-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Slim PS3 ...good fake or...
- Thread starter bloke
- Start date
- Status
Felix Lighter
Member
NYCrooner said:
The PSP really isn't in the same situation as the PS3, though I think the PSP Go pricing is a mistake on Sony's part.
alternade said:
That's not true at all. A significant portion of the PS3 cost is in the elaborate chassis, massive copper-tube cooling system, and custom 300 watt power supply.
If there's a PS3 Slim, it's designed around the heat requirements of the current, smaller Cell processor, which would certainly be cheaper to produce than the current unit. Sony could forgo a price drop and enjoy a margin on hardware sales, but I can't imagine anyone in or out of Sony would think that's the best decision for the future of the platform.
Felix Lighter
Member
enewtabie said:
That may be the case but that explanation is not going to convince people to pay that price for that device.
BattleMonkey
Member
Felix Lighter said:
Seeing as the psp 3000 is still going to be sold at retail, to have the GO model at around the same price would make no sense.
Felix Lighter said:
But SCEA execs are not hiding the fact that the PSP Go is a high margin device for "Premium" Customers that gives retail a larger cut. What may be lost in the PSP Go story for retail is that the 3000 is also download-ready and retail may end up sucking wind on that one.
It's not necessarily a bad thing for Sony (or gamers) if the 3000 is still the best selling PSP model.
Felix Lighter
Member
BattleMonkey said:
This is getting off topic, there is a PSP Go thread somewhere out there where every conceivable argument for and against the pricing has been made.
theBishop said:
I don't think it's anything nefarious on Sony's part. I just think the pricing is too far out of wack. It just seems like they've stripped away most of the appeal of the thing with that price.
darkhunger
Member
The point to be made about the PSP Go is that it is absurd to be comparing that and the PS3 Slim... Like someone pointed out, its an entirely different situation in a different market. The PSP has been turning a profit for Sony for a while now, so they wouldn't be nearly as desperate at boosting sales for that device as they would be for the PS3.
darkhunger
Member
nevermind
Audioboxer4
Banned
darkhunger said:
The main focus with the PSP is going digital, not so much the hardware. The PSPGo is just a catalyst to fuel the digital desire and show Sony are serious about it (you can't remove UMD if you weren't). It's obviously more portable as well, a factor that will interest some gamers, even at a higher price.
It's not the PSPGo that's getting devs back on boards it's a digital channel for distribution which in return slashes development costs (along side Sonys own slashing of PSP dev kits).
The PSP is digital distribution backwards compatible, buy a PSP3000 and memory card if the Go is too expensive, you'll enjoy the exact same experience. It wouldn't surprise me if manufacturing costs on the PSPGo actually exceeded the fat, that internal memory won't be that cheap.
The slim is more of an immediate hardware replacement for the fat PS3. It's not pushing any new standards and is mainly being put out to drive down costs. Anyone comparing the PS3 Slim/Fat scenario to the PSP/PSPGo scenario doesn't have their business head screwed on properly, or just lacks business acumen completely. They are not similar scenarios.
there is nothing confusing here.
PS3 is big because it had to be when it launched. Now everything is smaller, more power effecient it can be smaller, lighter, have a smaller power supply etc. Thats just how consoles progress - they take a hit on the hardware initially and the costs come down.
PSPgo is more like a mobile phone - its so small initially, that making it smaller costs more - either actually costs more or can be viably sold for more due to its size.
PS3 is big because it had to be when it launched. Now everything is smaller, more power effecient it can be smaller, lighter, have a smaller power supply etc. Thats just how consoles progress - they take a hit on the hardware initially and the costs come down.
PSPgo is more like a mobile phone - its so small initially, that making it smaller costs more - either actually costs more or can be viably sold for more due to its size.
