One million dollars worth of goods sold in Home so far
by Andrew Yoon 
{ Jan 9th 2009 at 2:00PM }
Sony is also looking into the value of user-generated content in Home. However, allowing users to create their own objects in Home will not only cut into Sony's bottom-line, but it will undoubtedly cause moderation migraines. Let's not forget that Second Life was once filled with flying penises.
[Via Joystiq]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
sean @ Jan 9th 2009 2:06PM
good job sony. gotta get your money back somehow with all the free online services
sean @ Jan 9th 2009 2:18PM
but you'll never catch me buying that crap.
MakaiOokami @ Jan 9th 2009 4:41PM
Well if you're not really willing to buy any of the stuff, that just means your ungrateful. After all you want a better network experience, you don't appreciate all the work that's gone in, the discount PSN titles that have become availaible, the cost savings you get for using wifi, the 50 dollars a year you don't have to pay for online gaming, etc...
I mean seriously if you're not willing to put in 5-10 dollars then you really don't care about the system or don't appreciate it. The 360 charges 50 dollars a year and people are complaining because some clothes cost 2 dollars or 50 cents. Sure they don't have a whole lot of free content, but there will be more once games like Namco Museum and other Home Related titles are released. You can always preorder killzone 2 from Amazon.
sean @ Jan 9th 2009 6:43PM
@MakaiOokami
so because i wont waste money on virtual clothes im ungrateful? first of all, what do i have to be grateful for? i payed 630 dollars for my system and over a grand on PS3 games,both retail and downloadable.
i think sony made a good decision by selling this stuff in home but im just not going to waste money on it. maybe after i buy real content that i can use and i have like 50 cents left over that i cant use on anything else ill buy a stupid ass shirt.
McManus @ Jan 11th 2009 4:20AM
dont forget Home has been branded an 80/20 game
its when 80% of the profit is generated by 20% of the players
ryuk @ Jan 9th 2009 2:10PM
wow, i honestly expected $100,000 dollars at most in the first month
francisco @ Jan 9th 2009 2:14PM
Wow didn't expect it. Good Job Home ^^
Kruegmeister @ Jan 9th 2009 2:15PM
Maybe Microsoft will take note and make Live free...
PSN: Aggie_CEO @ Jan 9th 2009 2:22PM
why?? its not the same thing........not to mention I'm sure they make more than a couple hundred million a month on Live Gold fees.....
R_Shackelford @ Jan 9th 2009 3:21PM
Hundreds of millions a month? You're sure? Wow.
Even under the absurdly generous assumption that all 17 million Live subscribers have full-priced gold accounts, that's only about $70mil a month.
Yay math.
tlarkin79 @ Jan 9th 2009 4:16PM
If these sales numbers continue, and this wasn't just a one off event, that might be true. I'm sure a lot of holiday items were purchased and many people won't be going out making those kinds of purchases consistantly.
It shows that a lot of people have money to burn, even in a tough economy.
Popfrogs @ Jan 9th 2009 7:24PM
$70mil/month that MS makes from advertising to Gold subscribers should just barely cover the replacement costs of RROD consoles. That's a solid business model right there.
PSN: Aggie_CEO @ Jan 11th 2009 10:36AM
@R_Shackelford: I"m also throwing in Purchases and fees they get from Advertising to those Gold Subscribers...
chode grinder @ Jan 9th 2009 2:16PM
Mmmmmmm, flying penises.
PSN: Aggie_CEO @ Jan 9th 2009 2:21PM
million in under a month!?!?!!?
would it be over guessing to say that it will hit $10-15 Million by years end
McManus @ Jan 11th 2009 4:16AM
no it wouldnt Home is only going to become more successful in the coming months if the beginning has proven anything to us
William @ Jan 9th 2009 2:22PM
Well, there goes all chances of sending Sony a message that their prices were too high for virtual goods that have no real use.
I've had paid $.10 for pieces of clothing, but $.50 is ridiculous and the more expensive things are insane. Guess I just won't be buying.
maxpontiac @ Jan 9th 2009 2:33PM
Yes.
Because how dare Sony attempt at making a company profitable, and it actually working.
JaffaBoy @ Jan 9th 2009 3:07PM
Yes maxpontiac but maybe they would make more from making these things real micro-payments (and generating more sales)
William wasn't saying they should be free... we all know that Sony is doing this to make money
Perhaps if we got to see the conversion rate but Sony ain't going to do that are they.
