PS3: 1,058,700
Wii: 1,851,200

Now take PS3, multiply that w/ 599.99 and do the same w/ Wii, 249.99. The total is

PS3: 635,209,413
Wii: 462,781,488


The Wii is different in that it profits from each console sold, and the PS3 differs that it loses money on each console sold. But looking past that for a minute, the numbers from the installed userbase is staggering. The PS3 only has a million owners while Wii is just 150k shy of 2 million yet the PS3 has made 632 million to Wii's 462 million.

It looks like the PS3 doesn't need to overpower the competition in sheer userbase numbers. The PS3 just needs supporters in general (going at the rate we are going or better) to keep the system afloat. The strategy then is to just release quality games and by the time next Fall hits, we see a new pricepoint, with better features, upgraded firmware which means better value for our machine.

great post. That right there and posts that are along the same line explains why Sony can lose 200 bucks every unit. For that 200 they lost, they've made thousands more from that single person to cover what they lost.

because you can't read. Refer to post 38. You're thinking damn they lost 200 bucks per Sony PS3 unit sold, how could they make that back if all they do is lose 200 bucks per PS3 sold? Yes it is about revenue streams and Sony has them hand-over-fist compared to Nintendo.

It might be good business but at what cost? At the cost of the consumer? They blind the consumer with a gimmick to hide the fact that their console is severely outdated and give you prices like 49.99 and 249.99 to entice you to buy because it's so cheap and something they haven't done before. One day people are going to be able to buy a next-gen console and realize that there can be brand new experiences on PS3 and 360 and realize Nintendo is a bunch of crap.

No one is trying to do that but concerning their finances one needs to look at this from different angles and considering what's posted, people see this issue in black and white and it simply does not work that way. If it did, then the PS3 wouldn't even still be here, neither would the Xbox or the 360.

Btw, nobody even understood my cost reduction argument. Hasn't anybody realized that the 360 is now selling in the green for each console sold? That's how much the 360 has cost reduced itself (in it's span of 2yrs) and now it has made enough to release yet even another SKU. Think about it's multiple streams of revenue within their games division (microtransactions, XBL)

Ah screw it, nobody even cares to read in this goddamned board anyways.
I think so, and have thought so ever since this "Wii hype" started. I think they're purposefully embellishing hardware shortages so that they always keep that one person looking for the console and multiply that person by X amount for every single store and there you go. Isn't it odd that Nintendo's own store is fully stocked on Nintendo Wii's all the time, yet they are in controlled, low shipments to other retail stores? As my friend said. Wii stock will magically appear out of nowhere once Mario Galaxy comes out.

Yup. I'm not sold on it yet, but the concept looks like it could be really cool.

Depends on how big a price cut we're talking about here. Personally I believe a 150-200 Price cut would do it, 100 might not be enough.

I think LittleBigPlanet will be available for download on PSN in Q4. That game (amongst those connected to the 'Net) is bound to be a success.

I don't understand the point of this thread is either. Revenue alone proves nothing. Of course the revenue for a more expensive unit could be higher.

The two numbers that are important in this business is marketshare (or your installed base relative to your competitors), or your profit or Net Operating Income.

In both those cases, Nintendo is on much more solid footing than Sony.

If you want to argue that Sony has a stronger long term strategy for generating profit or marketshare, fine, but I don't understand how pointing out today's revenue really has any significance.

Ask the Sony shareholders if they think that Sony is "doing well". They don't care about how much money SCE makes if they aren't turning a profit. You could throw out the old Microsoft line - "We're losing money now to get a foothold in the industry later" - but that no longer applies to Sony. They're already as entrenched as Nintendo, which means they're now losing money for no real good reason beyond their (likely unnecessary) high cost of producing each PS3 console.

Nintendo shareholders are laughing all the way to the bank, because what Nintendo's doing is good business. Not only are they making money hand over fist, but they're also changing the face of the industry by refusing to maintain the status quo (even if nobody on this board wants to admit it).

The PS3 is NOT a hit, not yet. I don't know how you can possibly spin the dismal sales of the PS3 in a positive way. Even Phil Harrison has said that the PS3 is doing so poorly right now that it wouldn't even make sense for them to buy third-party exclusives becasue they'd lose money. That's not "doing well" by any definition.

However, I think Sony will be fine long-term. The PS3 has gotten a bum rap because its so-so launch lineup was pitted again the Christmas 2006 360 lineup that was a year in the making. Instead of saying things like "Resistance: Fall of Man is a great first person shooter, one of the best out there", people were saying "It's OK but it's not Gears of War". People bought into the anti-Sony hype and turned on them pretty quickly.

But we'll see what happens by the end of this year. I'm thinking that the PS3 will get a price cut in Q4, and that's when PS2 owners will finally bite the bullet. Metal Gear Solid 4, Grand Theft Auto IV, and even already-available games like Lair and Warhawk will be too good to ignore.

