, 2006 by 6 Foot Invisible Rabbit

[BattleCookiee]

Actually production costs do change. There is a benifit in large production runs for obvious reasons. But that needs to be balanced against other factors like storage costs.

 

Yeah. Noticed I forgot the "fixed" pricing. Has nothing to do with sales though, but still edited my post to reflect it...

 

The current PS2 is quite different from the launch version and the costs are likewise lower (to offset the lower retail price point).

 

But they still make loss on it... like they always did

 

Obviously as X technology becomes the norm the prices decrease mainly because the initial price is over inflated and artificial although justified in terms of R&D costs. Because consoles dont actually rely on the hardware for the main profit this isnt the case which is what makes them different from PC's.

 

Exactly!

 

The benifit of thinking the PS3 will cost Sony $800 is pretty obvious if it goes on sale for $400. On the other hand if some people. Like Karka for instance confuse the manufacturing cost with the retail cost they may get a 360 or revolution instead.

 

It just shows how large the loss is Console manufacturers are willing to take to lure people to buy their systems. Manufacturing takes as much as a decent PC, but due to this artificial lowering of the price it will be cheaper for the costumer..., thus keeping a public otherwise to go to the PC due to improved power and functionality for the same price...

Unlike IBM or AMD or Nvidia or ATI they can afford to cheaply sell because they have other sources for the lost income which these 4 do not have. Nvidia doesn't get an amount for every sold game...

 

Sony manufactures a lot of their own stuff which is another benifit to them in the cost department.

 

Doesn't really benefit alot actually I would suspect... and not all is made themselves. Chipsets for both X-Box 360 and PS3 have been made by... exactly Nvidia or ATI... (depending on system which one made it)

 

Why make a product that will lose you money?

 

As stated a million times before, because the loss will be made well with income from additional sources. And due to the low pricing more gamers would buy a console instead of a PC, and thus buy console games (+income Sony) instead of a PC game (+income actual creators of the game)

Edited February 21, 2006 by BattleCookiee

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

I will never get the console market.  Why make a product that will lose you money?  Makes no sense to me.  I will tell you this much no console is worth more than $100 to me.  There are very very very few console titles that I am interested in and spending anything more than that would be a waste.

 

If I am going to spend anything more than a $100 its going into my PC.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Because the hardware isnt what makes you the money. If you can offer people something that will play games as well or better than a PC 5 times the cost (or more) people will lap it up. And thats before you weigh the casual benifits of ease of use etc.

 

For you that may be the case. If you add mine and Yuki's purchases together though you get around