• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Sony CEO dismisses price cut chatter on PlayStation

legend166

Member
Jan 31, 2007
19,429
0
0
Stringer said:
Asked about the logic of not cutting prices, Stringer said, "I (would) lose money on every PlayStation I make -- how's that for logic."

They probably should have asked themselves that question 4 years ago when they were developing the PS3.
 
diddlyD said:
your inference is wrong, look at the end of the sentence. "how's that for logic?". the editor probably added the "would" to adjust the sentence to take into account context that was left out in the article. for example he probably said something like "he says it would be logical for me to lower price on the ps3. if i lower the price, i lose money on every ps3 i make. how's that for logic?"
For my blog post about this I contacted the author and editor of the article to verify how and why the word ´would´ was added. This is the reply I received.


Reuters said:
I think you can use the story without the word "would". It was probably added in the editing process in an attempt to clarify the quote, which was "I lose money on every PlayStation I make -- how's that for logic."
I sent her another mail asking: Do you think that Stringer was self-critical of his business model of subsidizing consoles? He was confronted with the assertion that there is no logic in not cutting the price and he replied by saying that there is already no logic in Sony's business model of heavy subsidies?

Still waiting for an answer, will post as soon as I get it. He could only have been self-critical, in my mind. It's obvious that Stringer disagrees with this practise.
 

Bearillusion

Banned
Jan 17, 2006
5,777
0
0
47
I won't be surprised if they don't drop the price. I am surprised that England lost 3 wickets after winning the toss though.
 

SonOfABeep

Banned
May 10, 2007
3,158
0
0
Averon said:
:lol Why would Sony jack up the price for the PS3 slim? At worst, the Slim stays at $399.
I present you with - the PSP Go.

I would hate it - but I wouldn't be entirely surprised if the PS3 Slim is a $500 machine, and they justify it with BC and a bigger hard drive.
 

Dunlop

Member
Oct 2, 2007
10,962
3
965
SonOfABeep said:
I present you with - the PSP Go.

I would hate it - but I wouldn't be entirely surprised if the PS3 Slim is a $500 machine, and they justify it with BC and a bigger hard drive.
me neither, which is sad.

I picked up the PS3 last and have lately been buying only PS3 games...it's like I feel bad for the system

I'm trying Sony, stop fucking everything up!

About the PSP go, I get they needed to jack up the price for the merchant. but wouldn't it have been better to sell it for much less at Sony stores and online only? I can't see any chance of this product succeeding in it's current form
 

JudgeN

Member
Apr 12, 2007
3,961
1
860
Don't see how anyone can really think a price drop is going to happen anytime soon. Sony wants profits and price drops don't normally bring profits. Mind share people had about the PS3 left a long time ago, I predict there won't be a price drop and they will still stay in business. Rather then have a price drop, make everyone else somewhat happy and they lose even more money.
 

Valkyr Junkie

Member
Mar 29, 2007
12,487
0
0
Dunlop said:
About the PSP go, I get they needed to jack up the price for the merchant. but wouldn't it have been better to sell it for much less at Sony stores and online only? I can't see any chance of this product succeeding in it's current form
Online still represents a tiny portion of retail sales, and there aren't exactly a lot of Sony Style stores around the country.

I do find it humorous that people actually think the slim with be $399, and using the PSP Go price as justification is equally humorous.
 

Ranger X

Member
Jun 10, 2004
34,867
1
0
www.backloggery.com
So basically he's denying the upcoming price cut (and undirectly denies PS3 slim) because he simply want the PS3s that are currently on the shelves to fly off as much as possible. He wouldn't to basically tell people "well, wait for this winter before buying" because now they would lose money on all the PS3s that are currently on shelves.

So yeah, Stringer is indeed doing "standard business" move here.

.
 

dammitmattt

Banned
Nov 9, 2004
7,124
0
0
Birmingham, AL
Falafelkid said:
For my blog post about this I contacted the author and editor of the article to verify how and why the word ´would´ was added. This is the reply I received.

I sent her another mail asking: Do you think that Stringer was self-critical of his business model of subsidizing consoles? He was confronted with the assertion that there is no logic in not cutting the price and he replied by saying that there is already no logic in Sony's business model of heavy subsidies?