Console piracy is statistically insignificant. What's huge success for a "mod chip"? Twenty thousand users out of seven million? Cry me a river.

Do you have a link to the Website where you found this information? I post on another forum and some people don't believe me when I say MS haven't made a single penny on the Xbox brand.

Also another question for the economists here to tackle: Do you think Nintendo are purposely keeping the supply low on the Wii as to keep the demand high? The Wii doesn't seem like an awfully difficult piece of machinery to build when compared to the likes of the Xbox 360 and PS3. I just want to hear from people who are "into" this kind of stuff; the behind-the-scenes "war" if you will.

Where'd you get those numbers from? Microsoft is really 5 bil in the hole? If that's true, I don't see how they can get out of that this generation or even the next.

heh you guys talk like you have money invested with the respective companies.

ps3 has made more money gross than wii, i suspect the two will even out eventually. it makes sense that the cheaper console has more users.

wii makes money every console, so that's money in the pocket for them, and sony loses money (investment in the future? maybe who knows). overall, ps3 is losing money, regardless of gross figures. that's a fact.

the one thing you all aren't taking into account is the fact that the wii is moddable, and you can download/buy pirated games - which negates the userbase that the wii is marketing games to, and the ps3, as of yet, is not. I don't have the patience to download a 15gb game anyhow. Meaning this - all of the ps3 owners are potential bd dvd and game purchasers, while a good percentage of wii owners (at least overseas) are purchasing the hardware and then using pirated software. Dont' ask me for citations, i don't have any, but im speaking from experience. google for wii torrent, and you will see what i mean about availability of wii games online.

the point is this: i don't care about sony or nintendo as a company, the only reason i want both of them to stay in business is so i can get games n stuff for the hardware i've already bought. my gut feeling tells me that the ps3 with end up making more money, simply because users HAVE to buy the games and the hardware.

But the point is that Sony still loses money on every PS3 sold so what good does it do? none at all

Here's a concept...

In Australia, Wii costs $399, PS3 costs $999.

Now, let's say there are a 100 people who want a Wii, and 100 who want a PS3.

What are the chances, the 100 Wii people will buy their console first? Why? Well, $399 is a lot easier to save for (and spend) than $999!!!

So, those 100 "Wii-ers" buy their console and in the meantime, the PS3 people are still saving. Then the sales people look at the figures and say "Damn, Wii is outselling PS3!".

Now, let's say there are not 100 who want a PS3, but 200, 300, 400...

The fact that people have not bought a PS3 does not indicate it's too expensive, or it's not value for money, or there are no good games yet. Wii is just at a more accessible price point right now.

The people I know who wanted a Wii have one.

The people I know who want a PS3 do not have one yet. And believe me, the people I know wanting a PS3 far outnumbers the Wii crowd.

It's a basic, very simple, and yes not totally accurate analysis but could this not explain the current situation somewhat?

As has been said before, don't judge things too much by what has happened so far. Hasn't even been a year yet...

PS3 is just a part of their business, and if they don't have a profit now od PS3, that doesn't mean that it is not planned. I bet if you just combine PS2+PS3, they have profit, and where are LCDs, digital camera/camcorder division, or movie and music industry. Sony is the largest or one of the largest companies in the world in all of the four divisions.

Nintendo does make profit from day one, but nintendo sold how much N64s, or Gamecubes ? Their consoles are cheap, they are not cutting edge technology, so they don't earn much, and they don't last too long. Sony on the other hand does it completely different. They go all the way, and try to tie one business to another. PS3 doesn't suppose to be selling very much now, because they don't make any money, so they are not in a rush. It's good to sell some number of units in this point of time, but not too many. The main focus should be on games, but, you can't just release a bunch of meh games as soon as possible (who said Microsoft ), instead you must do it the best you can, and believe me, Sony knows what is good, and what happens ? Till the end of this calendar year, we got a bunch of high profile games and 2008. will be an explosion year of games, and thats exactly where PS3 also gets cheaper to build (they just announced 80% loss cut in fall). So till november/december PS3 will sell almost without loss, games will sell like mad, and PS2 will be on a slow but firm decline, so PS2 owners start to pickup PS3s. On the other front, LCDs and bluray movies are selling like s**t, so PS3, Bluray and LCDs are tied, and Bluray is tied to video industry, so If they make good game, that reflects on PS3 and LCD sales, if they make good movie, that reflects on bluray, LCD, and again PS3, and if they make good LCD, you will probably buy some kind of bluray player with it, and that doesn't exclude PS3. On top of that, many parts in PS3 are developed and manufactured by sony, so they can lower the cost, and they can manage much more things than its competitors who only buy chinese slaves to make everything for them

So, what I'm trying to say is that Sony knows what they are doing, they did risk alot in their past, and risk is their middle name, but they made a bulletproof plan that can't burn and die.