Why exactly do you think the 160GB phat will be the one to remain alongside the slim? From what we have seen the slim will be 120GB, would Sony really keep two models on shelves, a 120GB slim and a 160GB phat? I don't know.. I actually wonder if Sony will have multiple SKUs of the slim, a 120GB and perhaps a smaller storage system.. 120GB slim will more than likely be $400, considering their approach to the PSPgo (albeit they're different situations) this will be considered 'premium, new, fresh' etc. Question is will the 80GB phat be $300? Where does that leave the 160GB phat?gofreak said:
So bloody confusing :lol time will tell..
If Sony doesn't have a $299 system this fall then they will fail hard. They are SO far off their 2009 estimates it's not even funny. Forget about $349. Forget about $399, and laugh at anything $499+.
This link breaks down the math:
http://dubiousquality.blogspot.com/2009/07/console-post-of-week-its-just-math.html
This link breaks down the math:
http://dubiousquality.blogspot.com/2009/07/console-post-of-week-its-just-math.html
mrklaw said:
I don't believe this personally. The guts of the PSP Go aren't so much smaller than the existing PSP when you subtract UMD. If Sony is making a profit on PSP at $169, they're making a significantly larger profit on the PSP Go. That doesn't make Sony "evil" in my opinion, but it is what it is.
Baron Doggystyle von Woof
Member
I would buy a ps3 slim for 299,-
but only for 299,-
Because I still find it lame that their are no HDMI (let alone component) cables included in the box. Yes they are only like 20,- but still..
(It's being targeted as a HD console ffs!)
but only for 299,-
Because I still find it lame that their are no HDMI (let alone component) cables included in the box. Yes they are only like 20,- but still..
(It's being targeted as a HD console ffs!)
Baron Doggystyle von Woof
Member
agreed, but they weren't that cheap 2/3 years ago.
user friendly
Member
dark10x said:
All the more reason for Sony to pack it in.
shaft said:
And HDMI jacks weren't common enough to include such an expensive (I payed $8 in 2006) cable back then.
Sony should've done a hybrid composite/component like Microsoft, no question about it. But then Microsoft didn't include a 5.1-ready audio cable either, so you could still bitch if you wanted.
I think Sony's argument then was you can't please everybody, so they just threw in the cheapest thing that would work for everyone.
Ninja Moomin
Banned
shaft said:
So you're posting from 2006? Cool!
user friendly
Member
Hmm.Cruzader said:
Wow, thanks for opening my eyes to the world. It's just funny how hard they pushed BD and did not include an HDMI, let alone a component cable.expy said:
They also should have packed in a headset. I'm not complaining, got my cables from monoprice, just would've been nice right out of the box but hey, if it saves them millions of dollars then I guess it was a wise decision. It's not like people aren't buying it because there is no HDMI bundled in.
Joel Was Right
Gold Member
I don't think it will really matter if it isn't priced at $299. They could however cut the price of an older SKU to $299 till that runs out, then drop the price of the Slim for winter. But don't they have an 80GB and a 160GB SKU? The 80GB, if anything, will probably the one cut as I doubt the 160GB - a few months old, would be replaced so soon. Which leaves me to wonder how they'll juggle the Slim and that model in terms of pricing
To all the people saying that the PS3 Slim will be more expensive (and using the PSP Go to support their theory): This is what I have to say.
A) PSP already has an install base of 50M.
B) A far cheaper SKU already exists
C) Sony HAS to give retailers are larger margin.
D) Retailers want a price-cut on the PS3.
E) The current PS3 still incurs losses for Sony. They would want to get rid of that ASAP.
A) PSP already has an install base of 50M.
B) A far cheaper SKU already exists
C) Sony HAS to give retailers are larger margin.
D) Retailers want a price-cut on the PS3.
E) The current PS3 still incurs losses for Sony. They would want to get rid of that ASAP.
