All purpose Sales and Sales Rumors and Anecdotes [2016 Edition]

[Shifty Geezer]

Price isn't the only factor but the highest selling console for the last four generations has been the console that has spent most of the its life in the market at the lowest price to the credible competition. That's a fact

It's only a fact because you're filtering out all cheaper consoles by claiming they aren't credible, which is a subjective criterion you are applying. What constitutes 'credible'?

As a pure argument, has the cheapest credible console sold the most for four generations?

That's an impure argument because credible is undefined. It becomes subjective and needs a whole discussion to define the argument, whereas 'cheapest' is unambiguous and objective.

The answer is yes. You can debate credible if you like.

There's no need to debate it as you're the only one using it. We don't need to decide what credible is so we can determine if the cheapest credible console wins. We know that the best value and best marketed console wins. You don't win the market by being extra cheap, and you can price yourself out of the reach of the masses which is what PS4 Pro basically does hence it not being the top selling console and never going to be.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I don't really see how that's a fact when the PS4 was cheaper than Xbox One for only something like 6 months and I'd say Xbox has had in general the more aggressive deals since then.

You'll have to explain these "6 months". Focussing on the US market; PS4 launched at $399 for the basic package and stayed that price until October 2015 when that package dropped to $349. The Xbox One launched at $499 for the basic package, a Kinect-free package was launched in June 2014 for $399 and cut again in November 2015 to $349. Unfortunately for Microsoft they lost huge market share in the year plus it was more expensive than PS4 and inertia and traction did the rest. Like I said, timing.

I think Shifty is right about the fact that it's been more about not pricing yourself out of the competition instead of being the cheapest. Most of the competing platforms have been at the same price for majority of their time in the market. It's the other stuff that made the difference in the end.

How are you measuring this? Because this is unknowable. You're going with gut feelings, heavily influences by your own preferences and biases. There is literally no way to know why PS4 is outselling XBO. Let me remind you of the interview with Kaz Hirai who conceded Sony themselves had no idea why the PS4 was selling so well.

It's only a fact because you're filtering out all cheaper consoles by claiming they aren't credible, which is a subjective criterion you are applying. What constitutes 'credible'?

Any product that holds a significant portion of a given market (the accepted number is 25% - that signifies significant market presence by most monopoly legislation) or for margin-driven economics, a product that generates the greatest portion of profit relative to that entire market. In a three horse race, 25% shouldn't be that hard to achieve but the 25% threshold was originally written for markets with dozens of competitors where accumulating that much market was a huge achievement.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Any product that holds a significant portion of a given market (the accepted number is 25% - that signifies significant market presence by most monopoly legislation) or for margin-driven economics, a product that generates the greatest portion of profit relative to that entire market. In a three horse race, 25% shouldn't be that hard to achieve but the 25% threshold was originally written for markets with dozens of competitors where accumulating that much market was a huge achievement.

This is needlessly muddying the waters.

Console A - $500 - 8% market
Console B - $400 - 17% market
Console C - $300 - 55% market
Console D - $200 - 13% market
Console E - $150 - 7% market

By our definition, the cheapest console isn't the highest selling. By yours, it is because you exclude cheaper consoles than Console C by saying the cheaper consoles aren't 'credible'. By doing that you're not really talking about the cheapest console.

Why are you adding this caveat? Surely it's far more sensible to use a different definition than 'cheapest'? I'll be very surprised if anyone weighs in on this conversation agreeing with you that the cheapest console doesn't necessarily mean the one with the lowest price.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

By our definition, the cheapest console isn't the highest selling. By yours, it is because you exclude cheaper consoles than Console C by saying the cheaper consoles aren't 'credible'. By doing that you're not really talking about the cheapest console.

Again, Ouya. When it launched it was easily the cheapest console but was it ever really credible? No. Choosing a console isn't an isolated decision, it is also an investment in an ecosystem managed by Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony. Even if you only buy third party games, who will support your platform regardless (unless you bought a console from Nintendo) but you need the manufacturer to continue to update and support your purchase. To support third party devs who want to support your console.

Why are you adding this caveat? Surely it's far more sensible to use a different definition than 'cheapest'? I'll be very surprised if anyone weighs in on this conversation agreeing with you that the cheapest console doesn't necessarily mean the one with the lowest price.

Because if you include all the cruft, the consoles that fail before they even launch, that fail at launch, or that launch with a bang then fade inside a year, you can't say the price is a common denominator for the last four generations. As I've said in previous posts, most actual factors that go into the decisions can't be observed let alone measured and price is one of the few that can. It is well accepted and evidenced that consumers are price conscious; lower the price of a selling product and it'll sell better. But that doesn't remove the need for a product to be credible. Cost doesn't conquer the consciousness that a console purchase is an investment, and a degree of trust, in the manufacturer going forward.

it's not just cheapest.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

it's not just cheapest.