And sorry for my English

You seriously believe in the mercedes comparison...

That's like saying, we're selling really slow but that's ok because our system is expensive...

Anyways, mercedes can sell few cars because they make money on every car sold... PS3 on the other hand loses money on every system sold and makes money on software sales. Meaning, if they have a low userbase, developers won't care to release games on PS3, which means sony won't be able to make profit...

you completely missed the point. Sony is a company that releases premium electronics. They ONLY release the premium of any given piece of electronic they sell. Now given their current track record with these premium electronics, they know how to survive in enviornments like this where they have cheaper products on competition. Sony's HDTV's are actually turning a profit, despite their high price tag and you want to know why? The answer is very obvious.

And btw, 3+ million over European, Asian and American territories is not low. It's not 38 million huge (PS2) but it's not low It's still very possible to create a game and have it be a million seller. You're talking like the PS3 is doomed because of the userbase they NOW (hint, stop thinking about the here and now) and you're not thinking outside of the box. At least if you're not willing to think outside of the box, use the PS2 as an example. Although I highly doubt you can do that either

People are not looking at the big picture!!! Come on I know every fanboy says this but games are a huge hit right now for the PS3...R:FOM, Motorstorm, maybe Oblivion!!!! I mean the Wii is fun and cheap right now! But once future buyers see what kind of power and the output the PS3 has in games like MGS4, Lair, WarHawk, and HS, then the user base will grow! Wii is doing exceptionally well and will probably kept doing well but I believe Sony will get out of the red by the Holiday season and I don't know about consoles sales itself but I think in revenue and profit it can easily reach and pass Nintendo!

Also think of games that will be release on Muiltplat that are leaving the Wii out! There will be no Unreal 2007, Bioshock, Haze, GTA4, that I know of, for the Wii, these are begging to become very talked about games in development! How will Madden look on it, I doubt they can dev it for the PS3 or 360 and port it, too much work! Are people even thinking of this!!! Those are huge franchises that sell millions of games and push consoles!

Possibly the worst thread ever. Nintendo is going to have near double the userbase, thus meaning they will have the potential to sell more software, which will in turn make them even more money.

What in God's name makes you think third party publishers care about the gross revenue of Sony? They care about the installed user base, (in which case Sony is dead last).

I actually feel sorry for the people trying to explain it to you.

My guess is you've never heard of it

Well somebody needs to since its clear you don't quite get it. As soon as you typed PS3 makes a loss on each unit you should have abandoned the thread.

By 850 'MILLION' I'm assuming you mean thousand and units. Its a moot point as your US unit numbers are wrong.

Because of course its doing really well in the US what with its 260,000 unit per month sales figures and dominance over the GBA, oh wait......

Not that the point is valid in any way but a little news flash for you the pound sterling and Euro are stronger than the US dollar and its doing **** over here too.

The only reason why the PS3 is not doing well overseas? it couldn't be because there's no games for it, or that people have a limit on what they will spend on a games console, nor the poor image, nor the confusion over HD etc.....

Wow,

I said that the Wii has almost double the end users that the PS3 has in the US. Did you have some sort of trouble with that.

There is litterly no point arguing with you, Revenue means jack **** unless there's a profit being made which guess what at the moment for the PS3 its not. 3rd parties look at the install base and generally support the lead machine which is not the PS3.

I love the way you include the whole of Sony versus Nintendo, why don't you do the correct and fair comparison and concentrate on SCE versus Nintendo.

That would be correct. One could take a look at the recent upturn in PSP sales as well as continued PS2 sales as a sign that at least the brand recognition is remaining strong even if the new high end product remains strong.

The PS3 is a great big ? as of now in many ways. The success of the Wii is more easily explained if not framed in direct diametrics, though. The first year answers no questions for any product. HD-DVD had a major head start on BluRay but look at it now.

This has more to do with revenue generation than profits.

Revenue
For a company, this is the total amount of money received by the company for goods sold or services provided during a certain time period. It also includes all net sales, exchange of assets; interest and any other increase in owner’s equity and is calculated before any expenses are subtracted.


Net Income
Net income can be calculated by subtracting expenses from revenue.

profit
The positive gain from an investment or business operation after subtracting for all expenses.

loss
A condition in which a company's expenses exceed its revenues.
opposite of profit.


so soy is doing better because it has more revenue, but it's expenses are greater than its revenue hence it makes a loss.

ninty has less revenue but its expenses are less than that revenue hence it makes a profit.

Sony is gambling that over the lifetime these early losses in the early years will be evened out by profits in the latter years. Which is fine provided those losses and profits are in line with expectations.

