UK Stock update (X360)

[wco81]

Think of it this way. If it wasn't a WW launch, you guys wouldn't have any units now, instead of just 25 or 50k for the UK.

Then you'd be wailing about how Europe got screwed over again by a console manufacturer.

Isn't some taste or some crumbs better than none?

BTW, I read an analyst speculate that the Xenon CPU supplies may be constrained. Wouldn't be surprising, given IBM's history (ask Apple). At least there are no plans to push up the clock speed.

I don't know about the Pound but the Euro is near a 2-year low against the Dollar. So it's a good time for MS to be launching in Europe. Who knows what the exchange rate would be next fall?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Who said it isn't?

What you're saying is that manufacturability should have been given an even higher priority (over, presumably, console power or flexibility).

Keep in mind that launch shortages are short term. The power / flexibility of the system will be for the life of the console. Would the trade-off be worth it? Who knows.

In a way I agree with Titanio's philosophy and suggested as much elsewhere. If you're aim to winning the next gen is to launch first and get a massive installed base, the hardware ought to be designed for that strategy. That means some compromises in the technical side to make a cheaper, easier product. If MS had gone with a more conventional CPU and GPU combo, the hardware would have less potential but they could swamp the industry as it were (if the software and all else is there). With 20 million units before PS3 launches and 20 million more in the first year, you'd createa massive software platform that, for all your rival's better technology, is going to draw the software devs. With a complex bit of hardware, the early-lead card become less powerful and you're back to competing with a hard slog on. If you hav a strategy you ought to play to it. There's no point playing a defensive strategy if you're fielding a 3-4-3 formation. There's no point playing the early-lead if the numbers you can produce for an early lead aren't sufficient to make the difference.

If MS are experiencing difficulties, such as in the CPU department, then it's unfortunate for them. If they're getting the numbers they were expecting, I question if the rush-launch was a wise move. Better to take your time on the hardware and software launch titles and erupt onto the scene with a bang if you're going to be going toe-to-toe.

But as for the worldwide launch with what they've got, I'm not grumbling.

 

[scooby_dooby]

So 50k for the UK? That's been confirmed?

Seems really low, how many regions are they launching in in europe? That's about 1/6 of what they had claimed for the European launch (300k)

You would think UK would get the largest allotment though, that doesn't bode well.

Ah well..I gots mine!

 

[Tap In]

So 50k for the UK? That's been confirmed?

Seems really low, how many regions are they launching in in europe? That's about 1/6 of what they had claimed for the European launch (300k)

You would think UK would get the largest allotment though, that doesn't bode well.

Ah well..I gots mine!

yea that seems low but it is a number that has been floating around for a while since it was posted once a while back.

I would like to wait for some confirmation on that before pointing to it as fact.

Shifty.... great points!

 

[BlueTsunami]

I just got about $450 unexpected dollars Direct Deposited to my account today (its legit). I'm still going back and forth in my head about getting the Premium or the Core pack (the Core so I can save about $100 and that can go towards presents). I'll feel guilty if I blow the whole $450 on a 360..so i'm probably going to get the Core

 

[hey69]

I bought 3 premiums today. one of it is already on ebay ..

 

[wco81]

20 million BEFORE the PS3?

I don't think in Microsoft's wildest dreams they expect that.

I've heard Allard and his boss talk about the first to 10 million wins the next-gen race.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

You'll only save $60 off the Premium remember, unless you intend to never save your games so won't ned a save-game card. Which, if you intend to finish any games, would require you to never switch your XB360 off. Which probably isn't wise...

 

[Shifty Geezer]

20 million BEFORE the PS3?

I don't think in Microsoft's wildest dreams they expect that.

I've heard Allard and his boss talk about the first to 10 million wins the next-gen race.

No, 20 million wasn't their target, but to win the war on the early victories strategy, you'd want a huge advantage. 20 million provides a user base contrast of 20:1 for PS3's launch, and still 5:1 much later on. What developer would then write for PS3 when they'll get likely 5x the sales on XB360?