R_Shackelford @ Jan 9th 2009 3:19PM
Um... which is more profitable, 10,000 people buying a virtual shirt for $0.50, or 1,000,000 people buing a shirt for $0.10?
R_Shackelford @ Jan 9th 2009 3:19PM
Um, which is more profitable? 10,000 people buying a virtual hat for $0.50, or 1,000,000 people buying a virtual hat for $0.10?
Yay math.
JaffaBoy @ Jan 9th 2009 6:33PM
PMSL!...yay math indeed!
So yes, 50,001 @ $0.10 would be more profitable!
If we can get those 949,999 to cough up too, we'll really be in the money :-)
maxpontiac @ Jan 9th 2009 2:26PM
I am glad to see this working out for Sony so far.
After seeing the EA Sports Home space, I am even more optimistic over Home's success.
I do however expect a barrage of posts by some the readers stating --
"You people are idiots! Way to tell Sony it's ok to charge for clothes and stuff!"
For those who do embark on this oh-so-familiar endeavour, let me remind you of this --
YOU don't have to purchase anything if YOU don't want to.
What people spend THEIR money on, is THEIR business, not yours.
Patrick @ Jan 9th 2009 2:37PM
@maxpontiac
Your exactly right, I couldn't agree with you more.
McManus @ Jan 11th 2009 4:20AM
you are the 2nd most intelligent person here besides myself who realizes these things when they happen
frank @ Jan 9th 2009 2:45PM
I bet a high % of that revenue is from the Summer Houses and Clubhouses and not necessarily the items for sale
Gaucho @ Jan 9th 2009 2:47PM
aren't those free?
vaa112atpsu @ Jan 9th 2009 4:26PM
They were free during Closed Beta & I know a lot of people got them then including me because they knew Sony was going to jack up the price for it by a lot...
Gaucho @ Jan 9th 2009 2:46PM
I'm surprised that it made anywhere near that amount. Personally I don't find Home that entertaining but apparently a ton of people do. congrats to sony. it looks like all that time developing Home might eventually pay off :)
frank @ Jan 9th 2009 2:50PM
Summer Houses are $5 and Clubhouses are $5
Phunlee @ Jan 9th 2009 2:50PM
I'd love to see the price breakdown: lots of tiny purchases or a few high purchases?? I can't break down and buy anything 'virtually'. It just doesn't compute. I got the free Resident Evil tshirt. I'll never put it on my avatar, tho. It's hideous. Kind of like most free tshirts in real life.
MatthewJ @ Jan 9th 2009 2:51PM
I can kind of understand this, its really the brilliance of microtransactions. I've got my credit card linked to my PSN account and I've bought lots and lots of PSN games without ever really thinking about the prices, because they were only £2.99 and so on. It seems like such a small amount to pay for a bit of entertainment. Pricing useless bits of clothing at lower than a pound/dollar is extremely smart, because its such a low price that individually people might go "pfff, I'm only going to buy one or two of these things" but spread this out over several million users and you've got a big moneymaker on your hands.
I can't really even feel in any way mad about it either, because the items ARE priced low enough for it to not really matter at all to individual people.
Hopefully this will lead to Home expanding a lot quicker than expected, once people see the money they can make from it. If they were to introduce the user-created profiteering too, that would be brilliant.
JaffaBoy @ Jan 9th 2009 3:12PM
Yeah me too...for Games
But these are not micro-payments for virtual clothing and the like.
Compare how much effort it is to create a game and charge £3, but those sort of prices for virtual clothing...errr no thanks
MatthewJ @ Jan 9th 2009 3:29PM
yeah, but they AREN'T charging those sorts of pricing for virtual clothing, Santa outfits aside.
acedoh @ Jan 9th 2009 3:07PM
This is a good thing, a very good thing. Obviously by supporting HOME it will only make it better. More advertisers and companies will come to support it. We should see many more spaces over the coming months if this continues.
Rob Bourne @ Jan 9th 2009 3:15PM
Isn't Home still in beta? They should not be charging for stuff in a beta, it's disgusting.
Saying that, I'm actually shocked that they've made so much money on this. I'm also taken aback that there are so many people stupid enough to pay the prices charged for such trivial/pointless 'content'.
Charmless1 @ Jan 9th 2009 3:25PM
Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean the people doing it are stupid.
I say good for Sony and good for Home.
The more money they make the better it is for us.
