Sony: Wii U Launch Lead Isn't Important

[mad825]

They are in financial trouble with the other sectors of Sony then the gaming division as a whole.

So you are saying the company as a whole making tremendous losses for several years in a row wont have any impact on Sony's gaming division?

The gaming division of Sony is really the only profitable sector they currently own. Will it bleed over to the gaming division? I will say its a possibility and I don't see it yet happening in the foreseeable future.

If Sony wants to cut the loses they need to rethink the strategy on the marketing side and cut off some of the Sony products that don't sell very well. Also, Wouldn't hurt if they dropped the price of the Sony TVS.

But if you want to sell systems at a loss to establish a consumer base, you need a lot of money. I'm not so sure the gaming division of Sony can pony up that money all by themselves. (If it was MS, they could do pretty crazy stuff with their Windows money for sure)

But that's really besides the point. We pretty much already know the range of hardware that's going to be in the next Sony console, and it's not lightyears ahead of the hardware of the Wii U.

The reason why the PS3 was so expensive and such a financial loss was because it introduced some pretty new tech at the time it was released. The cell and Blu-ray was a technological leap and as such it costed an arm and a leg, Sony gets 10 points for future proofing and -5 for it being a waste. In the long run, Sony had made quite abit of profit from Blu-ray alone.

Common knowledge and understanding of computers always dictates a desktop like console ( Xbox360, PS3 and wii) hardware components will always be cheaper because the hardware hasn't been specially designed to be smaller (the overall hardware component size not the transistors). In fact, the WillU will have to sacrifice performance and efficiency to compensate for the smaller hardware and better battery life (mobility).

 

[busterkeatonrules]

Hey, does that WiiU remind anyone else of the Sega Game Gear? That big, clunky turd that hardly anyone ever bought because it was too bulky to casually haul around, and used six batteries which got drained so fast you could hear it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega_Game_Gear

I can honestly say no, I don't think the WiiU reminds anyone of a super old handheld. I mean talk about reaching.

Who's reaching? I took one look at that WiiU controller, and felt like I was back at my local mall in 1991 trying to play a Sonic game on the demo Game Gear they had chained to the wall there. Anything that bulky can't possibly be comfortable to play games with.

 

[Tom Gentry]

They are in financial trouble with the other sectors of Sony then the gaming division as a whole.

So you are saying the company as a whole making tremendous losses for several years in a row wont have any impact on Sony's gaming division?

The gaming division of Sony is really the only profitable sector they currently own. Will it bleed over to the gaming division? I will say its a possibility and I don't see it yet happening in the foreseeable future.

If Sony wants to cut the loses they need to rethink the strategy on the marketing side and cut off some of the Sony products that don't sell very well. Also, Wouldn't hurt if they dropped the price of the Sony TVS.

The only profitable sector Sony owns is gaming? Lol are you joking or just horribly uninformed?

Sony is a public traded company. Look at their earnings reports like I have. What revenue Sony generates comes from insurance. Not gaming, not TVs or any other consumer electronics products. Sony loses money on everything they do besides life Insurance.

Sony isn't a gaming company or an electronics company now. They are a life insurance company that as a hobby offers electronics that they lose insurance profits on.

Can't really call them an electronics company when their top revenue generator is by far life insurance and other financial services.

 

[Wolfram23]

Uh... WiiU is current gen. The Wii was basically last gen repacked, but definitely not up to snuff with modern consoles. I think it will be neat to see what Nintendo does with the WiiU's power, but I don't think of it as being the next gen of consoles. Can't, really.

 

[wooty]

The Wii to me was a nice new idea for the time, I mostly bought one for Twilight Princess and.........didn't blow the dust off of it again until Skyward Sword and Okami. The same will happen to the WiiU I fear if Nintydoo dont think about real (beginning, middle and end) games and impliment the new hardware and features properly.

I can also understand why Sony and Microsoft aren't announcing new consoles and wanting the life of their current systems to go on a bit longer. The business climate is a tiny bit volatile at the moment and I guess nobody really wants to venture out there just yet, not until things are properly thought out at the very least.

At least thats what I think.

 

[omicron1]

If I was Sony, I'd announce the PS4 right before the Wii U launch. Show it off, maybe give a target price range... Anything to break consumer interest in the (at this point obviously) last-gen Wii U.
Done right (and if they can get the target price to match the Wii U's $400), they could cripple it before it even has a chance to take off. Sure, it would take firing on all cylinders to accomplish, something Sony notoriously is unable to handle, but it's not out of the question by any means.