I think though MS have talked of the early launch, they haven't specialised on that, and gone for that as their strategy. It was an afterthought and something else they could do to stengthen their game. They've gone for something of a balance between power, launch-time, price etc. which basically means no overwhelming strength in any category that they can use to their advantage. At the moment MS have 'we're the only next-gen console available' but not enough units to really make that matter, and when PS3 launches it could well be the only strength they can advertise is 'we have Live!' (other than 1st party exclusives of course). They won't have 'we're the most powerful' (all talk is of 'we're similar to PS3'. There's no obvious numbers MS can wield to show themselves more powerful), 'we're the cheapest' (Revolution), 'we've the biggest selection of games' (assuming Devs stick with PS as the primary platform, which a super installed base for XB360 would change), 'we're the most popular' (not enough consoles being sold to make a difference here either), 'we've the most diverse games' (assuming PS maintains it's diversity, plus EyeToy and Revolution providing alternatives) or any other strategy. XB360's becomes just a rounded, middle of the road machine that they'll be competing on all levels without a key attraction (other than Live! and 1st parties of course).

If you compare that with a cheaper, simpler machine that's produced on mass and gets 20 million out there cheap ($200), when PS3 arrives MS would have substantial games, diversity of titles, be the best selling console, the most popular, have the momentum of millions of owners showing the machine to their friends who'll also want one to play multiplayer and share friends' games, etc. This is what could be got from an early lead, but only if you intend to do that from the beginning and plan for that.

 

[scooby_dooby]

I don't know what you're expecting Shifty, they can only produce so man yconsoles in a given timeframe, and have never claimed to be aiming higher than 10million by the end of 2006.

I think the importance of availability at launch is being a little overblown, will it really efefct anything 2 or 3 months from now? MS's target is 1million for 2005, lets say they botch it competely and only can get out 600k, does it really matter? 600k instead of 1000k?

Will it impact their stated goal of 4.5-5.5 million by June, or 10million by the end of 06? I don't think it's that big of a deal, as long as it isn't so bad that theres a consumer backlash(console consumers tend to be extremely forgiving) and as long as the problem are fixed fairly quickly and they get a solid stream coming in 2006.

Also, as far as scaling back the hardware, how do you know they didn't already scale it back?

 

[Joe DeFuria]

If you compare that with a cheaper, simpler machine that's produced on mass and gets 20 million out there cheap ($200), when PS3 arrives MS would have substantial games, diversity of titles, be the best selling console, the most popular, have the momentum of millions of owners showing the machine to their friends who'll also want one to play multiplayer and share friends' games, etc.

But when the graphics / gamplay is decidedly not so great (due to reduced hardware...) who says there will be demand for 20 million units while everyone is waiting for the "superior" PS3 to launch?

See "dreamcast".

IMO, MS needed to do a few things (hardware wise) this gen to give them the best chance at significant market share increases:

1) To have a machine that can at least be considered "about on par" with the PS3, (real or percevied.)

2) Availability 6 months to a year earlier than PS3

3) Keep hardware costs about the same or less than PS3

Doing all three things simultaneously is a tall order. Your best shot is going to be a machine that is in reality marginally less powerful, though the end result (games), doesn't appear that way.

But again, if you reduce your power too much you lose point one. It's all a delicate balancing act.

 

[eSa]

XBox sales for Finland...

Not gonna try to buy it myself, but anyway; according some guy from M$ Finland amount of X360 consoles for finnish launch was "under 5000 units".

Biggest department store in Finland did not have any, something like a hundred were sold for persons who had reserved the 'Box early on. According the above mentioned d.store sales person, "small amounts will available" for each week until x-mas. So, basically M$ did blow it for x-mas sales...

 

[Tap In]

But when the graphics / gamplay is decidedly not so great (due to reduced hardware...) who says there will be demand for 20 million units while everyone is waiting for the "superior" PS3 to launch?

See "dreamcast".

IMO, MS needed to do a few things (hardware wise) this gen to give them the best chance at significant market share increases:

1) To have a machine that can at least be considered "about on par" with the PS3, (real or percevied.)

2) Availability 6 months to a year earlier than PS3

3) Keep hardware costs about the same or less than PS3

Doing all three things simultaneously is a tall order. Your best shot is going to be a machine that is in reality marginally less powerful, though the end result (games), doesn't appear that way.

But again, if you reduce your power too much you lose point one. It's all a delicate balancing act.

good analysis

I think MS has gone a long way in meeting that tall order and I'm sure has fleshed out all the possibilities of the balancing act.

It is WAY too soon to be claiming the launch a failure.

considering its never been done, they are doing pretty well IMO. Shifty was right in his analysis IMO regarding them at least getting as many units as possible into as many areas as possible. Satiating demand in one area is not nearly as important as creating a presence in many. They still have plenty of time to meet the demand prior to the PS3 launch.

