PS 3 80 gig for $250.00 at sonystyle

[Kangum]

sony is having a deal where you get 150.00 refund for your first purchase at sonystyle using the sonystyle credit card. you also get free shipping on 100.00 purchases or more.

so if you pick up a 80 gig ps 3 you can get it for 250.00

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/StoreCatalogDisplay?langId=-1&storeId=10151&catalogId=10551


the ps 3 is listed under blueray players.  cheers.

[somunny]

Sonystyle runs this deal quite a bit.

[ChadTower]

A subsidized deal to get you to open a new credit card.  What is unusual about that?  Happens all the time.  Free cell phones aren't free and neither is satellite TV hardware.

[shardian]

$150 off is probably the best credit card offers I've ever seen. Usually credit card offers average $30 or so as a signing bonus.

[ChadTower]

Actually, it's not too big a deal in the higher tiers of credit card.  It all depends if this is a run of the mill credit card or one of the type that regular people don't normally carry.  You'd have to look at the qualifying requirements.

[SithMaster]

Doesn't the banner ad for the 150 credit say its awarded after a qualifying purchase?  So don't you have to buy something, receive the credit, and then use that credit towards the PS3 thereby making the 150 credit not really 150 since you bought something to get the credit?

[Kangum]

you buy the ps 3 with the credit card. they credit you 150 within 8 - 12 weeks. so your paying off 250 off the card.

its all in  the fine print

[NipRing]

Is this the new non BC 80gb SKU?

[Kangum]

Is this the new non BC 80gb SKU?

yea. no backwards compatibility with the ps 2. all 80 gigs in circulation now are this way. this is why the price dropped from 499 to 399. its basically the 40 gig with an 80 gig hard drive. the new 160 comming soon will also have no backwards compatibility with ps 2.

if you manage to find a metal gear solid bundle then you would get the ps 2 backwards compatibility

[shmokes]

Keep in mind, this is not like giving you a $150 signing bonus.  It's a $150 rebate on Sony branded stuff purchased from a Sony store.  I mean, for the customer who wants a PS3 or other things from the Sony store, this is as good as $150 off, but it's not like Sony actually loses $150 on the deal the way they would if they were giving you $150 back on your first purchase of any product from a store of your choosing.

[Dartful Dodger]

Be sure to pay off the card as soon as you get the statement.

I'm assuming Sony is hoping that the people doing this are the people who can't afford a $250.00 PS3 in the first place so they'll end up paying the full price after they've added up all the interest.

[Kangum]

Im pretty sure this deal will be dead oct 23rd.

[shmokes]

Don't do it.  It's a retarded reason to get another credit card.  This is a deal for suckers.

[Flake]

No, Sony is doing this as an accounting trick to shuffle money on their income statements - they're mitigating PS3 losses by showing increased income on their credit card accounts.

It smacks of sales desperation to me.   

Actually, most companies report sales as net sales which means gross sales less an allowance for returns, rebates, etc.  So the $250 net sales price will be the accumulated total reported in net sales.

[Edgedamage]

No, Sony is doing this as an accounting trick to shuffle money on their income statements - they're mitigating PS3 losses by showing increased income on their credit card accounts.

It smacks of sales desperation to me.   

Ok three posts in this thread, and you still have not made a valid point. At least troll with some style.

[Flake]

Actually, most companies report sales as net sales which means gross sales less an allowance for returns, rebates, etc.  So the $250 net sales price will be the accumulated total reported in net sales.

I haven't glanced at Sony income statements, but I'd assume that they treat their Sony Style stores and Playstation concerns as separate entities.  Selling a PS3 for $250 is a way to shuffle a loss from one entity to another.

Sony, like all publically traded entities, reports sales on a consolidated basis meaning all their interests are combined into one sales number on their income statement.  At most they may report two or three different sales categories but all those are still "net" sales numbers.  They may be able to play around with the numbers for internal reporting purposes but the only thing that matters is publically released information and that is based on consolidated information.

[ChadTower]

...and you have to stop thinking like American businesses.  Sony is Japanese and they play with very different internal rules.

