US law in that area looks more at consumer harm, not incidental harm to other companies, IIRC. There's a separate way to get in trouble here around predatory p

US law in that area looks more at consumer harm, not incidental harm to other companies, IIRC. There's a separate way to get in trouble here around predatory pricing, but I think that's more complicated (you have to be doing it specifically to drive people out of business). It depends on what the rest of the market does. See https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/single-firm-conduct/predatory-or-below-cost-pricing https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance/competition-guidance/gui... Specifically > Pricing below a competitor's costs occurs in many competitive markets and generally does not violate the antitrust laws. Sometimes the low-pricing firm is simply more efficient. Pricing below your own costs is also not a violation of the law unless it is part of a strategy to eliminate competitors, and when that strategy has a dangerous probability of creating a monopoly for the discounting firm so that it can raise prices far into the future and recoup its losses. So > Is it okay because Sony/MS don't raise prices? Yes exactly this. See also: Printers sold below cost with expensive ink refills. E-readers, often Razors for shaving - the base or chassis or whatever you call it is often sold below cost.