Sony refuses to change

SegaR&D

Newcomer
Sony Refuses to Change

By Dennis Day, News Editor
Published May 17, 2004 -- 07:56 pm CDT

While sales of Sony's PlayStation 2 game console have
significantly outpaced rivals, experts believe Sony's business model may ultimately cripple profits.

According to a recent report by the Economist, Sony suffers from their dependence on a vertical business model. Thereby, Sony has a principal role in manufacturing and assembling key components for their game consoles and electronics products. By comparison, many of Sony's rivals both in the gaming industry and larger electronics market rely on a horizontal business model.

A horizontal business model relies on other companies to supply key components and assemble products to take advantage of lower costs.

To put things into perspective, Sony spent an estimated 46% of their total budget last year to fund semiconductor research and production. Over the next three years Sony is expected to spent 500 billion yen ($4.4 billion) on revitalizing their semiconductor business. The financial gamble will include the production of CELL processor technology which is expected to power Sony's next-generation game console and network computers.


According to Goldman Sachs analyst Shin Horie, "Firms outside Japan are increasingly focusing on specific areas of the production chain, from chips to sophisticated components, assembly to marketing. This allows, say, American, European and even Korean firms to marry their particular strengths with the advantages of cheap manufacturing in China and Taiwan. The Japanese are fighting this trend by upgrading their existing vertical (do everything in-house) model."

Likewise, the Economist suggests the long-term projections of Sony's gaming business are in jeopardy,

"The weakness in games, where operating profits fell by 40%, is especially worrying, as this division has lately generated most of Sony's profits. Sales of its PlayStation 2 are falling. To slow the decline in unit sales, on May 11th Sony announced that it would cut the price of its consoles in America. Moreover, the PSX which launched last year, which combines a game console and video recorder, has disappointed. Sony expects a fillip from the PSP, a portable game console that it will release in Japan later this year. But the successor to PlayStation 2, due in 2006, will have a far bigger effect on its fortunes—and will face stiff competition from Microsoft's Xbox."

http://www.polygonmag.com/news/index.php?id=2202
 
article said:
Sony Refuses to Change

I have yet to find an explenation why Sony should change and why their businessmodel is bad? Afterall, this model has successfully made SCE the profitable division the article even mentions. It was able to successfully cut costs and the new fabs and investment are not *only* going to be used for PSP and PS3, but for other products aswell. I trust Sony that they know which model actually suits their needs better.

On the other hand, where's the other article talking about Microsoft's businessmodel with Xbox and the Nvidia Microsoft problem over chip prices?
 
well if the ps3 fails badly or if the cell chip is a failure thats 500billion that they wasted to build the chips , let alone other costs . Same with the fabs. If they fail , or don't work right or at all for some reason that will basicly destroy sony
 
The one thing you wonder about is whether Sony plans to develop a new chip architecture every 5 years, each time a new console comes out.

Kind of costly to spend billions designing and then building fabs for one-off CPUs.

Sony spent a bunch on the EE and now they're spending a bunch on the Cell, which is intended to have wider applications than consoles.

But will it have as much legs as say the Pentiums, for instance?

Will they have to craft something entirely new from scratch for the PS4?
 
The horizontal business model works fine for Samsung, and it has worked fine for Sony with PS1 and PS2. I think the vertical model is actually more risky when it comes to high end electronics, as evidenced by Microsoft's Xbox which followed that logic and was never able to turn them any profit. It works fine for Nintendo though.
 
jvd said:
well if the ps3 fails badly or if the cell chip is a failure thats 500billion that they wasted to build the chips , let alone other costs . Same with the fabs. If they fail , or don't work right or at all for some reason that will basicly destroy sony

Archie already replied to this in the other thread, saying that new chips won't require *new* fabs. Sony isn't going to make a new fab for every new chip they plan/make.
 
Sony isn't going to make a new fab for every new chip they plan/make.
What do you know, maybe that's their insidius plan to take over the world. A chip-fab for every place on earth. :p
 
Jvd,

You put forth a bunch of pretty darn big IFs, man. If the Earth gets hit by a comet tomorrow Sony will basically be destroyed too.

Anyone can make up a doomsday scenario out of nothing, it doesn't require one iota of intelligence, knowledge, competence or imagination. There are no facts pointing towards ANY of your ifs being true.
 
Fafalada said:
Sony isn't going to make a new fab for every new chip they plan/make.
What do you know, maybe that's their insidius plan to take over the world. A chip-fab for every place on earth. :p

And dont forget, the "we're gonna steal your bandwidth to compute our secret projects to take over the world". What do u know, they might be fabricating spider-like AIBOs that wake up at night and kill u.
 
Guden Oden said:
Jvd,

You put forth a bunch of pretty darn big IFs, man. If the Earth gets hit by a comet tomorrow Sony will basically be destroyed too.

Anyone can make up a doomsday scenario out of nothing, it doesn't require one iota of intelligence, knowledge, competence or imagination. There are no facts pointing towards ANY of your ifs being true.

They are ifs . Which is why I said if .

The playstation 3 can fail. Ms could launch earlier and with the help of xna have the best launch tittles ever while saving devs millions per game thus taking dev support from sony.

Hell even nintendo can take the market for themselves and I don't think either doing it would be a big if . Remember once sony announces the ps3 its back to a 0 installed base. The success of the playstion and playstation 2 mean nothing on the playstation 3 as you can see from past succes storys in the industry.

Also new wonder chips are developed all the time and only a few ever make it out or in quanity .

The same could be said for the cell chip. The yields and performance may never become acceptable .

The fabs are the easiest place I can see sony fail as it takes alot of work to get procces working. Even ibm has had problems. Even ibm helping amd , amd still had problems with the process.

Declaring the ps3 a succes is one of the most pompus things anyone can do. So please don't do it .
 
Paul said:
BTW, JVD. Me and you are going to fight in the Cell Cyber world. :LOL:

Na when yours burns up and you need to buy a new playstation 3 , i will still be playing with my gamecube 2 which wont need replacing though out its life . ;)
 
SCE only consists of a few percent of total Sony staff, yet it rakes in around 50% of Sony's profits. I doubt Sony is in a rush to make any changes to SCE.

Though it is shaking up other divisions such as Sony Electronics which aren't performing as well as they should
 
Sony needs their third-party licensing initiative for the CELL architecture to go a lot better than their EE/GS initiative did.
 
Lazy8s said:
Sony needs their third-party licensing initiative for the CELL architecture to go a lot better than their EE/GS initiative did.

Don't they have the best 3rd party support for the PS2? People are always complaining, often without justification, that the PS2 is holding back the quality of games because big companies develop on the PS2 and port to what they believe are superior platforms like the Xbox.

I think a lot of gamers will migrate to the PS3 for series like GT and FF (if it stays exclusive to Sony). So while they will start from 0, they are polling well, just like certain politicians poll well before a single vote has been cast.
 
I find this ironic that they can downplay Sony's attempts, but they don't look at Samsung whose doign the same thing Sony's aiming for and is doing amazingly well in semiconductors and vert integration.
 
Back
Top