Should Sony cut the price of the PS3 or not?
The PlayStation 3 may be cheaper and more stable than the Xbox 360 overall, but let’s face it: Sony’s console still asks for $399, and can take its toll on your wallet. People haven’t been too crazy about the PS3’s price tag, which is probably why Activision CEO Bobby Kotick threatened to stop supporting PS3s.
However, Sony CEO Howard Stringer is having none of that. When asked about Kotick’s demands, Stringer had this to say:
He likes to make a lot of noise. He’s putting pressure on me and I’m putting pressure on him. That’s the nature of business.
The Sony head honcho was also asked about the logic of not cutting the PS3’s prices even if everybody seems to be asking one. Howard was pretty direct:
I (would) lose money on every PlayStation I make–how’s that for logic.
I have two reactions to Stringer’s disagreeable statement.
First: “Howard, you blockhead, if you sell more PS3s, you’ll be able to recover those losses easily and would most likely exceed the deficit with all those insane software sales that your PS2 used to enjoy.”
Second: “Sony is a huge company capable of hiring people knowledgeable about the inside facts and figures about the industry. In all likelihood, Sony has considered the risk of a PS3 price cut. Hey, if Sony can make even more money from a PS3 price cut by means of stronger software sales, expect their money-grubbing executives to know about it!”
So which of these do you think is the right reaction? Care to add another one?
Popularity: 14% [?]
July 8th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
I think the Sony’s gotten way past the point where we can trust their judgement on the matter. Remember, just cause you’re a powerhouse company with lots of money doesn’t mean you’re always gonna be right. Plenty of times it leads to a calcification of forward thinking in the ranks. Look at the current financial crisis. All the wall street companies that fell were considered beacons of the freemarket. Look at Nintendo, who was in the same place as Sony after the SNES then fell from grace for two console cycles before learning their lesson.
Sony can absorb the loss on the PS3 by now, especially considering how cheap blue really playing devices have become.
[Reply]
July 9th, 2009 at 11:26 am
they can’t afford to not lower the costs. activision, a major player in the gaming industry, has already threatened to drop support for the PS3. who’s next? Guerilla Games? Capcom? with less attractive games hitting the PS3, sony won’t be able to keep up in this, or the next console war, for that matter.
[Reply]
July 9th, 2009 at 11:48 am
but then again, sony WONT “lose” activision, as sales a warry close to the xbox. the price is okay at the moment.
[Reply]
July 9th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
i honesty think the PS3 is already at a reasonable price I mean come on how long has PS3 been now, its been through alot that no one understands. I would still pay 600.00 for one because its from Sony and they make quality consoles and games. It really doesnt matter if Activision drops the ball only game they have is Call of Duty. Sony in my opinion is better off without them. Activision makes a new guitar hero every month it seems and the bundles are close to 300.00 for plastic instruments.
[Reply]
July 9th, 2009 at 12:27 pm
@JAKE
Im not a typical critic of other people’s opinions, however you have no idea what it is that you’re talking about.. First off, if you look at the actual numbers, Sony is doing slightly better year over year numbers then microsoft’s $199 arcade 360. The PS3 currently has about 27 Million install base, when microsoft has about 33 million, and the xbox came out 1yr before the PS3.. Second.. Activision will NEVER drop Sony from its lineup. Activision is a publicly traded company, and therefore has stock holders to answer to, and when Sony is making 18% of your annual revenue you do NOT take them off your friends list. To put that into perspective microsoft accounts for 14-15%….. Why is Bobby not talking about that?? ITS SIMPLE.. Sony has the option to drop its price, create a larger install base and sell MORE games that have Activsion on the box.
My third and final point is this.. Guerilla Games dropping Sony?? Are you serious?? You must be joking? You make it seem like GG owns Sony! Except Sony owns GG… You clearly know NOTHING about the gaming industry or business for that matter. So PLEASE next time, take the time to do some research, or actually know what you’re talking about. Thanks
[Reply]
July 9th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
I forgot to add one thing!!!!!!!! LESS ATTRACTIVE GAMES COMING TO THE PS3?????????? WOW ARE YOU EVER A FANBOY!!!! Lets see, in the next 8 months… Unchartered2(GOTY?) GOW3(GOTY?) G.T M.A.G… and then we have later releases… AGENT, HEAVY RAIN, KILLZONE3… My friend, u have halo 1.9087874893947858569 ENJOY
[Reply]
July 9th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
I hate howard stinger, the price needs to be cut
[Reply]
July 9th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
Activision are just blowing hot air. PS3 has a user base of over 25million. Sure they don’t make as much revenue from PS3 at the moment but they still make a considerable amount. Any company that gives away that kind of income would be insane and the shareholders would never allow it. 360 is only 8 million ahead and would have already been overtaken if the economy hadn’t taken a dive, PS3 was catching hand over fist until Sept ‘08.