 

[AgentCooper]

They are in financial trouble with the other sectors of Sony then the gaming division as a whole.

So you are saying the company as a whole making tremendous losses for several years in a row wont have any impact on Sony's gaming division?

The gaming division of Sony is really the only profitable sector they currently own. Will it bleed over to the gaming division? I will say its a possibility and I don't see it yet happening in the foreseeable future.

If Sony wants to cut the loses they need to rethink the strategy on the marketing side and cut off some of the Sony products that don't sell very well. Also, Wouldn't hurt if they dropped the price of the Sony TVS.

The only profitable sector Sony owns is gaming? Lol are you joking or just horribly uninformed?

Sony is a public traded company. Look at their earnings reports like I have. What revenue Sony generates comes from insurance. Not gaming, not TVs or any other consumer electronics products. Sony loses money on everything they do besides life Insurance.

Sony isn't a gaming company or an electronics company now. They are a life insurance company that as a hobby offers electronics that they lose insurance profits on.

Can't really call them an electronics company when their top revenue generator is by far life insurance and other financial services.

I don't like your accusations and the gaming division is profitable for them and I was just talking gaming in terms of there electronic division. That is a profitable and yet lacking from previous years when the PS2 was on top. But, if you want to be hard headed about then yes a technicality is right.

The electronic side of Sony is losing money at a really bad rate. That is the side of the company they need to redo. This conversation was about the electronic side and not about insurance or rumors.

 

[Tom Gentry]

They are in financial trouble with the other sectors of Sony then the gaming division as a whole.

So you are saying the company as a whole making tremendous losses for several years in a row wont have any impact on Sony's gaming division?

The gaming division of Sony is really the only profitable sector they currently own. Will it bleed over to the gaming division? I will say its a possibility and I don't see it yet happening in the foreseeable future.

If Sony wants to cut the loses they need to rethink the strategy on the marketing side and cut off some of the Sony products that don't sell very well. Also, Wouldn't hurt if they dropped the price of the Sony TVS.

The only profitable sector Sony owns is gaming? Lol are you joking or just horribly uninformed?

Sony is a public traded company. Look at their earnings reports like I have. What revenue Sony generates comes from insurance. Not gaming, not TVs or any other consumer electronics products. Sony loses money on everything they do besides life Insurance.

Sony isn't a gaming company or an electronics company now. They are a life insurance company that as a hobby offers electronics that they lose insurance profits on.

Can't really call them an electronics company when their top revenue generator is by far life insurance and other financial services.

I don't like your accusations and the gaming division is profitable for them and I was just talking gaming in terms of there electronic division. That is a profitable and yet lacking from previous years when the PS2 was on top. But, if you want to be hard headed about then yes a technicality is right.

The electronic side of Sony is losing money at a really bad rate. That is the side of the company they need to redo. This conversation was about the electronic side and not about insurance or rumors.

Sorry if I offended you. It wasn't my intent.

In your original post you had mentioned that Sony needs to drop under performing products. That would mean the consumer electronics side of the business. Sony started Sony Life in the late 70's and it is a huge business for them today. Sony would actually be a profitable company if they weren't making electronics.

The first group of products Sony should drop is TVs and then video games. PS3 is barely profitable for Sony today. Like each console sold generates a little bit of profit. But if you look at the bigger picture, the PS3 has been an absolute disaster for Sony. Sony making profit today from each PS3 console sold is a tiny drop in the hole PS3 dug for them.

PS3 has lost more money for Sony than the PS1 and PS2 made them combined. Those losses are before you total in the PSN outage fiasco. If you look at the entire history of Sony while they have been in the video game business - they haven't made any profit from it all. Not a cent. They have lost hundreds of millions of dollars because they decided to enter the video game business.

The PS3 selling today at a profit doesn't mean they are making money from video games. It just means they are making back a tiny fraction of what they have lost.

Again, Sony is a publicly traded company. None of what I said is opinion. It is non debatable fact as stated by readily available earnings reports.

 

[AgentCooper]

They are in financial trouble with the other sectors of Sony then the gaming division as a whole.

So you are saying the company as a whole making tremendous losses for several years in a row wont have any impact on Sony's gaming division?

The gaming division of Sony is really the only profitable sector they currently own. Will it bleed over to the gaming division? I will say its a possibility and I don't see it yet happening in the foreseeable future.

