Originally posted by: cubby1223
They didn't subsidize the PS3 any more than Microsoft subsidized the xbox 360. Actually, given the build qualities, Sony will probably turn a profit on the PS3 before Microsoft does on the xbox.
The subsidization of the 360 was for control over the gaming share. The subsidization of the PS3 was almost all due to the BD.
Have you seen Toshiba's last financial statement? Wow, they lost a TON of money on HD DVD last year even before they called it quits. So in your eyes it would have been a phyrric victory no matter what. Except that you jumped on the HD DVD bandwagon, thus Toshiba's phyrric victory would have been awesome!!!!!
Toshiba's 10k statement write-offs were mostly due to inventory write-down and impairment of assets (R&D, royalties...etc) from the discontinuation of a business. It had very little to do with actual subsidies. If you have edvidence to the contrary, please let me know.
As far as me buying into HD DVD, the expense was less than .1% of my annual income. BFD.
Not everyone ran out and bought a $300 dvd player. That format did quite well.
There are several significant differences there. First, DVD provided a huge leap of tech over VHS, including chapter skipping, no degredation of quality, more storage, the ability to have multiple streamlined audio tracks, better audio and visual quality, easier medium to transport, store, sell, replay...etc. It was a revolutionary leap in technology which had so many significant differences, all of which could be ******USED****** by normal people, that it was easy to switch.
It helped that the release schedule for DVD was shorter than VHS, which drove rental stores. It also helped that rental stores streamlined the contractual costs, moving from VHS cost +, to straight sales, driving the shorter window. Not to mention the actual cost of DVDs was within the budget of "normal" consumers, especially release week.
DVD did well because it ushered in so many significant hardware, software, and business model changes.
BD offers none of these *REVOLUTIONARY* steps, but marginal *EVOLUTIONARY* steps, albeit, at a MUCH higher cost.
It was far cheaper because it was in the far worse position. Toshiba's only option was to lose money on players, make it up in disc sales. If they were in a stronger position in the market, you can bet your sweet ass they'd have been charging the hell out of consumers.
It was far cheaper because Toshiba had a different business model. Sony added the cost of the BD into the PS3, it's primary driver of hardware sales, and drove its price down to create a gaming+ device. They lost far more money on that strategy than Toshiba did. Nobody has been able to directly tie any losses prior to the write-offs, to hardware sales from the 2nd and 3rd generation players. I'd ask you to prove that claim.
Which is why it was silly to think either format can become "mass market". They will be "niche" no matter what happened, no matter how much money Toshiba wanted to lose on each player. But that small number who does want improved quality, will be getting it thanks to Blu-ray's higher capacity and bit-rate.
Becoming mass market also means you have to deliver value. HD DVD was delivering value, based upon price/performance, BD delivered studios through purchase and is now not delivering any value. Low price was the only way either format was going to win, since the average consumer with an HDTV won't see value in buying a 300 player and paying 30/disc.
If they want to keep it "high end" then fine, but they are not aligning their strategy with their costs and are conflicted in many different ways in their business strategy.
So a company is filled with "complete morons" when they want to at least cover the cost of manufacturing? And have you been to a Wal*Mart lately? Check it out. Blu-rays sitting right next to the dvd releases priced on average $5 higher. Don't expect Blu-ray to compete against the $5 clearance dvd bins.
Then they need to drop their manufacturing costs. DVD was 14.99-16.99 on each release, even in the beginning in 97. I don't shop at Wal-mart, I refuse to support the company, but I have a hard time believing they are that cheap overall.
The evil Sony who had higher disc sales all of last year, even higher standalone player sales in December, can only bring more evil upon consumers. Their efforts and dedication to quality releases is all a part of their big evil plan. Digital downloads in any significant capacity or quality, are a loooooong way off. Blu-ray is easily a 10 year product. A little bump in year 2, not that big a deal in the grand scheme of evilly screwing over consumers.
Have I covered everything in there?
Dedication to quality releases? There were far more shit transfers on BD, not to mention the poor rollout of players on-par with HD DVD stand-alones.
BD is far from a 10 year product. DVD didn't even last 10 years before a successor was developed. Technology accelerates.
