Pifft on all you guys who complane(*) about spelling. I would speculate that english isnt the first language of the team of ppl who put this together. No matter the errors, it looks to be a big first year loss for Sony in the only div that makes real money. Maybe two Billion for the first two years.... Im rounding up for the worst case. How long can Sony as a company bleed?mrdarko said:
Merrill Lynch Update: PS3 BOM Approaches $900
- Thread starter Alpha_Spartan
- Start date
It's not about spelling, but about making sure you're reflecting your topic professionally. They just have some weird ways going about it... (Notice the stylized use of "xBox," which--while nice if it were apt--is not how Microsoft reflects their product. They use both xBox and Xbox alternatively to refer to both the original and 360.) All in the same report they call it Playstation 3, PlayStation 3, PS3, PS III, and PSX III. (Those last two frequently in the same PARAGRAPH.)
It would simply be nice if SOMEONE had done any editing.
Personally, I think the damn addition error is more glaring.
It would simply be nice if SOMEONE had done any editing.
Personally, I think the damn addition error is more glaring.
scooby_dooby
Legend
cthellis42 said:
i think it's far more likly that theres a typo in the price listings rather than a mistake in adding 6 numbers together. the whole report is framed around the $900 number.
as sis points out, seems like the $70 rsx should be $170, which would explain alot.
Last edited by a moderator:
randycat99
Veteran
It also suggests that any one of their numbers could well be off by more than 100%, w/o any of their internal writers picking up on the discrepency. They should just play it safe and give a range, like they predict the price will lie somewhere between $90-$900. That would at least be more credible.
I haven't read the article but how did they came up with those numbers?
I mean, is that really what the production cost is, just the production cost? And not what a company would sell it for to another?
Because Cell, blu-ray and RSX is produced by sony themselves, aren't they?
I mean, is that really what the production cost is, just the production cost? And not what a company would sell it for to another?
Because Cell, blu-ray and RSX is produced by sony themselves, aren't they?
randycat99
Veteran
Maybe that's the trick- they are actually basing their costs as if an utterly 3rd party was to venture with a hypothetical PS3 product, using proprietary parts that will need to be procured through outside sources.
True enough. Still not a simple error a financial institution would want to get wrong, and definitely a shoddily-put-together report from a professionalism standpoint.scooby_dooby said:
I would have been more interested in them saying just why they updated the numbers they've gone by until now so much.
cthellis42 said:True enough. Still not a simple error a financial institution would want to get wrong, and definitely a shoddily-put-together report from a professionalism standpoint.
I would have been more interested in them saying just why they updated the numbers they've gone by until now so much.
You do an analysis/report like this those numbers should have been added up many many times on different occassions.
This just seems like a rushed unprofessional job.
No explanation of why they think the bill of materials will be the cost they predict.
Speng.
Megadrive1988
Veteran
there have been mistakes before. In 1999 after specs were announced, the inital estimate for PS2 price was $850.
I don't know if that estimate was manufacturing cost or retail cost, but either way it was clearly wrong.
Thus, it is best to not jump on every report that comes out regarding PS3 costs or retail price.
even with a 256-bit memory bus for the GDDR3, I don't see PS3 costing $900 to make. and right now it only has a 128-bit bus.
I don't see how PS3 will cost any more than $600 to make, at the absolute highest, and I don't see how PS3 will retail for a penny more than $499.99 ...again at the absolute highest.
I don't know if that estimate was manufacturing cost or retail cost, but either way it was clearly wrong.
Thus, it is best to not jump on every report that comes out regarding PS3 costs or retail price.
even with a 256-bit memory bus for the GDDR3, I don't see PS3 costing $900 to make. and right now it only has a 128-bit bus.
I don't see how PS3 will cost any more than $600 to make, at the absolute highest, and I don't see how PS3 will retail for a penny more than $499.99 ...again at the absolute highest.
Last edited by a moderator:
I've been looking for their quotes for the PS2 online, but haven't found any links yet... Got anything juicy? ^_^Megadrive1988 said:
overclocked
Veteran
scooby_dooby said:
Yeah well i dont know if they count in R&D and shitz in their numbers but for G70 to cost that much it would need to be larger that what i expecting it to be, they likely could have their yields numbers fuc£d upp also.
Anyway that analysis seems bogus but good PR on one side on the coin. The other side and the dark is that these analyst get so much response from basically knowing shit in many cases.
$350 BRD? I thought the ~$100 they said it would be 6 months ago was unreasonably high. Really makes you wonder...
Analysts since 1993 have been predicting enormous costs for PS hardware, would've thought "lesson learnt" by now.
I suppose you can't outright dismiss it, these guys are paid professionals, but they're just proving so...consistently wrong.
Once again its a waiting game.
Analysts since 1993 have been predicting enormous costs for PS hardware, would've thought "lesson learnt" by now.
I suppose you can't outright dismiss it, these guys are paid professionals, but they're just proving so...consistently wrong.
Once again its a waiting game.
overclocked
Veteran
Nicked said:
Yes and thats a sign that you are healthy
350 for a BRD is absurd.. Wonder what idiots get these kind of jobs..
For processors, 2d10 + INTELLIGENCE modifier. Drives are 1d8 for each level of tech, with BluRay being level 5 for a total of 5d8. "Other Components" is 1d10. These values are multiplied by ten. Ports are 1d6 (the prominence of 5's suggests to me their die might be a little imbalanced). Memory is just the WISDOM modifier x 10. The TOTAL is all that added plus CONSTITUTION modifier (x 10).weaksauce said:
This is standard Third Generation Analyst rules. STATS for CE devices are provided by the manufacturers. I actually caught a glimpse of the PS3 character sheet and can confirm INT = 3, WIS = 5 and CONST = 10, which tallies with ML's figures. the sheet saw actually had "Pelenor's Harddisk" attached (+3 WISDOM) but I don't know if that comes as standard.
Except no one has yet pointed to what makes the optical units possibly expensive (or inexpensive). The rumblings were that Toshiba was taking a loss by selling their brand new HD-DVD player at US$499. Now, we also know that the retail price for the HD-DVD player was about US$300, based on an error in the Best Buy system that let a few people pre-order at that price.overclocked said:Yes and thats a sign that you are healthy
350 for a BRD is absurd.. Wonder what idiots get these kind of jobs..
So, the question is: what is the cost breakdown in an HD-DVD player that could cause the BOM for an HD-DVD player to exceed the ~US$300 manufacturer's price? Doesn't it have to be the optical unit?
(And, of course, that's assuming that Toshiba is taking a loss or even minimal to no profit on these units.)
scooby_dooby
Legend
Sis said:
That's the million dollar question. Many people are happy assuming it can't possibly be much more expensive than a DVD opu, but I don't think this is the case at all. With no hard numbers, we can only guess. Unless someone here worlls for panasonic....
I think I mod should delete all posts after Shifty Geezer's, lock the thread, and declare him the winner.
That was BEAUTIFUL!
That was BEAUTIFUL!
LOL. It's been a long time, makes me want to dig out those dices from the store room. But seriously in general, analysts have little/no access to cost information (except for bread and butter commodity stuff). They also can't know how a company can optimize their cost. So their numbers, not just for PS3, are bloated. Same for their Xbox Live numbers.