PS3 is worth more than the asking price IMO. It’s a shame that it’s compared to 360 and Wii and labelled too expensive by the media when it is clearly in a class of it’s own. In Australia it costs $450 for a 60GB 360 and $688 for 80GB PS3. Add on $98 for 12 months of Live to 360 and with PS3 you get a blu ray player for $140 and an extra 20GB of storage. If you want wi fi for 360 add another $140 and you get the blu ray player for free with a PS3. After buying Live for a couple of years the PS3 looks like a pretty sweet deal at $688. Add on a new controller for 360 every 12 months or so because they keep breaking and PS3 is even sweeter.
PSN is free and all LIVE has over it is in game voice chat, voice messages and partys/party chat and laggy games of GOW 1 and 2. Not worth $98 per year IMO.
I own both 360 and PS3 and the build quality of the hardware is far superior in PS3 and well worth the money. PS3 is also a superior media server supporting more codecs and being hassle free to setup. HDMI 1.3, free music video streaming, HOME with free mini games, remote functionality through PSP from any wi fi access point anywhere in the world, (which can also access the Vidzone service). My 360 has gathered dust for almost a year.
[Reply]
July 9th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
You’ve raised a very good point, Ryan. If Sony and its executives really knew what they were doing, then why do they keep shooting themselves in the foot (figuratively) with their questionable business decisions?
@ everyone
As much as I prefer the PS3 over its rivals, I must agree that if Sony seriously wants to increase its market share soon, it should cut the price of the PS3.
A larger market share would increase software sales, especially the PS3’s many exclusives.
[Reply]
July 9th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
Mike, I disagree
Sony does not NEED to cut the price, they’re selling at almost the same pace as the 360 already and if you compare the sales M$ had this far into it’s life time then the PS3 is actually doing better.
More to the point:
It would be a very bad business decision to cut the price of the console itself just to increase the user base when another option (that they are currently implementing) is available and much less costly. That being Game Bundles.
Bundling desirable game titles increase the appeal of the PS3 at its CURRENT price point, and knowing that games release for $60 lets a consumer see the value right away. The most recently released 80Gb bundle with Metal Gear Solid 4 and Killzone 2 at $400 is GUARANTEED to pick sales up. Another recent bundle was with Wall-E and LittleBigPlanet which has a more casual and blu-ray emphasizing appeal.
Bundles like these are in line with what consumers want because chances are they wanted the system for an exclusive title that is now likely to be in a bundle so now they don’t have to spend an extra $60 on top of their $400-$500 purchase and at the same time sony effectively and in a cost-friendly way increases their user-base without pissing off their own share/stock holders.
[Reply]
July 9th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
activision can go jump every title theve released since COD MW was complete shit.
sony needs to drop the price of the ps3, here in australia atleast i still dont understand how it can be 400 in the US and 700 here in australia.
last time i checked 400USD is no where near 700 AUD, and aint they made in jappan? so wouldent it be cheaper to import them here than the US?
im lost were getting the complete finger its not fair, thats why the 360 is kicking sonys ass here that and marketing.
every 5 minutes theres a xbox 360 add on tv im lucky if i see 1 ps3 add per week.
dident they just cut the costs of the ps3 almost in half recently?
the costs of both bluray players and the cell chip have plumited so shouldent that infer a price drop?
here ive seen 1 price drop since the ps3 was launched and that was because of when they removed BC,soon game stores are going to not stop but almost stop suplying ps3 content because its not selling.
you look at any game store here in australia the xbox 360 content is at the front and the ps3 stuff is in the back, and the 360 has almost double the size of the ps3 area besides old games when it comes to that theres 10 times more used games for the ps3 than 360.
[Reply]
July 9th, 2009 at 6:28 pm
Sony stinks soo much that they can’t afford cutting the price.
[Reply]
July 9th, 2009 at 7:21 pm
You will not decide whether Sony will cut the price or not, so there’s absolutely no need for you to discuss this issue any further.
[Reply]
July 9th, 2009 at 7:57 pm
@FamilyGuy
Those are very good points. +1 to you, sir.
@xXn00bXx
It’s called a BLOG.
[Reply]
July 9th, 2009 at 10:27 pm
Has anyone notice that they priced the PSP Go at $249 MSRP (aprox. $100 USD more from the actual PSP) to absorb what is inminent, a reduction in price from the PS3? I think is going to happen (a price reduction) and the strategy is that they´re going to recover the loss with the sales of the PSP Go
[Reply]
July 10th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
Ok, so here’s the warped logic of Mr Kotick: “We might stop developing for them because they don’t have enough consoles out there”. So, what he means is that 23-24 million consoles are not enough, BUT back in Oct 07 they released Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, when the 360 had an installed base of… want to take a guess?, that’s right, sub-25 million consoles.
So right now, with the PS3 with exactly the same number of consoles out there as the 360 has had in the same time reference, Sony has to get crap from Activision?.
To me it’s either 1) Kotick is an amateur CEO’s giving uninformed opinions/threats, or worse yet, 2) He really thinks he has the upper hand against Sony and thinks he can easily disregard 20+ million potential customers without a financial fallout (if I were their stockholder I would grill him in the next investors meeting).
All of their popular products are readily (and easily) replaceable (too many FPS’ and Rock Band).
[Reply]