Still waiting for an answer, will post as soon as I get it. He could only have been self-critical, in my mind. It's obvious that Stringer disagrees with this practise.
Well done! That's one mystery solved.
 
Dec 7, 2008
3,129
0
0
My guess is that the Slim is going to launch for $350, and right around that time, Sony will drop a PS2 BC firmware bomb as well.

Lets face it....the buzz is HUGE about the Slim, and this is Sonys big chance to turn things around.
 

dammitmattt

Banned
Nov 9, 2004
7,124
0
0
Birmingham, AL
sloppyjoe_gamer said:
My guess is that the Slim is going to launch for $350, and right around that time, Sony will drop a PS2 BC firmware bomb as well.

Lets face it....the buzz is HUGE about the Slim, and this is Sonys big chance to turn things around.
GAF != the world

Natal had more mainstream buzz than a potential PS3 Slim
 

sonicmj1

Member
Dec 2, 2007
8,973
0
0
If you cut the price on the PS3, you lose money. Okay.

That said, if you don't find a way to significantly increase the rate of PS3 sales, you're going to miss the fiscal year sales forecasts you set for yourselves a few months ago, projecting a 30% sales increase over last year. Since PS3 sales had generally been declining YoY to that point, you obviously have something planned.

This is just dodging the question. Unless they have serious heat packed in the new model, there's no way they aren't cutting the price.
 
Dec 7, 2008
3,129
0
0
sonicmj1 said:
If you cut the price on the PS3, you lose money. Okay.

That said, if you don't find a way to significantly increase the rate of PS3 sales, you're going to miss the fiscal year sales forecasts you set for yourselves a few months ago,
projecting a 30% sales increase over last year. Since PS3 sales had generally been declining YoY to that point, you obviously have something planned.

This is just dodging the question. Unless they have serious heat packed in the new model, there's no way they aren't cutting the price.

Exactly....they're damned if they do, and damned if they dont, but they have to do something. If im a Company in this predicament, Im going to take the short-term hit on the hardware if it will mean i'd see a large increase in my hardware sales long-term. Larger installed base, means more software purchased, and more profit, and an overall better position for my Product, market-wise.

A Twisty Fluken said:
Sony's chance happened a long time ago.
Some could have said the same thing about Nintendo before the Wii was launched....
 

sonicmj1

Member
Dec 2, 2007
8,973
0
0
sloppyjoe_gamer said:
Exactly....they're damned if they do, and damned if they dont, but they have to do something. If im a Company in this predicament, Im going to take the short-term hit on the hardware if it will mean i'd see a large increase in my hardware sales long-term. Larger installed base, means more software purchased, and more profit, and an overall better position for my Product, market-wise.
It's a difficult predicament, but since they released those forecasts in May, they've clearly already decided what they're going to do.

Any talk denying some sort of price cut is a charade.
 

xbhaskarx

Banned
Aug 13, 2007
32,787
0
0
oi39.tinypic.com
Random thought, this may not make any sense...

Are MS and Sony going to include their new waggle setups with every console? They had better if they want them to catch on. For the 360 that would mean adding a Natal camera to Arcade units that currently sell for around $199. For the PS3 that would mean adding two SonyWands (plus I assume one regular controller) and a PS Eye to consoles what would be selling for around $299 (if there are 1-2 price cuts) in late 2010 or 2011? If they're already losing money on every PS3 sold at $399, can they really afford to cut the price and eventually add waggle even if they lower their costs with a PS3 Slim?
 

H_Prestige

Banned
Aug 2, 2008
15,476
0
0
SonOfABeep said:
I present you with - the PSP Go.

I would hate it - but I wouldn't be entirely surprised if the PS3 Slim is a $500 machine, and they justify it with BC and a bigger hard drive.
This argument has been put forth several times in this thread and I just don't understand it. The psp situation is completely different. The GO isn't replacing the psp 3000, which is still being produced and will continue being produced and sold at the same $169.99 retail price. What Sony is doing with the psp (for better or worse) is simply introducing a more expensive sku alongside of the regular psp. Moreover, it has to be more expensive to give retailers a lot of margin, otherwise they might not stock the thing. There is no psp price cut or price inrease going on. You just have the option to now buy a more expensive psp that does less, or just buy the regular psp for the same price it's been going for, which is already being sold at profit so there isn't much incentive for Sony to get rid of that sku like there is with the fat ps3.

