PS3 Under $400 in Japan?

[Metalgearih]

In the update, the blogger writes, "In the latest Famitsu, a very important person mentioned that the PS3 price would not be over 40000yen". This information correlates to a previous comment from a Sony rep a few months back, who mentioned the same price. With any luck this will turn out to be the case, and Japan will see the PS3 in the spring of 2006 for slightly under $400.

http://1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3145024

http://blog.livedoor.jp/coolgamer/

Interesting turn of events, especially after the 500 Euro bomb LB dropped on us :wink:
Anything you like to add LB?

As for me, this wasn't really surprising but exciting. I was already expecting them to have a decent price tag compared to Xbox360. And if this thing is true then it only is a confirmation of Sony's commitment to their past doings with the Playstation brand. I just hope sometime down the road we hear an official confirmation of this. You know like Kutaragi's speech happening this week or something :roll:

[Powderkeg]

It would not suprise me at all to see the PS3 launch for the same price as the 360. In fact, I pretty much expect it.

[Titanio]

I just hope sometime down the road we hear an official confirmation of this. You know like Kutaragi's speech happening this week or something :roll:

Interesting you mention it, because his speech is due just around the same time Famitsu will be hitting the shelves this week (and not to fan the flames, but coverage is often arranged in advanced with Famitsu for announcements). I very much doubt he'll be announcing pricing though..seems a bit too much to hope for given more recent comments from Sony.

[Carl B]

As gets mentioned every now and then, there has been that 40,000 yen quote out for a while now - given by an official at one of Sony's investor meetings. Of course that doesn't mean it's a number they will/would stick by.

Now, CoolGamer (the blog) is there quoting Famitsu. So what we need to know is who the important person Famitsu is quoting is. If it's just a rehash of the investors meeting quote (afterall that was one of the SCE crew - thus important), that doesn't help us, but if it's a new quote reaffirming that price, that could be some good confirmation!

[avaya]

Kaz Hirai or Kutaragi also mentioned the Y40,000 price point as being an upper limit a couple of months ago.

Y39,800 is a very likely price for Japan IMO, exactly the same as PS2.

[dukmahsik]

in japan i can see this happening

[Titanio]

Can we get links on the "mentions" of Y40,000 as an upper limit, previously? Thanks.

edit - does this cover everything we know sofar? :

http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/05/24/news_6126410.html

Last week, the Mainichi Daily News quoted Sony Computer Entertainment officials as saying the PlayStation 3 would be priced at under 50,000 yen

Today, Japanese Web site Impress PC Watch reported that SCE has told its business partners that the PS3 will be under 40,000 yen ($370) at launch.

I don't think Kutaragi or Hirai said anything about pricing previously, except that it'd be expensive, in Kutaragi's case? The only talk of pricing we've had sofar seems to me to be a case of "he said she said"..words often get put in Sony's mouth, seemingly, so I think it's important to clarify, especially on an issue like this :p

[PG2G]

I don't think Kutaragi or Hirai said anything about pricing previously, except that it'd be expensive, in Kutaragi's case? The only talk of pricing we've had sofar seems to me to be a case of "he said she said"..words often get put in Sony's mouth, seemingly, so I think it's important to clarify, especially on an issue like this :p

I'm with you. I'm pretty sure I never saw anything where they mentioned pricing aside from it'd be expensive. I'd love to see what you guys are referencing.

[EpicZero]

Hirai hinted that it may be a little more expensive than the PS2, but it will not be expensive.

39,800 yen in Japan
$349 in North America

This would be a killer combination.

[Metalgearih]

You know guys, I think there is something waiting to be read between the lines here. Kutaragi saying, "It'll be expensive!". Ok , so we know whenever playstation's were launched in NA, they were sold at atleast $100 less than their Japanese launch price. But in this case, now that the $400 Japan price has been thrown around quite a bit.

Could it be that both NA and Japanese launches will bear the same price tag? Hence Kutaragi's statement: "It'll be expensive". Maybe media and forum members around the globe blew his quote out of proportion while all he wanted to say was , hey both regions pay the same cost(for a long time without reduction in price) etc.

I don't know it's just theory on my part. But who knows :wink:

[Titanio]

Well as a counter to the PS2 precedent, the PSP sold for the same in both territories. Who knows with PS3 though.

It sure would be nice to have PS, PS2 and PS3 all launch neatly at the same price though (39,800 Yen). I ain't holding my breath, but the symmetry is nice :)

[Shifty Geezer]

As for pricing announcements, something near XB360's launch would make sense, along with some new game movies or something, That'd 'sow seeds of doubt' in the undecided who were eyeing XB360 without necessarily taking much of the Christmas PS2/PSP sales because it'd only be info known to the gaming world = early adopters of XB360. If the price is emminently affordable (comparative to XB360) this'd make a lot of sense. Whereas if PS3 is likely to be a lot more expensive they'll likely delay the announcement so as not to scare away potential customers into XB360's launch.

Or, Sony will just announce whenever and couldn't give a monkey's what clever tactical manoeuverings they could have engineered instead.

[Alpha_Spartan]

PS3 will launch at $400 but it won't be the same system Sony advertised at E3.

[hey69]

thats 299 euro. so that means 399euro with 20%tax inluded most probably

still much cheaper then the 540euro the ps2 launched back in da day

[Platon]

I don't know. With all the tech that PS3 is supposed to have, id now the E3 config is the final one, I really can't see how they can afford to sell it for less than $400 and not go bankrupt...

[Platon]

thats 299 euro. so that means 399euro with 20%tax inluded most probably

still much cheaper then the 540euro the ps2 launched back in da day

Yep, but Europe always get screwed, so don't get your hopes up...

[hey69]

i'm sure they will break even or have a very small loss there.
i think the loss will be much smaller compared to the ps2 launch

[Titanio]

I don't know. With all the tech that PS3 is supposed to have, id now the E3 config is the final one, I really can't see how they can afford to sell it for less than $400 and not go bankrupt...

