Support NeoGAF

[Indyana]

So did they cut their forecast on PS3 sales?

edit: I see they dropped it to 14 Million.

Which was their previous forecast?

 

[Johnny2Bags]

Thanks for the insult. no problem with comparisons on marketing standpoints on why MS is selling more 360's then Sony is with PS3's, however, the comments in this thread are nothing more then stupid statements that do nothing but go "lol MS is better then Sony!".

.

My apologies, my girlfriend was annoying the shit out of me, and I entered the thread to ask for a comparison between the three companies so I could get an Idea of the actual situation, a; and unfortunately your post was the first one I saw basically calling mine out before I had posted it.

Sorry... not all comparisons are bad or uncalled for. I still can't believe the TV division (once so grand) is now in the state it is in...

 

[Bollocks]

DVD has not backfired on 360 at all. Sure its forced some multi disc issues but it certainly hasnt done harm to the console.

Blu Ray on the other hands took a profitable division and erased 2 console generations worth of profits alone.

So what other technology should they have used instead? It's easy to say that it was expensive but what where the alternatives?
It's only logical that they used Bluray, it established Bluray as the next gen standard and opened up a new revenue stream which in the end is far more important than the few bucks saved if they had opted for something cheaper.

Microsofts HDDVD add-on was a disaster and it would have been the same with Bluray so there was no other option than to put it right in.

From a consumer point of view there's even less debate whether it was a good choice or not.

 

[NemesisPrime]

it established Bluray as the next gen standard and opened up a new revenue stream which in the end is far more important than the few bucks saved if they had opted for something cheaper.

Urban myth.

DVD is still by far the optical format that makes money.

 

[CadetMahoney]

From a consumer point of view there's even less debate whether it was a good choice or not.

From a gamer point of view Blu-ray helped movies more than it did the PS3.

 

[Monty Mole]

I just think it's petty to come into a discussion and start up console war asininity over a financial report. Leave that fanboy bullshit to the side and let's have an actual discussion like how Sony is on track to hit their goal of 15m PS3s sold by the end of the fiscal year or what will Sony have to restructure to make up some of the losses? There is plenty to talk about.

But all you added to the discussion before this post was:

Good numbers for the Oct-Dec quarter but that net loss, ouch.

 

[BKK]

PS3 hitting 62m means all 3 current gen consoles have outsold the 3rd gen leader NES, along with every other previous gen console bar PS1 and PS2. PS1 sold 102.49m, I wouldn't exclude the possibility of all 3 consoles ending up close to that either. PS3 and X360 will have to stay relevant for a few more years to achieve that though.

 

[Averon]

This I believe too. But is Kaz willing to do what needs to be done? Thats the big question mark for me.

He must, and I think he will. It's getting closer and closer to defcon 1 at Sony, and the way they've been doing things either ain't working, not working fast enough, or is ineffective. The only reason I think Kaz can turn things around is because he pretty much saved SCE. SCE was in really, really, bad shape post PS3 launch. Bleeding massive amounts of cash, lost mindshare, bad news and pr almost everyday, etc...The health of SCE today compared to 2006/2007 is like night and day. Then again he has to run all of Sony, not a single division. Only time will tell whether Kaz will do a repeat or fail.

 

[Hammer24]

PS3 hitting 62m means all 3 current gen consoles have outsold the 3rd gen leader NES, along with every other previous gen console bar PS1 and PS2. PS1 sold 102.49m, I wouldn't exclude the possibility of all 3 consoles ending up close to that either. PS3 and X360 will have to stay relevant for a few more years to achieve that though.

It´ll be interesting to see if 360 and PS3 will be able to catch the PSP, too.

 

[sphinx]

this is the first time I see PSP worldwide numbers from the last year or so, interesting as NPD stopped tracking them long ago.

 

[Maximilian E.]

Like some have already mentioned, Sony will most likely go for profit with PS4, meaning that they will sell it with profit from the get go.

Shareholders would very much like to see this figures turn to black. Selling a machine with loss, only increases the loss if the machine is popular.

This means, well at least I dont believe that the will push HW so much.

 

[BKK]

It´ll be interesting to see if 360 and PS3 will be able to catch the PSP, too.

I doubt PSP passes 80m (or GBA 81.51m), so I don't think either 360 or PS3 will have a problem passing it.

 

[ClosingADoor]

PS3 hitting 62m means all 3 current gen consoles have outsold the 3rd gen leader NES, along with every other previous gen console bar PS1 and PS2. PS1 sold 102.49m, I wouldn't exclude the possibility of all 3 consoles ending up close to that either. PS3 and X360 will have to stay relevant for a few more years to achieve that though.

