Playstation 3: Hardware Info and Price

[patsu]

Possibly, but it's still difficult to get to the CC# via a compromised web browser, if the # is stored in a secure manner on the Xbox (or PS).

 

[RancidLunchmeat]

I'm not really following this thread but I'll input anyway


I'm pretty sure impulse purchases aren't based on weekly income. It's not like a person gets their pay cheque and has a week to spend it all, and then it's gone and they have to spend their next pay cheque. On the one hand after bills I doubt many people have hundreds of dollars per week spare (depends on prices over there though. Certainly not here in the UK) so you're looking at spending based on savings. Each week x amount is put away into the bank account, and if they have enough in the account to pay for a product, they may impulse buy. But secondly, big ticket items are invariably put on the credit card AFAIK, so current availability of funds isn't an issue.

Huh? You are assuming that consumers at the median income level have available a credit line greater than that of their current paycheck?

That in itself defies the definition of impulse shopper. They know how many paychecks they have that go to rent, to pay their current credit card bill's minimum payments, etc.

What is 'extra' is the weekly paycheck they get that is 'free'. Because the other 3 paychecks per month go to pay the bills.

That's what we're talking about here. Availability of funds is most definately an issue because if they don't spend their current paycheck on an impulse buy, then those funds will go to paying down the debt they already owe.

I think impulse purchases are more a case of 'I want it' and then deciding if it's pricey or not based more on gut feeling than anything. I don't think most people have the financial sense to work out how much of their income goes towards a purchase in how many payments at what interest etc.

Again, this is assuming that impulse consumers actually have available credit. Have you checked the consumer debt index lately? Impulse buyers don't have available credit, they've already used it. And they are already using the majority of their paychecks to pay off the debt they've already incured. What they have left, at most, is a single paycheck that they shouldn't spend on an impulse purchase, but will anyway because they are impulse buyers.

The sole reason that I don't already own a 360 is because I simply can't afford to do so.

Well.. sure, of course I COULD buy one tonight. I have the available cash in my bank account right now. I can purchase one, not even on credit (and owe no interest on the payment), but I would owe interest on the money that I already owe that I didn't pay off because I spent that money on a 360. And that makes no sense. First, you should pay off the money you owe before making any new purchases, and second you should also have enough available cash to cover any unforeseen expenses that might occur in the meantime.

However, I'm well aware of the fact that the majority of NA consumers don't feel that way. If they know they owe X amount of $ for their bills, and they know that 3 of 4 or 2 of 3 paychecks go to satisfiy their debt, they will impluse buy products using the extra percentage of their paycheck.

Using the median income for US taxpayers as a guide, those people actually have the ability to impulse buy a 360. They don't have the ability to impulse buy a PS3.

To imagine that impulse buyers still have credit with which to spend defies both the nature of 'impulse buyers' and the statistics that are provided by the consumer debt index.

 

[one]

Using the median income for US taxpayers as a guide, those people actually have the ability to impulse buy a 360. They don't have the ability to impulse buy a PS3.

Really? Do you have any concrete data?

 

[RancidLunchmeat]

Really? Do you have any concrete data?

You mean except for the data I've already presented that demonstrates the median US consumer doesn't have enough money in a single paycheck to cover the cost of a PS3?

 

[one]

You mean except for the data I've already presented that demonstrates the median US consumer doesn't have enough money in a single paycheck to cover the cost of a PS3?

No, I mean statistical studies about impluse buy. Yours is just an arbitrary comparison of median income and product prices, it doesn't explain where the threshold of impluse buy is.

 

[RancidLunchmeat]

No, I mean statistical studies about impluse buy. Yours is just an arbitrary comparison of median income and product prices, it doesn't explain where the threshold of impluse buy is.

Umm.. Ok, I see your point. I'll see if I can find that information.

But I really don't think it's all that relevant because if consumers simply don't have the available cash, regardless of what the normative baseline for impulse purchases is, they can't make the purchase.

Furthermore, I rather believe that any such study would show the baseline for impulse purchases is far below the price of the PS3, and probably far below the current price of the 360. I'd say its probably around $200, thus the magical $199 price point. Then again, that would also be the normative baseline, so impulse buyers with more available cash would still make purchases above the norm (or the majority).

Either way, it all essentially boils down to disposable income, so the median income figures still paint the rather obvious picture that a $299 purchase is far more palatable to American Consumers than a $499 purchase.

 

[one]

But I really don't think it's all that relevant because if consumers simply don't have the available cash, regardless of what the normative baseline for impulse purchases is, they can't make the purchase.

From the way you talk about impluse buy don't you define it as "buying a cheap product without thinking twice"? It sounds like a circular argument to me. If quality of 2 products are exactly the same people will buy the cheaper one but in a real world you cannot always find 2 identical products. If self-explanatory "cheaper is better" is the gist of this argument it's a bit redundant to discuss, isn't it?

IMHO if people are offered lucrative enough deals they jump on it even though they are a bit expensive, like HDTV sets.

 

[Acert93]

http://cnet.com.au/games/ps3/0,39035763,40062685,00.htm

Sony has locked in 17 November as the Australian launch date for the PlayStation 3, just in time for Christmas. The system will come in two bundles -- a PS3 with a 20GB hard drive (confirmed RRP of AU$829) and one with a 60GB HDD (confirmed RRP of AU$999).

As a comparison, the Xbox 360's core bundle retails for AU$499, while its upgrade bundle which includes a 20GB hard drive retails for AU$649.

