By "Toshiba's more expensive HD-DVD player," I meant, "the more expensive model of Toshiba's two players." PS3 falls in price between the two Toshiba models. Sorry fo the confusion.

Can be had for $363.

The panasonic and pioneer will both be over $1300 and are currently on tap to be the best way to see them.

I seriously don't get why you're here to start bullshit. Do some research.

Sony's Stock plummets on PS3 shortage news.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TOKYO (Reuters) - Shares in Sony Corp. (6758.T: Quote, NEWS, Research) fell more than 3 percent by early afternoon on Thursday after a Japanese brokerage cut its rating on the electronics maker and its shipment target for the upcoming PlayStation 3 game console.

Mitsubishi UFJ Securities lowered its rating on Sony to "3" from "2" and slashed by half its estimate on PS3 sales for the current business year ending March 31 to 3 million units, citing difficulties in procuring enough cutting-edge parts.

The PS3, sometimes described as a high-performance home server disguised as a game machine, is powered by the Cell microchip, dubbed the "supercomputer on a chip," and equipped with a Blu-ray next-generation high-definition optical disc drive.

Sony shares were down 3.2 percent at 5,080 yen, underperforming the Tokyo stock market's electrical machinery index (.IELEC.T: Quote, NEWS, Research), which lost 1.51 percent.

A spokeswoman for Sony's game division, which in March delayed the PS3 launch to November from spring 2006, declined to comment.

Sony, which competes with Microsoft Corp. (MSFT.O: Quote, Profile, Research) and Nintendo Co. Ltd. (7974.OS: Quote, NEWS, Research) in the nearly $30 billion video game industry, aims to ship 6 million units of the latest version of its blockbuster game machine by March.

Slower PS3 sales would affect Sony's bottom line in a positive way in the short term as the company is expected to make a loss on each console it sells at the initial stage.

The Tokyo-based company said in April its game division would rack up an operating loss of 100 billion yen ($860 million) this business year.

It is not unusual for game makers to suffer substantial losses at the early stage of a console launch by setting prices low to spur sales. They typically rake in profits later through game software sales.

The Samsung can be had for $799 at Amazon right now.

And it sucks.

Do you even own either format? Or plan on it?

I'm sorry, I thought we were just discussing price. BD currently costs around twice HD-DVD. That's a pretty discouraging stat right there. I don't know why you're not able to use actual numbers instead of stretching crediblity by comparing the cheapset retail price of HD-DVD's least expensive player to the list price of BD's most expensive players.

I am using actual numbers. One is out and the other two are not. ;)

How much cheaper are those players going to get if and when they finally come out? Most places (amazon/BB/CC) don't even have them for sale. The Sony, also, is NOT discounted. It's still 1k.

The samsung is so bad that it's not even worth mentioning. No one's buying it and I suspect that once the others come out, they won't sell another.

And I'm still waiting for the answer to my other question.

Your rationale is amusing, but not convincing. I still don't see why you need to stretch the truth to support your "nearly triple the cost" argument, instead of going for the more reasonable "more than double the cost" statement. We're still talking hundreds of dollars here.

I don't own either format, and I don't plan to any time soon. For me they're too expnsive still, and I'm not convinced of either format winning the "war" right now. I have seen them in action though, and at the moment HD-DVD has the edge in cost and quality. I'm not ready yet to discount BD from the equation though, and I feel it's foolish to do so.

This is just speculation by an independent firm of the type that estimated Toshiba losing hundreds of dollars on each HD-DVD player sold.

From another article:
http://www.webwereld.nl/articles/425...shipments.html
"Mitsubishi UFJ Securities believes that supply problems for some electronics components used in the gaming machine will cause Sony to miss its target. The components in question were not identified."

They're basically guessing, and while it's an informed guess, it's not fact.

I don't think anyone has (on the HD DVD side). It's funny, though, because early on, EVERYONE on the BD side said that HD DVD was dead. I don't think anyone has said it about BD as of yet.

But just like the editor of the official playstation magazine says, who cares? She doesn't want a cheaper version of the newest movie machine, she wants a competitively priced gaming machine.

If the BR players are able to decode VC1, why are they not using it universally?

There is no PQ/AQ difference between the A1 and the XA1 and both have the same input/output (both have HDMI).

So it would be fair to compare price between the A1 and the PS3 (with HDMI). The PS3 with HDMI lists for $599. The A1 lists for $499.

Now the actual prices are going to be more interesting. The A1 can be had around $375 if you take advantage of some sales... if not it isn't hard to get one for $450. So $450 for the A1 is an actual after tax street price. Also, the XA1 was recently on sale for $699 delivered.

When do you suppose you'll be able to get a PS3 at a street price of < $450 including tax? For a good while into 2007 you won't find one for even the $599 list price. They'll probably still be more expensive than the XA1 @ $699 for a good while.

So HD DVD wins on price, too. Even over a highly subsidized BD "player". Oh, and I'm one of those who don't necessarily believe that the A1 is subsidized by Toshiba.

I'm not sure i understand your question.

WB wasn't using it because their first titles had already been done in MPEG2.

And Sony, well, we already know their problem.

Paramount, Fox and Disney are all supposed to be using VC1 on BD.

Plenty of people seem to. I don't think that anyone's been arguing that Sony is going to have a hard time selling the PS3s they make.

Why are you listing the Blu-ray players in American dollars but the HD DVD player in Canadian dollars?

MSRP of the HD-A1 is $499 USD and always has been.

Sure....at launch....in the long run though, they very well might due to the pricing.

My bad. I thought no one was using VC1 on BR for some reason. What is Sony's problem with it?

Microsoft makes it and they would rather rot in hell than pay them.


