Why Sony can't price of the PS3

[SandEagle]

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10129785-1.html

"Altogether, Sony's second-generation PS3 features a 35 percent total cost reduction from the first-generation model. In dollars and cents, today's PS3 costs Sony about $448.73 to produce, compared to the old model's $690.23 price tag. That said, the lower cost doesn't include software, box contents, and royalty expenses."

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/56559

"The 47% reduction in per-unit costs comes from lower component prices, as well as revisions that have reduced the amount of components by an estimated 30%. The firm claims that the first-generation PlayStation 3 had about 4,048 parts, while more modern PlayStation 3s only have around 2,820 components. "


Wasn't aware of how complex the PS3 was.

 

[CrackRabbit]

You have to remember that the first generation of PS3s had the electronics of a PS2 inside as well as a memory card reader. The current models have none of that.

 

[ric1287]

its still just a $400 dvd player/dust collector for me.

 

[phantom404]

I still enjoy it. I've hooked it up to my surround sound by hdmi and now cod4 and other games i play online sound freakin sweet. Also have a 500GB External that I have hooked up to my computer and stored all my movies and music on and use TVersity and stream it to the ps3. Works Flawlessly.

People seem to forget if you take the cheapest 360 and add a harddrive and then wireless and then a blu ray player i bet it would cost more then the ps3....Only thing sony could really do is take out the built in wireless but then there would be people that would bitch about that as well.

 

[Baked]

I use it as a Blu-ray player, media streamer, and game console. The $400 I paid is worth every penny to me.

 

[IamDavid]

Originally posted by: Baked
I use it as a Blu-ray player, media streamer, and game console. The $400 I paid is worth every penny to me.

Agreed. Got mine for $400 -$100 Walmart GC.. Consider it a steal... Replaced my HTPC very quickly.

 

[Muadib]

Originally posted by: Baked
I use it as a Blu-ray player, media streamer, and game console. The $400 I paid is worth every penny to me.

Yes, this!

 

[videogames101]

Originally posted by: Muadib

Originally posted by: Baked
I use it as a Blu-ray player, media streamer, and game console. The $400 I paid is worth every penny to me.

Yes, this!

Hmm, sounds like my PC, except less powerful....

 

[lupi]

Originally posted by: Baked
I use it as a Blu-ray player, media streamer, and game console. The $400 I paid is worth every penny to me.

While I've used mine more for PS2/bluray, the $250 it cost me from sony was well worth it 🙂

 

[Dacalo]

Originally posted by: videogames101

Originally posted by: Muadib

Originally posted by: Baked
I use it as a Blu-ray player, media streamer, and game console. The $400 I paid is worth every penny to me.

Yes, this!

Hmm, sounds like my PC, except less powerful....

You built it for $400? And it plays games like MGS and Valkyria Chronicles?

 

[Insane3D]

I've been extremely happy with mine, and it's a nice fit for my new 46" HDTV and Denon receiver. I got in on the holiday Dell deal and got the 80GB unit for $310 shipped.

For me, it was just more attractive than the Xbox and the Blu-ray capability is a pure bonus...

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: videogames101

Originally posted by: Muadib

Originally posted by: Baked
I use it as a Blu-ray player, media streamer, and game console. The $400 I paid is worth every penny to me.

Yes, this!

Hmm, sounds like my PC, except less powerful....

And less expensive. I used an HTPC for several years; when I discovered the capabilities of the PS3 and Xbox 360, I ditched the HTPC.

 

[SandEagle]

i bought mine during launch for $600 (original 60 GB)... use it for everything: pics, music, internet, blu-ray, games, etc. i even play ps2 and ps1 games on it... no regrets at all

 

[jacktesterson]

I have a HTPC with a blu ray player,etc already....and I entered the console gaming world just recently again. due to the extras i dont need (since i still have my htpc hooked up)....I went with the 360

i think too many people focus on the blu ray player....sure its a nice bonus, but Sony i think even poured to much focus on this. People buy consoles to game.... not to watch movies. (maybe not for the hardcores on here 😉 )