It's become cliche, but Sony gets some unknown amount more for their buck than the other manufacturers. (That said, I do expect PS3 to be the most expensive to produce regardless..just not as expensive as it might be under the others). That asides, if you look at the strategic placement of PS3, how Sony has been talking about - they seem to want to position it as a driver for their content across the board. The more PS3 sells, the more games sell, the more bluray movies sell, the more other content will sell (depending on sony's offerings - downloadable content, music maybe? etc. etc.). So, taking a larger loss to expand the userbase quickly could make a lot of sense, as long as they can supply demand and actually get the systems out there. Without even mentioning the strategic importance attached to certain aspects of the system, like Bluray, which could affect revenue for many years to come beyond PS3 itself.

[liverkick]

PS3 will launch at $400 but it won't be the same system Sony advertised at E3.

B3D is just filled with scoops lately! So what will it really be Alpha_Spartan?

[scooby_dooby]

That asides, if you look at the strategic placement of PS3, how Sony has been talking about - they seem to want to position it as a driver for their content across the board.
Assuming this isn't the same old Sony song and dance they always do. The PS2 was supposed to be "more than a gaming machine" as well.

Sony doesn't get the benefit of the doubt from me anymore, they are always so full of crap(i.e. false promises, over-exagerations), so I'll believe it when I see it.

From 2000 (http://archives.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/10/23/ps2.hype/#r):

"Kutaragi sees PS2 as Sony's Trojan horse. The idea is that consumers will bring the device into their living rooms to play WipeOut and Crash Bandicoot and end up using it for all kinds of broadband entertainment. If everything goes according to Kutaragi's plan, PlayStation will lead Sony in a transformation from a producer of games, gadgets, CDs and movies to a "broadband delivery company." Future versions of the console will still give you games, but also music, online shopping, even interactive services. Already Sony has signed a deal with J.P. Morgan to deliver home banking through the PS2.

To handle functions beyond game playing, Sony has beefed up the PlayStation2 to near-PC strength, embedding a 300MHz processor. Other companies are pursuing a similar strategy. Microsoft's Xbox, targeted for release in late 2001, is a game console on the outside, but inside it's a full-scale Internet appliance, with a hard drive and a 650MHz Pentium III processor that makes it twice as fast as the PS2.


But Kutaragi isn't standing still. He's already at work on -- that's right -- PS3, a much stronger and, more significantly, stealthier PlayStation. "PS3 will totally disappear as a console, as a shape," he says. Sony may even cease making boxes altogether and instead sell PlayStation3 chips to other game-machine makers for use in their own units."


WTF? PS3 may totally dissapear as a shape? PS2 does home banking? KK will promise anything...

[Titanio]

Assuming this isn't the same old Sony song and dance they always do. The PS2 was supposed to be "more than a gaming machine" as well.

Sony doesn't get the benefit of the doubt from me anymore, they are always so full of crap(i.e. false promises, over-exagerations), so I'll believe it when I see it.

From 2000 (http://archives.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/10/23/ps2.hype/#r):

"Kutaragi sees PS2 as Sony's Trojan horse. The idea is that consumers will bring the device into their living rooms to play WipeOut and Crash Bandicoot and end up using it for all kinds of broadband entertainment. If everything goes according to Kutaragi's plan, PlayStation will lead Sony in a transformation from a producer of games, gadgets, CDs and movies to a "broadband delivery company." Future versions of the console will still give you games, but also music, online shopping, even interactive services. Already Sony has signed a deal with J.P. Morgan to deliver home banking through the PS2.

To handle functions beyond game playing, Sony has beefed up the PlayStation2 to near-PC strength, embedding a 300MHz processor. Other companies are pursuing a similar strategy. Microsoft's Xbox, targeted for release in late 2001, is a game console on the outside, but inside it's a full-scale Internet appliance, with a hard drive and a 650MHz Pentium III processor that makes it twice as fast as the PS2.


But Kutaragi isn't standing still. He's already at work on -- that's right -- PS3, a much stronger and, more significantly, stealthier PlayStation. "PS3 will totally disappear as a console, as a shape," he says. Sony may even cease making boxes altogether and instead sell PlayStation3 chips to other game-machine makers for use in their own units."


WTF? PS3 may totally dissapear as a shape? PS2 does home banking? KK will promise anything...


Look, it's quite simple. PS3s won't sell in isolation. They'll sell games, they'll sell Bluray movies. That much is undeniable (unless you believe they'll take out that Bluray drive and avoid things like microtransactions entirely). And it'll probably sell more if Sony is wise. Sony makes money on all of that. Looking at the loss on hardware in isolation and saying "sony will go bankrupt" is the point I am arguing against. It's like razors and razor blades, starting out at least, and Sony can sell a lot of different types of razor blade through PS3.

And for that matter, PS2 sold more than just hardware too (games/dvd movies). What I'm talking about here isn't a vast leap beyond that on the lower, more conservative end.

[Platon]

i'm sure they will break even or have a very small loss there.
i think the loss will be much smaller compared to the ps2 launch

How do you recon?

Complaired to the PS2, the PS3 is much more heavily packed with new tech. The PS2 had its EE and that was about it. The PS3 has the Cell, it has the RSX, nothing similar in the PS2, it has the BRD, not even close to the DVD that PS2 came with, alhtough quite new DVD was a very mature tech when the PS2 came along. Not to mention all the other stuff, broadband connections, wireless etc...

[mckmas8808]

Look, it's quite simple. PS3s won't sell in isolation. They'll sell games, they'll sell Bluray movies. That much is undeniable (unless you believe they'll take out that Bluray drive and avoid things like microtransactions entirely). And it'll probably sell more if Sony is wise. Sony makes money on all of that. Looking at the loss on hardware in isolation and saying "sony will go bankrupt" is the point I am arguing against. It's like razors and razor blades, starting out at least, and Sony can sell a lot of different types of razor blade through PS3.

And for that matter, PS2 sold more than just hardware too (games/dvd movies). What I'm talking about here isn't a vast leap beyond that on the lower, more conservative end.

I think it's sad that some people can't understand this concept Titanio. The PS3 could easily be under $400 if Sony really wanted it to. From building their own fabs to, pushing their blu-ray tech, to banking on the CELL to be scalable and able to sell to other consumers Sony has no reason to sell it over $400.


Think people think.