OH and an update. MI3 will be MPEG2 for paramount on BD. ;)

/sarcasm on....

nice lol, another BD movie that is going to look super stellar!

I had the opportunity to watch Benchwarmer's at Fry's on BD. All I could do when the salesman asked me...."sweet isn't it?" was reply "haha."

Z

I can't imagine Sony would put out an inferior product just because they are trying to keep from paying someone else.

:lol: I just posted that like I was serious.

"It's not inferior until we say it's inferior."

Well. I won a contest and got some money and this November,I'm buying a Playstation 3. So Damn it,Blu-Ray better be getting better,as HD-DVD is looking pretty good right now compared to Blu-Ray(IMO).

So I assume you're getting it to play games?

Edit: i wasn't being a smart-ass. It's a legitimate question.

Yes I'm getting it to play games(Hellboy,GTAIV,Star Wars:Next Gen,Marvel Ultimate Alliance). But it would be nice to know that Blu-Ray would be a nice deal sweetener,which right now it looks to be a high price for the losing HD System as a "bonus".

And you have reason to think this because?

It's just supposition that Sony is not currently using VC-1 because of animosity towards Microsoft. People have also supposed that Sony sticks to MPEG2 because of its own patents on the codec. The official Sony line is that they stuck with MPEG2 for their initial offerings because it's a codec they're familiar with and could guarantee quality from, while the other codecs were too new to work with at the time. The official line is called into question because HD-DVD managed to work with VC-1 within the same timespan, to an apparent advantage in quality over MPEG2. Thus, people start supposing what Sony's "true" motives were. Sony has hinted that shifting to another codec later on is a possibility.

Right, and it's just supposition that Sony's PS3 controller won't have rumble because they've lost a licensing lawsuit with Immersion, the company that owns the rumble technology used in all video game controllers. The official Sony line is that the rumble would adversely affect their motion sensing technology, even though the new Wii controller has far more sensitive motion sensing technology, rumble, and a speaker. And Immersion has said they have new, smaller rumble packs that would not in any way affect a motion sensor like the PS3 controller features.

But, hey, let's just give Sony the benefit of the doubt. I mean, they've proven themselves to only do what's best for the consumer in every situation, right?

The PS3 will, in the long run, drop in price. As will the 360 and HD-DVD and Blu-Ray players, and pretty much any consumer electronics device.

The question is, how quickly will it drop? It will be $600 through Christmas 2007. The earliest I could imagine any kind of price drop would be spring 2008. If the sales lag during 2007, it could do major damage to Sony.

Based on the reasoning that anyone spending $500-600 on a gaming system is doing so because of it's significant advantages over current systems, and the largest advancement the PS3 has over PS2 is image resolution. So one would assume that given the choice between hooking up their PS3 to an HDTV, or to their secondary SDTV, the majority are going to go for the HDTV.

If you have reasoning to think otherwise, please state it.

I have many reasons otherwise:

Some people like getting game stuff first, independent of the state of their home theater.

Some people just want to play the next Metal Gear Solid/Final Fantasy game.

Some people will buy it because it says Playstation.

Some people will buy it to sell it on ebay.

Some people will buy it for their kids, and not hook it up to their main TV (if they even have an HDTV).

Those are just a few reasons I can think of.

What would constitute lagging sales though? Only 4 million units sold? Only 2 million? That's still a significant number of PS3s that could potentially create regular BD consumers.

Ah, but the real question is, how many units PLUS attached media will it take to convince studios to stay exclusively with BD? Because Sony sold BD to the studios with the promise that the PS3 would boldly carry BD into everyone's home.

If the PS3 were $400 for the premium, then they might have been able to pull it off. As for now, I would be very hesistant to use the word "potential" when referring to anything about BD.

In the end, the point is, you could very well be right. But I could be just as right. And if I am, all of your arguments go right out the window.

If they even have motives. I stand by my supposition that Sony is just plain stupid. They take the easiest road to product development, and cheapest if possible, although the PS division seems to behave a bit differently than others on the cost issue.

They also think consumers are stupid, so they don't have any reason to not be stupid themselves. And, unfortunately, they are often correct.

The topic was of people who already have HDTVs putting the PS3 on a non-HDTV. So this reason doesn't apply.

Doesn't apply to attaching it to a non-HDTV though. They may only be wanting to play games, but if they have an HDTV they'll be wanting to play it on that.

So....they're not going to use it?

Not applicable, since the unit will eventually end up with an actual user, who is the person we're actually concerned about. You may as well have mentioned the original retailer, who is just going to let them languish unused in a box until someone else buys it.

.
A possibility, although $500-600 isn't money you just throw around; there'd have to be strong justifications for the upgrade, with a main one being increased resolution. And if it is an amount of money the parent can just throw at their kids, one would wonder at the state of their secondary TV.

Dude, I'm not going to argue this with you anymore. Clearly you are positive that the moment people open their PS3's, their first thoughts will be to run to Best Buy and purchase Blu-ray discs. I'm just trying to point out that your logic is really just your best guess, and there's no way we will know how people will react until the PS3 actually comes out. You could be right. But I could also be right. I'm going to leave it at that.

haven't been in this section for awhile. I see the "PS3 is going to sell a gagillion BD discs" stuff is still going on. oh well, I guess I'll check back in another month and see if anything changed then.

No idea. How many units plus attached media will it take to convince Universal to stay exclusively with HD-DVD, or better yet, to convince Universal to cover BD as well? I figure Columbia will stay BD exclusive until the bitter end.

I think raw sales will concern studios more than attachment rate. By the end of the year, HD-DVD's attachment rate will have to be 50-100 times better than just PS3's attachment rate for titles to match in sales.

Likewise with your arguments. I just assumed such an obvious observation was a given.