Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Sony Looks to 'Refine' PS3 Price

Posted by Zonk on Fri Jun 15, 2007 09:59 AM
from the that's-corpspeak-for-price-cut dept.
Sony PlayStation (Games) The Almighty Buck
Via GameDaily a Financial Times interview with with Sir Howard Stringer, Sony's CEO, gives fans the first hope that price cuts may be coming soon. Lauding the Wii's performance in last month's NPD numbers, Stringer says that Sony is looking to 'refine' the PS3's pricepoint. "'Nintendo Wii has been a successful enterprise, and a very good business model, compared with ours . . . because it's cheaper,' Mr Stringer said in a video interview. 'That [price cuts] is what we are studying at the moment. That's what we are trying to refine.' Sir Howard said he expected 'energy [in PS3 sales] by Christmas, and then you will begin to see break-out games'. Sony is launching a virtual-world game called Home this year, and up to 30 other games."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Sony Looks to 'Refine' PS3 Price 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • It Needs "Refined"... (Score:5, Funny)

    by morari (1080535) on Friday June 15 2007, @10:01AM (#19519247) Journal
    By about $350...

      • Re:It Needs "Refined"... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by MS-06FZ (832329) on Friday June 15 2007, @12:55PM (#19521847) Homepage Journal

        That's funny, but just stupid. The PS3 is and always has been worth well more than its price in the store for a lot of reasons that nobody should have to justify anymore.
        That's ridiculous. Value is subjective. Sure, the PS3 is a fine machine, but to say that it's worth the price - that's something people have to decide for themselves. You could put $3000 worth of computer hardware into a little black box that does nothing but play MP3s - it doesn't matter that it cost you $3000 in hardware, though, because the thing is still worth no more to me than what an iPod costs.

        If Sony's doing well at selling the PS3 at its current price point - then fine, good for them. For me, it's too damn expensive. There are much better ways I could spend $600, you know?

          • Re:It Needs "Refined"... (Score:5, Insightful)

            by twistedsymphony (956982) on Friday June 15 2007, @03:12PM (#19523937) Homepage
            I think the point is most of the things that the PS3 can do don't appeal to the people who consider it to be over priced...

            Maybe that $3000 MP3 player also plays games and Blu-Rays discs... but it's still just an MP3 player to those consumers who don't want to play games or Blu-Ray. To use another analogy if you were looking at two houses that were equal in all aspects except one had an extra 5 car garage and cost twice as much... if you have no cars, it doesn't matter if those 5 bays are "worth" the extra cost because you have no intention of ever using them, it's just a useless extremity that needlessly drives up the price.

            The problem with adding features that drive up the price of your console is that every feature you add shrinks the potential market of people who will find 100% of your features useful and valuable.

            Would be PS3 buyers who aren't interested in Blu-Ray see the blu-Ray features valued at $0... would be PS3 buyers who aren't interested in WiFi see the WiFi features valued at $0 etc... Eventually you have a machine that "just plays games" because a large group of gamers don't care about the noise and your console suddenly isn't valued at what you thought it was in the eyes of the consumer.

      • Re:It Needs "Refined"... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by poot_rootbeer (188613) on Friday June 15 2007, @01:41PM (#19522547)
        That said, people aren't always willing to pay what something is worth

        On the contrary, which people are willing to pay for something is the DEFINITION of its worth.

  • oh oh (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Gorkamecha (948294)
    When ever a company adds "refined" to a product it tends to get more expensive not less.... Playstation 3, it's for more refined tastes...not like some cheap Wii. Hey this sort of thing works for bottled water companies! What could possibly go wrong?

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by sqldr (838964)
      1) cheap Wii....
      2) Hey this sort of thing works for bottled water companies...

      I sincerely hope that wasn't deliberate..

  • What was their first hint? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by realinvalidname (529939) on Friday June 15 2007, @10:13AM (#19519413) Homepage
    Maybe the fact that a PS3 with one game costs as much as a 360 and a Wii combined?