[Shifty Geezer]

From 2000 (http://archives.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/10/23/ps2.hype/#r):

"Kutaragi sees PS2 as Sony's Trojan horse. The idea is that consumers will bring the device into their living rooms to play WipeOut and Crash Bandicoot and end up using it for all kinds of broadband entertainment. If everything goes according to Kutaragi's plan, PlayStation will lead Sony in a transformation from a producer of games, gadgets, CDs and movies to a "broadband delivery company." Future versions of the console will still give you games, but also music, online shopping, even interactive services. Already Sony has signed a deal with J.P. Morgan to deliver home banking through the PS2.There's a few key points here...

1) King Kenny has his vision, but if the parent company didn't share it he'd be stifled. SCE itself wouldn't be in a strong position to structure and implement a full content service. From the same article
Kutaragi faces rivals inside and outside Sony. The company's famously territorial music, movie and electronics units are furiously pursuing their own -- not necessarily complementary -- strategies.
It seems Harrison is more sympathetic to KK's ideas.

2) A broadband delivery platform needs broadband connections. Back then there weren't many. Only about now is it becoming mainstream. Sony weren't the only company to chase the livingroom internet dream, and none of the others succeeded either for the same reasons.

3) Future versions of the console will still give you games, but also music, online shopping, even interactive services. Does this reference PS2, or the PlayStation brand? Regards Online Banking, again this isn't the first time a company has had an idea that hasn't panned out, and as is business you have to talk up your ideas to sell them. It'd be stupid for KK to say 'we want to add these internet features, but it could all go pear shaped. Chances are the broadband infrastructure won't grow as quick as it needs and we might hit some serious snags on the software front. Hell anything could go wrong really. We've got these aspirations but maybe they'll amount to nothing.' That's a realistic attitude for any business venture, but a stupid public front to pose. You need to prove to the masses you're serious, and if it doesn't work it doesn't work. Would you really want to fly in a plane when the advertising brochure said 'it's got lots of security features, although accidents do happen. Chances are slim you'll have an accident but realstically, planes fall out of the sky all the time. We do our best but sometimes one's best just isn't good enough'? :D

4) Big thinkers like KK talk with an air of the fantastic and unrealistic, but that's how they think. He's dreaming, and telling us of his dream with the excitement and enthusiam and fanciful imagery that he sees himself. Dreams don't always come true, but there he is still dreaming and pushing. I'd say KK's vision has always been there. He hasn't made it happen yet, but he won't stop trying. He'll offer all these ideas for PS3, maybe which won't amount to anything because the best laid plans of mice and men gang aft aglay, but the sincerity is there. And I think now he actually has the rest of the systems in place, and apparently the support of the parent company, that if it is going to happen it'll start this next gen.

[Titanio]

I'm should clarify that I'm not making the argument that PS3 should be no more than $400. Simply that revenue/loss on hardware is simply one part of the puzzle in terms of the financials relating to a system, and that ultimately it's the "soft" side - be it games, movies whatever that'll be really driving revenue. It's the way with every system, but obviously the more channels you open up in terms of content, the more flexibility you have. Sony has some advantages here (if they'd only get their arses in gear and do so, beyond Bluray movies - under Stringer I'm a little more hopeful he'll get everyone to co-operate).

[Mefisutoferesu]

Not that I have much to say, but one thing to take into account is PS3 is being built on a very mature 90nm process, PS2 was built on, at the time, a very cutting edge immature process. That allow should be a good economic boon to PS3 relative to the PS2.

[scooby_dooby]

Look, it's quite simple. PS3s won't sell in isolation. They'll sell games, they'll sell Bluray movies. That much is undeniable (unless you believe they'll take out that Bluray drive and avoid things like microtransactions entirely). And it'll probably sell more if Sony is wise. Sony makes money on all of that. Looking at the loss on hardware in isolation and saying "sony will go bankrupt" is the point I am arguing against. It's like razors and razor blades, starting out at least, and Sony can sell a lot of different types of razor blade through PS3.

And for that matter, PS2 sold more than just hardware too (games/dvd movies). What I'm talking about here isn't a vast leap beyond that on the lower, more conservative end.

Oh I have no issue with what you're saying, all that is very true. PS3 pushes blu-ray, it pushes CELL, these will hopefully pay-off in the end for Sony.

My issue is with anything beyond that, sure PS3 will drive BR sales, but all this stuff about it being more than a gaming machine, the CELL-centric storage system, linking multiple cell's together, streaming HD content to the HDD etc etc.

Shifty - It's fine to say KK has big dreams, and whatever, but IMO they've never ever delivered anything but a gaming system, when all's said and done, and all teh dust/hype clears, you have a game system, nothing more nothing less.

They've just lost all credibility to me, making such lofty promises in the past, and not delivering ANY of them, so I'm just under the opinion that when I see it with my own 2 eyes I'll believe it.

[fireshot]

in japan, Kutaragi told watchimpress that PS3 will be around the same price as PS2. PS3 will also see less frequent pricecuts.

frankly this comes as no surprise, 360 is already 40k yen today, PS3 40k yen by spring06 can be done.

most of the components are in the same ballpack. wifi/ports are small cost drivers. BDRom is ps3 hdd. sony has their own factories so that helps them to save some. sony may absorb more costs as they have to play catchup. 360 accessories could be lower.

I will more surprised if PS3 is us500-600! that is getting console jacked by a first generation BDrom!

[one]

IMO they've never ever delivered anything but a gaming system, when all's said and done, and all teh dust/hype clears, you have a game system, nothing more nothing less..PSP is for you, then. In its versatile functions, it has a web browser with JavaScript engine which may be usable for net banking if a bank website doesn't kick out non-mainstream browser users. It's very probable that PS3 will have a full web browser while what MS can put on Xbox 360 stays crippled MSN Explorer without IE/Outlook functions at best.

[EricVonZipper]

Well as long as it's under 1,000$ I'm buying it. :)

But lets add up some figures:

*************WARNING HIGHLY SPECULATIVE NUMBERS ******************
Per -> PS3

60$ for the RSX (wonder what sort of deal nVidia cooked up?)
70$ for the Cell (IBM is teh rich $!)
90$ for the Blu-Ray HD (could be cheaper? or.......?)
60$ for memory + motherboard, power supply, case, packaging, manual (Quality parts....or?)
80$ R&DCell, Fabrication, flex io R&d, RSX R&D, marketing, ect....(research and development ALWAYS kills you) :)
40$ overhead ,labor(always a ball-buster ;) ) , shipping & delivery, Advertising, ect......