The real question is has sony got the calculations correct?
here are some reasons that might indicate that all is not well.

the price reduction on the low value ps3 in japan prior to release has reduced revenue
the ps3 is being outsold 2-1 by a competitor
the ps3 has the smallest install base

'King of Queens' sucks IMO, you should have said Seinfeld (30 million viewers weekly at its height).

Guess what?

Microsoft still hasn't made a dime on its console gaming division. I love how people swear about how awesome Microsoft's systems are and they haven't even made a profit.

Exactly. Sony has multiple streams of revenue compared to Nintendo. They got:

Bluray-
License fees for each movie, each player out there

PSN-
games/addons sold online

Consumer Electronics-
includes HDTV's, computers, all sorts of stuff

Games-
PS2, PS3, PSP, fees from licenses on all consoles, plus sales of accessories for all three consoles

Movies-
They publish their own movies. Spiderman series anyone?

TV-
Anybody heard of King of Queens? Just one example of the many TV shows that they finance and produce which are very popular with it's fans.

So they lost 260 million each 632 million they make, they got revenue coming in from so many sources that it'd make Nintendo's head spin. In terms of sheer bankroll, Nintendo is the poor man on the block. You go where the money is, and right now, that's MS and Sony.

I don't think enough people appreciate this in their numbering, rumouring or in any other way. I don't know why people doesnt see this, but it seems rather obvious that for a company like Sony, there will never be a economic loss for them to sell a PS3. Take the gasoline retailers in my country for example. Not a single one of them makes any money on selling gasoline, they lose money. But for each time a costumer buys a pack of sigarettes, a coke, or a chocolate with the gas the profit turns way green.

It's all about marketing, never think different.

ps3 vs wii there is no contest the ps3 would win

How else do you think clubs can sell $1 chicken wings? Way cheaper then KFC and nicer too if you ask me.

But how can they sell chicken wings at a loss? Poker machines!

Blu-Ray is SONY's poker machine, not only are people buying PS3 games, people are buying Blu-Rays.

It's been done before, but PSP vs. DS, with high price of the PSP it's generated as much money as the DS even tho DS has had much larger sales all round.

dictionary.com

Again this proves what? Spell it out to me like I'm 10.

either way it makes no significant difference in the presentation. The PS3 is still pulling roughly 200 million more than it's competitor with a smaller userbase. One of my points is that Sony can just live with the current pace of PS3 sales, just until the reach the year 2 mark until they break even. No need to rush things as Sony will deliver content and upgrade their system to do things their competitors system can't.

I know, it's been stated many times, that Nintendo is actually *making* that 460 million, and Sony is losing more than 632 million. I am also well aware that Sony is not just in games. They are in the electronics industry altogether and have income coming in from various sources. Sony is a bigger company than Nintendo is by FAR..

While the sales for PS3 *appear* to be bleak, it actually isn't. It makes up for that by being a higher cost. Going at it's pace until next year, we should be pretty well set in the area of next-generation hardware/software. Games are sold at a premium, and the system is sold at a premium as well. If premium brands won't die and are turning profits, which live to this day, then why can't the PS3? Massive userbase isn't everything.

Notice how Nintendo's lack of software (and always have been) has to be made up for by the sales of consoles. Sony gives you added electronics for a lower cost and you get what you pay for when you buy MS. The catch is that Sony and MS delivers on content and therefore don't have to rely on console sales to rake in the profit. The games and accessories do all that. Now with the advent of online delivery, they are turning a profit on online services as well. That's why their consoles are sold for below cost and that's how it always has been in the industry.

2.5 million in the US *alone*??? source. I've already stated mine, with NPD backed up data.........

edit:

of course it might be a month behind, which is why it's a little off. But it's not by that much.

Your NPD data is old, check the NPD April numbers.

The point is in overall revenue, my friend. The PS3 has generated more, by a long shot (and I'm sure you can comprehend the difference between revenue and profit...).

If we look at overall dollars, the PS3 has made more of an impact on the industry, as it stands right now. Despite the price being more than twice the Wii, the PS3 still sells enough to create more revenue.

And your numbers are wrong...

Wii - 2,5 million

PS3 - 1,3 million

@ Coffeerox

They are comming ....

Next to none of that makes sense.

What is your point in this thread? He's saying that when you factor in costs, the PS3 still fares worse because it loses profit on the console where Nintendo makes profit.

Wii also has double the end users (twice as many Wii's sold as PS3).

I don't know where you're going with this thread, it just doesn't make any sense

of course I do. If I didn't I would not have said that Sony loses money on each console. or even posting a thread about finances in the first place.

lol you're just repeating what I said to you back to me, which means you did not read my post whatsoever. You are just trying to get me to see it your way and it's funny because you're saying the same things back to me.