This is why the 360 is more attractive. The 60GB Pro version is now $259.99 in Canada... comes with a controller and 3 games. Its a hard deal to beat if you dont care about blu ray


do you remember the PS2 launch? it had DVD player capabilities, but rarely did you hear people talking about using it as a dvd player. it focused on gaming and was sucessful.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Bigystyle
I have a HTPC with a blu ray player,etc already....and I entered the console gaming world just recently again. due to the extras i dont need (since i still have my htpc hooked up)....I went with the 360

i think too many people focus on the blu ray player....sure its a nice bonus, but Sony i think even poured to much focus on this. People buy consoles to game.... not to watch movies. (maybe not for the hardcores on here 😉 )

This is why the 360 is more attractive. The 60GB Pro version is now $259.99 in Canada... comes with a controller and 3 games. Its a hard deal to beat if you dont care about blu ray


do you remember the PS2 launch? it had DVD player capabilities, but rarely did you hear people talking about using it as a dvd player. it focused on gaming and was sucessful.

For a long time the PS3 was one of the best deals you could get for a Blu-Ray player, so having that in there is a big bonus for anyone who is interested in buying HD movies. I doubt I would have bought a standalone Blu-Ray player by now, but having it in my PS3 is a HUGE bonus feature. I'm not willing to pay Blu-ray prices for most movies (not that I buy many movies anymore), but for things like Batman, Transformers and Band of Brothers I'm glad I have it.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: phantom404
People seem to forget if you take the cheapest 360 and add a harddrive and then wireless and then a blu ray player i bet it would cost more then the ps3....Only thing sony could really do is take out the built in wireless but then there would be people that would bitch about that as well.

I bet it would, but the cheapest 360 plays every 360 game, and thats whats important.

Sony dug themselves into a hole here. They hedged everything on blu-ray, and it doesnt look like its paying off. The 360 had a one year lead, and has always been significantly cheaper. And the vast majority of third party games are cross-console and look and play exactly the same.

I'd like to play a few PS3 games, but right now the equation is $400 just to have the privilege to play a few PS3 exclusives, only one of which is really a system seller (MGS4). The barrier of entry for a PS3 owner looking for a 360 is half that, at $200 for an arcade.

I could stomach $200, but $400 is just ridiculous.

I dont think it's premature to declare the PS3 the gamecube of this generation. The only difference is that the gamecube turned a profit, but the PS3 never will. Three xmas seasons have passed, and its only gotten worse for them in sales over time. It's not a dead system by any means, and I'm sure it'll live out it's lifespan, but it's definitely not going to live up to it's potential.

They could have prevented all of this by just sticking with a DVD drive, and pricing competitively.

 

[gorcorps]

Originally posted by: Bigystyle
I have a HTPC with a blu ray player,etc already....and I entered the console gaming world just recently again. due to the extras i dont need (since i still have my htpc hooked up)....I went with the 360

i think too many people focus on the blu ray player....sure its a nice bonus, but Sony i think even poured to much focus on this. People buy consoles to game.... not to watch movies. (maybe not for the hardcores on here 😉 )

This is why the 360 is more attractive. The 60GB Pro version is now $259.99 in Canada... comes with a controller and 3 games. Its a hard deal to beat if you dont care about blu ray


do you remember the PS2 launch? it had DVD player capabilities, but rarely did you hear people talking about using it as a dvd player. it focused on gaming and was sucessful.

It's nearly as focused on gaming as the 360 is. All of the major games I've played recently are out for both consoles, so claiming the PS3 is less gaming focused is just bullshit. 360 has the pretty big price edge now which is nice, but it didn't used to be like that.

Also, I've always used my consoles as a media player as well. I find it silly to have 2 separate things do what one of them can do on it's own. I bought my PS2 and 360 for the games, but also got DVD players out of them. I would have done the same with the PS3 if I had the TV to make blu-ray worth it at the time.

 

[StageLeft]

PS3 is too expensive to worry about unless a person wants bluray. If they do, it's a bargain if considering it vs a 360, but if not (like me), it's too expensive; I don't give a damn about bluray, so don't want to pay the premium.

They could have prevented all of this by just sticking with a DVD drive, and pricing competitively.

Perhaps, but it probably had some role in securing the demise of HD DVD, so even if the PS3 is underwhelming for Sony, it had that benefit.