  • So... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by brkello (642429) on Friday June 15 2007, @10:14AM (#19519435)
    It is about every 2 days when we get someone from Sony talking about price cuts then someone else at Sony saying that there won't be price cuts. Now come all the posts on how it is stupid for a company to announce a price drop until they are ready to actually drop the price. blah blah blah...news worthy? blah blah blah. It's Friday morning...I need something better than this to get me through the rest of the day.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by EggyToast (858951)
      Well the caveat that they shouldn't announce until they're ready to drop the prices implies that people would actually buy the console at the current price :)
  • 'Nintendo Wii has been a successful enterprise, and a very good business model, compared with ours . . . because it's cheaper'

    Wow, this guy needs to win the "Captain Obvious" award of the year!

    • Re:Captain' Obvious (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Daniel_Staal (609844) <DStaal@usa.net> on Friday June 15 2007, @10:25AM (#19519567)
      Actually, it's not obvious. The XBox 360 for instance is also cheaper, and not getting as much buzz at the moment. (Perhaps just because it isn't 'new' at the moment, but also because it isn't as 'different' as the Wii is.)

      Yes, the Wii is cheaper, and yes it is sucessful, but is it sucessful just because it is cheaper? I sincerly doubt it. I think Sony and Nintendo intentionally aimed for different target audiences, and Sony found out that the audience they targeted at didn't exist in the numbers they thought existed. Now they will have to scramble to market a product to an audience it is not designed for. Meanwhile, Nintendo judged their market quite well.
      • Yes, the Wii is cheaper, and yes it is sucessful, but is it sucessful just because it is cheaper?

        Unfortunately, the ellipses in the TFS are also in TFA. I think they might hide a little more than that.

        Then again, considering the audience of the article, cost cost cost price price price seem to be the major motivations.

        • Yes, the Wii is cheaper, and yes it is sucessful, but is it sucessful just because it is cheaper?

          Unfortunately, the ellipses in the TFS are also in TFA. I think they might hide a little more than that.

          Yeah, I noticed that as well. I suspect the speaker knew what he was talking about, and that 'cost' is just the variable Sony is most able to change at this point. (And that he tailored his speach for his audience...)


      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by CastrTroy (595695)
        While the target audiences are different, the target audiences overlapped. Nintendo chose to build a console that almost everyone would like in some way. Sony chose to build a console that only a small portion of people would like. Sony limited their market by making it cost so much, that even a lot of people who would probably want one, aren't buying one. Same thing happened to NeoGeo. Everybody that I knew who saw the thing said they wanted one, but I don't know anybody who actually bought one. I wo

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by stratjakt (596332)
          AH NEO GEO now you're talking.

          Actually, Neo Geo was originally designed as a rental machine, the idea was you'd go to EB and rent one for your birthday party, so you could play real arcade games at home. Hence, the high prices. They put the cartridges on a different physical format so arcade operators couldnt use them, otherwise the hardware and games are identical.

          Anyways, once they started showing up, people wanted to buy them - so EB started selling them. The prices never dropped, once again, they we

  • Games (Score:5, Insightful)

    by strider2k (945409) on Friday June 15 2007, @10:18AM (#19519491) Homepage
    I don't really care about the price. I'd be glad to pay the $600 US dollars for the premium. The sad part is, what games will I get? The answer is none. I don't have a big HD tv. So unless they release at least 1 big gun soon (MGS4 or FF13) then there's no incentive for me to buy. I guess I'll play my ds/gba (lots of good games) or board games (Settlers or Puerto Rico)!!!

    When they do bring the AAA top tier games, then it'll be World War III in console terms.

    • So unless they release at least 1 big gun soon (MGS4 or FF13) then there's no incentive for me to buy.
      I think the major point is that they need to release AAA exclusives. If they lose exclusivity on either (or both) MGS/FF, then there is little reason, if any, for people to buy a PS3 over a 360. Given Sony's woes as of late, how long will the company allow their playstation division to hemorrhage money? It's not like they've got a blank check like the MS gaming division.

