Sony to Testify In Person Re: PSN Outage

Sony will finally be sending a high-level executive to testify before the US House of Representatives’ Committee on Energy and Commerce’s Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade on the three week outage of PlayStation Network and Sony’s slowness in informing its customers on the compromising of personal and credit card data.

Ken Johnson, an aide to subcommittee chairwoman Mary Bono Mack (R-CA), told The Atlantic Magazine that Tim Schaff, president of Sony Network Entertainment, would testify before the subcommittee next week:

“While Chairman Bono Mack remains critical of Sony’s initial handling of the data breaches, she also is appreciative that the company has now agreed to testify. The Chairman firmly believes that the lessons learned from…the Sony…experiences can be instructive and guide us as we develop comprehensive data protection legislation. We expect to introduce that legislation, which will provide new safeguards for American consumers, in the next few weeks.”

Previously, Sony’s Kaz Hirai had only sent his testimony in a letter to the Committee.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Related Post

Episode 564: Sony’s Pricing ProblemEpisode 564: Sony’s Pricing Problem

This week’s episode talks about Sony having issues, and that’s not even taking into account their pulling out of a convention due to the coronavirus scare. This week’s Gaming Flashback looks at the classic dark puzzle platformer Limbo.

As for the news:

  • Sony breaks PS5 pricing tradition for Xbox Series X launch
  • Next in No Man’s Sky: an organic spaceship you can grow from an egg
  • Xbox Game Pass for PC will get Yakuza 0, Two Point Hospital, and more soon (from PC Gamer)

This week’s Question of the Week: “What is your favorite videogame commercial or trailer?”

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.

PlayStation 3: Not About Quantity, About ProfitabilityPlayStation 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?