With the ps3, the slim is completely replacing the fat ps3, since the fat was too expensive to make. It's not going to be a 'premium' product sold alongside the fat ps3, nor is it a DD only device that needs higher margins at retail. Sony has stopped making the 80gb and 160gb sku's a long time ago and has been clearing out inventory ever since to make way for the slim, which is the only sku going forward. Worst case scenario it will be $399. They're not going to raise the price of the ps3 after a redesign to make it cheaper to make, just as they didn't raise the price of the ps3 when they introduced the 40gb. Given Sony's estimates of selling more ps3's this year over last, I have a feeling they will drop the price to $299. $350 won't cut it. Either that or Sony thinks GT5 will sell millions of ps3's at $399 or $350.
 

Click

Banned
Aug 15, 2007
1,964
0
0
What is Activision's problem?

Suing EA and now threatening Sony / SCE.

They must like to be hated within the video game industry.
 

charlequin

Banned
Oct 19, 2005
26,635
1
0
Tobor said:
All I'm saying is, I'm tired of people saying the UMD is a valuable feature all the time for every user
Amazingly, I didn't say that. I just said the PSP-3000 has more features -- including as it does the ability to play rented, borrowed, or purchased physical media games, rather than solely games purchased through the single chokepoint of Sony's PSN.

I'm not against the entire concept of the PSP Go inherently, but I do think it's very important to maintain awareness of what actual tradeoffs involved. Sony is producing a cheaper device by removing the UMD hardware -- an extremely major hardware feature even if it does happen to be one that is of differing value to different users -- and instead of passing along savings to the consumer, they're actually asking them to pay a premium, and passing the extra profits along to themselves and to retailers. I don't think that (or Nintendo's similar DSi strategy) is to be commended.

Kulock said:
They won't really co-exist no matter what they say, whichever model performs better, they phase out the other one.
This is also a good point. I have yet to see anyone treat the "co-exist" strategy seriously this generation, so I don't think accepting a hardware manufacturer's word on this is necessarily wise.

gofreak said:
I don't think you can read anything into comments about pricing before it happens.
Yup. Before a price cut and before no price cut, the official line is always going to be "we aren't cutting the price."

I really would be surprised to not see a PS3 cut this year, but it's not like all three mfrs. haven't surprised me with their stinginess this generation to date, so.
 

slider

Member
Nov 7, 2006
8,702
0
0
London
Teddman said:
:lol It'll be such a failure at that launch price... Even Sony wouldn't be that stupid. Would they?
If it did, which I doubt, you'd have to question the thought processes behind it.
 

JoJo13

Banned
Apr 5, 2006
1,815
0
0
charlequin said:
Amazingly, I didn't say that. I just said the PSP-3000 has more features -- including as it does the ability to play rented, borrowed, or purchased physical media games, rather than solely games purchased through the single chokepoint of Sony's PSN.

I'm not against the entire concept of the PSP Go inherently, but I do think it's very important to maintain awareness of what actual tradeoffs involved. Sony is producing a cheaper device by removing the UMD hardware -- an extremely major hardware feature even if it does happen to be one that is of differing value to different users -- and instead of passing along savings to the consumer, they're actually asking them to pay a premium, and passing the extra profits along to themselves and to retailers. I don't think that (or Nintendo's similar DSi strategy) is to be commended.
It's arguable whether or not the device is cheaper. Yes, they're taking out UMD, but they're also adding in 16 GB of internal memory and using a different form factor and components.




This is also a good point. I have yet to see anyone treat the "co-exist" strategy seriously this generation, so I don't think accepting a hardware manufacturer's word on this is necessarily wise.
Microsoft has used the 'co-exist' strategy this entire generation with 3 different SKUs on the market with different feature sets.
 

Tobor

Member
Sep 15, 2006
41,042
0
0
charlequin said:
Amazingly, I didn't say that. I just said the PSP-3000 has more features -- including as it does the ability to play rented, borrowed, or purchased physical media games, rather than solely games purchased through the single chokepoint of Sony's PSN.