      • Re:Games (Score:4, Informative)

        by Lightwarrior (73124) on Friday June 15 2007, @11:00AM (#19520105) Journal
        It's worse than the PS3 needing just AAA exclusives - there's a general dearth of quality games available. Check out Game Rankings / Metacritic / GameStats / the rating grouper of your choice; the only game above 90% is Oblivion. There are four exclusives in the Top 20: Resistance, Motorstorm, Virtual Fighter 5, and flOw.

        And once you get out of the Top 20, the ratings has already dropped below 80%. That's a serious, serious issue.

    • Re:Games (Score:4, Insightful)

      by drinkypoo (153816) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Friday June 15 2007, @10:52AM (#19519971) Homepage Journal

      So unless they release at least 1 big gun soon (MGS4 or FF13) then there's no incentive for me to buy.

      the sad thing is that they said that the console would heat up for christmas, but the great games wouldn't come out until after that. So Sony has what, one maybe two A-list titles until after christmas?

      That's a long time.

      When they do bring the AAA top tier games, then it'll be World War III in console terms.

      I don't know, will it be? Will they still be in the running by then? I'm kind of thinking that there's some good games on the Xbox 360 right now, that pretty much everyone in the market has a PS2 so back-compatibility is a total non-issue, and that people will be buying Wiis (they are becoming more available even now) and Xbox 360s while they're waiting for Sony to get their shit together and get out some games.

      But, maybe that's just wishful thinking.

    • The release schedule is cranking up significantly. Major games like The Darkness, Rainbow 6: Vegas, Ninja Gaiden Sigma are imminent, with Stranglehold, Lair, Warhawk, Singstar, Heavenly Sword, Assassins Creed appearing in the next 2 or 3 months. In total there are something like 70 or so titles appearing before the end of year many of which are exclusives.

      I think if Sony knocked off $100 or $125 that combined with the busier release schedule they'd probably quadruple their sales.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by amuro98 (461673)
        The PS3 needs exclusive games that are "good" or better. Darkness isn't exclusive, nor is Assassins Creed.

        I don't know why people keep mentioning Singstar. Do you honestly think a karaoke/DDR game is going to convince anyone to buy a PS3? Even fans of those games aren't going to spend $600 (or even $500) just to get a single game.

        Warhawk is very confusing, as it was first a Blu-ray game, then was a online only deathmatch type game that you would download, for free even. Now it's supposedly both a BR AN
  • Yes the price is high but I am not sure it's the price stopping a lot of people. When someone is going to buy a system now they aren't thinking I will buy this machine now and hope the game I want comes out, they are thinking I am buying this because they are games out now I want to get.

    Sony needs games and fast. Good games that are exclusive. That will solve their biggest problem. If the ps3 dropped to 300 bucks would anyone outside the I want blue-ray/linux running on it/etc. crowd buy one? I'm n

    • Re:When will they learn... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Floritard (1058660) on Friday June 15 2007, @11:01AM (#19520117)
      I'll tell you right now, the price is stopping me. And that is all that is stopping me. I had a Wii for a few months. I bought it on an impulse (right place right time), partly because I was intrigued by the new control scheme, but mostly because it's waaay cheaper than the other "next-gen" systems. I have since given it away to a friend of mine because I promised to buy her one at some point, but also because there are no games out for it that I really want (yet). While I did get bored of it already, the lack of games wasn't something that stopped me from buying it in the first place. And the Wii is so cheap that I'll easily pick one up again when they become more available. Not so with that wallet monster PS3. I can build most of a new PC off newegg for the price of that little bastard. Games or no games, it gives me pause dropping $600+ on a fucking console, they're supposed to be the cheap alternative to PC gaming. As it stands now I really don't know what to do, there are games coming out that I am looking forward to but luckily they aren't here yet. I'm on the fence here, I'll definitely get another Wii, but I will also want either a 360 or a PS3 for those truly next-gen games. Despite Sony's incompetance of late, I really dislike Microsoft's history of foul play and would prefer to stop buying into their products, especially after this power-grab Vista/DX10 business. I'm not especially excited about giving Microsoft so much control over the gaming world. But that PS3 is so damn expensive that I'm worried if I buy it I'll be stuck with a failed system. An expensive failed system. This whole gen is off to a bad start if you ask me. Too much risk. I'm waiting, and the industry isn't getting my gaming dollar.
      • I can respect that. Question though: if the price was still $600 BUT they where say 10 triple AAA games you really wanted would that effect your decision at all?

