Sony : Playstation Network is not profitable.

[theNoid]

http://www.joystiq.com/2010/12/24/sonys-hirai-playstation-network-not-yet-profitable/

Sony has yet to make the free-to-use PlayStation Network profitable, Sony's Kazuo Hirai told Reuters Japan. However, he expects the PSN to start making money in the following fiscal year. According to the report, PSN sales nearly doubled in the closing fiscal year, reaching 36 billion yen. Looking forward three years, Hirai expects revenue to increase nearly tenfold, to 300 billion yen.

Yikes. I'm going to assume this includes PSN+ and Home since the article does not separate any portions of PSN out. Sony has some serious re-evaluating to do regarding PSN and its future.

 

[Plague_Injected]

Not sure whetehr it's the same in other territories, but the new Pac-Man goes for 800 MSPoints (about AUD$15), but is AUD$20 on the PSN. Makes me wonder if there are other price differences on other games/DLC where the PSN price is more expensive.

 

[Setan]

Yeah, they pumped a bunch of money into something new for them. I'm not surprised they are in the red because of it. Like the rest of your quote goes on to say, they expect to start making money on it, and most likely will. Isn't that just normal for any business plan...put money into development with hopes of that investment bringing a return in the future?

 

[next-Jin]

Yeah, they pumped a bunch of money into something new for them. I'm not surprised they are in the red because of it. Like the rest of your quote goes on to say, they expect to start making money on it, and most likely will. Isn't that just normal for any business plan...put money into development with hopes of that investment bringing a return in the future?

Sony JUST started PSN+. It is an extension of a free service. Of course its not profitable atm, they are testing the waters and want what MS has with Live.

"If Microsoft did not have Live who would seriously own a 360"

That quote is exactly what Sony is thinking. It's the only reason people still use the console. It's the only reason I still use mine, to chat with old friends while playing poker.

EDIT: And let me be clear much like I mentioned in the PSN vs Live thread, Live is a phenomenal service and it is integrated beautifully with the Dashboard. However it is indeed paid for, and the adoption rate for Live is almost 1:1 I'd imagine. If you have a 360 without Live you might as well throw it in the garbage. Sony is finally seeing this and PSN+ is them dipping their toes into the pool. Next gen they will more then likely have things a little more fleshed out.

 

[bigdogchris]

I expect Sony to have a totally revamped, feature rich, PSN in place by the time PS4 launches.

Sony JUST started PSN+. It is an extension of a free service. Of course its not profitable atm, they are testing the waters and want what MS has with Live.

"If Microsoft did not have Live who would seriously own a 360"

That quote is exactly what Sony is thinking. It's the only reason people still use the console. It's the only reason I still use mine, to chat with old friends while playing poker.

I agree with you on this. At first it was gamer score and now while that is still important, Live has taken over as 'the reason' most people buy 360's. As soon as PSN loses the label as 'not as good', then I would expect Sony to start selling more consoles in the US.

 

[next-Jin]

I expect Sony to have a totally revamped, feature rich, PSN in place by the time PS4 launches.I agree with you on this. At first it was gamer score and now while that is still important, Live has taken over as 'the reason' most people buy 360's. As soon as PSN loses the label as 'not as good', then I would expect Sony to start selling more consoles in the US.

It has more to it than "just" Live, Halo is a huge deal. It's on the level of Mario for the Wii. Sony doesn't really have a "mascot" or a game that is synonymous with the platform. They can't really have one to be frank, they have a god damned army of major titles.

Halo is why people buy the 360, Live is the reason they stick with it after an RROD.

 

[bigdogchris]

Halo is why people buy the 360, Live is the reason they stick with it after an RROD.

That argument has merit but I don't totally agree with it. My 8 year old nephew was begging for a 360 for Halo Reach (which his grandma got for him). I know a lot of 360 fanbois who don't play Halo though. It is definitely one of the reasons.

