Pricing Discussions around AMD VEGA *over-flow*

[Malo]

Buy monitor or CPU bundle and get two games thrown in. Pretty simple.

AMD made it more complicated by removing the card-only SKUs and introducing a card+games SKU for $100 more that has nothing to do with monitors or CPU bundles. The games are listed as free, however they're obviously not, unless AMD have raised the price of the cards by $100. Combine this with the information from sellers regarding AMD no longer providing "rebates" on the $499 cards and it's a mess. Therefore consumer confusion that was unnecessary.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

AMD made it more complicated by removing the card-only SKUs and introducing a card+games SKU for $100 more that has nothing to do with monitors or CPU bundles.

AMD didn't remove anything. Buyers did, by you know, purchasing those cards.

 

[Kaotik]

That would be the case if the "normal" price woulndt have a very low stock...This is a case of false advertising unless AMD plans to sell the vega cards alone with their mrsp in the short tern future.

Which launch didn't have cheapest cards running out of stock? AMD said before the launch that the bundles are to draw away the miners from bying everything, unsuprisingly card-onyl SKUs ran out very quickly on launch, be it miners or gamers at fault, but AMD warned about it before launch

 

[Picao84]

And in the evening you must go protest in front of your local Toys'R'Us who are giving away a free doll if you buy a RC car and a RC boat, because if you don't need the boat then the car+doll is less expensive if bought separately, so the doll isn't free anymore.

Except in this case the CPU + Motherboard and Screen are not included in deal, consumers will have to spend even more money, beyond the pack cost, all the while they have already spent 100 above the normal MSRP to get the "full pack". The word pack itself does not make sense either, since you are getting vouchers, not products (apart from the GPU and "free" games). There you go, one more semantic question!

If that would be the same on the example above, it would mean that you would have to pay an additional extra for the car, to then be able to buy the boat cheaper. Everyone would tell you that that would be ridiculous.

Its not the same situation no matter how many colors you want to paint it in.

 

[Otto Dafe]

I gather you must get up every saturday and sunday morning to go protest at your local McDonald's because the free toy they give out with Happy Meals isn't really free.. because if you don't want the fries and drink then the Happy Meal is more expensive than a cheeseburger.
And at afternoon you must go protest in front of your local electronics store who sell a Surface Pro + keyboard combo and then offer the surface pen for free, but if you're not going to use the keyboard then the pen isn't free anymore.
And in the evening you must go protest in front of your local Toys'R'Us who are giving away a free doll if you buy a RC car and a RC boat, because if you don't need the boat then the car+doll is less expensive if bought separately, so the doll isn't free anymore.


How harsh must be the life of a semantics activist...

It's a weird example because something like that could be actionable depending on what types of claims were made, e.g:

https://www.law360.com/articles/888250/mcdonald-s-extra-value-meals-no-deal-class-claims

Obviously I'm not saying the situations are perfectly analogous or whether this McDonald's case has legs or not.

 

[troyan]

Which launch didn't have cheapest cards running out of stock? AMD said before the launch that the bundles are to draw away the miners from bying everything, unsuprisingly card-onyl SKUs ran out very quickly on launch, be it miners or gamers at fault, but AMD warned about it before launch

The "Pack"-SKU is just a "card-onyl SKU", too. You are not forced to buy a mainboard and CPU. And you dont get a voucher for later. Either you buy everything or you pay $100 more for the two games...

 

[Malo]

AMD didn't remove anything. Buyers did, by you know, purchasing those cards.

Are you saying the SKU is not available anymore because they sold out of that particular SKU of card only or because there aren't any more cards available?

 

[xEx]

Which launch didn't have cheapest cards running out of stock? AMD said before the launch that the bundles are to draw away the miners from bying everything, unsuprisingly card-onyl SKUs ran out very quickly on launch, be it miners or gamers at fault, but AMD warned about it before launch

The problem is that miners simply can sell those "items" that they are buying now for a discount price.

The thing about price is that if you tell people you will sell the card at a certain price and then sell then for a higher price.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

Are you saying the SKU is not available anymore because they sold out of that particular SKU of card only or because there aren't any more cards available?

Packless card SKUs sold out.

AMD will be providing more stock of every SKU next week, including packless SKUs:

”Radeon RX Vega 64 demand continues to exceed expectations. AMD is working closely with its partners to address this demand. Our initial launch quantities included standalone Radeon RX Vega 64 at SEP of $499, Radeon RX Vega 64 Black Packs at SEP of $599, and Radeon RX Vega 64 Aqua Packs at SEP of $699. We are working with our partners to restock all SKUs of Radeon RX Vega 64 including the standalone cards and Gamer Packs over the next few weeks, and you should expect quantities of Vega to start arriving in the coming days.”

https://www.io-tech.fi/uutinen/amd-...-rx-vega-64n-hinnoittelusta-ja-saatavuudesta/

 

[Deleted member 2197]

AMD’s official statement on RX Vega64 pricing answers absolutely nothing

This is AMD stating specifically that “initial launch quantities” of Vega64 did include cards at $499, $599 and $699 price points. However, it does not confirm that AMD will continue to use this pricing going forward. It simply states that at launch, those prices existed.