Look at the numbers again. They are only roughly 850 million behind in the US. The only reason that the Wii is ahead is because of the overseas market in which the ps3 is not doing so well as their markets are different in that their money is not worth as much as the US dollar. Stuff like this are more expensive over there and requires more work. Something like the Nintendo Wii is easily affordable and it's prices they've seen from previous generations and would not mind spending.

where did you come up with that idea? ********. You can't have double the end-users to each console. Sure you got people who come over to other people's houses and share games, but that person(s) don't count as an end-user or as an owner. Owners of the consoles are the ones that do count because they are the ones doing the real spending.

Sony should just focus on MS and let Ninty do their thing.
I go back to the apples and oranges... thing...
Or heavyweights (Sony and MS) vs lightweight(Ninty)

Yes. Its in millions $US by the way. 2007 numbers based on projections by individual companies.



I've seen this argument before, in fact Sony have used it on several occasions in thier many PR **** ups.

You do know how Zeroing works don't you? The more common term is giving away the razors to sell the blades (although at $600 its not exactly giving it away).

Sony will make a loss per hardware unit for the forseeable future so they need to sell games and accesories to not only cover the loss but to hopefully make a profit. Too sell enough games to cover the loss/make a profit they need as many consoles as they can in end user hands. Thats not happening. They arn't selling enough to end users who then buy the games.

With the Wii however not only are they making a profit on the hardware they according to your numbers (source please) but they also have almost double the end users compared tp the PS3 so thats twice as many people who will buy the games and accesories.

Edit: Because someone didn't quite get it.

VGcharts, NPD updated

yes they are

yep, but to reply to his post anyways, Sony stands to gain back their investment by the end of next year. So when they do break even, they stand to make 2-3x+ the profit that Nintendo is making in the short term. All Nintendo's plan is good for is keeping the company afloat and in the race.

Good question as Nintendo's mini-dvd drive was proprietary technology at the time, and they also had an advanced graphics board compared to PS2. I cannot really answer this as I do not know what Nintendo's budget was for their Gamecube. I don't either for PS3 but that info is actually available somewhere, so for PS3 we are able to see a better idea of where we're at on the topic of breaking even.

shut up. It isn't really even about all that. It's about the success of the short-term, versus the long-term success and which console stands to gain more. Looking at this, if Sony makes all the right moves until next fall (and whose to say they won't have a repeat of PS2) they would have beaten Nintendo yet again. Nintendo has a bad history for doing good in the beginning, and then it all rolls downhill from there.

I'm not one for being ignorant in any part of the industry, and Nintendo right now is a big competitor to the Playstation and I'd like to see where they are at in relation to the PS3 and where we, as gamers, would be a year, or two from now. Who knows we all might be Wii gamers next year, or they all might be PS3 or even 360 gamers next year.

They are losing in the short term. It's an investment from Sony's perspective for the longer term. When you factor in HDTV sales, Blue Ray movies they are benefitting overall as a company and eventually with the games will continue to thrive. I like a company like Sony and even MS to push the envelope on technology. It benefits everyone in the long term. Little innovations like the Wiimote don't really push the market forward to the type of games people want to play. That's my opinion. I understand gameplay is important but I need to see games that push the envelope further in graphics, AI ,etc.

Yes, Nintendo has been rolling in it, they always turn a profit, a tidy one at that. They're not short of a buck in any sense.

Whats with the PS3 vs Wii threads. Insecurity overload with the Reggie comments or something? We're talking about whose grossing the larger profits now? It doesn't make sense because Nintendo make profit on consoles, Sony don't; we also don't know what royalty deals each company has.

It's not like publishers say "wow X company is making so much profit, lets make games for that system!!" Install base, install base install base. It's all about the install base and the profitability of software on that system.

Sorry but this really is the worst spin ever.

Question:

If the original xbox never turned a profit for MS...
and the xbox outsold the gamecube...

Did the gamecube turn a profit for Nintendo???

Where did those numbers come from?

Ahh, but Nintendo are making money from their console, but Sony are losing, so even though the price is higher, they are still losing, and Nintendo are doing alot better because of it

Yeah.. Are these just US sales?

Which is irrelevent to the point the OP is making....

I understand the revenue stream, but I still don't get the point of this thread. Does knowing Sony have a good revenue stream make the system more enjoyable or something?

There are people that are into the business aspect of the industry and keep track of it. I myself like to know what's going on with my company because that company is the one that is responsible for keeping my platform of choice in the race. That is why there are a lot of threads (probably account for 90% of GD) that are about gaming politic alone.

At any given time we are tracking what everyone is saying about the PS3 and sounding off on it at all hours of the day. Does this mean that we aren't focusing on the games? No. But it doesn't hurt that people keep track of both at the same time.