If Sony wants to cut the loses they need to rethink the strategy on the marketing side and cut off some of the Sony products that don't sell very well. Also, Wouldn't hurt if they dropped the price of the Sony TVS.

The only profitable sector Sony owns is gaming? Lol are you joking or just horribly uninformed?

Sony is a public traded company. Look at their earnings reports like I have. What revenue Sony generates comes from insurance. Not gaming, not TVs or any other consumer electronics products. Sony loses money on everything they do besides life Insurance.

Sony isn't a gaming company or an electronics company now. They are a life insurance company that as a hobby offers electronics that they lose insurance profits on.

Can't really call them an electronics company when their top revenue generator is by far life insurance and other financial services.

I don't like your accusations and the gaming division is profitable for them and I was just talking gaming in terms of there electronic division. That is a profitable and yet lacking from previous years when the PS2 was on top. But, if you want to be hard headed about then yes a technicality is right.

The electronic side of Sony is losing money at a really bad rate. That is the side of the company they need to redo. This conversation was about the electronic side and not about insurance or rumors.

Sorry if I offended you. It wasn't my intent.

In your original post you had mentioned that Sony needs to drop under performing products. That would mean the consumer electronics side of the business. Sony started Sony Life in the late 70's and it is a huge business for them today. Sony would actually be a profitable company if they weren't making electronics.

The first group of products Sony should drop is TVs and then video games. PS3 is barely profitable for Sony today. Like each console sold generates a little bit of profit. But if you look at the bigger picture, the PS3 has been an absolute disaster for Sony. Sony making profit today from each PS3 console sold is a tiny drop in the hole PS3 dug for them.

PS3 has lost more money for Sony than the PS1 and PS2 made them combined. Those losses are before you total in the PSN outage fiasco. If you look at the entire history of Sony while they have been in the video game business - they haven't made any profit from it all. Not a cent. They have lost hundreds of millions of dollars because they decided to enter the video game business.

The PS3 selling today at a profit doesn't mean they are making money from video games. It just means they are making back a tiny fraction of what they have lost.

Again, Sony is a publicly traded company. None of what I said is opinion. It is non debatable fact as stated by readily available earnings reports.

They won't drop the gaming sector since it DOES still make revenue. It would be very bad if they up and left the gaming division.

The gaming division was profitable in the 90's to early 2000. Sony's gaming was a huge earner.

http://www.industrygamers.com/news/sonys-game-division-sees-135-profit-boost-during-holiday-quarter/

The PS3 was not profitable until 2010.

We were also talking about the electronic division and not Sony's Insurance which was irrelevant to anything I was talking about.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

Translation: "We are nervous as FUCK"

It'll be interesting to see how the Wii U goes, mean-spirited naysayers be damned. I've noticed that the more "hardcore" gamers ***** about Nintendo the better they do. It's like they feed off the energy of dickheads

 

[Xanthious]

Well I wouldn't be worried either because to say Nintendo is getting a one year plus head start is false in my opinion. I think the reality is that they are instead just now catching up to where MS and Sony were six years ago. So with that in mind allow me to be the first to welcome Nintendo to 2006!

 

[Clearing the Eye]

What I hate about it is that now that Nintendo has this stupid new console out, Sony and Microsoft just HAVE to present the next gen. console by next year. So we're talking about another year and a half of life for our PS3s and 360s, more or less. I'm just not ready to trade in my consoles.

The WiiU isn't even that innovative. I said it before and I'll say it again: it's gimmicky, not innovative, just like the 3DS.

Mhm. I've said as much on the issue a few times. This "console" seems like a very big misstep waiting to happen. Only time will tell, but I've grave doubts.

 

[weirdee]

the console will sell pretty strong on just the promise of pikmin 3 though, so at least that solves the foot in the door thing

 

[Eri]

I wouldn't be worried either if that was the Wii U was my competitor. The Wii was a financial windfall, but a failure in every other aspect. They're currently on track to do the same thing again, except, lightning doesn't usually strike twice.

This is what I got out of your post:

"I hate the Wii so it must have been pure luck that they made money, not because millions of people loved the console. I also don't like the Wii U so it will fail."

Not trying to be rude but that is what I got out of it.

Some people love it, most don't. 2/3 of people who bought it never used it after a few months (and telling me you did doesn't negate that either). It was a failure technologically, that part isn't even debatable.