[Flake]

...and you have to stop thinking like American businesses.  Sony is Japanese and they play with very different internal rules.

Sony is publically traded in the US and that means they have to comply with generally accepted accounting principles so the fact that they were founded in Japan is irrelevant.

Also, Pinball, I did state earlier that they may be able to use this tactic for internal reporting purposes.  I was thinking you were talking about Sony reporting on a consolidated level.

[ChadTower]

Sony is publically traded in the US and that means they have to comply with generally accepted accounting principles so the fact that they were founded in Japan is irrelevant.

What they're doing is a generally accepted principle.  It's not a good one but those principles don't say anything about best practice. 

[Dartful Dodger]

Yes, it has no effect on net, but it does make PS/3 look stronger at the expense of the stores and there would be no way to detect this from public documents. 

I think Microsoft has one or two other sources of income besides the Xbox.

But since Microsoft is above manipulating sales of one product to make another product look better I can understand why people beleive the Xbox is the more profitable product.

[Dartful Dodger]

Well, all this navel gazing aside, wandering through two PS/3 sections felt like being in a Sega Saturn section 10 years ago.  I think that says it all, really.

The Blu-ray videos section is equal or less than the VHS section.

According to you that would mean VHS is equal to Blu-ray.

I think that really says it all about your observations.

[Hoagie_one]

Wonder if the sony ebook reader counts?

hmmm

[DaveMMR]

Well, all this navel gazing aside, wandering through two PS/3 sections felt like being in a Sega Saturn section 10 years ago.  I think that says it all, really.

The Blu-ray videos section is equal or less than the VHS section.

According to you that would mean VHS is equal to Blu-ray.

I think that really says it all about your observations.

No, I think I see PinballJim's point (note to self: "I do?!")  He's comparing the sales floor space of three current generation pieces of hardware (which is very unlike comparing the floor space of a very old format with a very new format).  It's not a secret that Sony is in third place, so I could have saved Jim a trip to the electronics store - but yes, less people own a PS3 (than compared to 360 and Wii sales) so stores dedicate less space to it.   It has nothing to do with the quality of one company's product over another. 

[Dartful Dodger]

less people own a PS3 (than compared to 360 and Wii sales) so stores dedicate less space to it.   It has nothing to do with the quality of one company's product over another. 

Less people own a Blu-ray (than compared to VHS and (even)Beta sales).

Right now only good movies or movies people will want to own are being put on Blu-ray.

Once Blu-Ray starts making a profit Sony will be able to afford to churn out as many low quality games and gadgets as Microsoft does for its Xbox using profits from its Windows products.

For now PS3 owners will have to settle for quality over quantity.

[ChadTower]

If Blu-Ray starts making a profit Sony will be able to afford to churn out as many low quality games and gadgets as Microsoft does for its Xbox using profits from its Windows products.

Fixt.  That's a pretty big if.  I don't know many people who are out there clamoring for more Blu-Ray.  Hell half the people I know with HDTVs couldn't spot the difference between SD and Blu-Ray unless you put them side by side.  And since you can get an upconverting DVD player that does a pretty decent job of making up the difference it is far from a foregone conclusion that Blu-Ray will ever be a dominant format.  There is no killer quality increase from DVD to Blu-Ray the way there was from VHS to DVD.

[Dartful Dodger]

If Blu-Ray starts making a profit Sony will be able to afford to churn out as many low quality games and gadgets as Microsoft does for its Xbox using profits from its Windows products.

Fixt.  That's a pretty big if.  I don't know many people who are out there clamoring for more Blu-Ray.  Hell half the people I know with HDTVs couldn't spot the difference between SD and Blu-Ray unless you put them side by side.  And since you can get an upconverting DVD player that does a pretty decent job of making up the difference it is far from a foregone conclusion that Blu-Ray will ever be a dominant format.  There is no killer quality increase from DVD to Blu-Ray the way there was from VHS to DVD.

I sometimes have to author/program DVDs so my company had me sit through a Blu-Ray authoring seminar yesterday.