If they finally get to $/€150 (including Kinect for 360), I can see them selling tons more this gen. The cheapest PS3 is still €250 here, Xbox about €200 without Kinect.

Of course, lowering prices won't make them more money, but the amount of console sold can still grow a lot.

 

[Hammer24]

Then again he has to run all of Sony, not a single division.

I´m curious what his approach will be.
Sir Howard tried to destroy the walls between divisions/entities, kill redundancies and promote synergy effects. Not too successfully, as we know now.
Let´s see what Kaz´ strategy will be. All we know is, that a simple "Keep at it!" is not going to cut it.

 

[Mr Swine]

So is there are reason why Sony doesn't scrap the PS name and start something new? Nintendo did that and got lots of success, I don't see why Sonyshould still keep the Playstation brand that has been on a downhill since the PS3 was released

 

[Endo Punk]

More reason for Sony to not rush out with a PS4.

 

[AniHawk]

So is there are reason why Sony doesn't scrap the PS name and start something new? Nintendo did that and got lots of success, I don't see why Sonyshould still keep the Playstation brand that has been on a downhill since the PS3 was released

at this point they could probably still revive it. microsoft took xbox and made it extremely popular. for sony to ditch playstation, they'd also have to change the name for psn and drop the branding from vita, something that probably needs the playstation brand just to stay noticed in some places.

 

[Globox_82]

it's time they begin charging for PSN, that simple. Just that thing costs them a few hundred million usd. get of yor high horse. We are not in 1980s anymore. Your tvs suck and are expensive! Cut tv division, and other tech that eats money. Cut gaming division if needed. I would do that if I was Kaz.

 

[AdventureRacing]

I think at some point you have to put your foot down and accept a loss of marketshare if it means keeping your head above water financially. If MS/Nintendo drop to $199/$99 this year, I think Sony is going to have to grin and bear it, the PS3 is never going to be in 1st place.

Yeah in the last few npd threads everyone seemed extremely confident that sony still had a price cut up their sleeve. This has got to put that into question.

 

[bigtroyjon]

It still brings in a lot of revenue, though. There is just too much competition from the Korean companies like Samsung and LG.

revenue is the most misused word on neogaf. Bringing in a lot of revenue means absolutely nothing.

The situation isn't that bad yet.

It's getting pretty damn close if they can't figure out a way to start making a profit. Look no further than American Airlines who lost money for years and ended up declaring bankruptcy despite the huge amount of assets.

 

[gofreak]

PS4 is definitely not going to be the over-engineered, overpriced mess that PS3 is just as it is highly unlikely that it will be seen as the most powerful compared to its peers.

A lot of MS fans seem antsy to make this point after recent Xbox 3 rumours...

I'm not sure it really matters, but I don't think whether PS4 is more powerful than its competitors depends on how much they sink into their own hardware r&d. They can not put as much money into their own r&d and still have a very powerful, or even most powerful, system. This is exactly what they did with Vita - wrt processing guts they pretty much entirely leveraged r&d costs sunk by other companies, while packing a lot of power into that system. It depends far less on bespoke r&d costs than it does on a) timing and b) target cost per unit relative to competitors.

I think there is a pretty reasonable chance Sony's timing and their competitors' target costs per unit relative to theirs may favour Sony being able to stick more in their box if they want to. They seem to be coming no earlier than their competitors, at least, and their competitors seem to be either more cost-conscious (Nintendo) or splitting their budget among more variables (Kinect build-in in Xbox 3?). In fairness, though, we have zero visibility on Sony's plan - we could assume they'll go a certain route, but for all we know they might go in some completely different direction, with their own 'extra' features that eat into their box budget etc. But I do not think the choice to go with a powerful box, or not, depends on making a PS3-style r&d spend.

 

[Endo Punk]

it's time they begin charging for PSN, that simple. Just that thing costs them a few hundred million usd. get of yor high horse. .

No! Just make PS+ more enticing. No need to drop one of the major reasons people purchase a PS3.

 

[Petrichor]

What is hilarious is that 360 had 1 year head start and barely beats PS3. So much for being a dominant console in 2, may be three countries.

What I see is Microsoft effectively stealing half of the PS2 userbase from Sony this generation. Even if the PS3 ends up winning marginally, you can't spin this to be anything but a bad thing for the playstation brand.