AU$999 = USD$755 PS3-60GB
AU$829 = USD$627 PS3-20GB
AU$649 = USD$491 X360
AU$499 = USD$377 X360 Core

Man, Australians are getting double cracked by MS and Sony! Roughly, it is ~25% markup, per dollar. Maybe these are all taxes and tarrifs, but some of that has to be localization. I thought it was bad here in the states

I am glad I decided to wait until 2007 to get a new console. They should be on 65nm then and be cooler/user less power/be quiet + higher quality, not to mention possibly lower price and better selection of games. I was hoping for a price war, but it doesn't look like I will see one until late 2007 at the earlies. When did gaming get so expensive? I would consider getting a Wii... but I already own a GCN and wireless controller

 

[RancidLunchmeat]

From the way you talk about impluse buy don't you define it as "buying a cheap product without thinking twice"?

No. I'm defining it as buying a product you can afford without saving, which is pretty much the definition of 'impulse purchases'.

If you can't afford it.. you can't buy it on impulse. If you have to save for it, then it's not an impulse.

Clearly there is a price threshold, which is why I provided the median income statistics to demonstrate that US consumers will have enough disposable income so that those people who are impulse buyers can purchase the 360 Core, but not the the PS3 Core.

IMHO if people are offered lucrative enough deals they jump on it even though they are a bit expensive, like HDTV sets.

There's a reason why HDTV sets have a very low adoption rates. People are still purchasing SDTVs or "almost HDTV" sets instead of buying full blown HDTVs.

Again, it goes back to economics and it's not a very difficult concept. Anything that people have to SAVE for is going to sell at a slower rate than those products that people don't have to save for.

This is not only common sense, it's been proven time and time again.

 

[overclocked]

I been wondering of the possibilites of only 60gigs machines at launch, in Europe. IMO i dont see the price as a problem as we get dont get that screwed like before. The yen is strong and dollar is week and its in Sonys interest to sell many units in NA ofcourse. And talking about medium income and so on is rather silly. A console is launched every 6-7 year so impulse is a little naive in my mind. I always save for expensive things but some are born with $ in thier ass.

 

[Sis]

From the way you talk about impluse buy don't you define it as "buying a cheap product without thinking twice"? It sounds like a circular argument to me. If quality of 2 products are exactly the same people will buy the cheaper one but in a real world you cannot always find 2 identical products. If self-explanatory "cheaper is better" is the gist of this argument it's a bit redundant to discuss, isn't it?

IMHO if people are offered lucrative enough deals they jump on it even though they are a bit expensive, like HDTV sets.

I think Rancid is arguing capability of purchase in a product agnostic way. If the consumer living paycheck to paycheck only has $400 free once in a great while, they have a hard limit on what they can purchase. So even if a product normally was priced at $1000 and had a special price of $600, it wouldn't matter.

At least in this hypothetical situation. I'm not sure that any of the next gen consoles are actually in that impulse buy range, even though I'm sure people have purchased it on an impulse buy. I still think that magical $200 price point is key for that. This is the problem with the PS3 price-point; how long does it take to get below $200. Microsoft will have a version of the 360 below 200 by Holiday of 2007. Sony, I believe, will need 4 years to get there.

 

[Sis]

And talking about medium income and so on is rather silly. A console is launched every 6-7 year so impulse is a little naive in my mind. I always save for expensive things but some are born with $ in thier ass.

It's a debate about the mainstream possibilities of the PS3 price; I think everyone agrees that "hardcore" gamers will buy the PS3, regardless of price.

 

[MrWibble]

From the way you talk about impluse buy don't you define it as "buying a cheap product without thinking twice"? It sounds like a circular argument to me. If quality of 2 products are exactly the same people will buy the cheaper one but in a real world you cannot always find 2 identical products. If self-explanatory "cheaper is better" is the gist of this argument it's a bit redundant to discuss, isn't it?

IMHO if people are offered lucrative enough deals they jump on it even though they are a bit expensive, like HDTV sets.

Plus, it's kind of hard to impulse buy something that's out of stock for weeks because there's already a queue of people who decided they had the disposable income to get one...

 

[NavNucST3]

Plus, it's kind of hard to impulse buy something that's out of stock for weeks because there's already a queue of people who decided they had the disposable income to get one...

That's absolutely true, however, unless the price drops dramatically 7-months from now, when they are on store shelves for the masses, then the impulse buy scenario applies, if one subscribes to that theory.

 

[Fox5]

Plus, it's kind of hard to impulse buy something that's out of stock for weeks because there's already a queue of people who decided they had the disposable income to get one...

I've got no job, I've got no life, it's all about Halo! Yaaah!

Said some guy waiting in line for Halo 2 on G4TechTV's launch special. If someone wants it bad enough, they'll get it, even if they have a very low (or no) income.

 

[mckmas8808]

What RancidLunchmeat has to learn is buying a Xbox 360 will never be an impulse buy either for most people. It's either you want it or you don't.

 

[cam]

I don’t really understand? If you don’t want something you don’t buy it full stop, to me the scenario that would play out is thinking about getting console B, seeing console A at a lower price, seeing console B at a higher price and thinking why not make do with console A while the price of console B comes down or supply catches up with demand.

That would be an impulse buy to my mind.

 

[Tap In]

What RancidLunchmeat has to learn is buying a Xbox 360 will never be an impulse buy either for most people. It's either you want it or you don't.

O'Contraire

When the Core system drops to $149 - $199 (maybe sooner than we think) it will be an impulse buy product for a lot of people who like videogames.


That was MS's strategy all along with the cost efficient design.
​

 

[mckmas8808]

Oh yeah of course then that's when it's going to be impulse. That's when it's going to be interesting to see what Sony decides to do. I estimate that time will come in 2008.

 

[nelg]

What RancidLunchmeat has to learn is buying a Xbox 360 will never be an impulse buy either for most people. It's either you want it or you don't.

Considering that many consoles would be purchased as gifts, it would be foolish to to discount the price factor.