Whats that 400$?

I think Sony could break even......but I think everything must fall into place.

[mckmas8808]

in japan, Kutaragi told watchimpress that PS3 will be around the same price as PS2. PS3 will also see less frequent pricecuts.

frankly this comes as no surprise, 360 is already 40k yen today, PS3 40k yen by spring06 can be done.



I'm quoting this just because too many people still till this day know this. It's very sad. As a matter of fact I'm going to post it over and over until regulars here know, understand, and acknowledge it.

in japan, Kutaragi told watchimpress that PS3 will be around the same price as PS2. PS3 will also see less frequent pricecuts.

[Alpha_Spartan]

B3D is just filled with scoops lately! So what will it really be Alpha_Spartan?
If Sony sells the same PS3 they advertised at E3 for $400, I'll cut my left nut off and mail it to you.

[Kb-Smoker]

If Sony sells the same PS3 they advertised at E3 for $400, I'll cut my left nut off and mail it to you.
you know that going to the sig... :wink:

[Tap In]

I think it's in sony's best interest to hint that the PS3 will be around $299; surreptitiously enlisting online fans to spread the word, trying to get people to hold out for the cheaper yet "better" solution (PS3).

Fact is, I don't see how A) they can put out a machine as described on paper at E3 for less than $400 (maybe even more) and B) how they can afford to look like the cheaper unit when sitting next to X360 at market.

[Trawler]

Fact is, I don't see how A) they can put out a machine as described on paper at E3 for less than $400 (maybe even more) and B) how they can afford to look like the cheaper unit when sitting next to X360 at market.

Maybe they could go the MS route and release two SKUs? Perhaps a PSthree? :) They could make a lot of savings by cutting back on all the IO ports and perhaps replacing the BDROM with a standard DVD drive.

[Metalgearih]

If Sony sells the same PS3 they advertised at E3 for $400, I'll cut my left nut off and mail it to you.

Start investing in a good blade. According to XE.com 40,000 as of today equals to US$347, not $400. So if this rumor is true, you know what you promised the other dude. :lol:

[mckmas8808]

Fact is, I don't see how A) they can put out a machine as described on paper at E3 for less than $400 (maybe even more) and B) how they can afford to look like the cheaper unit when sitting next to X360 at market.

Tap In it's one thing to think with your opinion that Sony isn't going to launch less than $400, but it's just plain careless to not know how it can be possible. You are too smart to make a comment like that. Don't you see that if Sony put in the money that they can make back from the CELL being in the PS3 (i.e. they save money on making CELL chips due to defected PS3 chips), they will make millions apon millions due to the PS3 pushing Blu-ray, and seeing that the PS2 sold more than the PSone they could be setting their price based on the PS3 selling more than the PS2, and the PS3 is on a more mature 90nm process line. And they have their own fabs. Few middle men.

So stop acting like you can phatom how it can be possible. B3D has already taught you this. Now will it come true we don't know. But you should know how it's possible.

[Dr Evil]

Maybe they could go the MS route and release two SKUs? Perhaps a PSthree? :) They could make a lot of savings by cutting back on all the IO ports and perhaps replacing the BDROM with a standard DVD drive.

And how would you play Blu-Ray games then... Do you reckon that this PSthree would only be compatible with some early releases. LOL.

[fastasleep]

Sony will engage in a FUD campaign against the 360. As for the ps3 being cheap, I see little evidence in sony's actions to support such a conclusion. The ps2 has been stuck at a $149 price point for a long time and analyst predictions of a $99 ps2 this xmas look to be nothing more than wishful thinking. Rather than decontenting the psp to create a more consumer friendly $199 price point, sony is doing the exact opposite in creating a giga pack psp and raising the price point to $299.

Now, we have sony supporters claiming that sony will bring in a ps3 at an aggressive price point. If sony is a comfortable bringing out a $299 psp package, then I can see them being comfortable releasing a ps3 for $499 and above. I've bought sony products a long while, and sony is not a bargain basement company. They do not seek to engage in cut-throat price wars. Rather they look to seek a premium for their proprietary technology and the ps3 will be no different. Sony doesn't give away their products. Currently, they're the most expensive console on a feature basis and I don't expect that to change in the future.

[Tap In]

Tap In it's one thing to think with your opinion that Sony isn't going to launch less than $400, but it's just plain careless to not know how it can be possible. You are too smart to make a comment like that. Don't you see that if Sony put in the money that they can make back from the CELL being in the PS3 (i.e. they save money on making CELL chips due to defected PS3 chips), they will make millions apon millions due to the PS3 pushing Blu-ray, and seeing that the PS2 sold more than the PSone they could be setting their price based on the PS3 selling more than the PS2, and the PS3 is on a more mature 90nm process line. And they have their own fabs. Few middle men.

So stop acting like you can phatom how it can be possible. B3D has already taught you this. Now will it come true we don't know. But you should know how it's possible.

oh I never said it was a fact that it couldn't happen, I said it was a fact that I couldn't see how.

But I'm really not that smart, so I'll take your word for it that it IS possible. :D

[Tap In]

Maybe they could go the MS route and release two SKUs? Perhaps a PSthree? :) They could make a lot of savings by cutting back on all the IO ports and perhaps replacing the BDROM with a standard DVD drive.


I could certainly see scaling back some specs as an option to hit the sweet spot pricing. Not sure if they'd release a DVD though unless no games are released on Blu ray.

[wco81]

How do you recon?

Complaired to the PS2, the PS3 is much more heavily packed with new tech. The PS2 had its EE and that was about it. The PS3 has the Cell, it has the RSX, nothing similar in the PS2, it has the BRD, not even close to the DVD that PS2 came with, alhtough quite new DVD was a very mature tech when the PS2 came along. Not to mention all the other stuff, broadband connections, wireless etc...

You know, out of all those things, I was taking the RSX for granted.