 

[expletive]

But when the graphics / gamplay is decidedly not so great (due to reduced hardware...) who says there will be demand for 20 million units while everyone is waiting for the "superior" PS3 to launch?

See "dreamcast".

IMO, MS needed to do a few things (hardware wise) this gen to give them the best chance at significant market share increases:

1) To have a machine that can at least be considered "about on par" with the PS3, (real or percevied.)

2) Availability 6 months to a year earlier than PS3

3) Keep hardware costs about the same or less than PS3

Doing all three things simultaneously is a tall order. Your best shot is going to be a machine that is in reality marginally less powerful, though the end result (games), doesn't appear that way.

But again, if you reduce your power too much you lose point one. It's all a delicate balancing act.

I agree here and I think you have to remember what the situation will be when the PS3 acutally launches.

1. The 360 will be $50 to $100 cheaper.
2. The 360 will be relasing 2nd gen games which will probably look at least as good, possibly better, than launch PS3 games.
3. They will probably alreay have 7-10 million units sold.
4. A decent library of games with some of the bigger new IP titles imminent (masseffect, too human, etc).
5. Halo 3 on launch or announced.
6. Some word of mouth momentum and XBL community taking root.

Personally, i dont think that Revolution being cheaper than a core is a foregone conclusion, and that it will come down to 360 vs PS3 rather than stacking them all up against each other.

 

[kyleb]

I'm with you there to some extent on everything there aside from point #1, I don't see how anyone could would be in any position t o call that yet.

 

[BlueTsunami]

I just called Walmart and CircuitCity (local, in Fitchburg, Massachusetts) and both of said they were out and won't be getting any till after the Holidays....

 

[Joe DeFuria]

I'm with you there to some extent on everything there aside from point #1, I don't see how anyone could would be in any position t o call that yet.

I would say that so far, MS is indeed balancing well.

With point #1...as of right now, I would say the general perception is that the 360 won't significantly lack in power. Whether or not it does in the end we can't tell of course...but the important thing at launch is the perception of relative power. The vibe I get from reading press / reviews is not one that says "...but the PS3 will be a step better when it launches."

Point 2 can be argued both ways at this point...certainly, MS will have availability 6 months to a year before PS3 in most places. However, depending on how many units MS can ultimately ship, it could be argued that availability isn't widespread enough. I think if MS can get their 7-10 million units shipped worldwide before PS3 launches in the three major territories, I'd say that MS would've done the job.

Point 3: no one really knows the actual costs, but at this time I'd say MS has succeeded here. Most estimate the XBOX 360 premium to be in the neighborhood of, and possibly less than, what the PS3 will cost to manufacture. The xbox core system obviously costs less.

 

[kyleb]

Sorry for the confusioin, I was referring to expletive's first point. I think your first point is dead on, as well as the other points you list as well. My only issue with this situation is that the current lack of supply is building discontent and the longer that lasts the more people there will be who find other things to capture their interests. So I can't help but feel MS would have been better off launching a few months later when they would be at a better position to meet demand while still comming out well before Sony's launch.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

My only issue with this situation is that the current lack of supply is building discontent and the longer that lasts the more people there will be who find other things to capture their interests.

Yes, that is one potential downside to a "lower density" launch. The potential upsides include:

1) People maintaining interest since their "friends" have it and are playing with one
2) Less discontent from entire regions "waiting" for the console while others have it

To be clear, I'm not claiming the world-wide strategy to be a success...there's no way to evaluate it until at least the time that PS3 goes through it's own launch.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Who says it's building discontent?

Are casual gamers aware that MS may have missed their target numbers? Or is this just taken as your typical console launch?

I can tell you that most of my friends have no clue about shipment numbers, or how many units are going where, all they know is everyone wants one and it's totally sold out.

Alot of people have heard nasty rumours about the 360 melting, but I haven't heard anyone 'discontent' with MS(other than the usual MS is evil/incompetent crap), it's just taken as your usual console launch.

I think MS made the right decision, the hardcore's will still want one in 2 or 3 months, and by getting their foot in the door, they are now set up and ready to go worldwide once supply starts flowing. IN the meantime, they're still gonna sell 1 or 2million consoles they wouldn't have if they had waited.