So while it's only an opinion on how much a company's net worth is, that's not exactly the revenue that Sony is bringing in. You still fail. Also MS's net worth is more because their products are more expensive and they are mass market. They have the OS market and their suite programs cornered in every market that they are in.

There is no way (none that you can prove) that Nintendo, whose only a company that produces videogame consoles and also is a developer of videogames, can make more than a company that sells top of the line TV's, DVD players, Laptops, Desktops, Cameras, Memory cards, Bluray, as well as movies, TV's.

What you were trying to prove basically ended up nowhere. There's too much revenue that's unexplained that you didn't produce examples of. What my original case was (that you quoted) made sense. Therefore I don't need concrete proof. Need I say more but Spiderman 3? That's only ONE DIVISION and ONE MOVIE. Not mentioning the many countless productions that Sony has. You just can't keep track of it all. Nintendo is nowhere near that. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it. I don't know what you're trying to go up against here.

Cause Ninty is almost as big as Sony. They don't just make games n00b.

Nintendo does make other things outside of gaming. Thanks for showing us something we already knew. And MS is a SOFTWARE company. Doesn't come with the expenses of making a lot of hardware. And market capitilisation yo-yo's, it doesn't stay in one place. Seriously dude you came of a bit of a tool on that one.

Yes they still make hanafuda cards.

I'm sorry who was it that made the Xbox, Xbox 360, Zune media player and a **** load of PC accessories? You are right though someone did come out of that looking like a tool.

I'm gald my post taught you somthing

Yes they make the consoles to play those games, well done.

This is actually not all true.. they loose money in Japan & US. But in the PAL regions they make a profit or at least flatline due to the higher cost and the lower production price. But they make a huge profit on games and accessories everywhere and the attach rate on the PS3 is very good.

Can you prove that?

preferably with a link...

It was put together by a guy named SonyCowboy (don't let the name fool you he's quite balanced in his views) from annual Shareholder and fiscal reports (or as Sony call them Corporation Investor Relations) that have to be released to the public.

An example of which would be this

http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/fina...q4_sonypre.pdf

or this

http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/pdf/2007/070426e.pdf

Edit: added another

http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/fina...00000aksmr.pdf

(Requires acrobat reader)

With regards to Microsoft 'In the hole' that suggests that they are in debt which is most definatly not true (and the reason why they are not going anywhere soon) what is true is that the Xbox venture has cost them roughly $5 billion.

The last reported loss figure was by forbes in end of year 2005 at $4 billion (and counting)

http://www.joystiq.com/2005/09/26/fo...-and-counting/

Its been quiet on the losses front of late with the only announcement coming from Robbie Bach saying that the Xbox division will become profitable in 2008

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=24765

I think most people got it,

Yeah,i think i saw those numbers on one of the big sites like IGN, so i imagine they're pretty accurate.

I would argue that the attach rate is going to be much much less than any of the other systems out. It's more of a party console (you can't deny it), and people are going to have their one or two games for it, and not get much else. While it's great that Nintendo always makes profit on their hardware, it's a good thing they do, because they probably don't make as much money on their software.

The thing is, that Sony might have released the PS3 too early or maybe their strategy to release a new console every 6 years is not so acurate any more.

They might have just release a tuned down PS3 and after 3 (or whatever) years release a new one. That is something that would probably Nintendo do. After the components will be cheap enough, they will release a BD or HDDVD console for 249 USD...

And saying that they are blinding the customers... Every one has his own right to decide and the majority of the people decides by price. So the parents which have a mortgage and a lot of other cost would just pick up a less expencive one to give to their children. They do not care if its last gen or next gen.

Of course, it different, if you are doing the decision. The market is changing and the people who have played the consoles when they were 10 will probably play them when they will be 30 (at lease from time to time - on the opposite to their parents). So when these people will grow up, they will make their own investments and probably invest into more technologicaly advanced consoles for their own or their children (if they would have the money)

Dont get me wrong, I am a PS3 owner and a realy satisfied one, but I can see, that its more of a high end product which means that it would probably for now will not reach the numbers of other cheaper consoles.

And after all, never think that technological advancement means better entertainment...

Have fun everybody

I didn't want to dig this thread up but this is too interesting to ignore.

He's absolutly right Sony have got all of these revenue streams which has given the whole of Sony a market capitalization of $56.15 Billion. So hey Nintendo what with only the game division they must be the 'Poor man on the block' they can't be anywhere near that kind of value what with Sony being such a powerful company hold on one minute Nintendo, little old Nintendo has a market capitalization of $50.55 Billion. Remember thats the whole of Sony against little, bitty, poor Nintendo. This also makes both companies Large Cap (blue chip) corperations.

Disregard what I said about only comparing SCE to Nintendo, it seems as if it can hold its own against the whole of Sony Corp.