But I saw an ad for the Dell XPS special so I went to the site and they had a $999 system with only an X300 card.

The GF 7800 was a $690 option!

I don't even think it was an SLI configuration.:shock:

[mckmas8808]

Now, we have sony supporters claiming that sony will bring in a ps3 at an aggressive price point.

I guess you weren't around when people were saying that the PS2 would be $500+ or the PSP would be $400-$600? I guess you just didn't see those comments either though?:roll:

Why is it that everytime Sony releases some Playstation hardware everyone thinks that it's going to cost hundreds of dollars more than it really comes out to be? Sony has shut people up about the PS2 and PSP. Shouldn't Sony get the benefit of the doubt here at B3D of all places because of this history?

[scooby_dooby]

They are getting the benefit of the doubt, no system they have ever made has been this expensive, and considering inflation over the last 6 years, $399 would be a killer price point.

They're getting the benefit of the doubt, but I wouldn't be "shocked" to see it come in at $499. I agree with you though, they always say it will be expensive, journalists always report it and it's never that high.

He does bring up a good point though with the PSP at $299, that sortof makes you wonder how they will work the pricing structure with such a high pricepoint for their handheld.

[pipo]

If Sony sells the same PS3 they advertised at E3 for $400, I'll cut my left nut off and mail it to you.

Start investing in a good blade. According to XE.com 40,000 as of today equals to US$347, not $400. So if this rumor is true, you know what you promised the other dude. :lol:

AS has nothing to worry about. They've already dropped the router functionality...

[Mefisutoferesu]

The router function was dropped long before E3. I dunno why everyone thinks that. His huevo is still on the line. I hope Sony does pull it off just, so I can see the comedic gold that'll ensue as Alpha argues with others about his huevo. "Well, I'm not paying to mail it to you!" "It's OK, we're willing to go CoD on this!!" Comedy GOLD!!

[pipo]

The router function was dropped long before E3. I dunno why everyone thinks that. His huevo is still on the line. I hope Sony does pull it off just, so I can see the comedic gold that'll ensue as Alpha argues with others about his huevo. "Well, I'm not paying to mail it to you!" "It's OK, we're willing to go CoD on this!!" Comedy GOLD!!

Errr....

Since the console was revealed at E3, WITH THOSE SPECS, how would that be possible?

Edit - I'll save you the trouble...

The news that the system was intended for use as a router or hub was first revealed at E3, when Sony's Phil Harrison told GamesIndustry.biz that "it can be a hub, rather than just being a terminal at the end of a network."

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=10033

[AlphaWolf]

The router function was dropped long before E3.

Nope.

Dropped (http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/6626.cfm) in July. Well after E3.

[Titanio]

Errr....

Since the console was revealed at E3, WITH THOSE SPECS, how would that be possible?

Edit - I'll save you the trouble...



http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=10033

Nope.

Dropped (http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/6626.cfm) in July. Well after E3.

Arrrggghhh - make it stop! Sony did not announce router functionality at E3. If websites misreported that, so be it. But Sony said at the E3 conference that it was a switch (watch the video), and they even said again in interviews at E3 that it was not a router, but a switching hub. The coverage of it was atrocious, but that's not Sony's fault (obviously many journos did not understand the difference between a switch, or switching hub and a router). Kutaragi in the later interview was talking about how they had considered it as part of the spec, but decided against it (like perhaps how MS considered HD-DVD - but it was never announced). A lot of people reported incorrectly on the July Kutaragi interview (IGN for example, did not, and pointed out the mistakes - see: http://ps3.ign.com/articles/632/632766p1.html)

[BTOA]

Arrrggghhh - make it stop! Sony did not announce router functionality at E3. If websites misreported that, so be it. But Sony said at the E3 conference that it was a switch (watch the video), and they even said again in interviews at E3 that it was not a router, but a switching hub. The coverage of it was atrocious, but that's not Sony's fault. Kutaragi in the later interview was talking about how they had considered it as part of the spec, but decided against it (like perhaps how MS considered HD-DVD - but it was never announced).
QFT

[pipo]

I stand corrected is the line I'm looking for I suppose... ;)

[mckmas8808]

Thanks pipo and Alpha you have know lost every piece of respect that others here had for you. Glad I can stop reading your crazy post know. And I will repost what you guys said just to show the others here how far behind you two are.


Since the console was revealed at E3, WITH THOSE SPECS, how would that be possible?

Edit - I'll save you the trouble...


Quote:
The news that the system was intended for use as a router or hub was first revealed at E3, when Sony's Phil Harrison told GamesIndustry.biz that "it can be a hub, rather than just being a terminal at the end of a network."




Nope.

Dropped (http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/6626.cfm) in July. Well after E3.


Read the forum. Use the search function.

[pipo]

Thanks pipo and Alpha you have know lost every piece of respect that others here had for you. Glad I can stop reading your crazy post know. And I will repost what you guys said just to show the others here how far behind you two are.

Read the forum. Use the search function.

Which I why I googled for it and there didn't seem to be a site in the world reporting the correct way. And that's probably why I remembered it that way, as I sure didn't know it.

Thanks for pointing out what kind of person you are though...

[Shifty Geezer]

Thanks pipo and Alpha you have know lost every piece of respect that others here had for you.Au contrare. Pipo's intelligent enough to see when he's wrong, which is as much as any of us can hope for (none of us will be infallible. Except maybe LB apparently...)

However, Alpha's bet seem pretty safe. He said specifically $400 and E3 specs. If there's any chage to specs, up or down, or any change to the console box, like a few more vents, or any difference to a $400 price tage, like $399.99, he's scot free...

[AlphaWolf]

Arrrggghhh - make it stop! Sony did not announce router functionality at E3. If websites misreported that, so be it. But Sony said at the E3 conference that it was a switch (watch the video), and they even said again in interviews at E3 that it was not a router, but a switching hub. The coverage of it was atrocious, but that's not Sony's fault (obviously many journos did not understand the difference between a switch, or switching hub and a router). Kutaragi in the later interview was talking about how they had considered it as part of the spec, but decided against it (like perhaps how MS considered HD-DVD - but it was never announced). A lot of people reported incorrectly on the July Kutaragi interview (IGN for example, did not, and pointed out the mistakes - see: http://ps3.ign.com/articles/632/632766p1.html)

Ah ok. My apologies Mefisutoferesu.

