Everyone wants Xbox360 Premium, No one wants Xbox360 Core System

[Tap In]

I have only a core.
....

good info there Super... thanks for sharing

 

[cam]

I think the core is a very smart move on Microsoft’s part, The problem Microsoft has that maybe Sony (going by sales figures, market share etc) doesn’t is they need to get the x box brand in as many peoples homes as possible, not just for the 360 but for the generations to come, at £200 people like me, who never really would have thought about getting one suddenly have a hard time passing one by in the high street. And it can only get cheaper.

I know that technically the premiums are better value but at least you get in on the ground level cheaper than any other console launch, at least since the 16 bit generation.

 

[RancidLunchmeat]

I know that technically the premiums are better value but at least you get in on the ground level cheaper than any other console launch, at least since the 16 bit generation.

Absolutely! And of course it was a smart move from MS. And both your message and Super's above demonstrate the point.

Not everybody actually has the extra $100 to spend. And while some, like Super, might have had it at one point.. they no longer do and can still get most of the functionality out of the Core. I would say there's a huge population of people that live paycheck to paycheck, and the difference between saving up $400 and saving up $500 is huge to them.

It might not make sense financially, these people would be better off waiting, saving their money and purchasing the package at the discounted X360 rate. But, then again, that's true with alot of things in life.

You want me to wait 2 weeks to save an extra $100 to get the better deal? Or I can purchase the product now, and spend an extra $60 each of the next two weeks to get the same product.

They are essentially trading $20 for two weeks worth of game play. Why should MS remove the Core and remove people from having that option?

Not to mention that there's a certain group of people who simply would never be able to wait the extra 2 weeks to save the extra $100, and it's lucky those people waited long enough to save up the intial investment at the Core price as it is.

 

[Ben-Nice]

I think developers would have preferred having a hard drive standard so they could utilize it if they wanted to and IMO if no core models existed they wouldn't have sold any less consoles they they already have. Secondly, if you can't afford the extra $100 bucks for the premium, your really shouldn't be spending your money on a 360 because you obviously don't have much money to spare.

 

[MasaC]

MS's benefit is trying to counter PS3's main advantage over X360 which is the ability to play HD-movies. I don't think you should be talking about Business perspective when your ideas of the future are so illogical.

If that's the intent they would make a combined HD-DVD/Blu-Ray addon player or perhaps just an addon Blu-Ray player.

I'm leaning towards the announcement about the addon HD-DVD player is just to stir up doubts among the consumers about Blu-ray and delay Blu-Ray in general to hurt Sony/PS3.

 

[Hardknock]

Not even close to 90%, I'm not sure if it is close to a majority at this point. Don't try and judge the market penetration by enthusiast forums where everyone knows MS is forcing people to upgrade to play all the games they want. The majority of systems selling right now are Core systems, and the HD upgrade is not shipping anywhere near 1:1 with Core. At the first price drop the rift is likely to expand rapidly, $199 draws a lot more buyers then $299.



Will MS lie about requiring an upgrade? Yes.

Will MS lie about requiring a three digit upgrade to play a high profile game? Yes.

We know these things as point of fact. A lot of people were saying that MS wouldn't require the HD at all prior to the 360 launch because that is what they said. I found that highly amusing then as I do people thinking they won't require the HD-DVD player now.

Simply look at it from a business perspective. What benefit does MS have developing the HD-DVD drive if it will never be used for games? How are they going to recover the R&D costs unless they charge an amount comparable to a set top box if not more if they don't use it for games? What possible reason does MS have for ever releasing the device if they don't intend to use it for games? Looking at it from a business perspective it makes no sense at all if it is a real product. Either A- it's vapouware or B- it's for games.

MS is not developing the drive, that makes your entire point null and void.

 

[DeathKnight]

Yes, by a lot right now.

There's no "manufacturing" to it. The consoles themselves are identical. To get a "Premium" package they just toss in the hard drive and the proper accessories.

 

[RancidLunchmeat]

I think developers would have preferred having a hard drive standard so they could utilize it if they wanted to and IMO if no core models existed they wouldn't have sold any less consoles they they already have.