I rent Blu-ray disks when the DVD version is out because I thought the only difference in DVDs and Blu-rays is that I can make copies of DVDs.
Since I don’t have a Blue ray remote all I could do was watch the movie and the extra, the typical nonsense you get on a DVD.

Because of the seminar I’m going to start renting more Blu-rays(plus the last 2 DVDs I rented I couldn’t burn).

Blu-ray has 100 times more to offer and it looks like it's 100s easier to author in.

Authoring a DVD to do more than just play a movie is a pain in the butt. With a Blu-ray it's a piece of cake.

[ChadTower]

How many people do you know that buy DVDs have ever even thought about authoring their own?

I suspect by the time people are really motivated to move en masse to a format better than DVD that Blu-Ray will be surpassed too.

[DaveMMR]

  There is no killer quality increase from DVD to Blu-Ray the way there was from VHS to DVD.

I have the sneakiest suspicion that a lot of people that adopted the DVD format were in it for more than just quality.  Sure, it was a nice bonus - but VHS (and VCR's), by design, were always a pain in the ass.   You had to rewind the tapes, you couldn't jump around, they had this nasty habit of breaking, you had to fiddle with the tracking, etc.  It didn't hurt that DVD players and the discs themselves were eventually priced to move (unlike Laserdiscs). 

I'm going out a limb saying that if the only improvement between VHS and DVD was quality, we'd still be renting tapes instead of discs. 

On the flip side, Blu-Ray players are coming down in price enough where anyone in the market for a new player might spend a little extra coin to get the higher quality.  I'm on the fence here - so I'm just sitting back with a wait and see attitude. 

[Edgedamage]

How does one tell when they have reached adulthood? They don't care about sales numbers, they just enjoy the system they bought.

[Necroticart]

If anyone is on the fence about buying the PS3 don't hesitate the PS3 is the best console I have ever owned and yes I did have an Xbox360 and got the rrod 3 times due to Microsoft's faulty manufacturing process. Sony has built an amazing system deal or not it's worth a purchase and on the HD side of things It is the best blu-ray player on the market via the firmware updates as for all those people saying that their is no noticeable difference in quality between blu-ray and DVD they need to get their eyes checked.  Anyone that has seen Tranformers or Iron man in blu-ray knows the difference. As for games the PS3 is King with titles like MSG4, R2, and Uncharted as for the 360's Gears of War what a joke don't get me wrong it's a great game it's made by epic ie Cliffy B but it could be done on the PS3 much better given the storage on a Blu-ray disc and the fact we have seen the unreal engine run on the PS3 is proof of it. also A side note if anyone likes social networking wait till you see HOME in action It will blow every one away I'm not going to say any more as I might break the NDA and I don't want to do that considering how neat the beta is well anyway I hope my long rant has helped someone make the jump you will not be disappointed.

[Todd H]

How does one tell when they have reached adulthood? They don't care about sales numbers, they just enjoy the system they bought.

Ding...ding...ding. We have a winner.

Seriously, I don't think I've argued about which system was the best since I owned an Amiga 500 back in my youth. Can't believe people still argue over this crap.

[Hoopz]

Seriously, I don't think I've argued about which system was the best since I owned an Amiga 500 back in my youth. Can't believe people still argue over this crap.

Intellivision, hands down, was and still is the best console system ever.  The rest are just arguing about second place.

 

 

[ChadTower]

Sometimes I think DVD wasn't THAT much of an upgrade.  Sure, it's got a better picture and all that, but when did you ever have a VHS tape skip and freeze?

I had far less trouble with VHS than I've had with DVD.  I ended up moving to streaming pretty much only because every time I rent a DVD it's beaten to crap.  Netflix used to deliver DVDs in pieces - Blockbuster would deliver them so I'd watch the first 90 minutes and then it would be unplayable for the ending.  I went through 5-6 DVD players, they're mostly all disposable junk.  I never had any of those issues with VHS.  I went through two VCRs in ten years and I used them several hours a day.

I was excited when I did finally move to DVD beacuse of the 5.1 sound... and then found that it really wasn't as big a jump over PLII from a decent VHS tape than I thought it would be.