 

[ClosingADoor]

What I see is Microsoft effectively stealing half of the PS2 userbase from Sony this generation. Even if the PS3 ends up winning marginally, you can't spin this to be anything but a bad thing for the playstation brand.

It's bad for Sony, but didn't Nintendo play a bigger role here in stealing the casual gamers, who last gen purchased a PS2 and now a Wii?

 

[sTeLioSco]

wait psp is at 78mil??
any chance to sell more than 80mil until it dies due to vita?

ps3 growing and its the only console not getting below 200$(wii/360arxade) longterm,so its still has a long life.maybe when all is said and done to be the best selling hd console selling of this generation....

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Kaz has his work cut out for him. I wish him well, because Sony is a company which by all rights should be healthy and performing well. They just need people in charge who know what they are doing.

 

[Auto_aim1]

revenue is the most misused word on neogaf. Bringing in a lot of revenue means absolutely nothing.

The TV division is vital, considering what type of company Sony is. That's the main reason why they are tolerating all the losses. If that division is healthy, it will be extremely profitable.

It's getting pretty damn close if they can't figure out a way to start making a profit. Look no further than American Airlines who lost money for years and ended up declaring bankruptcy despite the huge amount of assets.

That is simply not going to happen any time soon. Most of their divisions can be made profitable, but it will take time. Something like an earthquake and strong Yen really makes it difficult to do that, but I think they will be profitable in a few years.

 

[NemesisPrime]

It's bad for Sony, but didn't Nintendo play a bigger role here in stealing the casual gamers, who last gen purchased a PS2 and now a Wii?

Indeed.

MS did manage to steal a big chunk as well I think, but Nintendo (and Apple) is one of the reasons Sony is in trouble.

 

[ULTROS!]

Don't know if this deserves a topic but might as well post this here:

Sony's New CEO Aims For Top Position in Games Market

http://andriasang.com/comzuc/hirai_games_number_one/

Kaz Hirai is set to become Sony's new CEO on April 1. But he was already in the spotlight today at Sony's quarterly earnings briefing.

According to Mantanweb, Hirai declared Sony's intention to claim the number one position in digital imaging and games.

Hirai listed digital imaging (which includes digital cameras), games and mobile as areas that Sony hopes to strengthen as core businesses. He hopes to use profits from PS3, PSP and PS Vita as investment into the company's mobile business.

In the third quarter (October 1 through December 31), Sony Corporation saw a net loss of $2,038 million on sales of $23,370 million.

The quarter saw sales of 6.5 million PS3 systems, bringing the system to 62 million units life to date, and 2.4 million PSP systems, brining the system to 61.3 million units life to date.

 

[Taurus]

ps3 growing and its the only console not getting below 200$(wii/360arxade) longterm,so its still has a long life.maybe when all is said and done to be the best selling hd console selling of this generation....

This is the most important point that you found about in this financial report? There's two (2) participants in this awesome HD console race. How do you think it makes any difference to anything which one is second?

I'm speechless. The company is effin bleeding to death.

 

[cyberheater]

So what other technology should they have used instead? It's easy to say that it was expensive but what where the alternatives?

You're missing the point. From a business point of view, shipping a DVD drive in the Xbox 360 turned out to be a wise move, it meant they could launch early, keep on cutting cost and have price reductions which kept them very competitive.

From a business point of view, bluray has been a failure for PS3. It delayed their launch which allowed a competitor to gain considerable market share and it forced them to release at a higher cost to the consumer which further eroded their share and reduced traction.

 

[Miles X]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=395262



Unless Sony released fake MS numbers on their FY09 report, then at least in 2009 the myth that MS is the juggernaut of software sales was indeed false.

Could very well be estimated, MS don't give out these figures so I find it hard to understand how Sony got their hands on them.

 

[Timbuktu]

This feels like the Apple of the 90s when Jobs came back and made brutal cuts, everyone has to justify their project needs to exist and streamline the whole company down to four products.

 

[cyberheater]

ps3 growing

You mean shrinking. They sold less FY 2011/12 then they did FY 2010/11.

 

[gofreak]

Don't know if this deserves a topic but might as well post this here:

Sony's New CEO Aims For Top Position in Games Market

http://andriasang.com/comzuc/hirai_games_number_one/

I thought these comments were rather colourful:

http://www.theverge.com/2012/2/1/2765345/sony-ceo-kazuo-hirai-cut-costs-shake-up

I think they may have come from an older conversation, though...not necessarily after the announcement of his promotion was made.

