[dmoy]

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/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.

[Aerroon]

Thank you!

[dmoy]

No problem, it's a good question, and it only works that way because of the particulars of US law. It differs for other countries, or even within the same country over time (the US's consumer focus was less strong in earlier years).