[Flake]

Are you kidding me DVD isnt a big upgrade over VHS?  Jesus you people are ridiculously particular and must have cataracts or something.  DVD has better PQ, better navigation and my experience with DVD players has been much more reliable than with VHS.  I have 3 DVD players.  One I got for free about 5 years ago for switching to Directv.  It was a crappy Go Video brand and still functions well to this day.  Another 5-disc Sony I bought about 8 years ago and it still functions perfectly.  Finally, I bought a upconverting Sony about 1.5-2 years ago, which also plays mp3's, and it works great with great PQ.  Never had any issues with any of them.  They are all setup and still functioning perfectly.

My wife bought a old VHS player from a yard sale last spring to play all the VHS movies she bought at another yard sale for our 2 year old daughter.  When I put in the tapes for her to watch and look at the PQ the difference is absolutely noticeable.

Also, I dont have a Blu-Ray player yet but I have seen them function on other setups and I would agree with an earlier poster that if you cant tell the difference you need your eyes checked.  I will be getting one sometime soon.   

[ChadTower]

You have to keep in mind the average person, and this applies more and more as you move forward in age, doesn't care nearly as much about the difference in picture quality from 480p to 1080p.  And they don't have a 60" television to make it an issue.

I definitely see and understand the difference.  I just don't care.  It's not enough for me to reinvest in all this stuff again.  An upconverted DivX through XBMC does 85% of the work at little cost.

[Flake]

Invest in what stuff?  You cant hardly buy a new TV today without it having 1080p capabillity and you can get a blu-ray player for $130 now.

Now I agree if you have a fully functioning TV right now thats not 1080p capable then it would most likely be silly to go out and buy a new one just to have that technology but once you feel compelled to replace your existing TV, the decision to "invest" or not in a 1080p TV isnt really an option.  If you already have 1080p technology then spending $130 on a Blu-ray player isnt much of an "investment" IMO.  You could just ask for one for X-mas if you dont want to spend the money on one.

[ChadTower]

I have several LCDs and none of them are 1080p.  They are 1080i at best and native resolution is closer to 720p.  It all depends on when you bought the TV.  People still consider a TV a ten year appliance.

$130 for the jump from DVD to Blu-Ray?  No thanks.  The difference between DVD and Blu-Ray on a 32" TV isn't nearly worth $130 plus the cost difference between DVDs and Blu-Ray discs.  Especially when you can upconvert, making up most of the difference, for so much less.

Even with all that there is a line somewhere at which most people just don't need that much more quality.  That line seems to be around DVD quality.  If the line were higher we wouldn't even be having the "when Blu-Ray becomes profitable" discussion.  It would already be profitable.

[Flake]

Well notice I said "You cant hardly buy a new TV TODAY".  If you already have LCD TV's that are only 1080i then you have purchased fairly recently and shouldnt spend the money on a new 1080p capable tv.  I'm really talking about those who are upgrading from SD TV's RIGHT NOW.

And yes I also agree that a blu-ray player for a 32" makes no sense.  I would only consider getting a blu-ray player for a 50"+ tv.  I suppose my argument about "investment" assumed that if you have a 1080p TV the picture size is 50"+.

So allow me some clarification...........If you have already have a 50"+ 1080p TV then I think $130 for a blu-ray player isnt that big of a deal.

If you have a working TV that is not 1080p and have no desire to upgrade your TV then this negates all arguments.

If you DO have interest in purchasing a new TV because either your old one is shot or you finished your basement or something then "investing" in a 1080p TV is not a big deal because most TV's now are 1080p anyway.

[ChadTower]

We're pretty much on the same page about a lot of that.   

[ChadTower]

Yeah, well, I'll switch to HD when my 27" Panasonic CRT croaks.

So... 2015?

Heh, that's exactly what I said for years.  My 27" Panasonic croaked last year after about 9 years.  It actually just needed a cap kit, probably, but I wasn't going to bother.  It was only a little off.  I couldn't even give it away and had to recycle the thing.