I'm not against the entire concept of the PSP Go inherently, but I do think it's very important to maintain awareness of what actual tradeoffs involved. Sony is producing a cheaper device by removing the UMD hardware -- an extremely major hardware feature even if it does happen to be one that is of differing value to different users -- and instead of passing along savings to the consumer, they're actually asking them to pay a premium, and passing the extra profits along to themselves and to retailers. I don't think that (or Nintendo's similar DSi strategy) is to be commended.
Obviously we disagree. I don't trade in games anymore and I'm not much of a lender. More importantly I want the device as small and lightweight as is possible. I want internal memory included. The only trade off I see is having to lug around a bigger device in order to maintain backwards compatibility I'll never use.

I understand where you guys are coming from, and every argument leads us back to "buy a 3000" if that's what you want, or "buy a Go" if that's what you want. The price is what it is, and unless it's a red herring to boost PSP-3000 sales before the Go launch(which is unlikely but possible), it's going to stay that way.
 

kevm3

Member
Jun 12, 2004
7,969
275
1,595
Sony has been overpricing all of their goods lately. Their biggest problem is that they are having boom time prices in a recession. PS3 is the costliest of the consoles. PSP GO didn't drop the price of PSP despite losing the UMD drive... In fact, they raised the price by $50. Their new walkman is expensive as well. They are stuffing their products with premium features and charging big money for them, but they fail to realize that the economy isn't what it was. There always needs to be a balance between affordable price and features, and Sony seems to be getting away from affordable prices by focusing on features people may not be willing to pay for.

Sony may be 'profitable', but they are at risk of losing a lot of the prestige that the Playstation brand once held. They need to be careful and not let immediate profitability overtake having a solid relationship with consumers and maintaining a strong brand image.

They need to be aware of isolating their third parties as well. First party strategy is good, but they need to get back on good terms with their 3rd parties. A situation in which Square is making more games for 360 and so is Namco isn't a good situation for Sony. Having the new MGS be on 360 isn't helpful either.
 

Narcosis

Member
Apr 21, 2007
2,033
0
0
pseudocaesar said:
Sony should retail 1st party games at $49 as an incentive to buy 1st over 3rd party software. Im sure if MAG + headset was $49 it might fair better against MW2.
Microsoft tried that once. The response from 3rd parties is why you see MGS games at the same $60 price as the average 3rd party title despite the lack of royalty fees to the platform holder.
 

Slavik81

Member
Jan 23, 2007
18,505
0
0
cakefoo said:
Assuming the writer lacks comprehension skills, sure. But, if Stringer said

then the writer correctly cut off the redundant 5 words and added the (would) so that it represented what Stringer would have said if he knew the first half of his statement was going to be cut off.
Shouldn't he use elipses if he cut off the beginning of the sentence?
 

Ashour

Member
Dec 14, 2008
6,396
0
0
I really hope they can lower the production costs to a level where they can cut the price without taking a big blow.
 

charlequin

Banned
Oct 19, 2005
26,635
1
0
Tobor said:
Obviously we disagree. I don't trade in games anymore and I'm not much of a lender. More importantly I want the device as small and lightweight as is possible. I want internal memory included. The only trade off I see is having to lug around a bigger device in order to maintain backwards compatibility I'll never use.
But there isn't any question about whether these things are actually features, and shouldn't be any question about how the removal of features should affect a product's value.

There's a ton of debate and disagreement about what features are relevant to a given system, of course; different users make use of different capabilities, and it's reasonable to value those capabilities differently for one's own use. But consumers should still look to leverage even useless (to them) features for their own benefit. Look at the PS3. Lots of people are upset at the loss of BC, but that feature removal did at least come with a tradeoff: it helped enable a price cut, so people who didn't need BC but wanted PS3 to be cheaper before adopting were able to leverage the feature removal for their benefit: trading something they didn't need for something they did (a lower price.)

