My question was more in relation to the phenomenon of new products selling out immediately. If they don’t sell out immediately doesn’t it mean it’s priced appropriately based on simple supply/demand economics?
The irony is that we’re basically arguing that if a product sells out and stays out of stock for weeks/months then it’s priced correctly which is academically inaccurate. That’s why I want to see the price trajectory over a few months. It should drop sharply when demand dries up.
As with anything where we don't know enough details, we can't determine much without more information.
If a product sells out at launch, you can't really tell much from that. Early adopters are more willing to pay excessive amounts of money for a product than would be the case during, let's say the first year (generally speaking). So selling out at launch isn't necessarily a sign that it's priced too low, too high, or just right. If the product remains sold out in the first year, then it's likely priced too low. If there is a large stockpile in stores (like when you see pallets of product with a price tag attached), that's a sign it's likely priced too high. If all you see are some product on store shelves and a bare spot here or there where one vendor's model has temporarily sold out, that's likely the sweet spot. That indicates it's selling close to stock levels but not over stock levels.
But that only tells us whether pricing may or may not be appropriate for a given supply combined with existing demand. It doesn't say anything WRT how much is being supplied.
OTOH - if a product never sells out, that also doesn't necessarily mean it's priced correctly or priced too high. See above for the too much or just enough supply qualifiers. Same applies here.
And addendum to the last is that if a product doesn't sell out on launch for a product category that typically sells out at launch (like GPUs or game consoles, for example) that's an indication that pricing is too high as buyers are generally more willing to spend more at a launch for a new product than they are a few months after launch (because those people that would spend more have already bought their product).
Even underwhelming product such as the HD 2900 XT or FX 5800 initially sold out at launch as there were still an initial wave of people that wanted one regardless of price or performance.
Of course, there are complications that prior GPU launches haven't had to face. IMO, excessive pricing on GPUs due to expectations from GPU makers that pricing that was appropriate during covid lockdown + crypto mining bubble = the new norm. Combine that with record high inflation and fears of a recession. Top it off with less free money from the government to spend on luxury items (although in the US, there's a poll showing that most people qualifying for the college loan forgiveness plan are likely to use that money for vacations and luxury items so that might help with GPU sales.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/09/how-student-debt-forgiveness-recipients-plan-to-spend.html 
) products that people that are really well off can afford without even thinking about the cost (IE - cost doesn't matter) will still sell well, but everything else in the product stack might suffer.
It's a weird place for PC tech at the moment. The whales who are willing to buy the highest end product at any price are likely unaffected by worries about inflation or a recession with regards to a 2000 USD product (average scalping price for a 4090 on Ebay) that represents just pennies to them compared to your average buyer.
And as you move down from that into more middle class and lower middle class buyers, they're going to be looking at their budget far more closely now.
So, we might be in a weird position where ultra high end sales are unaffected by prevailing economic conditions but everything below that is likely to suffer to some extent.
Regards,
SB
