PlayStation 3: Not About Quantity, About Profitability

The Xbox 360 price drop rumors flow like water and it’s all but officially been announced at this point. What about PlayStation 3 and their price? No.

Nobuyuki Oneda, the Sony’s chief financial officer said, “our plan is not to reduce the price. Our strategy is not to sell more quantity for PS3 but to concentrate on profitability.” (gamespot) This makes complete sense coming from their chief financial officer, as their motivation is to make money, not lose it.

The question remains, how will they actually make money if they’re no longer in the race for competitive market prices? Considering game licensing must Net them some amount of profit Sony’s idea seems to be the exact opposite of their original PlayStation method: saturate the market and sell them all games.

So far we’ve seen very few “need to have” games for the PlayStation 3 console while Xbox 360 continues to build a substantial library and Wii continues to break sales records for apparently no reason. When a game publisher has to decide on a platform to launch a new game, why would they choose the one that doesn’t care to be competitively priced in the market? The one that doesn’t care about quantity of sales?

Sony intends to reverse the entire razor blade philosophy where one sells a cheap razor and charges users for the blades over and over again. Their take on this concept is to sell really expensive razors and put out small half-quality blades. Is that a good market strategy at this point?

0 thoughts on “PlayStation 3: Not About Quantity, About Profitability”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Post

Kaz Hirai Dooms 360 To Short LifeKaz Hirai Dooms 360 To Short Life

Sony’s PlayStation 3 has a 10-year plan. We’ve heard about the plan, we’ve seen Sony’s current execution and we’re starting to see some of the titles making their way to the PS3 for 2009. The Xbox 360? Kaz, Sony Computer Entertainment’s head man, made his thoughts clear when speaking to Official PlayStation Magazine.

kaz“Last time I checked, they’ve never had a console that’s been on the market for more than four or five years and we’ve committed to a ten year life cycle, so you do the math…,” he says. He goes on to state that the Xbox 360 won’t have a larger install base by the end of their 10-year plan has been completed, “unless things go really bad.”

Of course, nobody says Microsoft’s 10-year plan isn’t to push out yet another console. Is that wise? We don’t really know, but you can’t count them out on it. Maybe they’ll only have half the install base but two consoles in the market within the next ten years, nobody really knows.

The one major hole we can see in his comments revolve around their claims that the Microsoft doesn’t have any history of a console being on the market for very long. If I recall, Sony managed to squeek one by on Nintendo with the original PlayStation, which changed everything for the next ten years. Sony didn’t have a 5-year track record when they started taking Nintendo down, why does Microsoft need to have an extensive resume as well?

As for Wii?

“It’s difficult to talk about Nintendo because we don’t look at their console as being competitors. They’re a different world and we operate in our world — that’s kind of the way I look at things…” (kotaku)

Say what you want about Microsoft vs. Sony, but it sure sounds like Sony doesn’t want to acknowlege Nintendo’s success because it casts a dark shadow on their own product. Nintendo and Sony have been battling for years, that’s just the way it is and that’s how the industry sees it. When NPD releases numbers, when journalists write articles about consoles and when the war is finished one thing remains constant: all three consoles are included in the equation.

Sony Says Competition is GoodSony Says Competition is Good

It seems the console maker who’s trailing in sales typically says how great competition is and how it’s great for the consumer. Sony’s not leading the console race, as of now, and Sony Computer Entertainment Europe president David Reeves stated in a recent interview:

The winner, he said, is the consumer. “That’s why we are not going to slag off Microsoft or Nintendo at all,” he said, “because again it’s rather like the trainer market: one year it’s Reebok, next year it’s Nike, and then suddenly it’s Adidas; it’s cyclical, but in the end everyone wins in five to ten years.”

Sony continues to speak towards their “10 year plan” and how they’re increasing momentum in the market. They’re not winning in sales but with a ten years to go, this is just the beginning. Had this statement come from Microsoft it would be a chance to worry, but Sony has proof to backup their statements.

The PlayStation 2 is going strong as a nine year-old and doesn’t seem to be letting up in game releases. Sony’s press conferences always cover the PlayStation 2 in their talks with the PSP and PlayStation 3 for three big reasons: it’s worth bragging about, it distracts from lower PS3 sales and it separates them from the competition.

Where is the GameCube or classic Xbox in Nintendo and Microsoft’s press conferences and number crunch reports? The fact is, the companies have given up on both products retiring them as “last generation” (translation: poor sales). What better reason to buy a PlayStation 3 than knowing the company is in the game for the long haul?

It might be bit cheaper to buy an Xbox 360 but who’s to say Microsoft isn’t going to announce their next generation console tomorrow and kill off the Xbox 360? Obviously, Microsoft will deny those claims but there will always be doubt without a proven track record.

On the other hand, Microsoft hasn’t seen the success in the classic Xbox and Nintendo hasn’t seen nearly the fervor over the GameCube as compared to their current generation consoles. So, that begs the question, why would they halt all that for new console announcements?

Until they’ve had more time in the market, we cannot be 100% certain what Nintendo and Microsoft are going to do when it comes to next-generation announcements while Sony’s been very clear in each press conference. As Kaz Hirai said to Eurogamer earlier:

“We certainly don’t do the consumer the disservice of basically saying that the consoles have gone by the wayside because we have a new one. Right now, a prime example? PS2 is nine years into it. Where’s the Xbox? Where’s the GameCube?”

If one console maker is looking for a way to stand out and explain their slow sales figures, Sony’s got the PS2 and its long history in their back pocket.

Now, if we could only get those game designers to continue to take it seriously and not put all their eggs into the PS3 basket.

End of 100 Million Dollar Games?End of 100 Million Dollar Games?

Gigaom had a great writeup about how Grand Theft Auto IV marks the end of “next generation” as we know it, stating, in more words or less, the game is a failure. GTA: San Andreas sold 21.5 million copies during its time on the shelf while GTA IV has sold roughly 9 million copies as of June 7th.

Granted, the game is still on the shelves and will still get sales, but the mass of “hardcore gamers” have had their fill and either purchased it or will not. The end result? A huge tapering of sales numbers for the graphically impressive game. Take-Two spent USD $100 million to develop the game which had great opening sales records but has gone down drastically since.

Imagine the title gains them USD $30.00 per sale in profit (considering distributors get the game for roughly USD $45 to $48.00 USD), taking into account shipping of the product, marketing and all the materials that go into producing a copy, they’d have to sell a large quanity of game titles to break even, which I think they have done.

Nobody is in this industry to break even. A block buster title should make block buster profits, right? Else, why bother to spend the 100-million when a Wii title can double or triple the profits with six months of development?

(more…)