He intends to move Sony beyond focusing on its past successes and get more involved in software and services, telling the WSJ that "We can't just continue to be a great purveyor of hardware products." Hirai's goal is to centralize and unify decision making on new products rather than allow individual units to make their own decisions.

How hard will this change be? Hirai gave what can only be called a blunt assessment of the work ahead of him: "It's one issue after another. I feel like 'Holy s—, now what?'" He also noted that it will be difficult to overcome the institutional inertia that has kept Sony from innovating as aggressively as it needed to for the past few years, noting that "I don't think everybody is on board" yet.

I think the first point is really key. For a subset of important products, at least, there needs to be one dictated vision IMO.

There's a brief quote from the earnings call here too, pointing toward more painful decisions.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/02/sony-idUSL4E8D21G820120202

"There will be situations in which we will be required to choose, make a decision, or implement very painful issues that cannot be avoided for the future of Sony," Hirai told reporters on Thursday.

"But we can't take a step forward if we are afraid of this."

 

[bigtroyjon]

The TV division is vital, considering what type of company Sony is. That's the main reason why they are tolerating all the losses. If that division is healthy, it will be extremely profitable.

They aren't tolerating the losses, the stock price has tanked over the last year and they have shaken up the executive structure along with taking a huge loss to hopefully stop bleeding money on TV's.

That is simply not going to happen any time soon. Most of their divisions can be made profitable, but it will take time. Something like an earthquake and strong Yen really makes it difficult to do that, so but I think they will be profitable in a few years.

This has nothing to do with the actual facts of the situation, they are going to lose a billion dollars more than they were expected to 3 months ago. That forecast 3 months ago already had the strong yen and earthquake taken into account, these shitty results are all about them selling a lot less products than they thought they would and have nothing to do with the earthquake and little to do with the strong yen(and by the way, the dollar actually gained against the yen compared to their forecast at the last earnings)


Sony is in trouble, if they don't start trimming a bunch of fat they are going under. They need to start focusing on a select few products but the executive team just won't allow that to happen. Hopefully with Kaz in charge they start to figure shit out, otherwise a year from now we will be talking about some other company buying them out and the Playstation brand will have an unknown future.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

A lot of MS fans seem antsy to make this point after recent Xbox 3 rumours...

Antsy? Nah, man. (For the record, I'm an XBOX fan and not so much an MS fan. ) Just trying to sweep the hardware geek fantasy into the gutter where it belongs. The reality is that hardware superiority, unless facilitated almost effortlessly and at little cost for the developer, will be mostly ignored by the time the first year's sales tallies come in. The marketing angle of superior technical capability has simply provided no discernible value to Sony whereas core featuresets aimed at the primary buyer have proven worth investing into as a focus, just as Live, Kinect, and the Wiimote have shown. Sony, on the other hand, have tried and failed to successfully parlay their uber box's value proposition into a highly competitive market and financial success and, instead, will live for years with its direct losses and those more intangible effects attributed to its lack of effective strategy.

I'm not sure it really matters, but I don't think whether PS4 is more powerful than its competitors depends on how much they sink into their own hardware r&d. They can not put as much money into their own r&d and still have a very powerful, or even most powerful, system. This is exactly what they did with Vita - wrt processing guts they pretty much entirely leveraged r&d costs sunk by other companies, while packing a lot of power into that system. It depends far less on bespoke r&d costs than it does on a) timing and b) target cost per unit relative to competitors.

I think there is a pretty reasonable chance Sony's timing and their competitors' target costs per unit relative to theirs may favour Sony being able to stick more in their box if they want to. They seem to be coming no earlier than their competitors, at least, and their competitors seem to be either more cost-conscious (Nintendo) or splitting their budget among more variables (Kinect build-in in Xbox 3?). In fairness, though, we have zero visibility on Sony's plan - we could assume they'll go a certain route, but for all we know they might go in some completely different direction, with their own 'extra' features that eat into their box budget etc. But I do not think the choice to go with a powerful box, or not, depends on making a PS3-style r&d spend.

I don't agree, but that's because I'm not one of those who believes that Sony will be able to justify the cost, whether from internal R&D or just from the cost of off-the-shelf parts, and the distance to profit-making for the next platform which all investors will be watching with both the PS3 and PSP's (and soon, Vita) downward slide for the product line in mind. Sony is under the gun and PS4 is just not going to go balls out in any way that isn't already well matched by MS and/or Ninty and/or another entry into the console space. It's not difficult to imagine a PS4 that totally decimates PS3 on all fronts, but I just don't see how they'll be given the rope to go toe-to-toe with MS.