        As for the not wanting to support MS because you don't like them obviously that's a valid point for you. For me I bought one when there was at least a few games I really wanted (oblivion was my first) and that was back in Aug. 06.
          • Just curious. What things has Nintendo done that you consider "evil"?

          • That's why my wife and kids play the Wii and I log about 20-30 hours per week on my 360.
            Sorry I just thought that needed Highlighting. Ever think your wife and kids play the Wii because you log 20-30 hours per week on your 360? It's either that or you really need to get a job.
  • as they cost more then ps3 and they are missing a few blue ray features and it plays games as well as running linux.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by seebs (15766)
      You're sort of begging the question, there. You're assuming that a blu-ray player is worth buying at "full price", and looking at this as a discount.

      If I open a store called "McDucks" that sells bad hamburgers for $500, and then McDonalds starts selling them for $90, does the fact that they're more than 80% cheaper make them a good deal? No.

      Blu-ray isn't worth the money, so getting it for only way too much instead of WTF are you thinking too much is not a big deal.

  • This just in... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by pragma_x (644215) on Friday June 15 2007, @10:29AM (#19519633) Journal
    ""'Nintendo Wii has been a successful enterprise, and a very good business model, compared with ours . . . because it's cheaper,' "

    In a recent shake-up within the Japan-based electronics juggernaut Sony, Captain Obvious was promoted to the position of CEO.
  • erm, I could buy a C64 from ebay, and play "break-out" games...

  • Very good business model.... (Score:3, Funny)

    by MrAngryForNoReason (711935) on Friday June 15 2007, @10:42AM (#19519841)

    Nintendo Wii has been a successful enterprise, and a very good business model, compared with ours...

    Oh yes the revolutionary business model of selling a product for a reasonable price while still making a profit. Opposed to Sony's excellent method of selling at a staggeringly high price and *still* making a loss on each unit sold. Genius.

      • "Well, it isn't difficult to sell an old useless console with profit, because that's what the wii is, old technology, the control is not even that great or special, for god sake, you can't even play a dvd on the bugger even though it has a dvdplayer inside..."

        It's the same reason a Honda Accord outsells a Porsche 911. It's good, proven technology, that, while not the most powerful or cutting edge, fits the budget of the largest segment of the car buying populace. The PS3 is awesome technology, I think

  • Blu-ray is the problem. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Fross (83754) on Friday June 15 2007, @10:51AM (#19519953) Homepage
    A common argument for the high price of the PS3 is that "hey, it includes a blu-ray player!" Which is true, and changes something.

    The PS3 isn't the most expensive console, rather, it is the cheapest available Blu-ray player.

    So not only does Sony have part of the market for the next-gen console market with the PS3, but it also has the vast majority of the HD-video market as well.

    The sales figures are testament more to the fact that nobody wants HD video at the moment, and forcing people to take it in a bundle is crucifying them. The PS3 may be better than the 360 (the games look about the same to me), but it costs $300 more (at least here in the UK) - that's a lot to a gamer. You can make a car with a gold steering wheel for an extra $50,000, but if nobody *wants* a gold steering wheel, then your car isn't going to sell at all, as good as it is, unless you can sell if without the steering wheel.

