Merrill Lynch Update: PS3 BOM Approaches $900

[mckmas8808]

Yes and thats a sign that you are healthy
350 for a BRD is absurd.. Wonder what idiots get these kind of jobs..

Yeah and can you believe that there are some people that believe that the BRD in the PS3 cost more than the whole Nintendo Revolution is probably going to cost to make? This is getting too stupid now.

 

[mckmas8808]

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....

Didn't we here about the RSX doing sound and the CELL helping with the video? I thought with that everybody here assumed that the Blu-ray drive needed less things to do, thus allowing Sony the abilty to put in a cheaper than normal Blu-ray drive?

 

[Urian]

Perhaps Sony isn´t making the console with a 90nm process and they are using the 65nm process.

Who knows?

Nvidia has said that the RSX manufacturation starts in May of this year, it could be an huge impact in the price if PS3 appears with a 65nm process.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Didn't we here about the RSX doing sound and the CELL helping with the video? I thought with that everybody here assumed that the Blu-ray drive needed less things to do, thus allowing Sony the abilty to put in a cheaper than normal Blu-ray drive?

Without any numbers we're just pissing in the wind. Cheaper than normal? What's normal? $100? $300? How much cheaper? 1%? 50%? It's pointless until we can a solid price on the actual costs to manufacture a BR drive, which is a very mysterious number right now...

 

[Kanyamagufa]

Word of the day?

Manufacturation.

 

[Sis]

Didn't we here about the RSX doing sound and the CELL helping with the video? I thought with that everybody here assumed that the Blu-ray drive needed less things to do, thus allowing Sony the abilty to put in a cheaper than normal Blu-ray drive?

We're talking about the actual optical unit, not any of the decoder pieces. I fully assume that the PS3 will not require extra chipsets for BD decoding (such as those from Broadcom or Sigma).

 

[Trawler]

Don't know if anyone has noticed but this has now hit the mainsteam press. Hopefully having this info out there will force Sony's hand.

 

[Serenity Painted Death]

Why would completely this completely laughable farce of a report force Sony's hand? If anything it only enhances the notion that you are getting a "deal" when PS3 hits this fall for 400.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Why would completely this completely laughable farce of a report force Sony's hand? If anything it only enhances the notion that you are getting a "deal" when PS3 hits this fall for 400.

I don't think this will impact anything at all. Sony knows full well that they can not sell PS3 for more than $400-500, the amount of people that hear about this report will be negligible. It is interesting to see how expensive they consider the BR drive to be though.

 

[Serenity Painted Death]

Well, at the very least, these "reports" are certainly building anticipation for E3.

 

[Trawler]

The news reports I've seen (on FT for starters) have been emphasising the late release date, with the expected manufacturing costs as an aside.

 

[Nicked]

I don't think this will impact anything at all. Sony knows full well that they can not sell PS3 for more than $400-500, the amount of people that hear about this report will be negligible. It is interesting to see how expensive they consider the BR drive to be though.

Yes, very interesting indeed. The 3.5x increase from November is more interesting though, a direct-response to CES announcements maybe?

TBH, Sony could screw it all up by over-confidence in themselves and their ability to sell these consoles at $600+. The reason why PlayStation succeeded in the first place is because Sony knew exactly what consumers (cheap, powerful, what games and how to market) and developers wanted (low-cost media, easy-to-development, low royalties, more freedom). Last-gen they screwed up one aspect for developers (ease of development), maybe they'll screw up one for consumers this gen....

Ahhh, we'll see..

 

[mckmas8808]

Congrats ML you have a little brother

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Sony Corp.'s (6758.T) next-generation PlayStation 3 video game console might not appear in key markets this year and could cost the company $900 per unit to produce initially, according to Merrill Lynch analysts quoted in the Financial Times on Sunday.


But Hitoshi Kuriyama of Merrill Lynch in Japan said there are reports that the PS3 could be delayed by between six and 12 months, meaning an autumn launch in Japan and a late 2006 or early 2007 launch in the US, the FT said.


The implications are that Sony could have to take a substantial loss on the PS3 through subsidies or risk low sales at the higher price and hand the advantage to Microsoft Corp. (MSFT.O) to be first to market with its Xbox 360 next-generation console, the FT said.

Now the PS3 will come out 1 year later than Sony stated, after us finding out that the darn thing cost $900 to make. What else will they say games will cost $70 in stores?




PS: Someone posted this for the ML report.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Yes, very interesting indeed. The 3.5x increase from November is more interesting though, a direct-response to CES announcements maybe?