Exactly. And no-one was saying it was the cheapest except you...

If you look at which console sold most, it's invariably the cheapest.

PlayStation (cheapest), PlayStation 2 (cheapest), Wii then 360 then PS3 (cheapest to most expensive), PlayStation 4.

Simples.

Since saying 'the cheapest', you've now added a caveat to contradict your first two statements.

If you look at which console sold most, it's invariably the cheapest, even when other less expensive consoles are available.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Exactly. And no-one was saying it was the cheapest except you...

Which I qualified earlier to be clearer.

Since saying 'the cheapest', you've now added a caveat to contradict your first two statements.

Is this a new forum rule? Nobody is able to clarify or qualify a previous statement?

Ok, cool.

 

[iroboto]

From this article: http://www.gamespot.com/articles/2016-will-be-remembered-as-a-tipping-point-for-xbo/1100-6445932/

"Our data shows that there is still a significant number of households actively using their Xbox 360 who haven't upgraded yet," Eagle said. "[The backwards compatibility list] is growing all the time and I think it is definitely a benefit for Xbox 360 owners, to know that the money that they've already spent on games won't get wasted when they upgrade to Xbox One."

Pretty important ^^^
We've predicted well here.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

You'll have to explain these "6 months". Focussing on the US market; PS4 launched at $399 for the basic package and stayed that price until October 2015 when that package dropped to $349. The Xbox One launched at $499 for the basic package, a Kinect-free package was launched in June 2014 for $399 and cut again in November 2015 to $349. Unfortunately for Microsoft they lost huge market share in the year plus it was more expensive than PS4 and inertia and traction did the rest. Like I said, timing.

Xbox One launched in November 22nd 2013 at $499 and exactly 6 months and 19 days later it dropped to $399 with Kinect-free SKU, matching the PS4 price ever since.

How are you measuring this? Because this is unknowable. You're going with gut feelings, heavily influences by your own preferences and biases. There is literally no way to know why PS4 is outselling XBO. Let me remind you of the interview with Kaz Hirai who conceded Sony themselves had no idea why the PS4 was selling so well.

No I'm going with my argument that the price has been the same between the two outside of a small ever shrinking period of their existence, therefore the reason must be "other stuff" which conveniently includes every other reason Perhaps the lower launch price and the mindshare prior to launch was the key reason for their success over other reasons, but for the lifetime of these products, the prices have been very very similar and thus in stark contrast to your original argument that cheapest always wins.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Pretty important ^^^
We've predicted well here.

I think backwards compatibility is still a bit of a feature comfort blanket - something that's nice to have because it negates any feeling of losing software you've bought but consoles lacking it don't seem to struggle. Of course, you never know how much better a console without b/c would sell if it had provision for it but it's not holding PS4 back.

In future, if consoles platforms iterate then I think it'll become the expectation. Nobody would buy a new PC, or upgrade to a new version of Windows, if you had to leave all your software behind.

Xbox One launched in November 22nd 2013 at $499 and exactly 6 months and 19 days later it dropped to $399 with Kinect-free SKU, matching the PS4 price ever since.

Apologies, I misread your post.

No I'm going with my argument that the price has been the same between the two outside of a small ever shrinking period of their existence, therefore the reason must be "other stuff" which conveniently includes every other reason

Price can't be a differentiator if there is no price differential. So all things (like price) being equal, other factors will come into play. But the impact of pricing is constantly being reinforced. Xbox One S - cheaper - sales boost, actually beating PS4 in the US for several months. Though I suppose you can't know for sure if it was price or size or aesthetics but I know where my money is ;-)

 

[BRiT]

Xbox One S - cheaper - sales boost, actually beating PS4 in the US for several months. Though I suppose you can't know for sure if it was price or size or aesthetics but I know where my money is ;-)

Do not overlook the following plausible reason: Functionality plus the free pimping of all the brick and mortar stores cross-promoting it to sell 4K UHD BluRays and TVs.

 

[iroboto]

I think backwards compatibility is still a bit of a feature comfort blanket - something that's nice to have because it negates any feeling of losing software you've bought but consoles lacking it don't seem to struggle. Of course, you never know how much better a console without b/c would sell if it had provision for it but it's not holding PS4 back.

In future, if consoles platforms iterate then I think it'll become the expectation. Nobody would buy a new PC, or upgrade to a new version of Windows, if you had to leave all your software behind.