 

[next-Jin]

That argument has merit but I don't totally agree with it. My 8 year old nephew was begging for a 360 for Halo Reach (which his grandma got for him). I know a lot of 360 fanbois who don't play Halo though. It is definitely one of the reasons.

It's the only title they can play other than whats already on the PS3, being a fan of the console and saying it's because of Mass Effect 2, Black Ops, or Red Dead Redemption doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I'm sure people say they play 360 because of Call of Duty but then it's not really about Call of Duty anymore, it's about Live's integration.

It always falls back on Halo and Live, I'll give honorable mention to Gears and Forza though. Hell Gears was originally why I bought my 360 years ago.

 

[Tigerblade]

It's the only title they can play other than whats already on the PS3, being a fan of the console and saying it's because of Mass Effect 2, Black Ops, or Red Dead Redemption doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I'm sure people say they play 360 because of Call of Duty but then it's not really about Call of Duty anymore, it's about Live's integration.

It always falls back on Halo and Live, I'll give honorable mention to Gears and Forza though. Hell Gears was originally why I bought my 360 years ago.

Gears/L4D are the reasons I bought a slim, couldn't give a toss about Halo.

 

[450]

As soon as PSN loses the label as 'not as good', then I would expect Sony to start selling more consoles in the US.

Its sad that its taken Sony so long to put something into action. The PS3 has been on the market for 4 years now.

 

[next-Jin]

Its sad that its taken Sony so long to put something into action. The PS3 has been on the market for 4 years now.

Put what into action? There is nothing about PSN+ that benefits online gamers other than cheaper DLC. I have Playstation Plus and there is nothing there for me other than a few "perks" like Qore, Hulu Plus (access), cheaper DLC, and some free PS1 games.

They are not changing PSN in anyway, they are just saying they will start turning a profit on it now. It makes sense they would as the userbase grows because of declining console prices and the use of PSN+

In fact, it should be a testament that Sony can actually turn a profit at all with a free to play service. Microsoft charges 60 a year for millions of people and when they release a statement saying "Xbox Live is profitable" somehow it's a suprise. Microsoft has been developing Xbox Live (A giant software company putting huge resources into a project continuously for years) since November 2002.....

 

[Baker]

http://www.joystiq.com/2010/12/24/sonys-hirai-playstation-network-not-yet-profitable/



Yikes. I'm going to assume this includes PSN+ and Home since the article does not separate any portions of PSN out. Sony has some serious re-evaluating to do regarding PSN and its future.

Did you even read the last sentence of your own quote?

According to the report, PSN sales nearly doubled in the closing fiscal year, reaching 36 billion yen. Looking forward three years, Hirai expects revenue to increase nearly tenfold, to 300 billion yen.

 

[theNoid]

Yeah, they pumped a bunch of money into something new for them. I'm not surprised they are in the red because of it. Like the rest of your quote goes on to say, they expect to start making money on it, and most likely will. Isn't that just normal for any business plan...put money into development with hopes of that investment bringing a return in the future?

Very true, very true. However in comparison, MS made over $750 Million in just Live subscriptions alone in 2010. That does not include digital content purchases, games, movies, etc.. Just subscriptions. So while Sony is looking forward to hopefully one day soon not lose money, MS is wiping their ass with it.

Sony see this, and would probably love to charge for their service. I would gather doing so would kill a major selling point for their console so I don't expect them to charge going forward. That said, if they do... I would not be surprised.

Did you even read the last sentence of your own quote?

1. Looking forward 3 years and guessing does not equal happening
2. 300 Billion yen isn't that much. Thats 361 million US dollars, which would be less than half of what MS is reporting on JUST subscriptions alone for 2010. It pales in comparison and a large chunk of that goes back into operational costs for managing the infrastructure. I do that for a living, and if my companies annual budget is 15 million to manage our 500 server 2 site setup, I could only imagine what that must cost both Sony and MS on a global scale. 300 Billion yen isn't that much if thats total PSN revenue. We could play the guessing game all day, and one could deduce that MS may very well be generating over $1 Billion in just subscriptions by then.. but I won't say that because guessing is pointless. Sony is pandering to share holders, I can't say I blame them.
3. Yen is weak
4. Look at 1.