Joel Was Right
Gold Member
Cruzader said:
They gave away Sony 1080p 42" screens for the UK launch to the first 100 customers who waited outside. Adored them for that. People were willing to queue outside for days and pay £425+, the least they could do was make it worth it. Those TV's were probably worth twice as much as those guys spent in the stores
sixteen-bit
Member
but what about RFers?theBishop said:
user friendly
Member
F) ThisisSony.gif
Exactly what I did, so awesome.onken said:
shaft said:
To the Wayback Machine Sherman!
www.archive.org
Back to good ol' 2006. What's this? Oh they were still about $5 back then too:
http://web.archive.org/web/20060515...subdepartment.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10240&style=
Cruzader said:
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage...undle&lp=1&type=product&cp=1&id=1218099072505
Seems like they're unloading them pretty aggressively.
H_Prestige
Banned
Cruzader said:
PS3 slim isn't going to be launched until the last few 80gb fats are gone, which should only take one more month or so. You're never going to see Sony slash off $100 on the fat 80gb.
Sentry said:
I think they'd just be keeping the 160GB until they run out. I don't think it'd be a going concern, just there til they burn through.
But in the context of a $299 slim I think retooling 80GBs to be 160GB 'wonder bundles' would be the most elegant way to allow Sony to keep selling them at $399 until they burn through. It's financially healthier to plop in a new hard drive and some games than to give them away for $100 or more less than before (which would be necessary if you wanted to keep selling 80GBs next to a $299 slim).
It would also explain if and why 80GB supply is starting to peter out while 160GB supply remains unconstrained (speculative for now..we have Zellers memo as some indication, but we'd need more rumblings from retail to say something concrete about that).
Of course, this is a specific set of constraints I'm thinking about. If any of them change, all bets are off. Specifically if the Slim isn't going to be $299, it gives them a lot more leeway about what to do with remaining fat stock.
Oni Jazar said:
I think when Sony made this projection they were knowingly betting on a pretty spectacular second half. I don't know if they can pull it off or not, but $299, a Slim, FF XIII in Japan, GT5 and God of War 3, to name but some of the things that should hit by next March, ought to be a formidable mix. If that can't get PS3 out of its current sales rut, nothing will.
When Sony announces their Q1 results we'll see if there's any revision to that. But if it sticks, I reckon PS3 will have to mirror PS2's performance in the same six month period 3 years after its launch to hit that target :lol
gofreak said:
I don't know how they expected a spectacular second half. PS3's sales have been pretty bad since last year's 360 price drop. Everyone was expecting a PS3 pricedrop in the spring, then in the summer and now in the fall. The later it gets the bigger the price cut has to be.
Ninja Moomin
Banned
JMC said:
Not a joke in the least... what an HDMI cable cost 2 or 3 years ago has zero relevance to anyone's purchasing decision in the market today where they are of nominal cost.
Oni Jazar said:
Second half FY = Oct 09-Mar 10. That's the period where 'everything happens', and that's where they'll have to move a f-ton of units to hit their target. PS2 moved a similar number in the period Oct 2003-Mar 2004 that Sony would need to move in the same period this year (since I reckon they'll have moved at most 4m units in the period Apr-Sep - and that might be generous! - leaving 9m for the remainder of the FY.. :lol).
Oni Jazar said:
Well things are lining up that in that period they'll have a new type of PS3 available (with the associated opportunity for new marketing and branding exercises), a $299 pricepoint (hopefully), the next mainline Final Fantasy in Japan exclusively, Gran Turismo 5, and God of War 3, all in that period (GoW just making the cut coming at the end of March 2010). That's just considering the 'big' stuff, next to which everything else seems to be 'supporting cast'. So Sony bean counters might expect a much better second half compared to the first. That's some of the biggest games Playstation can muster coming in a tight timeframe with significant new retail offerings (a new slimmer unit & the first pricecut in nearly 2 years)
So I think it's reasonable, if those things all come to pass, to expect a better 2H. The question is 'how better'. I dunno if it'll be so much better to hit the numbers they forecast, but it should be a good lift.
Their next earnings report (end of July) will be interesting..it'll be interesting to see if they change their forecast, and also to see how many ps3s were sold to retail in Q1.
Grampa Simpson
Banned
Ook.. That's right. It is earnings time again.gofreak said:
- Status