NPD February 2007

The GDC performance is no different then how they promoted the PS2, PSP and the PS3. Its only when things don't go well that the cracks in their marketing armor gets exposed. Sony never had to do real damage control when it comes lackluster performance and its painfully showing with their handling of the PS3's current sales.

They either say nothing at all or paint a picture of how wonderful things are going, which creates a feeling that there is a disconnect between their perception and their customers' perception.

Slow sales is understandable at the current price point and the current price point is understandable due to the high cost of the components and manufacturing issue with BluRay. But instead of concentrating on explaining of how these two issues will be rectified and have no bearing on the future of the PS3 we keep getting Tretton or Harrison touted how the PS3 is a great value at $599. Its understandable how Sony wants to maximize sales at the current price point. But it comes off as arrogant or ignorant when sales don't mirror that perception.

Its like watching a comic perform during a show with his manager crowing about how funny his client's routine is, all the while only about 6 people are laughing out of a crowd of 100.

Look how they comment on NPD Feb #s

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3158048

They basically lumping all their hardware sales together to dilute the slow sales of the PS3. They even go and mention a short month like 2 or 3 days would of made a real difference. Extrapolating the data, an extra week would have created a bigger gap between sales of the PS3 and the 360 and Wii.

I don't expect any company to paint a bad picture on whats going on but Sony could use a lesson on how to subtlely handle less than stellar performances of their products without seeming so insincere.

If I was Sony I would put a muzzle on Harrison, Tretton and Kutargi and hire PR personnel that are familar with the individual nuances of US, Europe and Japanese markets to act as the official faces of Sony in their respective regions to deal with the media.

 

Well said

I don't think it's just a problem with the guys you mentioned though ... seems to be part of the culture. Take a look at guys/girls with the "S" on the chest everywhere.

 

I beg to differ. The concept, content and packaging they showed in GDC is different from PS2, PSP or any other consoles before PS3.

As for redirecting attention in bad news, yes... that would be typical of any large company or Sony (That's why some say "There is no bad PR"). It's better than not reaching out to bloggers, keeping mums *and* having no visions/plans before GDC.

Don't think this will work. The PR guy may not be intimately familiar with Sony and the industry to make credible comments. In impromptu Q&A interviews, he will get BBQ'ed. Harrison is doing fine as it stands now.

 

Dobwal I have to disagree on the way Sony execs should handle it; the silence/detached from reality statements make total sense, and it's because of this: the actual strategy is simply not going to change in the nearterm. It can't and it shouldn't.

What sense would it make to admit that the price is a problem and that consumers are tepid? Such an admission would naturally spark in most consumers' minds the idea that now something will be done about it, since an 'error' has been admitted... but no 'correction' is coming, and the price has to remain for a while longer. So the SCEI "face of Sony" team is naturally constrained in what ways they can choose to project to the public.

It is their job to try to tell the public why they should buy at this price - I don't think there's any question that behind the scenes they realize it's a very material barrier. But when changing the price is not an option (and I think changing the price right now would be a grave misake by the way), you spin it like you have to in order to at least seem consistent and confident - even if it comes off as detached and aloof.

Long story short, you don't like the way they handle things now - I understand where you would see them as crazy or arrogant - but believe me, the alternative is worse for them.

 

I'm still not excusing their pre-launch perceived arrogance (ie "customers will work harder to afford this" KK) but you are right, they have no choice now; good post.

 

Sony uses the same tactic with their "Bravia" display line. Where they lump LCD and LCOS (SXRD rear projection micro display) sales together to claim the number selling brand. It is just an attempt to hide the fact other companies sell more LCD's displays than Sony.

The same thing with the latest marketing spin.


Each Playstation 2 sold is fine by Microsoft. Those PS2's won't be going online, and the only real network product the PS3, Microsoft doubled its sales with the 360.

 

<offtopic>Other than the fact that the guy can't carry a tune, the catchy part is no wonder: The parody is a knockoff of The Fary's platinum selling single How To Save A Life, a song having spent 48 weeks on the Billboard Hot 100, currently @ #23, peak @ #2.</offtopic>

 

I feel obliged to strongly disagree with the "hardcore gamer" definition you're implying there. IMO a hardcore gamer is someone who games (and enjoys) pure and abstract things. That is the opposite of what you're using the term for, which I'd simply call "graphics whore" (or "watcher" in a broader sense but the term isn't well established).

 

Oops.... I seem to have spent too much time in B3D and NeoGAF. Yes... the good Wii people don't mind lesser graphics, unlike the more rigorous PS3 and Xbox 360 folks. I don't want to get involved in that battle though.