Rob Bourne @ Jan 9th 2009 3:36PM
Oh I understand it perfectly, I just think it's a big waste of time and money. Paying for content for games, I can fathom, but paying for inanimate objects purely for decoration purposes - or pieces of clothing (and yes, XBL Avatars will get a sigh from me too when they start charging) - is pretty backwards.
It serves no purpose and I personally cannot see the sense in parting with my hard-earned for some irrelevant chair or t-shirt.
Different strokes though, it's just not for me.
Mr. Joe @ Jan 10th 2009 1:01PM
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3172097
this article is about why home may always say "beta." i hope it clears something up for ya.
Mukey @ Jan 9th 2009 8:23PM
I'm so glad that stupid people are supporting Sony this way so that they can keep the online gaming free. Anyone who pays for virtual content is an idiot
ChocoDK @ Jan 9th 2009 3:31PM
Wow the Summer House now costs $5USD. Well I am glad I still got mine when I downloaded it for free from the Closed Beta.
As for the 1mill that Sony is making, well congratulations to them. Hopefully this will finally help Sony profit from the PS3.
However, I won't be buying anything but am suprised at the amount of money they have made so far.
Leonsan @ Jan 9th 2009 3:32PM
Great Job, I'll probably be duped into buying some stuff sooner or later, but as to the problem of user generated stuff Sony should charge like .5 or .10cents on being able to publish items, maybe increasing depending on size, and if the publisher violates rules by making"flying penises" they won't be refunded and an account suspension is put in place.
Leonsan @ Jan 9th 2009 3:37PM
Well Home will always be in beta form because it'll keep expanding, that's what Jack Buser was trying to explain to people.
Matt @ Jan 9th 2009 3:49PM
Who the heck is buying all this junk like furniture and clothes on Home?
I can understand the odd shirt or whatever, but chairs, lamps, dressers and stuff?
Come on...
libertine07 @ Jan 9th 2009 4:39PM
It seems like this could be a good source of revenue for Sony with $1million in the first month..
Whos knows how much they've got from in-home advertisements as well.
Crimson_Ryan @ Jan 9th 2009 6:28PM
Charging for clothing on NXE avatars = Yay Microsoft.
Charging for clothing on avatars in Home = NOOOOO.
Something just doesn't compute. Either way, its cheap, so alot of people must be buying.
Rob Bourne @ Jan 10th 2009 12:34PM
I dunno who's in that frame of mind, yaying MS but booing Sony, but at the moment Avatar clothing is free so it's all good.
Not that I ever need to redress my avatar now he's all superfly in his tux and trilby :)
A few more free clothes on Home would be nice for those of us against paying for such things - the basic selection is very small and generic :(
CopaceticOpus @ Jan 9th 2009 7:07PM
I just don't understand it. You buy a pretend shirt, and then you stand around in a pretend room with other avatars and they look at your shirt?
I guess Home will be better when there is, you know, stuff to do. But even then, I'm not going to spend more than a few minutes playing mini-games when I have much better real games waiting to be played.
danitsu @ Jan 10th 2009 1:29AM
@ mukey
you said...
"I'm so glad that stupid people are supporting Sony this way so that they can keep the online gaming free. Anyone who pays for virtual content is an idiot"
your attitude stinks, you sound bitter is it because your to poor to buy dirt cheap "virtual content" atleast these people are gratefull enough to show support to sony for the amazing free service we get. if everyone had your attitude then home would fail straight away. im so glad stupid people like YOU are not supporting sony. and do people know how silly they sound b!tching about £00.79p or $00.79c, its an extremely small price to pay for what home will eventually become.
Chris @ Jan 10th 2009 5:31AM
The reason for Home is pure Genius. It allows people to have their "dream" Home virtually, at moderately well priced items. I think Sony hit Gold with this (literally) because if there were lets say 17million counsels out there in the world and one person buys an item of clothing for lets say a measly 0.50¢, Sony would make $8,500,000. THAT'S INSANITY.
This is also not anything new for all those people shocked at this. Just look at Neopets, they integrated pieces of clothing and those things sell like crazy because everyone loves to accessories and dress their pets; Sony just thrived on that and thought, well people want to dress and accessorize themselves, lets do it and have it be "remotely affordable." They knew people were going to want to buy stuff because everyone likes buying things. I think home is going to develop into and immense online world; the threshold of networking done right.
Well done Sony. I take my hat off to you. Now use that money and make us proud to be PlayStationers. (and develop a PSP 2 with built in HOME!!)