The PSP Go has no such tradeoff. Even if someone doesn't see UMD games as a useful feature to them, they shouldn't be happy to pay more for this feature to be removed; they should look to Sony to pass the savings on to them, providing a product that can be sold more cheaply to the consumer because an "undesirable" feature was removed.
 

spwolf

Member
Feb 15, 2007
16,283
0
0
kevm3 said:
Sony has been overpricing all of their goods lately. Their biggest problem is that they are having boom time prices in a recession. PS3 is the costliest of the consoles. PSP GO didn't drop the price of PSP despite losing the UMD drive... In fact, they raised the price by $50. Their new walkman is expensive as well. They are stuffing their products with premium features and charging big money for them, but they fail to realize that the economy isn't what it was. There always needs to be a balance between affordable price and features, and Sony seems to be getting away from affordable prices by focusing on features people may not be willing to pay for.

Sony may be 'profitable', but they are at risk of losing a lot of the prestige that the Playstation brand once held. They need to be careful and not let immediate profitability overtake having a solid relationship with consumers and maintaining a strong brand image.

They need to be aware of isolating their third parties as well. First party strategy is good, but they need to get back on good terms with their 3rd parties. A situation in which Square is making more games for 360 and so is Namco isn't a good situation for Sony. Having the new MGS be on 360 isn't helpful either.
you have to idea what the fuck are you talking about. So why bother at all?

- PS3 is not overpriced, it is too expensive. It cant be overpriced as they are losing money on each sold. :lol
- PSP Go! is $80 more expensive than PSP-3000, not $50. Yeah, despite losing 0.10c DVD laser and adding $20-30 memory module.
- Sony always produced high end products, thats their whole thing.
- Sony just announced new Netbook and new mainstream laptop where BD-drive is $80 extra. So, yeah, quite aware of the recession.
- Sony is NOT profitable right now.
 

JoJo13

Banned
Apr 5, 2006
1,815
0
0
charlequin said:
But there isn't any question about whether these things are actually features, and shouldn't be any question about how the removal of features should affect a product's value.

There's a ton of debate and disagreement about what features are relevant to a given system, of course; different users make use of different capabilities, and it's reasonable to value those capabilities differently for one's own use. But consumers should still look to leverage even useless (to them) features for their own benefit. Look at the PS3. Lots of people are upset at the loss of BC, but that feature removal did at least come with a tradeoff: it helped enable a price cut, so people who didn't need BC but wanted PS3 to be cheaper before adopting were able to leverage the feature removal for their benefit: trading something they didn't need for something they did (a lower price.)

The PSP Go has no such tradeoff. Even if someone doesn't see UMD games as a useful feature to them, they shouldn't be happy to pay more for this feature to be removed; they should look to Sony to pass the savings on to them, providing a product that can be sold more cheaply to the consumer because an "undesirable" feature was removed.
The tradeoff is that the device is actually a hell of a lot more portable and has a good chunk of memory built into the unit itself.

I never touched my PSP much (due to lacking quality games and just how large it was). It was just too much of a pain for me to lug around.

With the PSP go being about the same size as an iphone, and with a much better upcoming game library, i'm extremely excited about the PSPgo. I'll actually have a decent reason to use the damn machine.

IF it's not worth it for others, then that's fine, they have another option.
 

spwolf

Member
Feb 15, 2007
16,283
0
0
charlequin said:
The PSP Go has no such tradeoff.
smaller size/weight, bluetooth and 16GB of internal memory is just whispers on the wind I see, compared to the kick ass, awesome power od UMD drive. So much love for UMD, its pretty amazing. I could swear that before PSP Go! was announced, people HATED UMD with PASSION, and claimed that they are cracking PSP-1000 just to rip their legal games and play them from AWESOME memory stick to increase load speed, battery life and decrease that awful noise. Was that in some other universe or what? :lol
 

Tobor

Member
Sep 15, 2006
41,042
0
0
charlequin said:
But there isn't any question about whether these things are actually features, and shouldn't be any question about how the removal of features should affect a product's value.

There's a ton of debate and disagreement about what features are relevant to a given system, of course; different users make use of different capabilities, and it's reasonable to value those capabilities differently for one's own use. But consumers should still look to leverage even useless (to them) features for their own benefit. Look at the PS3. Lots of people are upset at the loss of BC, but that feature removal did at least come with a tradeoff: it helped enable a price cut, so people who didn't need BC but wanted PS3 to be cheaper before adopting were able to leverage the feature removal for their benefit: trading something they didn't need for something they did (a lower price.)