Sony Corp. http://www.marketwatch.com/quotes/sne

Nintendo LTD. http://www.marketwatch.com/quotes/ntdo.y

You may notice on those links A red number next to Sony and a green number next to Nintendo, its quite important. Whats exciting about it is if you watch that Sony number you can see it go down on a regular basis, right before your very eye's. Its great fun which is more than can be said for the......I aint going to go there.

For anyone Interested in Microsoft's market value $294 Billion. Wow.

http://www.marketwatch.com/Quotes/msft

Yes because Bioware, Ubisoft, EA, Capcom et al decide who to make games for based on how many cybershots and bravia's they've sold.

Market capitilization is the investment markets opinion of the value of the company not just "an opinion". Net worth is almost a worthless measurement as it is just a measurement of balance sheet items

Net worth in business is generally based on the value of all assets and liabilities at the carrying value, that is, the value as expressed on the financial statements. To the extent that items on the balance sheet do not express their true ("market") value, the net worth will also be inaccurate.

From a revenue perspective it is highly unlikely Nintendo will ever match Sony but the real important measurement is net income and in that area Nintendo certainly can, and I think actually did for the fiscal year just ended, surpass Sony.

As far as MS goes I don't know how you can think that MS's software packages are more expensive then Bravia TV's. The reality is MS has a stanglehold on the desktop, office, OS and much of the server markets and as such is extremely profitable and has a much larger market capitalization.

So far, attach rate's been better for the Wii, but I think the game drought has been worse on the PS3 for a lot of users. In the long run, it's hard to say; with current installed base, the Wii attach rate could be half the PS3 attach rate, and it'd still be more games sold. If you use new console sales as a guide, the Wii attach rate could be about a quarter of the PS3 attach rate, and it'd still be more games sold...

for some sad reason the wii is has sold a lot more then the PS3.
here in america. sony needs a price drop

I just hope the new npd numbers are better than the vg charts numbers are. The 360 crowd is on the gamefaqs ps3 board rubbing everybodys faces in it right now. The vgcharts only covered weekly though.

Yes they still make hanafuda cards.

I'm sorry who was it that made the Xbox, Xbox 360, Zune media player and a **** load of PC accessories? You are right though someone did come out of that looking like a tool.

I'm gald my post taught you somthing

Yes they make the consoles to play those games, well done.

Cause Ninty is almost as big as Sony. They don't just make games n00b.

Nintendo does make other things outside of gaming. Thanks for showing us something we already knew. And MS is a SOFTWARE company. Doesn't come with the expenses of making a lot of hardware. And market capitilisation yo-yo's, it doesn't stay in one place. Seriously dude you came of a bit of a tool on that one.

So while it's only an opinion on how much a company's net worth is, that's not exactly the revenue that Sony is bringing in. You still fail. Also MS's net worth is more because their products are more expensive and they are mass market. They have the OS market and their suite programs cornered in every market that they are in.

There is no way (none that you can prove) that Nintendo, whose only a company that produces videogame consoles and also is a developer of videogames, can make more than a company that sells top of the line TV's, DVD players, Laptops, Desktops, Cameras, Memory cards, Bluray, as well as movies, TV's.

What you were trying to prove basically ended up nowhere. There's too much revenue that's unexplained that you didn't produce examples of. What my original case was (that you quoted) made sense. Therefore I don't need concrete proof. Need I say more but Spiderman 3? That's only ONE DIVISION and ONE MOVIE. Not mentioning the many countless productions that Sony has. You just can't keep track of it all. Nintendo is nowhere near that. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it. I don't know what you're trying to go up against here.

This is actually not all true.. they loose money in Japan & US. But in the PAL regions they make a profit or at least flatline due to the higher cost and the lower production price. But they make a huge profit on games and accessories everywhere and the attach rate on the PS3 is very good.

Can you prove that?

preferably with a link...

Market capitilization is the investment markets opinion of the value of the company not just "an opinion". Net worth is almost a worthless measurement as it is just a measurement of balance sheet items

Net worth in business is generally based on the value of all assets and liabilities at the carrying value, that is, the value as expressed on the financial statements. To the extent that items on the balance sheet do not express their true ("market") value, the net worth will also be inaccurate.

From a revenue perspective it is highly unlikely Nintendo will ever match Sony but the real important measurement is net income and in that area Nintendo certainly can, and I think actually did for the fiscal year just ended, surpass Sony.

As far as MS goes I don't know how you can think that MS's software packages are more expensive then Bravia TV's. The reality is MS has a stanglehold on the desktop, office, OS and much of the server markets and as such is extremely profitable and has a much larger market capitalization.

It was put together by a guy named SonyCowboy (don't let the name fool you he's quite balanced in his views) from annual Shareholder and fiscal reports (or as Sony call them Corporation Investor Relations) that have to be released to the public.