 

[darkrisen2003]

One thing thats hard for me to wrap my head around is the pricing figures being represented. Sony owns blueray and manufactures it. Sony owns ps3 and manufactures it. The only things sony doesnt own in the console are the processor and the gpu. Combines those 2 parts prolly only cost about 100 dollars to buy since you know they get a bulk discount on them. I am willing to bet money they really only spend about 200 per unit to create one and then give high figures to the media to justify not dropping the price.

 

[erwos]

Originally posted by: darkrisen2003
Sony owns blueray and manufactures it.

Well, no. They're part of the Blu-Ray consortium, and certainly a big player, but they've got to pay licensing fees like everyone else. Don't overestimate their ownership stake in the format.

Sony owns ps3 and manufactures it. The only things sony doesnt own in the console are the processor and the gpu.

Actually, they own those, too.

Combines those 2 parts prolly only cost about 100 dollars to buy since you know they get a bulk discount on them. I am willing to bet money they really only spend about 200 per unit to create one and then give high figures to the media to justify not dropping the price.

Between you, Sony, and iSupply, I think I'm going to go with Sony or iSupply. Unless you want to tell us exactly where you're pulling your numbers from (I have my own guess).

 

[darkrisen2003]

Its just my thought process erwos. I have worked in retail and vending etc and most companies get a bulk discount on goods when producing. They create the goods at cost and then ship it to distributors at a slightly marked up cost. The distributors then place there own markup on the item which in most cases is anywhere between 15% to as much as 150% depending on the store. This markup placed on the item in the store is used to pay for the item handling and the employees wages as well as the cost to maintain the stores monthly's. I am just making up a dollar amount here but in my mind it really isnt too far fetched to think the ps3 is made for 200 or less and then marked up to make profits for everyone.

 

[Jeffg010]

All I got say is Xbox live

/end

 

[Insane3D]

There are a lot of good points being brought up here, but in the end, it really boils down to each system being the "best choice" for different people. Take myself for example, I know the 360 has a much more robust online gaming system, but I do not play online, or have plans too. Sure, Xbox live is superior to what the PS3 offers, but it also is an added cost is it not?

When I was deciding which system to get, the PS3 seemed more future proof to me, had a Blu-Ray player that I would use on my new TV, and seemed to be the better fit for my gaming style (single player, no online gaming). Also, the "ring of death" problem happening on the 360's seemed to still be a significant problem, and I know a few 360 owners who are on their 3rd or 4th system.

To me, the 360 seems to be what the PS2 was when the 360 first came out. The 360 was better hardware and had better graphics, but the games were severely lacking while the PS2 was established, popular, cheaper, and had a ton more games. Fast forward to today, and the 360 is where the PS2 was, and the PS3 is where the 360 was. I'm fairly sure we will get to a point where the PS3 is the favored system over the 360, and some new system (Xbox 3?) will be in the same boat.

My .02.

🙂

 

[erwos]

Originally posted by: darkrisen2003
Its just my thought process erwos. I have worked in retail and vending etc and most companies get a bulk discount on goods when producing. They create the goods at cost and then ship it to distributors at a slightly marked up cost. The distributors then place there own markup on the item which in most cases is anywhere between 15% to as much as 150% depending on the store. This markup placed on the item in the store is used to pay for the item handling and the employees wages as well as the cost to maintain the stores monthly's. I am just making up a dollar amount here but in my mind it really isnt too far fetched to think the ps3 is made for 200 or less and then marked up to make profits for everyone.

Consoles are sold to stores at a very small discount - that is to say, wholesale prices are very close to retail. That's why you never see much in the way of discounts or bundles except for manufacturer-oriented ones (or during prime shopping season).

What you _think_ kind of pales in comparison to iSupply actually ripping apart a console and pricing the components - and they have access to the wholesale pricing data, which none of us do.

Also, the Cell, BR lasers, hard drives, etc. - those things all add up. And then you price in marketing, maintenance, warranty repairs, etc. I think $450 is _not at all_ an unbelievable cost for making a PS3.

 

[Maximilian]

Originally posted by: BD2003
I dont think it's premature to declare the PS3 the gamecube of this generation. The only difference is that the gamecube turned a profit, but the PS3 never will. Three xmas seasons have passed, and its only gotten worse for them in sales over time. It's not a dead system by any means, and I'm sure it'll live out it's lifespan, but it's definitely not going to live up to it's potential.

Yeah that sounds about right. Most gamers dont care about blu ray, wireless and all that added stuff.