patsu said:
In general, expletive is still correct. Pricing does not create needs (Pricing is irrelevant if utility is zero). Lowering the price of UMD will not convince someone who does not need a PSP to buy one. Whether the same person will buy DS, iPod, ... is irrelevant.
No, it's more that the example is irrelevant. Or, rather, taking too narrow a look. Do you really think that--as many iPods as are selling now--they wouldn't sell
more if songs on iTunes suddenly halved in price? You don't NEED to buy songs on iTunes to buy or enjoy an iPod to the fullest (I've bought a sum-total of one song, because I needed it in a hurry.
), but they are still connected services, and part and parcel of the "cost" people think about when determining if they want.
As I said before, none of these devices possess
needs. Lowering the price lowers resistance to purchasing what you
desire, so you pick up those on the border. There are always going to be plenty of people "on the border"--they just have different checkboxes to fill before they decide to go for it.
In the case of UMD movies on the PSP, it's certainly arguable that the effect is lessened (certainly less than if iTunes dropped their prices notably, since music is the primary service), but it still picks up people.
If someone's been pondering picking up a PSP but only sees a few games that they like and don't want to spend that much on UMD's, lowering the cost may finally tip them over.
If someone's been curious specifically about the portable movie playing but didn't like the price, lowering the price lets them keep it in mind, pay more attention to the PSP in general, and see a game they really WOULD like...
Then, the moment they own a PSP, they start laying out for games AND peripherals AND UMD's... While the statement "regardless of how low prices go for UMDs, people without PSPs arent buyin 'em" is true on the surface (but not 100% true, as there are still people like me who pick up games/media/etc in advance of actually owning the device because we think we WILL eventually own one, and don't want to pass up on good deals or time-sensitive offers, etc. I've done that so far with laserdisk players, the GameCube, PS2, and PC games/utilities I didn't yet have the configuation for), is it utterly pointless. The market does not exist in small boxes with hard walls and people who can't see beyond them. Lowering cost will--quite directly--convince people to BUY a PSP, which makes for MORE people to buy UMD's. (And games, and peripherals...) And then contribute to all the secondary and tertiary effects listed as well.
People who buy DVD's and HD DVD's are (obviously) into movies. UMD's are movies. The PSP plays them. Is anyone here claiming that
no one who buys DVD's and (later on) HD DVD's would have ANY interest in UMD's? Because that is the only circumstance where saying it would have
no influence on driving PSP sales exists. Personally, as I think the vast majority of people have and interest in movies and TV shows, and that
most of them make DVD purchases from time to time, this becomes a good way to catch their eye with what the PSP has to offer.
One can freely toss around criticisms and question how many people would actually be convinced. Personally, I think that the secondary affects would have more impact in PSP sales than the primary affects, but they play into and off of each other, but it is still a part of the "cost of entry" and "cost of ownership" and WILL have an affect--even if it doesn't do much until it accumulates with later cost drops, new bundling offers, etc. (It still makes it
lower, which draws in more people.)
I'd rather we do THAT than pretend there was anything poignant being said here. If you lower the cost of something--ANYTHING--closely associated with a device, it will have an affect.