Reeves: PS3 is 300,000 units ahead of 360 in Europe
- Posted December 4th, 2008 at 12:06 EDT by
- 3,094 views
- 26 Comments
Microsoft has been making a lot of noise in the past few days about its price-cut-fuelled European market performance, claiming that Xbox 360 sales during November were 124 per cent up on sales in the same month last year, as against a 3 per cent rise for PlayStation 3. Time for the Sony counterattack.
Sony Computer Entertainment Europe (SCEE) President David Reeves has told MCV that PS3's installed base is still thousands of units larger than that of the Xbox 360 on the continent. "I am confident that in PAL territories our installed base is 300,000 units ahead of Xbox 360,” he said.
Reeves dismissed the prospect of a PS3 price cut, commenting that "our strategy is very much value added.” Apparently the "elastic" business model Sony employed for PlayStations 1 and 2 is a thing of the past. “When we came into the industry we started at zero. And we had to have a model that offered price elasticity. As soon as we got the manufacturing price down on PSOne we lowered the price. Same with PS2.
"But we’re not doing that on PS3 -that’s not the model, even if people are expecting it.
"We’re relying on the fact that the industry will keep growing and while we might have a comparatively smaller share of the market we will have higher sales," Reeves went on. "PS3 is tracking where PS2 was at the same point in its life. The value added strategy will continue for some years to come."
He did, however, suggest that Sony would adopt a more pugnacious pricing strategy once the PS3 is sold at a profit. "We are a in a solid position, and are not lackadaisical. Next year we are probably going to be a little bit more aggressive when we reach the break-even point."
Comments
-
teevanator |
teevanator- 12:10pm GMT - December 4th, 2008
- 1
why isnt he cutting prices, stupid fool, many of my freinds are debating xbox or ps3, and while i have persauded most of em, sometimes price is an issue
1st aswell:D
-
Taylor1981 |
BaggyPants- 12:14pm GMT - December 4th, 2008
- 2
Nicely said for the Xmas shopping craze. May stop people 'sitting on the fence' on holding off for a price drop.
-
-
Fiddlesworth
- 12:26pm GMT - December 4th, 2008
- 4
True to form Microsoft have been spreading a lot of misinformation lately.
-
CSUPSU
- 12:43pm GMT - December 4th, 2008
- 5
It’s always the same way: people who often claim not to care about owning a PS3 will harp on that they don’t own one due to price (or whatever the current contrary stance is to the matter being discussed) and that Sony should, globally, suffer increased losses so those few internet vocalists can buy a single unit of their global product at a price more in line with their salary and, it seems, appreciation of finances...
“I want a cheaper PS3 and Sony should lose money to make it happen”...
Yeah...I wonder why Sony might have a different take on that...hmm?...
“I don’t need to care about Sony’s business! I want a cheaper PS3″...
Yeah, well perhaps Sony is more concerned with Sony’s business than you...are you going to hold that against them too? (The answer, according to the internet, seems to be Yes)...
...“Sony are selfish. They should give me a cheaper PS3″...
Yup...they are selfish..because every other moderately successful business ALWAYS drops prices to appease the demands of potential ‘customers’ at the risk of making increased losses!...
Throwing money away is good business! Right?!?...
-
mikeghtmare |
mikeghtmare- 1:03pm GMT - December 4th, 2008
- 6
I'm sure MS spread misinformation, but their 'NEW' model is something to worry about. How does Sony think they'll sell more with a higher price... defies all logic.
-
englishgolfer
- 1:05pm GMT - December 4th, 2008
- 7
i have trouble relying on microsoft and their press releases all the time. however, sony is also a company it no doubt spins the figures aswell. we need to wait for an independent market review before we can say for certain that sony are leading (which my gut feeling tells me they are...)
finally i still believe a price cut is coming soon - they aren't going to announce it just before christmas - but it won't be big.
-
mikeghtmare |
mikeghtmare- 1:39pm GMT - December 4th, 2008
- 8
@10, quantity over quality??? hmm, I'll take Quality any time. There might not be as many titles, but if we are talking "good" titles, PS3 winns easily.