Oh right, definitely agree with your points. I should have been a bit more careful on my quoting, but I wanted to make comment on the fact that we saw MS aggressively making moves to transition people off of X360 to XBO. I guess this cements the data behind their actions, X360 users just don't want to move... haha.. just like Windows users

 

[DuckThor Evil]

Price can't be a differentiator if there is no price differential. So all things (like price) being equal, other factors will come into play. But the impact of pricing is constantly being reinforced. Xbox One S - cheaper - sales boost, actually beating PS4 in the US for several months. Though I suppose you can't know for sure if it was price or size or aesthetics but I know where my money is ;-)

Yeah, but I'm saying price has nearly never been a differential. As soon as one manufacturer seems to get an edge due it, the other(s) basically match the price. Most of the console generations have seen consoles at identical price points, except for a short periods of time. I'm not really seeing Xbox One S being cheaper than PS4. I don't know perhaps there was some Black Friday deal I missed? Right now PS4 is little bit cheaper in Amazon.com ($269 Slim with U4, need to put it in cart), but these things seem to fluctuate day in day out. As far as I know they cost the same.

 

[BRiT]

Xbox One S is around $250 but then you get an extra game bundled and $50 credit to the MS store. I consider that to be $50 cheaper than PS4.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Yeah, but I'm saying price has nearly never been a differential.

That is contrary to all evidence for pricing consumer devices. However..

As soon as one manufacturer seems to get an edge due it, the other(s) basically match the price. Most of the console generations have seen consoles at identical price points, except for a short periods of time.

Do you have numbers that show this? It's not that I disbelieve you but I'm curious.

One console gaining a lot of traction early on is generally all you need to cruise to victory because you get a snowball effect. People like to have the same console as friends so that they can play with each other or, if they're not into multiplayer games, can at least swap and trade games. Few consoles have ever come back sales-wise. PS3 is a rare exception.

I'm not really seeing Xbox One S being cheaper than PS4. I don't know perhaps there was some Black Friday deal I missed? Right now PS4 is little bit cheaper in Amazon.com ($269 Slim with U4, need to put it in cart), but these things seem to fluctuate day in day out. As far as I know they cost the same.

Excluding flash sales, Xbox One S is cheaper than PS4 Slim in most of the EU (although not by much) and was obviously cheaper than the original PS4 prior to Slim's launch. In the US it's the other way around. This is the Dollar working for Microsoft in Europe and the Yen working for Sony in the US.

 

[BRiT]

Are you saying the PS4/4Slime is cheaper than the Xbox One S in the US? Thats not something I see at all, even excluding flash sales.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Are you saying the PS4/4Slime is cheaper than the Xbox One S in the US? Thats not something I see at all, even excluding flash sales.

My bad, I was looking at Amazon and see the One S was a bundle and Slim was not.

I was correct originally then, the One S is generally cheaper.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

That is contrary to all evidence for pricing consumer devices. However..

I'm just talking about consoles and not what could have been, but no differential due to identical price points. Obviously different price points would create differential and have like the PS3 launch, but those prices were quite short lived also, PS3 dropped a lot in price during it's first calendar year.

Do you have numbers that show this? It's not that I disbelieve you but I'm curious.

Well the PS2 and original Xbox in US had identical prices during the 4 year lifespan of Xbox. First $299 and then $199-179-149 matching each other in very small windows.

Other than the first year of PS3 in NA or about 6 months in Europe the cost of PS3 was at the same level as the HDD SKU of Xbox 360. Granted MS had the cheaper Core/Arcade unit, but that was never a big seller. Nintendo has never been more expensive than the others, with the Wii it worked, before and after not so much, unless you go back to 16bit. The current generation I already covered.

One console gaining a lot of traction early on is generally all you need to cruise to victory because you get a snowball effect. People like to have the same console as friends so that they can play with each other or, if they're not into multiplayer games, can at least swap and trade games. Few consoles have ever come back sales-wise. PS3 is a rare exception.

I'm not dismissing the importance of the launch window by any means or the mindshare prior to the launch. 360 also got second wind and boosted sales later in it's life with the Kinect and Slim models. It was a weird long generation...

Excluding flash sales, Xbox One S is cheaper than PS4 Slim in most of the EU (although not by much) and was obviously cheaper than the original PS4 prior to Slim's launch. In the US it's the other way around. This is the Dollar working for Microsoft in Europe and the Yen working for Sony in the US.

I'm seeing quite identical prices for both consoles, but MS has been often more aggressive with deals and promotions, but at the end of the day the prices do look quite similar to me now. I think prior to One S, the old unit was often little bit cheaper than the PS4 over here, but PS4 has been in far better demand in Europe in general, so that helps with the pricing. In Europe Sony definitely has other strengths than a pricing advantage to keep the competition at bay, pretty much always has.

edited small typos.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

As of right now in Amazon US. PS4 slim with Uncharted 4 is cheaper than any Xbox One S system, as far as I can see anyway.

 

[BRiT]

Its so funny to see such fluctuations of price on Amazon right now with these consoles.

 

[DrJay24]

As of right now in Amazon US. PS4 slim with Uncharted 4 is cheaper than any Xbox One S system, as far as I can see anyway.

$20 cheaper and 20 spots higher on the hourly list. When they were both $212 a week or so back they were like #1 and #3.