Which goes back to my original statement that says questioning the availability of Core units at launch was a respectable perspective.

Secondly, if you can't afford the extra $100 bucks for the premium, your really shouldn't be spending your money on a 360 because you obviously don't have much money to spare.

A finacial responsibility argument? Great! Let's debate morality in the realm of console sales.

Going by your logic, nobody should ever buy the Corvette Coupe for $45k. Because if they can't afford the Z06 for $65k, they obviously shouldn't be spending their money on a Corvette because they don't have that much money to spare.

The reality is that people who spend $45k for the Coupe get 90% of the functionality at a price point they can afford. Which is the same as people who spend $299 for the Core instead of $399 for the X360.

 

[RancidLunchmeat]

There's no "manufacturing" to it. The consoles themselves are identical. To get a "Premium" package they just toss in the hard drive and the proper accessories.

And that should lead to the question.. Is there a difficulty in HDD availability for the X360?

And the other question that I asked previously which was stated profusely yet no evidence was provided for... Is MS producing more Core units than X360 units? And are they doing that on purpose (as BenSkywalker believes) because there's a conspiracy to milk more money from people by making them buy Core units and then everything else with an accessory add-on premium, or are they doing that because there's a lack of HDD?

Anecdotal evidence so far would indicate there actually is a lack of HDD availability, because a number of people have never actually seen them in The Wild.

Whether that's the case or not, is an interesting topic, but it's one that should be supported with any factual data available. And as somebody mentioned earlier, there's no clear reason why X360 HDDs should be hard to come by in terms of manufacturing. It's my understanding they are simply laptop HDDs and at 20G, they should be rather common.

These are all interesting questions... but they don't have anything to do with conspiracy theories, or morality issues about fiscal responsibility.

 

[DeathKnight]

It's my understanding they are simply laptop HDDs and at 20G, they should be rather common.

20GB laptop drives are far from common these days (just go to Newegg and they only offer one Hitachi model)... not to mention the 360 HDD's have a SATA interface. It's not like there's general supply in the market. They have to be manufactured specifically for Microsoft.

 

[superguy]

And the other question that I asked previously which was stated profusely yet no evidence was provided for... Is MS producing more Core units than X360 units? And are they doing that on purpose (as BenSkywalker believes) because there's a conspiracy to milk more money from people by making them buy Core units and then everything else with an accessory add-on premium, or are they doing that because there's a lack of HDD?

AFAIK MS stated they were producing an 80-20 Premium-Core ration for launch, or something like that.

I cant recall exactly, but where I got mine it was announced at 33 premium 14 cores or some ratio..it was the same by all reports elsewhere.

So I cant say except that I expect the current ratio of 360's to be HEAVILY premium skewed. Maybe 80-20.
I really cant sppeak on what they're producing more of..but I suspect Premiums. They said they would adjust SKU skew according to demand for launch. Obviously that came out heavily in favor of Premium..if you believe them anyway.


As many have stated, the purpose of the core is not for now, it is for down the line when the system becomes more mainstream and eventually $99.

Monetarily I once figured it up by guesstimate and MS profits about equally on the core and Premium. Whether they profit more on Core would depend on how many people later purchase accesories like the HDD.

If you look, the premium has a HD, headset, Hi-def cables, wireless controller..think that's it.

HD guess cost=$35?
All three other trinkets..$5 each?

MS extra cost of premium BOM=$50?

So they profit an extra $50 (or reduced losses) on premium BUT

Core buyer

Mem card $40, costs $5, 35 profit

Profit difference=$15 in favor of premium.

Now, it's just how many people buy the HDD, Hi-Def cables, and/or a wireless controller, in ADDITION to the Core system and a mem card (some wont buy a mem card either, further hurting Core profits. As to whether they make or lose money relative to premium.

If the HDD sells for $100 and costs $35, that's $65 profit per. If ten percent of core buyers later buy the HD, that's average 6.50 profit per core sold for MS. If twenty percent eventually do, It's $13. And so on. Same idea with the other accesories.

I would say looking at it..yeah it might be fairly easy for MS to profit more off the core..MAYBE. If most people never buy a lot of accessories, specifically the HD and headset and Hi-Def cables (extra controllers will have the same attach rate on both systems) they wont.