[hey69]

Well as long as it's under 1,000$ I'm buying it. :)

But lets add up some figures:

*************WARNING HIGHLY SPECULATIVE NUMBERS ******************
Per -> PS3

60$ for the RSX (wonder what sort of deal nVidia cooked up?)
70$ for the Cell (IBM is teh rich $!)
90$ for the Blu-Ray HD (could be cheaper? or.......?)
60$ for memory + motherboard, power supply, case, packaging, manual (Quality parts....or?)
80$ R&DCell, Fabrication, flex io R&d, RSX R&D, marketing, ect....(research and development ALWAYS kills you) :)
40$ overhead ,labor(always a ball-buster ;) ) , shipping & delivery, Advertising, ect......

Whats that 400$?

I think Sony could break even......but I think everything must fall into place.

you really dont think sony is going to pay 70$ for the cell chip now do you?
and 90$ for blueray? make that 15$ at max

those corporations dont shop at bestbuys or walmarts. the make orders for multimillion pieces of hardware for at least 10years.
R&D is done long ago (for the most part on bleulazer technology) for bleuray, fabricating and ordereing the lazerheads wont cost that much.
a normal redlazer head goes for under the 3$ a piece already for big orders.
some of the R&D is carried by sony global, why others are carried by sony enternainment. so they have different budgets

[Shifty Geezer]

Though they do have to recover the costs of development. Sony's Gaming divisons hasn't been of profitable as late because they were spending on RnD. They need to turn the books around and make big profits to compensate, which means losing as little money on the hardware as they can get away with.

[mckmas8808]

Which I why I googled for it and there didn't seem to be a site in the world reporting the correct way. And that's probably why I remembered it that way, as I sure didn't know it.

Thanks for pointing out what kind of person you are though...

Look I typed it while you were typing your apology. Plain and simple I'm tired of people quoting darn lies about Sony every chance they get to push their agenda. Man to man I'm glad to see that you understand the truth though so I take back what I said about you.

Cool?:cool:

[pipo]

Though they do have to recover the costs of development. Sony's Gaming divisons hasn't been of profitable as late because they were spending on RnD. They need to turn the books around and make big profits to compensate, which means losing as little money on the hardware as they can get away with.

QFT. And there's no way they'll hit 15$ for a BR drive any time soon...

Some related stuff:

Research and development costs on PS3 drive Sony's games division into the red

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/news.php?aid=10470

Sony to take $100 loss on $399-priced PS3, says new report

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/news.php?aid=9838

Take it all with a shipload of salt, but it's tricky business at best. Big N seems to be the only one with a 'normal' business model these days. ;)

Cool?:cool:

Yep.

[Mefisutoferesu]

Though they do have to recover the costs of development. Sony's Gaming divisons hasn't been of profitable as late because they were spending on RnD. They need to turn the books around and make big profits to compensate, which means losing as little money on the hardware as they can get away with.


I'm half tempted to believe that's why the PStwo hasn't dropped down to $99 as of yet. They're, perhaps, using the extra profit from PS2 to subsdise the losses in PS3. Sounds smart to me, but I haven't really thought hard about it... ...

[mckmas8808]

Sony has always had a great business model with their Playstation brand. It seems to me that with the PS3 having Bluetooth, CELL, built-in wireless 802.11b/g support, and Blu-ray and also with the PSP having UMDs and a steady updating OS that adds more and more options that their business model so far still seems great.

What's the problem?:???:

[Shifty Geezer]

The main reason why PS2 hasn't dropped in price is because it's still selling! First rule of business - sell at the highest price your customers will pay.

[pipo]

Sony has always had a great business model with their Playstation brand. It seems to me that with the PS3 having Bluetooth, CELL, built-in wireless 802.11b/g support, and Blu-ray and also with the PSP having UMDs and a steady updating OS that adds more and more options that their business model so far still seems great.

What's the problem?:???:

Read the link I've posted.

Not making a profit is the problem. Especially when they should in this period of the PS2's lifespan.

I tried to say Nintendo, because they're not concerned about having the best specs, is the only one making a profit. That's including R&D and a console which is arguably a failure.

[EricVonZipper]

you really dont think sony is going to pay 70$ for the cell chip now do you?
and 90$ for blueray? make that 15$ at max

those corporations dont shop at bestbuys or walmarts. the make orders for multimillion pieces of hardware for at least 10years.
R&D is done long ago (for the most part on bleulazer technology) for bleuray, fabricating and ordereing the lazerheads wont cost that much.
a normal redlazer head goes for under the 3$ a piece already for big orders.
some of the R&D is carried by sony global, why others are carried by sony enternainment. so they have different budgets

It's not the *chip* itself they are paying for, nVidia *wants* it's cut and Sony must pay for the green machines: technology, R&D,software, support, delivery, expenses, ect...

I think the chip itself isn't going cost Sony much more than 20$ bucks to fab.

Blueray is still an unknown quality/quanity, but I doubt the Sony bean counters will let them get away with passing the R&D buck.

they can probably make the device itself for 10-15$ but they still MUST pay(eventually) the R&D piper.

[Dr Evil]

I tried to say Nintendo, because they're not concerned about having the best specs, is the only one making a profit. That's including R&D and a console which is arguably a failure.

and handheld business.

[Metalgearih]

The main reason why PS2 hasn't dropped in price is because it's still selling! First rule of business - sell at the highest price your customers will pay.

Rule of business? Shifty, It's quite funny you mention that yet you totally ignore the other rules that are applied in the same business. For example, how a company balances it's profits by branching them onto other related products. A good example is a $250 PSP that was analysed to be at the least $500. It had UMD movie's selling for $30-$40. That is a price almost twice as much as a regular DVD with much less space and resolution. I don't know how much profit they have turned in with that procedure but it surely brings us to light about a business rule, NO?

Xbox360 is asking premium prices for it's official accessories. Another example of branching out profits.

