Activision Blizzard’s Bobby Kotick says they ‘might have to stop supporting Sony’.


Bobby Kotick has warned that Sony risks losing support of the mega publisher unless it decides to issue a price cut for the PlayStation 3.

“They have to cut the price, because if they don’t, the attach rates [the number of games each console owner buys] are likely to slow. If we are being realistic, we might have to stop supporting Sony,” Kotick told the Times Online.

When prompted as to when the firm may consider dropping support for Sony, the executive added: “When we look at 2010 and 2011, we might want to consider if we support the console — and the PSP [portable] too.”

“Games generate a better return on invested capital on the Xbox than on the PlayStation,” he said.

Kotick went on to say that his company forked out $500 million to Sony in royalties and other goods back in 2008, which he said “probably still worked out at 400 percent of the profit they made”.

Shortly after this statement their stock drop 1.18% costing them over a billion dollars. Hmm..

For the first quarter ’09  Ubisoft posted 15% of sales were for 360 and PS3.  Namco reportedly made more on Sony’s systems combined than the Xbox for fiscal year ’08-’09.

 Playstation 3 – 3.273 million, Playstation 2 – 4.630 million units sold,PSP – 4.202 million units sold ,Xbox 360 – 2.704 million units sold) .

Sales of MGS4 boosted Konami’s profits for 2 quarters on a system that was the highest priced and boosted the sales of the PS3 over the 360 for 2 months. So is the XBox brand really more profitable than the Playstation at this point? I don’t think so.


Written by: Sakinah - Contributing Editor


,

  1. #1 by TCCCCnME on June 19th, 2009

    Whose stock Activision or Sony?

  2. #2 by Fleakitten on June 19th, 2009

    Activisions.

  3. #3 by Blackstaffer on June 19th, 2009 [ 7211 Points ]

    These statements don’t even make sense. Why would the attach rates fall?

    Each individual gamer will not change how many titles they buy just because the console’s price is high. More likely would be that the total number of PS3′s sold will fall, resulting in total fewer sales of a given game.

  4. #4 by Fleakitten on June 19th, 2009

    All they see is the millions of hardware the 360 has pushed while conviently forgetting those millions include RROD 360s as well.

    Sony, on the other hand, makes more reliable systems. If you buy 1 PS3 that’s all you’ll need in most cases.

    In the end though, I think Kotick is bluffing. But if not, I’ll always have RockBand.

  5. #5 by Rob on June 19th, 2009

    Bluff. Why is he so insistent to run Sony’s business? Run your own. Same stupid company suing EA over the rights to Brutal Legend cause they let it go prematurely due to not being able to make it a recurring franchise. Kotick’s gotta go. Sony should rebuttal saying they’ll cut the price of the PS3 upon removal of Kotick.

  6. #6 by Ian on June 19th, 2009

    No offensive, but do you have a source for the stock drop?

  7. #7 by Ian on June 19th, 2009

    I so meant to say “no offense”.

  8. #8 by Darrin on June 19th, 2009

    Stop supporting Sony? They make more money off of Sony platforms than either Microsoft or Nintendo.

    Activision Net Revenue for fiscal year 2008
    $241 million PS3
    $284 million PS2
    $361 million 360
    $407 million Wii
    $1152 million MMO

    Why would the Activision CEO so publically bad mouth a partner like that?

    Also, is it just coincidence that EA CEO said something like this, when he blamed EA’s financial problems on the PS3.

    Sony is right to avoid comment on verbal attacks like that.

  9. #9 by Trieloth on June 19th, 2009

    *facepalm Multiplats is where the money is at , am I right? They must not like money…stupid retards.
    People will NEVER be happy with the price till it hits $200 bucks. And it will be a long time before that happens. People must forget about that it has a Blu-ray player, sigh.

  10. #10 by Fleakitten on June 19th, 2009

    @ Ian, You can view the stock online. It’s currently trading higher now. Rats!

  11. #11 by ehandlr on June 19th, 2009 [ 44542 Points ]

    The problem is Kotick tends to fly off about the mouth alot. Here is what he has said before

    “Kotick- In responding to why Activision Blizzard chose not to publish certain games, he implied the company is not interested in games that “don’t have the potential to be exploited every year on every platform with clear sequel potential and have the potential to become $100 million franchises.”

    All in all its not even a bluff…but he is the first guy that says something to incite a riot. he wants the consumers riled up so that Sony has no choice.

    Although Activision will never stop making PS3 games.

  12. #12 by Falafelkid on June 20th, 2009

    With all due respect to you people and the PlayStation brand (market leader for two consecutive generations), Kotick is a businessman and the article’s author and some commentators don’t appear to understand some fundamentals of economics.

    Kotick isn’t talking about revenue. We all know revenue is fine on some of Activision’s PS3 titles. He’s talking profits and has given us a clue about how expensive development is for the PS3 and much Sony is taking in license fees. The worst install base of this generation (at perhaps a little over 20 million) and the highest price tag aren’t helping either and, obviously, without the latter coming down, the former is not about to shoot up.

    Kotick’s intention may be to force Stringer to lower the price tag but I wouldn’t call it a bluff. Stringer has clearly said that profitability is his main goal, which means no PS3 price cut for some time. And if there is none until 2010, Kotick could well drop the PlayStation platforms. EA dropped the Dreamcast when other publishers were still making money on the platform. I wouldn’t rule out that Kotick will put his money where is mouth is, should he not see profit improve.

  13. #13 by ehandlr on June 22nd, 2009 [ 44542 Points ]

    Developing a multiplatform title result in minimal costs in porting to the PS3. A common myth of developing costs is the PS3 costs so much more to develop for and that is just false. It does cost “more”…but the difference is almost not even noteworthy. On multiplatform games the fact is just porting further removes this cost in adding the PS3. this has been said by several 3rd party devs already.

    The difference in install base between the 360 and the PS3 is less then 8 million. Far less then the difference between the PS2 and Xbox.

    But one thing we can all agree with is the PS3 does need a price drop. I don’t think anyone will argue that and industry sources are pointing towards a holiday price drop with an announcement of the PS3 Slim.


You must be logged in to post a comment.

Like trophies? Like giveaways? Want to speak your mind? Register here!