-
spawn of stumpy |
spawn_of_stumpy- 1:54pm GMT - December 4th, 2008
- 9
@12, well said, couldnt of said it better myself ! lol
With the current financial climate it cant be easy riding a fine line betweem keeping the same price & watching sales figures closely or dropping the price & suffering a bigger hit in profitability which could hurt sony badly.
(wander`s off into a warm fuzzy daze as he see`s the picture on avatar pic on post 2)
-
Alpha2
- 2:22pm GMT - December 4th, 2008
- 10
The statement he's making is misleading because Sony has always waited for the system to make a profit before cutting prices. Yes the PS1 and PS2 wehere sold at a loss at first, but so was the PS3, just because it was the most expensive dosent mean they didn't get hurt the same way, and they STILL are. The point is it NEVER EVER makes sense to drop the price before you can make a profit on your system, this is something the "other system" dosent care about as they dump their price into the basment to protect their market position. Sony stands firm on their price because they know the hardware is worth it and in time they drop the price as needed, they did this with the PS2 they did it with the PSP and they WILL eventually do it with the PS3.
It's just plain Logic.
-
markwesker
- 2:56pm GMT - December 4th, 2008
- 11
The ps3 is value for money just like three grand pc`s but not many get sold hence why games are aimed and developed for medium range pc`s.just cut the price n stop acting like u havent heard about the world recession.no one says same price as the 360 just a cut nearer the £200 pound mark for the uk i think.
you won blu ray so sony is guranteed billions for the next 10-15years so dont be tight.as a gamer i would love to see more ps3 only games.
-
-
DINAMO788 |
DINAMO788- 4:28pm GMT - December 4th, 2008
- 13
well ask any marketer, great companies are first to add value and last to cut price. however market share affects a lot more than just console sales. I just hope they find a way to gain incentives for developers using this new value based costing method.
also, 300,000 units isn't much of a lead considering Europe is supposed to be Sonyland
-
gadena
- 4:32pm GMT - December 4th, 2008
- 14
well all i have to say to those who complain that the ps3 price is still high (and i got mines when it was 600) SAVE YOUR MONEY! if you don't want to save your money then shut the heck up about price being too high. its like anything else (tv, car pc) if you want it bad enough you will save your money for it.
-
-
Odium_Generis_Humani
- 5:03pm GMT - December 4th, 2008
- 16
Hmm. Well at least it's out in the open now. They did pick a bad time in the world's economy for the "Value-Added" strategy. But they also seem to realize that they lose marketshare to do it, so obviously it more calculated than I thought. They've been doing it with the PSP for years. Think about it. The PSP is what? Almost 5 years old? There's rumors of a PSP2 as well. SHOULDN'T THE PSP BE LIKE, $50 at this point? It's as much as a slim PS2 still. This is the way Sony does business now I guess. They are willing to wait for the consumer to catch up (which they did with the PSP, as the PSP is HARDLY a failure). All I know is the proof is in the pudding because of the way the number looked, people declared the PSP AND the PS3 dead. Neither are. What do people have to say about that?
-
edward_moffet |
edd- 5:28pm GMT - December 4th, 2008
- 17
he's saying that people who buy ps3 are the people who buy games, which if im not mistaken is true right now because didn't EA say that more profit came from ps3 sales than 360?
-
pizzamonkio
- 6:00pm GMT - December 4th, 2008
- 18
i agree with not dropping the price . its superior compared to other current gen consoles. plus if you think of it this way: xbox live costs money. psn is free. so wouldn't that balance out any savings you would get by purchasing an xbox? you pay for what you get. plus it doesnt make sense to lose money by selling them for cheap. it would be like if burger king sold whoppers for 5 cents . man would they ever sell a 'kings ransom' of whoppers but they would surely be out of business in no time.
-
ps3_axe |
Troubl- 6:17pm GMT - December 4th, 2008
- 19
for me price is not an issue, and if it was, i would really look at the $200 price tag on the 360 instead of the $400 on the ps3 and ask myself: how can a system be worth $200? cus if it is it must be crap.." really, too expensive is not good, but too cheap is definitely not better as i will start question the quality of the product..
and @18.. the $200 price tag on the 360 is a cheat to the consumer. because they have to pay for LIVE.. It's ridiculous. Microsoft tout their online as the best part of their system and tout their low prices on their consoles, but forget to tell their customer that they have to pay $50 a year to get full functionality out of their games. you actually have to pay MICROSOFT to play half a game not even made by them... i would never support that and i never will.