I understand a normal human brain cannot comprehend how WiFi, Cell, Blu-ray and RSX would be included in a single package in a competitive price point. But to grasp the idea, one has to apply the "business rules" for the mind to accept it. Sony has been in the Playstation business for about a decade now. If there is anyone in the world that knows how to branch out it's profits, it's SCE!

That is a one-sided onslaught I agree. Sorry about that. But how some people can't understand that Cell will be the catalyst in the making 10's of other products, not only from Sony and Toshiba. But will also be licesenced to other general purpose areas(like army, medical, servers). How's that rule for making profits out of the same product?

With every major Hollywood studio joining the Blu-ray camp, it's assured that Sony's profits are now etched further in the stone with that product. One could argue until their face turns blue how that won't happen anytime soon. But I'll wait and hear a response when a few million PS3's go out in the first year. After all, even PS2 accepted a generous loss for the first year to be fair.

Ahh, whatever man! Let's wait for some official confirmation. No need to waste my mind over these pointless arguments. To be clear, the above were my opinions and should be taken as part of an argument. So shifty, if you're offended over something my friend, my apologies.

[london-boy]

Rule of business? Shifty, It's quite funny you mention that yet you totally ignore the other rules of that are applied in the same business. For example, how a company balances it's profits by branching them onto other related products. A good example is a $250 PSP that was analysed to be at the least $500. It had UMD movie's selling for $30-$40. That is a price almost twice as much as a regular DVD with much less space and resolution. I don't know how much profit they have turned in with that procedure but it surely brings us to light about a business rule, NO?

I understand a normal human brain cannot comprehend how WiFi, Cell, Blu-ray and RSX would be included in a single package in a competitive price point. But to grasp the idea, one has to apply the "business rules" for the mind to accept it. Sony has been in the Playstation business for about a decade now. If there is anyone in the world that knows how to branch out it's profits, it's SCE!

That is a one-sided onslaught I agree. Sorry about that. But how some people can't understand that Cell will be the catalyst in the making 10's of other products, not only from Sony and Toshiba. But will also be licesenced to other general purpose areas(like army, medical, servers). How's that rule for making profits out of the same product?

With every major Hollywood studio joining the Blu-ray camp, it's assured that Sony's profits are now etched further in the stone with that product. One could argue until their face turns blue how that won't happen anytime soon. But I'll wait and hear a response when a few million PS3's go out in the first year. After all, even PS2 accepted a generous loss for the first year to be fair.

Ahh, whatever man! Let's wait for some official confirmation. No need to waste my mind over these pointless arguments. To be clear, the above were my opinions and should be taken as part of an argument. So shifty, if you're offended over something my friend, my apologies.


Uhm not that i disagree with you, cause i kinda agree, but... R u sure you wanted to reply to Shifty? Cause from what he said, and from what you said after your introduction, that introduction itself doesn't make much sense...? Or is it just me?

All he said is that PS2 is still $150 (or whatever it is these days) because Sony know that at that price point, it will sell loads. Lowering to 99 is still not "needed".
Then you went into one about him not knowing what he's talking about, giving a completely different and unrelated argument to counter-attack?
I didn't get it, you covered issues that Shifty didn't, you didn't actually disagree with him.

[Metalgearih]

Uhm not that i disagree with you, cause i kinda agree, but... R u sure you wanted to reply to Shifty? Cause from what he said, and from what you said after your introduction, that introduction itself doesn't make much sense...? Or is it just me?

All he said is that PS2 is still $150 (or whatever it is these days) because Sony know that at that price point, it will sell loads. Lowering to 99 is still not "needed".
Then you went into one about him not knowing what he's talking about, giving a completely different and unrelated argument to counter-attack?
I didn't get it, you covered issues that Shifty didn't, you didn't actually disagree with him.

Yea, sorry about that. I realized that halfway through that I should have mentioned pipo and alpha's arguments but somewhere in between reading theirs and Shifty's, I mixed them up badly. Hence my excuse to Shifty at the end :oops: I'm sure he'll get mad at me so my apologies.

[Shifty Geezer]

Hence my excuse to Shifty at the end :oops: I'm sure he'll get mad at me so my apologies.Mad...no. Confused? You betcha! ;)

[Metalgearih]

Mad...no. Confused? You betcha! ;)

LOL, I can live with that :razz: but again, sorry for messing up!

Anyways, I'm still wondering why 1up reported it as $400, yet exchange rates currently indicate 40,000 Yen to be around US$350. That's a $50 difference! Where the heck 1up.com got their numbers checked is uber weirdness. Maybe even their minds couldn't comprehend the idea of a PS3 with all the bells and whistles for $350. So to just be safe, they raised it up a notch with $400 :lol:

[london-boy]

Yea, sorry about that. I realized that halfway through that I should have mentioned pipo and alpha's arguments but somewhere in between reading theirs and Shifty's, I mixed them up badly. Hence my excuse to Shifty at the end :oops: I'm sure he'll get mad at me so my apologies.

Heh no worries, it happens to me sometimes, when i talk to me. I always get me confused with me. And the other me too sometimes.

[pipo]

and handheld business.

Sure. But other companies are trying that too... ;)

[Powderkeg]

LOL, I can live with that :razz: but again, sorry for messing up!

Anyways, I'm still wondering why 1up reported it as $400, yet exchange rates currently indicate 40,000 Yen to be around US$350. That's a $50 difference! Where the heck 1up.com got their numbers checked is uber weirdness. Maybe even their minds couldn't comprehend the idea of a PS3 with all the bells and whistles for $350. So to just be safe, they raised it up a notch with $400 :lol:


Exchange rates change. What was the exchange rate when 1up wrote their article?

[scooby_dooby]

hey69 I don't know what you're smoking, but $15 for a BR drive? Care to back tyhat up with an ounce of proof, or is that just right from between your buttcheeks?

Analysts estimated the BR wil cost sony $100 to produce. Presumably they are basing this some solid information.

I believe Dave has also stated that the G70 costs Nvidia in the neighbourhood of $100 to produce as well.

[Titanio]

I believe Dave has also stated that the G70 costs Nvidia in the neighbourhood of $100 to produce as well.

G70 and RSX costs will be completely different I'm sure.

[scooby_dooby]

Why would they be drastically different?