Yes I read my own quote. Sony is losing money (never made any) on PSN and is guessing that one day they'll make some. Toss in some MAKE.BELIEVE (see what I did there?) numbers and youve got yourself a PR statement.

 

[pigpen]

Can somebody explain to me how it works? I just got one last night and if i try to sign up and it keeps telling me i have to update. Why would i have to update?

 

[Setan]

1. Looking forward 3 years and guessing does not equal happening

Just as stupid as comparing a service that's had two console lifecycles of maturity, to one that's in it's infancy.

Live is doing great for MS, good for them. PSN is on track to do great for Sony, good for them. I say /thread to this worthless flamebait posting.

 

[NSCTripleAgent]

Sony JUST started PSN+. It is an extension of a free service. Of course its not profitable atm, they are testing the waters and want what MS has with Live.

"If Microsoft did not have Live who would seriously own a 360"

That quote is exactly what Sony is thinking. It's the only reason people still use the console. It's the only reason I still use mine, to chat with old friends while playing poker.

EDIT: And let me be clear much like I mentioned in the PSN vs Live thread, Live is a phenomenal service and it is integrated beautifully with the Dashboard. However it is indeed paid for, and the adoption rate for Live is almost 1:1 I'd imagine. If you have a 360 without Live you might as well throw it in the garbage. Sony is finally seeing this and PSN+ is them dipping their toes into the pool. Next gen they will more then likely have things a little more fleshed out.

Speak for yourself. Live is a huge part of the puzzle, but is far from the only reason to own a 360. There are enough good retail and XBLA games to keep the average gamer entertained until the next round of consoles come around. Saving it from the RROD debacle...I'll entertain that, but aside from that, MS has done an infinitely better job this generation, Sony blew their lead, and it is what it is.

I could make some equally nonsensical statement why there's no good reason, or only one reason to own a PS3, but for what?

 

[munkle]

I own a 360 for the media center extender, and halo. So far there isn't anything that will do what media center extender does ( live and recorded tv to various tv's from one pc).

 

[Tigerblade]

Sony blew their lead, and it is what it is.

Not to turn this thread sour but I thought the gap wasn't that big between the PS3 and 360 now? Considering the 360 is a year older etc etc

The race for second place is by no means set in stone.

 

[SPARTAN VI]

Put what into action? There is nothing about PSN+ that benefits online gamers other than cheaper DLC. I have Playstation Plus and there is nothing there for me other than a few "perks" like Qore, Hulu Plus (access), cheaper DLC, and some free PS1 games.

They are not changing PSN in anyway, they are just saying they will start turning a profit on it now. It makes sense they would as the userbase grows because of declining console prices and the use of PSN+

In fact, it should be a testament that Sony can actually turn a profit at all with a free to play service. Microsoft charges 60 a year for millions of people and when they release a statement saying "Xbox Live is profitable" somehow it's a suprise. Microsoft has been developing Xbox Live (A giant software company putting huge resources into a project continuously for years) since November 2002.....

Indeed, X360 is worth almost nothing to me without XBL. I go where my friends go. Had they gotten a PS3 too, I would be expressing an entirely different set of joys and frustrations with PSN. As it is, short of Demon's Souls and Fat Princess, I've got no business on PSN.

Other than that, I find it a bit funny that Sony is suddenly the underdog in this arena. Microsoft is relatively new to this market; why did Sony let them get the jump on centralized online multiplayer...?

 

[next-Jin]

Speak for yourself. Live is a huge part of the puzzle, but is far from the only reason to own a 360. There are enough good retail and XBLA games to keep the average gamer entertained until the next round of consoles come around. Saving it from the RROD debacle...I'll entertain that, but aside from that, MS has done an infinitely better job this generation, Sony blew their lead, and it is what it is.