    • Re:Blu-ray is the problem. (Score:4, Interesting)

      by SparkyFlooner (1090661) on Friday June 15 2007, @11:08AM (#19520243)
      I have the 360 add-on HD-DVD player, and I find myself ignoring HD-DVD titles and just renting regular DVDs. (and yes, I have an hdtv) Regular DVDs still look good, you know? Even 200 bucks on an HD player seems like too much for what you get. I would've been content watching regular DVDs until the price of an HD player came down to 100 or less.
      • I don't get it. If the movie is available on both HD-DVD as well as DVD, then why would you pick up the DVD for rental because it "still looks good"? They may still look good, but if you've spent $200 on the player and have an HDTV to take advantage of, why not get something that looks better? Obviously some movies are still only available on DVD, but I assume you're not talking about that.
    • Well, at $300 more than the 360 it's $100 more than the 360+HD-DVD combo, so they are screwed even if you are looking for a next generation movie player. I personally plan to get the 360 HDDVD drive for my PC, I already have all the gaming I want, plus excellent media center capabilities on the PC, why not add next generation movie capabilities for a third the cost of a PS3 =)

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by DarkJC (810888)
        You're applying American prices to UK prices.

        In the UK, it costs £381.96 on Amazon for a 360 Premium + HD-DVD player...381.96 GBP = 755.107 USD
        It costs £399.99 for a PS3...399.99 GBP = 790.754 USD

        Hardly $100. The 360 is slightly discounted on Amazon at the moment as well, otherwise they'd turn out to be the same. And that's with a 360 that lacks an HDMI port..if you wanted one it'd end up costing you more than the PS3.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by DrEldarion (114072)
      There's a lot more to using blu-ray than just promoting a new format (though I'm sure that's part of it). With gaming this gen, games are going to be LARGE. We already saw PS2 games spanning multiple DVDs, so it makes sense to move to a bigger storage medium as standard. It's already been stated that Resistance would have had to be on two dual-layer DVDs, and Rockstar said they're having issues with storage space on the 360 version. Not including a better drive in the 360, to me, shows a pretty big lack of
  • I sincerely hope Sony doesn't believe Nintendo is beating them simply because of price.

    I sincerely believe they aren't that silly, but these days you never can tell.
    • One thing at a time, man. They can only have so many revelations at a time.

      Obviously the price is significant, only complete morons thought it wasn't, by which I mean Sony execs. They're slowly figuring out that a $600 console is inherently unappealing and will never be mass-market.

      Once they've wrapped their head around that concept, then they can start figuring out the other problems with their strategy.

    • Re:Hope... (Score:4, Informative)

      by Pluvius (734915) <pluvius3 AT gmail DOT com> on Friday June 15 2007, @03:44PM (#19524429) Journal
      Certainly Sony knows that the Wii is currently selling because of a combination of price and hype. Hype wasn't mentioned because the question Stringer was asked was about the PS3's price. You'll notice that Sony is trying to combat the hype problem elsewhere, like in their new blog.

      BTW, here [ft.com] is a transcript of the interview in question. You'll also notice that Stringer did counterargue the idea that the Wii is selling better because it's more fun.

      Rob
  • I prefer to think of my video gaming experience as a fine dining experience, as Sony so helpfully suggested [gamesindustry.biz]. I cannot believe they would betray my trust by discounting their truly unique console to McDonald's-level prices. They've already said it was too cheap, and now they would cheapen it further? Traitorous hounds!

  • You learn something new every day (Score:3, Funny)

    by Chelloveck (14643) on Friday June 15 2007, @12:03PM (#19521081) Homepage

    'Nintendo Wii has been a successful enterprise, and a very good business model, compared with ours . . . because it's cheaper,'

    And here I thought the reason for the Wii's success relative to the PS3 is because the Wii has games that don't suck. What a fool I was.

  • The PS3 is a wonderful device. It has amazing abilities and is a shining example of what one company can do when all the stops are pulled and the horizon is just the beginning.

    Sound familiar?

    Until Sony admits they are selling the console equivalent of the Bugatti Veyron, nothing much is going to change in the marketplace. Consider the commonalities. Exceptional performance; pushing the envelope; losing considerable amounts of money when each one is sold? Rabid fans line up to buy one. Not much you can

    • Ok, Sony - the PS3 is a milestone - sure to go down in history. Nothing can compare.

      Saturn? Dreamcast? Neo-Geo?

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.