If I'm not mistaken Sony also has to pay royalties on top of manufacturing fees. So how does that come into play?

[Titanio]

Why would they be drastically different?

Different manufacturer, different factories, different design (?), different process, different time, different target volumes.

If I'm not mistaken Sony also has to pay royalties on top of manufacturing fees. So how does that come into play?

It'd be a flat fee on top of the manufacturing cost, if you'd like to consider it that way. We've no solid figures on that, but one analyst pegged it at around the $5 per PS3 mark.

[Shifty Geezer]

RSX should be cheaper as it's produced on 90nm, and with built-in redundancy should get higher useable yields. Dunno what actual difference that'll contribute to unit prices though.

[Carl B]

RSX should definitely be cheaper than G70. If it's a straight G70 adaptation - then a LOT cheaper.

Some points of reference with PS3's costs overall:

Back in PS2 launch days, the EE was 240MM^2 and the GS was 279mm^2. Plus, those were both on an immature cutting-edge process with terrible yields.

In contrast, Sony will be launching Cell and RSX on a very mature 90nm process, with a Cell chip that not only is the same die-size as the old EE, but will be on 300mm wafers and able to withstand some level of on-die defects.

RSX, though we don't have an exact die-size, is on the same mature 90nm process. If we scale from the GTX's 334mm^2 die size down to 90nm, RSX should actually be smaller than the original GS (assuming again a straight 'port'). Not only smaller, but perhaps also with some 'redundancy' a la Cell - per Kutaragi.

So right now RSX and Cell are looking to me a fair deal cheaper for Sony to produce than their EE and GS analogues were back in the day.

[Platon]

RSX should definitely be cheaper than G70. If it's a straight G70 adaptation - then a LOT cheaper.

Some points of reference with PS3's costs overall:

Back in PS2 launch days, the EE was 240MM^2 and the GS was 279mm^2. Plus, those were both on an immature cutting-edge process with terrible yields.

In contrast, Sony will be launching Cell and RSX on a very mature 90nm process, with a Cell chip that not only is the same die-size as the old EE, but will be on 300mm wafers and able to withstand some level of on-die defects.

RSX, though we don't have an exact die-size, is on the same mature 90nm process. If we scale from the GTX's 334mm^2 die size down to 90nm, RSX should actually be smaller than the original GS (assuming again a straight 'port'). Not only smaller, but perhaps also with some 'redundancy' a la Cell - per Kutaragi.

So right now RSX and Cell are looking to me a fair deal cheaper for Sony to produce than their EE and GS analogues were back in the day.

But aren't they shifting to 65nm soon? I wouldn't call that process mature...

[Carl B]

But aren't they shifting to 65nm soon? I wouldn't call that process mature...

But they're not launching at 65nm. And if they were - hell, that would just make it easier to make an analysis slashing Sony's costs, 65nm being basically half the size area-wise as 90nm and all... But no, I believe it's their mature 90nm process on which they are launching.

[fastasleep]

I guess you weren't around when people were saying that the PS2 would be $500+ or the PSP would be $400-$600? I guess you just didn't see those comments either though?:roll:

Why is it that everytime Sony releases some Playstation hardware everyone thinks that it's going to cost hundreds of dollars more than it really comes out to be? Sony has shut people up about the PS2 and PSP. Shouldn't Sony get the benefit of the doubt here at B3D of all places because of this history?

You need to take your attitude along with that sizeable chip on your shoulder to a system wars forum where rolling eyes smilies impress the other 12 year olds posting there.

Psp pricing was made in context of DS pricing. When you're entering virgin territory against a dominant competitor, you're not going to make much headway pricing yourself hundreds of dollars above their price point. For a large segment of the market, the psp is still way too expensive to consider. While the hardware cost of the psp may not be that bad, their inflated accessory, umd movie and game pricing more than makes up for it. Consumers are far more sophisticated than they're being given credit for and people look at total cost of ownership for a product now. On that basis, the psp is a pricey piece of consumer electronics.

As for what uninformed media journalists estimated the psp price would be, that's no concern of mine. As it is, a number of aspects of the psp were grossly exaggerated by the media, starting with the plasma like screen of the psp. The lcd screen of the psp has a pretty miserable pixel response time, which equates to low quality in my book. The viewing angle was mediocre and it's virtually unviewable in daylight. Aside from the size and the aspect ratio, I was underwhelmed by the plasma like qualities.

Sony went for a glossy black matte finish to give the impression of quality, when in reality, it was a terrible decision, as the finish showed off fingerprints, dirt and grime in pristine detail.

As for the ps2, sorry, but I don't keep five year old articles on whatever speculative pricing for the ps2 might have been. What I've pointed out, is that sony is NOT a price point leader, that is not part of their overall company strategy and it isn't. If sony feels that they can get $499 and above for a ps3 based on the feature set they'll be offering, then that's what they'll do. They're not going to price the ps3 to fulfill some fantasy of a sony ******. When you analyze the giga pack for the psp and ask what the point of the gigapack is, you need to think revenue streams. Sony competes with sansdisk in the memory stick pro duo market, except sansdisk's products are less expensive and from one report I read, offer superior performance to boot. Sony is basically looking to cut out sansdisk and nab that revenue stream for themselves by offering the gigapack.

Sony has been very anxious to convey the impression that the ps3 is more powerful than the 360. They'll feature bluray as standard, built in wifi as standard, dual hdmi ports as standard, multiple memory card support along with other features. I have a hard time seeing sony lowballing the ps3 when they're comfortable creating an even more expensive psp pack which ran contrary to most people's expectations. And its not even like the psp is that hot as a consumer item anymore if it ever actually was to begin with.

If MS can sell a $399 xbox 360, then why wouldn't sony ask $499 and above for a product that can not only play games in high def but usher in an era of high dev movie watching on bluray as well. Built in wifi alone on the ps3 is $100 extra cost option on the 360.

As for these reports, let's be blunt here, some unknown blogger quoting an upcoming issue of famitsu from an unspecified source at sony concerning what they might be thinking along the way of pricing? This is ****** rumor stuff, not news. When I look to what a company might or might not do, I look at recent precedents not some rumor mole mongering.