I could make some equally nonsensical statement why there's no good reason, or only one reason to own a PS3, but for what?

I agree with Live being a huge part of the experience and that there are other reasons to own a 360. You have a couple exclusives and a few must haves on Live, I've never disagreed with that. But I believe your comparing the two only in the US market, if you look at things globally it looks much more even. Then of course you have RROD repurchases (I'm not even going to speculate the number there but it has to be large), and the year head start. It's very interesting because Sony initially released at 600 USD.

No matter who you are you have to recognize that as an accomplishment, this generation's race is still very much up for grabs and if history repeats it's self Sony will support the PS3 long after Microsoft abandons the 360 for their next console.

I'd be interested to see the equally nonsensical argument why there is no good reason, or only one reason to own a PS3.

 

[NSCTripleAgent]

Not to turn this thread sour but I thought the gap wasn't that big between the PS3 and 360 now? Considering the 360 is a year older etc etc

The race for second place is by no means set in stone.

I meant from the previous generation, that should have been clearer.

I agree with Live being a huge part of the experience and that there are other reasons to own a 360. You have a couple exclusives and a few must haves on Live, I've never disagreed with that. But I believe your comparing the two only in the US market, if you look at things globally it looks much more even. Then of course you have RROD repurchases (I'm not even going to speculate the number there but it has to be large), and the year head start. It's very interesting because Sony initially released at 600 USD.

No matter who you are you have to recognize that as an accomplishment, this generation's race is still very much up for grabs and if history repeats it's self Sony will support the PS3 long after Microsoft abandons the 360 for their next console.

I'd be interested to see the equally nonsensical argument why there is no good reason, or only one reason to own a PS3.

You're not getting my point, which is: fanboyish arguing and speculation/opinion is pointless, stop making up nonsense and enjoy your games. I don't want to make up crap on the PS3, I have no interest in one, but if it works for you, awesome.

 

[next-Jin]

I meant from the previous generation, that should have been clearer.



You're not getting my point, which is: fanboyish arguing and speculation/opinion is pointless, stop making up nonsense and enjoy your games. I don't want to make up crap on the PS3, I have no interest in one, but if it works for you, awesome.

What did I or anyone else make up? I am not the one who posts the anti Sony hate with every thread they publish or praise the 360. I argue the merits of both and have been for awhile. Its just that here lately since things are looking much better for Sony the bs meter is through the roof especially from people like thyRoid.

 

[refraxion]

What did I or anyone else make up? I am not the one who posts the anti Sony hate with every thread they publish or praise the 360. I argue the merits of both and have been for awhile. Its just that here lately since things are looking much better for Sony the bs meter is through the roof especially from people like thyRoid.

I agree, why is it always someone who just owns 1 system (360 or PS3) that makes a thread "appearing" to be objective in their posts but you know they are just so hungry to post anything negative towards a system/ console they don't own or dislike?

Seems like a cheap pot shot at something, and I won't name any names but I have seen my fair share of certain posters just waiting for a chance to bash a certain system or try to glorify their own in almost every post in the console sub-forum.

 

[next-Jin]

I agree, why is it always someone who just owns 1 system (360 or PS3) that makes a thread "appearing" to be objective in their posts but you know they are just so hungry to post anything negative towards a system/ console they don't own or dislike?

Seems like a cheap pot shot at something, and I won't name any names

http://hardforum.com/search.php?searchid=16082606

You don't have too.

 

[Cataulin]

Live is fun and all but I dont use or pay for it. As long as I have the trickle of Co-op games me and my wife will be fine.

 

[Setan]

I agree, why is it always someone who just owns 1 system (360 or PS3) that makes a thread "appearing" to be objective in their posts but you know they are just so hungry to post anything negative towards a system/ console they don't own or dislike?

Seems like a cheap pot shot at something, and I won't name any names but I have seen my fair share of certain posters just waiting for a chance to bash a certain system or try to glorify their own in almost every post in the console sub-forum.

You hit the nail on the head.