An example of which would be this

http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/fina...q4_sonypre.pdf

or this

http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/pdf/2007/070426e.pdf

Edit: added another

http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/fina...00000aksmr.pdf

(Requires acrobat reader)

With regards to Microsoft 'In the hole' that suggests that they are in debt which is most definatly not true (and the reason why they are not going anywhere soon) what is true is that the Xbox venture has cost them roughly $5 billion.

The last reported loss figure was by forbes in end of year 2005 at $4 billion (and counting)

http://www.joystiq.com/2005/09/26/fo...-and-counting/

Its been quiet on the losses front of late with the only announcement coming from Robbie Bach saying that the Xbox division will become profitable in 2008

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=24765

I think most people got it,

I didn't want to dig this thread up but this is too interesting to ignore.

He's absolutly right Sony have got all of these revenue streams which has given the whole of Sony a market capitalization of $56.15 Billion. So hey Nintendo what with only the game division they must be the 'Poor man on the block' they can't be anywhere near that kind of value what with Sony being such a powerful company hold on one minute Nintendo, little old Nintendo has a market capitalization of $50.55 Billion. Remember thats the whole of Sony against little, bitty, poor Nintendo. This also makes both companies Large Cap (blue chip) corperations.

Disregard what I said about only comparing SCE to Nintendo, it seems as if it can hold its own against the whole of Sony Corp.

Sony Corp. http://www.marketwatch.com/quotes/sne

Nintendo LTD. http://www.marketwatch.com/quotes/ntdo.y

You may notice on those links A red number next to Sony and a green number next to Nintendo, its quite important. Whats exciting about it is if you watch that Sony number you can see it go down on a regular basis, right before your very eye's. Its great fun which is more than can be said for the......I aint going to go there.

For anyone Interested in Microsoft's market value $294 Billion. Wow.

http://www.marketwatch.com/Quotes/msft

Yes because Bioware, Ubisoft, EA, Capcom et al decide who to make games for based on how many cybershots and bravia's they've sold.

I just hope the new npd numbers are better than the vg charts numbers are. The 360 crowd is on the gamefaqs ps3 board rubbing everybodys faces in it right now. The vgcharts only covered weekly though.

for some sad reason the wii is has sold a lot more then the PS3.
here in america. sony needs a price drop

I think the comparison is much more complex than that. In regards to profits, it's important to find out the average number of games (and hdtv's, blu-ray movies, accessories, etc.) bought per user and how much Sony and Nintendo benefit per game sold; in addition to the profits/losses associated with the console itself.

Even if the PS3 = Wii in the number of games bought per user, that would still mean Nintendo is selling more games overall.

So far, attach rate's been better for the Wii, but I think the game drought has been worse on the PS3 for a lot of users. In the long run, it's hard to say; with current installed base, the Wii attach rate could be half the PS3 attach rate, and it'd still be more games sold. If you use new console sales as a guide, the Wii attach rate could be about a quarter of the PS3 attach rate, and it'd still be more games sold...

The thing is, that Sony might have released the PS3 too early or maybe their strategy to release a new console every 6 years is not so acurate any more.

They might have just release a tuned down PS3 and after 3 (or whatever) years release a new one. That is something that would probably Nintendo do. After the components will be cheap enough, they will release a BD or HDDVD console for 249 USD...

And saying that they are blinding the customers... Every one has his own right to decide and the majority of the people decides by price. So the parents which have a mortgage and a lot of other cost would just pick up a less expencive one to give to their children. They do not care if its last gen or next gen.

Of course, it different, if you are doing the decision. The market is changing and the people who have played the consoles when they were 10 will probably play them when they will be 30 (at lease from time to time - on the opposite to their parents). So when these people will grow up, they will make their own investments and probably invest into more technologicaly advanced consoles for their own or their children (if they would have the money)

Dont get me wrong, I am a PS3 owner and a realy satisfied one, but I can see, that its more of a high end product which means that it would probably for now will not reach the numbers of other cheaper consoles.

And after all, never think that technological advancement means better entertainment...

Have fun everybody

Yeah,i think i saw those numbers on one of the big sites like IGN, so i imagine they're pretty accurate.

I would argue that the attach rate is going to be much much less than any of the other systems out. It's more of a party console (you can't deny it), and people are going to have their one or two games for it, and not get much else. While it's great that Nintendo always makes profit on their hardware, it's a good thing they do, because they probably don't make as much money on their software.

I think the comparison is much more complex than that. In regards to profits, it's important to find out the average number of games (and hdtv's, blu-ray movies, accessories, etc.) bought per user and how much Sony and Nintendo benefit per game sold; in addition to the profits/losses associated with the console itself.

Even if the PS3 = Wii in the number of games bought per user, that would still mean Nintendo is selling more games overall.