 

[cyberheater]

Don't know if this deserves a topic but might as well post this here:

Sony's New CEO Aims For Top Position in Games Market

If you were the new CEO, what else would you say?

 

[Phonomezer]

$2bn loss.

I wonder what they'll put inside the PS4.

 

[NemesisPrime]

You mean shrinking. They sold less FY 2011/12 then they did FY 2010/11.

Growing is the new shrinking!

 

[tzare]

62 vs 66 shipped. Interesting. I wonder how do sales to consumers for both hd twins are. I still see room for improvement on both consoles as their main skus are still above 200€

Good software sells too, ps3 tie ratio must be good at this point.

They still have to do better overall as a company, guess they are on their way, as they bought ericsson recently so at least they have a plan, just like the cylons.

 

[gofreak]

Antsy? Nah, man. (For the record, I'm an XBOX fan and not so much an MS fan. ) Just trying to sweep the hardware geek fantasy into the gutter where it belongs. The reality is that hardware superiority, unless facilitated almost effortlessly and at little cost for the developer, will be mostly ignored by the time the first year's sales tallies come in. The marketing angle of superior technical capability has simply provided no discernible value to Sony whereas core featuresets aimed at the primary buyer have proven worth investing into as a focus, just as Live, Kinect, and the Wiimote have shown.

I don't disagree with that, in recent cycles at least, but it's a different point than the one you were making...which was, linking the ability to make 'more powerful' hardware to massive r&d investment etc.

I don't agree, but that's because I'm not one of those who believes that Sony will be able to justify the cost, whether from internal R&D or just from the cost of off-the-shelf parts, and the distance to profit-making for the next platform which all investors will be watching with both the PS3 and PSP's (and soon, Vita) downward slide for the product line in mind. Sony is under the gun and PS4 is just not going to go balls out in any way that isn't already well matched by MS and/or Ninty and/or another entry into the console space. It's not difficult to imagine a PS4 that totally decimates PS3 on all fronts, but I just don't see how they'll be given the rope to go toe-to-toe with MS.

As I said, it depends on timing and each company's target cost per unit. It is more or less that simple.

If MS, for example, has a $400 target cost and wants to include a Kinect in every box, their budget for 'the box' may be lower if Sony is also targeting a $400 box that doesn't have to carry that additional hardware. Or if Sony has some new-fangled 'thing' they want to include, conversely their budget for the box itself might be lower. It's very simple - if Sony and MS and Nintendo have different priorities and different component budgets as a result, at different times, there's scope for the boxes to be different. You seem to be assuming Sony and MS have the same sort of vision for their boxes and what to include in each box - as with PS3/360 - and they are thus working with the same parameters, but I think that's less certain now than it ever was. It does not depend so much on whether any of these companies are willing to make vast PS3-style spends on their own new chip architectures and optical formats.

 

[HollovVpo1nt]

I hate to see Sony lose money. They've been losing money for a while now and I can't imagine a market without Sony.

 

[cyberheater]

I hate to see Sony lose money. They've been losing money for a while now and I can't imagine a market without Sony.

They should go 3rd party like Sega did.

 

[Phonomezer]

I hate to see Sony lose money. They've been losing money for a while now and I can't imagine a market without Sony.

Just remember it before Sony.

 

[The Bookerman]

One of the problems is the yen, Same problem Nintendo has. I don't know why the japanese goverment isn't doing anything to lower the value of the yen. It ain't doing them any good.

 

[herod]

Just remember it before Sony.

How soon can we get to the endgame here?

 

[Zen]

One has to wonder how much money they can afford to lose before things become really dire.

 

[mikeybwright]

Here is a brief look at my electronics purchases:

Sony Walkman ----------> Apple Ipod
Sony PS2 ----------> Microsoft 360
Sony TV -----------> Samsung TV
Sony laptop ------------> Apple Macbook Pro

I hope they can turn things around.

 

[Forsete]

They should go 3rd party like Sega did.

3rd party = PC then I hope.

GT on PC would be delicious (didnt Yamauchi consider it at one point?), ND would be even better. Crytek? Lul.

Here is a brief look at my electronics purchases:

Sony Walkman ----------> Apple Ipod
Sony PS2 ----------> Microsoft 360
Sony TV -----------> Samsung TV
Sony laptop ------------> Apple Macbook Pro

I hope they can turn things around.

Sony Walkman -> Sony Walkman X-series
PS2/GC -> PS3
Sony TV 32" -> Sony TV 52"
Sony Vaio -> Lenovo Thinkpad

3 out of 4 aint bad!