TBH, Sony could screw it all up by over-confidence in themselves and their ability to sell these consoles at $600+. The reason why PlayStation succeeded in the first place is because Sony knew exactly what consumers (cheap, powerful, what games and how to market) and developers wanted (low-cost media, easy-to-development, low royalties, more freedom). Last-gen they screwed up one aspect for developers (ease of development), maybe they'll screw up one for consumers this gen....

Ahhh, we'll see..

$600 would be pretty crazy, once you start converting that $600 US dolars to other currencies around the world that's alot of cash. I dunno, I think they could be smart about it, sell it for $600 for 6months or so to the hardcore, offset costs, but as soon as demand started to drop though they would have to lower the price to something more competitive, I mean once the HD-enthusiasts are appeased, regular gamers are not going to be into spending 6bills.

This is like par for the course for Sony, I can almost see Hirai walking out next E3...$299 turn around and walk away. lol, ok...$399. It'll still be a good deal though.

 

[Titanio]

For what it's worth, Sony has denied Merrill Lynch's report:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000080&sid=asbSll.kfEgk&refer=asia

Sony Corp., the world's second- biggest consumer electronics maker, denied a Merrill Lynch & Co. report that the PlayStation 3 video game console may be delayed.

``There is no change in our original plan to release the console in spring 2006'' in Japan, said Kei Sakaguchi, a Sony spokesman in Tokyo. Sony may start selling the PlayStation 3 in Japan in autumn and by late 2006 or early 2007 in the U.S., Merrill Lynch's Joe Osha said in a report dated Feb. 17.

This one was already posted in another thread, but is more relevant here, and has a little more detail:

http://today.reuters.com/business/n...s Angeles, May 16, 2005. REUTERS/Fred Prouser

"We're aiming for spring, but we haven't announced specific regions," a spokeswoman for Sony Computer Entertainment said, adding that it was waiting for the final specifications on some of the technology it is using in the PS3, such as that related to the Blu-ray drive and to input and output video and sound.

The specifications are decided by industry consortiums.

"We're waiting for them until the last possible minute, but the launch could be pushed back if they're not decided soon," the spokeswoman said. If the PS3 is not ready in time, the company will choose the next best timing for the launch, she said.

Sony's shares fell as much as 4.4 percent on Monday after Merrill Lynch said in a research note last week that the PS3's launch might be delayed by six to 12 months and the cost of materials could initially approach $900 per unit.

 

[mckmas8808]

Trust me Titanio some people don't care what Sony has to say today. This news is just too juicy not to talk about.

 

[rabidrabbit]

"We're aiming for spring, but we haven't announced specific regions," a spokeswoman for Sony Computer Entertainment said, adding that it was waiting for the final specifications on some of the technology it is using in the PS3, such as that related to the Blu-ray drive and to input and output video and sound.

Is that a hint that PS3 would indeed be a pvr type device, or that the other HDMI could be "video in" connection.
Or does that "video and audio input" refer to the EyeToy2 cam and mic.
Maybe it was just a slip, more likely.

 

[Titanio]

A different spokesperson, another denial (with no AACS/HDMI related "get-out clauses" as with the first spokesperson):

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=14821

Sony Computer Entertainment spokesperson Kei Sakaguchi has officially denied reports from financial analysts at Merrill Lynch that the PS3 could be delayed by several months, reiterating that the console will launch this spring.

Sakaguchi was responding to allegations made by Merrill Lynch analyst Joe Osha in a report published late last week, in which Osha claimed that the PS3 could launch in autumn in Japan, with a US launch possibly being delayed to early 2007.

"There is no change in our original plan to release the console in spring 2006," Sakaguchi told the press in Tokyo, referring to the company's only stated goal for the launch so far - namely that the console will appear in at least one territory, most likely Japan, this spring.

Of course there could be no change right now...

 

[mckmas8808]

A different spokesperson, another denial (with no AACS/HDMI related "get-out clauses" as with the first spokesperson):

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=14821



Of course there could be no change right now...

Good to see Sony responding more than once.

 

[<nu>faust]

i think one of the reasons that made ml to revise their numbers is the reported losses that microsoft is taking with 360. According to earlier ml eastimates, the cost of a 360(premium) system was supposed to be around 340$ , yet ms is selling the system for 399$ and still taking substantial amount of hit per system. Considering ms has said being cost effective was one of the key design priorities with 360 in many different occasions(being more of a bruce lee less of a hulk in their words), and sony in contrast always presented ps3 as this expensive,cutting-edge high-end supercomputer, i can kinda see where these revised(inflated i must say agree) ml numbers are coming from.