 

You are of course wrong. It's quite easy to tally up the respective sales of the Xbox 360 and the PS3 in their first four months, and if you do so you'll see they performed very close to each other. If price was such an issue, the PS3 should trail far behind, but it just didn't.

Add to that the weaker launch line-up (Condemned, Kameo, PGR3 all filled niches that are still empty or are just now getting occupied in the PS3 line-up) and the presence of competition, and you should expect it to perform much worse, but no, it even surpassed the first four months of 360 unit sales by a hair.

In other words, if the price did not make the PS3 perform any worse in the US than the 360 did, what was your point?

Yes, the current numbers aren't good enough to sustain a console and there need to be lots of quality games releases ASAP. But it goes to show that the PS3 has certain perceived advantages that offset its tangible current disadvantages, even if you don't want to acknowledge them.

 

Xbox 360 had to deal with severe launch shortages (due to production issues and shipping in 3 territories). To blindly compare the first 4 months of its sales to the PS3 is deceptive, at the least.

There is no upside to these numbers. They fit exactly inline with what you'd expect from an expensive and feature-laden console, except we've been expecting more due to the Playstation brand alone. It should not be a surprise that at that price even brand name can't carry a console. They need to shave off $200 immediately--which they can't--and release a lot more compelling exclusives--which they also can't. I'm not about to say the PS3 is down and out, but there is no way to describe these numbers other than "disappointing".

 

The PS3 supplies were horrible at first, weren't they? Maybe you could talk me into believing they started easing up post-Xmas, but not earlier. Knock it down by a third if you must, but it's still par for the course.

I didn't claim there was an upside. All I did claim was that price isn't so much of a deterrent for a piece of kit where you want to have a 600~800$ TV in your home before it even gets worth contemplating, and that the current sales numbers don't support such assumptions at all.

And again, I agree that the games line-up needs immediate fixing.

 

I would just like to point out that MS has done a nice job if 1 to 1 sales with PS3 are considered ok. If that is so today, it certainly hasn't been that way very long. I personally think it's valid to point to say the high price is hurting sony, because coming from last generation as the dominant player they should be higher on the sales list than MS. Naturally there are other significant reasons than just the price for that not happening at the moment, but it should not get overlooked. February numbers seem to support that, as X360 never went that low.

 

No worries here, Sony and the PS3 might have a rocky start. But things will smooth out, and they will be on top again, crushing the sompetition. The PS3 is doing damned well for a $500-$600 console.

I have faith in the PS3 and Sony.

 

FWIW:

The average selling price for the PS3 was $598.10 in Feb.

Sony should make more 20GB SKUs available.

 

The 360 in Feb of last year was ~160K; Given the competition that the PS3 is facing, and that steep price tag, I would assume that Sony is kinda sighing a bit in relief in response to these numbers. We gotta keep in mind that there was virtually no incentive to buy a PS3 in February, either...all of the games started "sweeping" in during the second half of the month. Furthermore, at this point, I really think that Sony's own worst enemy is themselves. I guarantee you that alot of people are observing games like God of War 2 and simply saying "so...why do I need a PS3 again?" That said, I can only damage control this so far.

 

Damn...of course I'm wrong. Dammit...I knew it! I guess I was thinking that the PS3 should actually outperform the Xbox because it outsold it 5:1 last generation...silly me!

Not to mention the 360 was supply limited for 4months, and PS3 only 5 weeks.

The price is killing the sales, wake up.

 

I think you are a bit unfair : you are comparing the sales of a console of which is currently in the way of finding its public in US, to those of a console which has just arose and currently have problems.

I think the contexts are different and we should not compare them.

In your arguments, you use the things positive towards one of them to question the weaks of the others.

Plus, you litteraly refuse to deal with the problems Xbox360 is facing :
- Penetration of "HD Gaming" as a whole.
- The fact that Wii's sales are flying past the other 2.

My point is : you keep on focusing on the battle occuring between those 2, ignoring the signal the public sent, which is quite strong. Who would have thought a few month ago that Wii could have sold 6M console by end of March ? We should start looking at things with both eyes and not only one ...

Of course, it is ... for both.

 

A bigger problem is that people aren't buying 3rd party games for the PS3. Last February, there were 6 games in the top 25 for the 360 and none of them were by Microsoft. Fight Night 3 was #1 and Call of Duty 2 was #2. Crackdown doubled all PS3 game sales, by itself, in 8 days of work. February's big game for the PS3 was Virtua Fighter 5 and it didn't even make top 30. VF5 sold 53k in February 2007, Halo 2 sold close to 50k, in February 2007 to put it in perspective. Of the 7 games in the top 30 for Microsoft this month, 5 are 3rd party. For the PS3 to be successful, that statistic has to change.