 

[BenSkywalker]

The bitter tone of every one of your posts in this thread.

Reality comes across to you that way? I must ask why are YOU so bitter with MS then? They are in a business, and they are very good at making money.

I'd say that's reason #2 to explain your bitterness with MS.

Well for the prior gen I had to replace two XBoxes and three of my PS2's. A dead HD isn't exactly a huge shock to the system.

You want me to prove a negative, while you posit the positive as a valid position without evidence?

Quite the contrary, you have invoked the positive by assuming that a console manufacturer is going to release an add on exceeding $100 that has nothing at all to do with gaming. That has not been done before- you are attempting to claim that MS is going to do the unheard of in the console industry and I'm unfounded claiming that an add on for a gaming console is going to be used for gaming. Think hard and see if you can find why the onus of proof by any reasonable standard is entirely on you.

And you do 'this' for a living? I'm thinking you must have meant author bitter, unfounded, illogical messages in discussion forums, rather than any degree of business forecasting as you previously implied.

Look at my numbers from five years ago. I was within a couple precentage points for each platform and how it would all play out. This is back in the era when the analysts were saying three platforms couldn't possibly survive and that we would end up with Sony commanding ~80% of the market and either Nintendo or Microsoft removed from the industry. If all you want to go by is my forum posting history then I would be more then happy to compare them to yours. Put up. My posts are archived here- check them yourself.

Now, is that a statement or is that an action? I also wasn't aware that 100% of upcoming games require the HDD. Care to provide evidence of that claim?

..ohh.. that's right. I'd have to prove that 100% of them won't require the HDD. I forgot the rules of your world.

My apologies, I had been under the impression that English was your first language(I forget where I am some times)-

so far 100% of expensive add ons released to date are required to play all upcoming games which they said wouldn't be the case

If I had said every there then that would imply that you needed a hard drive to play any game. By utilizing all it indicated that you would be unable to play every single 360 game without a HD. Using all doesn't imply anything other then you can not play 100% of upcoming games without the HD.

Figures? Link? MS is manufacturing 'a lot' more Cores than X360s? I'd love to see the evidence.

Put up a few grand and subscribe to NPD.

So you're a part time employee at Game Stop? Thank you. That seems to make more sense.

Which element of distribution would you like to go into an in depth discussion about? I'll take you to see my employees and my facility if you would like, I live in SouthWest New Hampshire about fifteen minutes from MA and twenty minutes from VT. If you live anywhere near by I'll come pick you up and show you what I do.

Wait.. wait.. a second ago I asked if you knew if MS was making more Cores than X360s and you said "Yes, a lot".

Now it seems you are saying they are filling orders for Cores more quickly. Which is a different metric, isn't it?

Not in the real world it isn't. Maybe in your arm chair analysis one that is how things are done, but in the real world production is considered finished when it hits my level of the game. Look at any of the numbers the manufacturers use- shipped is what they quote almost every time. Not built, not sold, shipped. That means it moves from their facilities to mine. That is when it moves from being a physical asset to a liquid one for the manufacturer. Really, very basic stuff here.

Also.. I'm wondering, if Cores are available everywhere but nobody is buying them and X360s are nowhere to be found and MS isn't filling orders for them.. Why is anybody actually ordering more Cores to the point you can establish that MS is filling those orders
"very quickly"?

DrEvil said perhaps noone is buying them- I never said any such thing. It would help if you could attribute things properly.

But I thought MS had to offer the HD-DVD because they had to offer games on HD-DVD for some reason you have yet to explain?

They don't have to offer the HD-DVD at all, in fact I think it could strongly be argued that they are foolish for doing it, although I can see both the upside and downside for either end of that particular choice.

There's no "manufacturing" to it. The consoles themselves are identical. To get a "Premium" package they just toss in the hard drive and the proper accessories.

Manufacturing includes everything in and the box itself.

MS is not developing the drive, that makes your entire point null and void.