The PSP Go has no such tradeoff. Even if someone doesn't see UMD games as a useful feature to them, they shouldn't be happy to pay more for this feature to be removed; they should look to Sony to pass the savings on to them, providing a product that can be sold more cheaply to the consumer because an "undesirable" feature was removed.
And yet I am, since what's been added(smaller size and internal memory) are worth more to me.

I'll give you a perfect example. The 13" Macbook Pro vs. The Macbook Air. Looking at tech specs, the Air has less features(no optical drive, non-upgradeable ram, slower processor, fewer USB ports, no firewire port), and yet the Air sells very well for Apple as a premium model. We all know why it sells, and who it is being sold to. So how can that be if your argument is true? Shouldn't the Air have flopped on it's face?

You don't see size as a premium in a portable device, but it absolutely is, and people will pay for the luxury. That's what I see the Go as. A premium PSP, and I can afford to pay the premium.
 

DCharlie

And even i am moderately surprised
Jun 7, 2004
23,294
25
1,480
www.dcharlie.com
Pretty sure if it was for Kutaragi they would have launched it at 399 rightaway.

He was THAT crazy.
well, yes, we went from 80k to 60k for a PS3 60 gig before it launched, which he announced (reportedly) without consulting anyone on.

And yes , we would definitely have a much cheaper PS3 by now with Kutaragi at the helm. That said, Sony would now be in DEEP trouble.

I'm 100% convinced that the removal of Kutaragi saved Sony from oblivion.

Stringer is Sony's saviour - not this gen, but next gen Sony will be a completely more refined animal.
 

JoJo13

Banned
Apr 5, 2006
1,815
0
0
xBuTcHeRx said:
The PS3 is gonna start losing 3rd party devs, like Activision said to stop making games for the PS3.
right, because getting an extra 50-100+% in sales (depending on the title) is certainly something third parties are going to give up, especially in this economy.
 

JoJo13

Banned
Apr 5, 2006
1,815
0
0
WhiteAce said:
well, yes, we went from 80k to 60k for a PS3 60 gig before it launched, which he announced (reportedly) without consulting anyone on.

And yes , we would definitely have a much cheaper PS3 by now with Kutaragi at the helm. That said, Sony would now be in DEEP trouble.

I'm 100% convinced that the removal of Kutaragi saved Sony from oblivion.

Stringer is Sony's saviour - not this gen, but next gen Sony will be a completely more refined animal.
How about we label Stringer as Sony's savior when he actually produces results. So far, during his tenure at Sony, I haven't looked at anything that said to me, "that was ALL Stringer".

Granted, it's not an overnight change, but I wouldn't give accolades to the man just yet when he has failed to produce. He's a lot of talk so far, but not much else.
 

pseudocaesar

Member
Dec 4, 2008
3,705
0
0
Australia
This thread is fucking shit, and its only 3 pages long.

JoJo13 said:
How about we label Stringer as Sony's savior when he actually produces results. So far, during his tenure at Sony, I haven't looked at anything that said to me, "that was ALL Stringer".

Granted, it's not an overnight change, but I wouldn't give accolades to the man just yet when he has failed to produce. He's a lot of talk so far, but not much else.
Thats just wrong. The mans restructured the entire company, and changed its operating philosophy from the ground up. You expect overnight results with that? Your tune might change when in a couple of years your accessing the PSN (or whatever it will be named) from your tv, phone, PS3, PSP, Computer, Microwave, Fridge, Blender etc.
 

Shadow780

Member
Aug 3, 2007
19,432
0
0
NYC
JoJo13 said:
How about we label Stringer as Sony's savior when he actually produces results. So far, during his tenure at Sony, I haven't looked at anything that said to me, "that was ALL Stringer".