The very next sentence says: “We are working with our partners to restock all SKUs of Radeon RX Vega64, including standalone cards and Gamer Packs over the next few weeks”.

This is not AMD saying that GPUs will be back in stock at their original price points, it is merely AMD saying that GPUs will be back in stock. It appears to be intentionally ambiguous, which ultimately means that this statement provided us with no real, definitive answers.

https://www.kitguru.net/components/...rx-vega64-pricing-answers-absolutely-nothing/

 

[3dilettante]

The fixed-count rebate method may be a way for AMD to manage the mix of card-only and bundled packs. If the price being paid by the retailer is such that it's not compelling to sell card-only at MSRP without the rebate, then it limits how many sales can be done without going to the higher pack price.

This would avoid having to make a distinct product for what is potentially a temporary situation, and may be a way for AMD to leverage slack in other products/relationships to either boost Vega or compensate for uncomfortably high costs.
Aside from hoping some vouchers go unused, the additional discounts seem to be applied so that they encourage buying AMD products or those that may have some other partnership or shared investment already.

It sort of distributes an otherwise fatter rebate or higher MSRP and their downsides over those other avenues, and potentially gives some efficiency if it helps move inventory or provides more value-add than it cost to arrange for them.

What keeps the card-only SKU possible is if AMD's prices at some point shift to make card-only more readily acceptable, a form of the rebate continues, or possibly a mix of the two.

 

[Deleted member 2197]

If the price being paid by the retailer is such that it's not compelling to sell card-only at MSRP without the rebate, then it limits how many sales can be done without going to the higher pack price.

Then the introductory price is a fake MSRP, and the true MSRP to retailers being the price without the rebate applied.

 

[3dilettante]

Then the introductory price is a fake MSRP, and the true MSRP to retailers being the price without the rebate applied.

I think that depends on whether AMD continues to rebate a fraction of the later batches.
If this continues, then the output mix is akin to AMD making a line of cards that were specifically for the card-only sales.

If that continues, the next question is if it's a non-trivial fraction of cards and if at some point prices will adjust to not need the rebate.
Since money is fungible, one other way to interpret the pack sales is that their higher cost is in part subsidizing the rebates on the card-only sales.

 

[Geeforcer]

Packless card SKUs sold out.

I didn't realize that these games were soldered directly into the GPU itself to create the "pack SKUs" as opposed to a separately distributed leaflet with download codes.

I guess now we know where the increased transistor count went.

 

[Kaotik]

AMD’s official statement on RX Vega64 pricing answers absolutely nothing

https://www.kitguru.net/components/...rx-vega64-pricing-answers-absolutely-nothing/

That's just BS. Even as non-native english speaker there's no possible way to read the statement that "launch prices were these, future prices are something else"
The statement says, without room to wiggle, that launch had 3 SKUs (basic, bundle, bundle with watercooling, with $499, 599 and 699 prices respectively) and they're working on getting every SKU back in stoc (with the same prices)

 

[Kaotik]

I didn't realize that these games were soldered directly into the GPU itself to create the "pack SKUs" as opposed to a separately distributed leaflet with download codes.

I guess now we know where the increased transistor count went.

Obviously they're not, but certain cards are "marked" to be sold as part of Packs instead of just the card. You get to choose if you buy it with just the free games for $100 premium over basic price or do you take advantage of the discounts too

 

[Malo]

Yeah I don't agree with that article. It really does imply that they'll be refilling the existing SKUs. Time will tell anyway.

 

[Malo]

Obviously they're not, but certain cards are "marked" to be sold as part of Packs instead of just the card. You get to choose if you buy it with just the free games for $100 premium over basic price or do you take advantage of the discounts too

Of course the cheapest version will have the least allocation by far which sucks for gamers that simply want to buy the card but AMD wants to make some money.

 

[silent_guy]

That's just BS. Even as non-native english speaker there's no possible way to read the statement that "launch prices were these, future prices are something else"

It perfectly valid to read the full statement as 2 separate ones: one talking about the past, one talking about the future, with the second one not necessarily adding to first. I like looking for loopholes, it's fun, and CarstenS clearly had the same immediate reaction.

But it's probably safe to attribute this ambiguousness to run-of-the-mill AMD communication ineptness instead of malice. They've probably given up by now, with interns running the show.

And there's no way to falsify anything: it's sufficient for AMD to send 1 GPU down the channel for $499 to claim they kept their word.

 

[eastmen]

http://www.gamersnexus.net/industry/3025-amd-statement-on-vega-pricing-retailers-fault

have a point of clarification on the official statement: The statement notes ‘initial launch quantities’ and attaches prices to those initial quantities. What is not clear -- to me, at least -- is whether the RX Vega 64 cards will be restocked at a specific price. The statement works around that. Can you confirm for print whether RX Vega 64 single cards (non-bundles) will be restocked at $500?”

AMD responded:

“Because we can’t control pricing, I can’t say that.”

So its just like anything else AMD set the MSRP and retailers will jack up the prices to make as much as they can.