The R&D is showing up on their sheets along with the IP. I know it is outsourced, but by that same token you can pretty much say that neither Sony nor MS developed much of anything for their consoles at all.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

Ben do you think that the installed user base for the HDDVD-drive would grow to large enough to warrant Halo 3 or some other high profile game to be released only on HDDVD. I don't think that will happen. There is way too much risk for MS to do it, they don't gain anything for it, they could just as well release the big games on multiple DVDs.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

1. The Core is a fantastic idea.

2. The Premium should have been in greater supply at launch vs. Core systems which are primarily for casual gamers, but there were probably HDD supply problems.

3. MS will NOT be splitting their userbase. All that talk of requiring HD-DVD is nonsense IMO. Same goes with the HDD except in a handful of cases (like FFXI).

 

[Ben-Nice]

1. The Core is a fantastic idea.

2. The Premium should have been in greater supply at launch vs. Core systems which are primarily for casual gamers, but there were probably HDD supply problems.

3. MS will NOT be splitting their userbase. All that talk of requiring HD-DVD is nonsense IMO. Same goes with the HDD except in a handful of cases (like FFXI).

1) how so?

2) They did it was around 80/20 split premium vs core, at least that is what MS said

3) No they technically don't split the userbase but if you buy a core you need to spend around $100 more to get the functionality of the premium so it ends up being a $500 360 and not a $400 360 if you upgrade later. It's $40 bucks for a memory card so why not pay the extra $60 for everything?

 

[scooby_dooby]

3) No they technically don't split the userbase but if you buy a core you need to spend around $100 more to get the functionality of the premium so it ends up being a $500 360 and not a $400 360 if you upgrade later. It's $40 bucks for a memory card so why not pay the extra $60 for everything?

It's really very simple. Imagine you don't have internet, and you don't have an HDTV. Why do you need anything more than the core + MC?

The wireless controller is nice, and IMO they should've made that standard in all packages, but other than that there's not alot of reason to get the premium. The HDD is essentially useless as you never go on live, and you have no need component cables either, making the premium a waste of money.

Anyways, I can't believe this argument is continuing for so long. It's SO simple. MS overpriced the HDD making the core unnattractive, thus it's not selling as well, as soon as they drop the HDD to $60 both packages will be equally attractive and this will be a non-issue.

 

[Ben-Nice]

It's SO simple. MS overpriced the HDD making the core unnattractive, thus it's not selling as well, as soon as they drop the HDD to $60 both packages will be equally attractive and this will be a non-issue.

Wow and all this time I thought they did it to make more money Boy was I wrong. They did the same thing with the Xbox bundled with a game. It's actually cheaper to buy and Xbox and the same game seperate. Interesting strategy if you ask me.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Wow and all this time I thought they did it to make more money Boy was I wrong. They did the same thing with the Xbox bundled with a game. It's actually cheaper to buy and Xbox and the same game seperate. Interesting strategy if you ask me.

You can assume anything you like, but since you have no facts at all to back it up, its nothing more than your obviously paranoid opinion.

There is no gaurantee for MS that they make more money off the core than the premium, if the user only buys a MC then they have just left money on the table. So, your logic is a little strange to say the least.

Honestly, MS's decision to ship the core at launch baffles me somewhat as well, however stretching it to be some sort of nickel&dime conspiracy by MS is totally far-fethced IMO, there are much more reasonable explanations. They could do it do push the percieved value of the HDD, to make consumer want it. They could do it to hit that psychological $299 pricepoint. Maybe they did it because they actually believe there's a market for Core's even at launch? I dunno...but a conspiracy to get an extra $10 - $20 on each console sold sounds pretty ridiculous to me.

 

[Ben-Nice]

I dunno...but a conspiracy to get an extra $10 - $20 on each console sold sounds pretty ridiculous to me.

Actually, if they made $10-20 on each console it would be pure genius. That is a boatload of money. Mabye your right, they did it to give the consumer a choice just like the HD-DVD add on.

 

[fearsomepirate]

a conspiracy to get an extra $10 - $20 on each console sold sounds pretty ridiculous to me.

Compared to that -$100 they made on the first Xbox, sounds pretty good to me. I wonder how much profit they actually make on HD cables and memory cards. Something seems weird to me about loudly announcing the "HD Era" and shipping without HD cables, but then...