Granted, it's not an overnight change, but I wouldn't give accolades to the man just yet when he has failed to produce. He's a lot of talk so far, but not much else.
Well, there's been a lot of internal struggle inside the corporation, he couldn't do a lot of stuff he wanted to.
 

charlequin

Banned
Oct 19, 2005
26,635
1
0
JoJo13 said:
The tradeoff is that the device is actually a hell of a lot more portable and has a good chunk of memory built into the unit itself.
The memory is one thing (though, at current prices and assuming you shop sensibly, you're still paying a premium on it at Sony's price compared to what you could get yourself) but the minor portability benefit comes entirely through moves that reduce the manufacturing price of the system. We're not even looking at a GBA Micro situation where someone might conceivably argue that better screen technology was needed to create the smaller system; they just took out the UMD drive (and the ability to actually change and upgrade your own battery) so they could put the same guts into a narrower package.

A size improvement that minor should not come at a price hike when other features are already being cut to cover the costs.
 

DCharlie

And even i am moderately surprised
Jun 7, 2004
23,294
25
1,480
www.dcharlie.com
How about we label Stringer as Sony's savior when he actually produces results. So far, during his tenure at Sony, I haven't looked at anything that said to me, "that was ALL Stringer".

Granted, it's not an overnight change, but I wouldn't give accolades to the man just yet when he has failed to produce. He's a lot of talk so far, but not much else.
The removal of Kutaragi by Stringer (come on, dress it up however you want, looks pretty obvious given the various interviews) was a massive change for Sony.

Granted we have yet to see the fruits of the talk yet, but they need someone NON-JAPANESE to cut through the interdepartment strife. Axe weilding honky Knights are the way to go and , the BIGGEST thing he brought to sony, was not allowing Kutaragi to gamble the company down the shitter with any insane price cuts.

As far as i'm concerned - he's already saved Sony once. I'm serious - if Kutaragi was at the levers during this time i think Sony would be in dire dire trouble right now. As it is, they are simply just hurting badly.
 
Nov 17, 2006
24,417
0
0
39
Koga, Ibaraki, Japan
There's a "complete fucking moron/disgusting corporate shill" vs. "rational human being" line being drawn in the sand with the PSP Go and I'm disappointed but not even a little bit surprised to see how many people are on the wrong fucking side of the line.
 

JoJo13

Banned
Apr 5, 2006
1,815
0
0
Segata Sanshiro said:
There's a "complete fucking moron/disgusting corporate shill" vs. "rational human being" line being drawn in the sand with the PSP Go and I'm disappointed but not even a little bit surprised to see how many people are on the wrong fucking side of the line.
With regards to what? The price? I think most people would agree that the price is about $50 too high. For whatever the true reason may be (retailer incentives, more margin on a low volume money maker for Sony, or a combination of both), the price is what it is. For some, it'll deter them from buying a PSPgo, for others (like me) who want the PSPgo enough for the benefits it provides, it's still worth the cost.

So are people 'complete fucking disgusting morons' for liking what the PSP go has to offer?
 
Nov 17, 2006
24,417
0
0
39
Koga, Ibaraki, Japan
JoJo13 said:
With regards to what? The price? I think most people would agree that the price is about $50 too high. For whatever the true reason may be (retailer incentives, more margin on a low volume money maker for Sony, or a combination of both), the price is what it is. For some, it'll deter them from buying a PSPgo, for others (like me) who want the PSPgo enough for the benefits it provides, it's still worth the cost.

So are people 'complete fucking disgusting morons' for liking what the PSP go has to offer?
If you're asking me if I think you are a complete fucking moron or a disgusting corporate shill, JoJo, I'm afraid I can't answer as it would be against the GAF TOS.
 

JoJo13

Banned
Apr 5, 2006
1,815
0
0
Segata Sanshiro said:
If you're asking me if I think you are a complete fucking moron or a disgusting corporate shill, JoJo, I'm afraid I can't answer as it would be against the GAF TOS.
I wasn't asking that at all, because I frankly don't care what you think of me.

You seem pretty angry that some people like the PSPgo.

It's okay. The PSPgo is just another PSP SKU. Just because it's not for you doesn't mean everyone that thinks otherwise is on the 'wrong side of the line'.
 

HK-47

Oh, bitch bitch bitch.
Oct 24, 2007
49,170
0
1,010
Segata Sanshiro said:
If you're asking me if I think you are a complete fucking moron or a disgusting corporate shill, JoJo, I'm afraid I can't answer as it would be against the GAF TOS.
Yay, its Segata with the moral high ground and logic!