-
TheWorldEndsWithMe |
DonovanTheICEMAN- 6:32pm GMT - December 4th, 2008
- 20
If they are concerned with people buying because PS3 is the best value (and it is) then why do they refuse to advertise any of the features? Where's free online on the PSN commercial? Where's PSP linkability on the PSP commercials? Blu ray? Why don't they say this to people so they can understand that you can't get that with 360?
-
Free_Agent
- 7:53pm GMT - December 4th, 2008
- 21
Sony does indeed need to drop the price. It doesn't matter that they have to take a bigger loss, as this is what happens during the first year or 2 of the consoles life. Sony isn't making big bucks on the consoles, they are making their money from licensing and publishers for all the games. I guess because Sony's library has been very lackluster until fairly recently, the software wasn't making enough profits. If Sony would drop the price for the holidays and dramatically increase market share, that pays off more in the long run. Too bad they won't release more details as I'm sure there is more to the story, but regardless the price needs to be dropped. I have a bunch of friends who own the 360, only 1 who owns the ps3, and none of them are ever going to buy the PS3 unless the price drops. They don't seem to feel that the system is worth the asking price, and while in some ways I disagree, in others I can definately understand.
-
davin_g
- 8:06pm GMT - December 4th, 2008
- 22
i agree with you #20. they definately need to show the ability the ps3 has..along with actually showing the games themselves but i think most of you are missing the point. they are not trying to gain market share. they are trying to grow the market...along with the wii. they plan to sell 100 million ps3. they don't care if microsoft sells 100 million as well or the wii 150 million. they had to keep the ps and ps2 cheap to grow their install base and grow the gaming market. now the gaming market is huge and they don't need to own the whole thing to be very very successful. look at all their products...sony is very very rarely #1 in market share in these markets. they are usually at the top...but not necessarily #1. they don't have to sell the most bravia's to be the considered king of the hdtv. with the price and margins they make they don't have to sell the most. sony is typically a value added, quality driven electronics company. they make top of the line products...they may sell fewer but usually make the most money. the ps and ps2 broke this mold because they were breaking into the market...now the market is big enough they can play this game the way they prefer to. i'm sure they would like to sell the most consoles while having the highest price but they won't be devistated if they come in second while making a huge profit. as far at the ps3 goes this is just a different strategy...one ps fans aren't familar with but one we should be comfortable with as long as they can maintain dev support while selling fewer consoles. whether they come in 1st or 3rd if they still sell 100 million consoles do you think devs will be interested in making games.....uh yeah...thought so.
-
Limmex
- 9:19pm GMT - December 4th, 2008
- 23
both are great consoles, i owned a 360 before i switched to a ps3. mainly as it broke down, on two models, and also as before i was a ps man. also blu-ray appealled to me as i have hdtv etc and enjoy films. as a blu-ray player its great value for money, the 360 i think has more games and a stronger online presence. i'm sticking with the ps3 but the price cut of the 360 will i think impact on sales in a good way for MS... especially with high profile titles such as GOW2. there is room for both but the ps3 will need to become cheaper and sony seen to be doing something about it.
-
-
Rauland |
PPp_Killer- 11:39pm GMT - December 4th, 2008
- 25
i agree with post 12
PAL regions get treated like s*** were as in america u get treated with royality eg (cheap ps3's, qoure, video store and actual updates for the psn store with pricing at a steal.) so in conclusion europe and the rest of the world buy more ps3's than 360's. Were as in america u buy more 360's than ps3's? O.o
-
wetfbbqchiken
- 5:30am GMT - December 5th, 2008
- 26
well in the uk at least theres no question really of 360 vs ps3 in my mind on price...
even with the price cuts to like £130 for a 360(with no hdd), ps3 still includes a 80gb hdd, blu-ray player (that alone is supposed to be worth £300) wireless adapter built in (around £50 for the 360) and free online play (around £40/year on 360?)
thats basically what made me decide on getting a ps3 i think its the smart choice..
people asking for a price cut just dont seem to add it up or are retarded!
Advertisement