Billy Idol
Legend
For me personally, it was a price drop and one of the reasons I bought one.
Now make the cloud fly, and give me games...
Now make the cloud fly, and give me games...
It's not technically a price drop, but in the context of the discussion it was a reasonable short-hand.
Messyman said, "Dropping the price* again after 5 months and $100 cheaper? I don't see that happening."
Just put a little 'of entry' where the asterisk is, which is somewhat implied, and it's a perfectly valid statement. The discussion was then how the drop in entry-level price affected retail uptake, and it increased it as one would expect from a product becoming available for less, although the matter becomes one of how sustained that was and whether the minimum price is the real limiting, factor, or the price of the full-fat Kinect is what is limiting larger adoption. If there is a further reduction in the entry level price, uptake should increase again, which is the recommendation. And it's a lot quicker and easy to type "price drop" than "reduction in entry level price".
Provided Microsoft does not come up with an Xbox One point Five upgraded console in 2015 should do either of the following:
1) moneyhat more game exclusives (full or time duration)
2) drop the price of the console by at least $50 to be $349 non Kinect and $449 Kinect
3) purchase Nintendo to get all those exclusives
Overall I think dropping the console price would end up being the cheaper alternative out of the three given how much they'd have to spend on the other options to make a sizable impact.
1) moneyhat more game exclusives (full or time duration)
2) drop the price of the console by at least $50 to be $349 non Kinect and $449 Kinect
3) purchase Nintendo to get all those exclusives
Overall I think dropping the console price would end up being the cheaper alternative out of the three given how much they'd have to spend on the other options to make a sizable impact.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
I'm curious about this. If Microsoft lop $50 off the price they lose $50 for every console sold, which is likely to be another 2+ million this year so that's $100m or more.
I wonder how much buying an exclusive is?
Right, I don't know but the buying of one exclusive only lasts and has an impact for so long, say maybe 6 months? I don't think any of the timed exclusives would be longer, perhaps 1 year at most? Even then, will a 1 year old exclusive game really have as much of an impact as a $50 cut? The other thought was the price drop is something they could eventually cover with cost reductions in the hardware.
I say MS should be in panic mode right now. They need a quick and sizable bump in their install base now to have carried over influence into the next couple of years. If the year ends up with PS4 at 16 million and XB1 at 7 million that will be even more lopsided after 2 years. I could see year 2 being 28 - 32 million PS4 to 10 million XB1. Those PS360 gamers looking to upgrade will more likely pick the PS4 as it should be a no brainer, as more of their early adopter friends picked up that console.
Brutal times ahead...
I say MS should be in panic mode right now. They need a quick and sizable bump in their install base now to have carried over influence into the next couple of years. If the year ends up with PS4 at 16 million and XB1 at 7 million that will be even more lopsided after 2 years. I could see year 2 being 28 - 32 million PS4 to 10 million XB1. Those PS360 gamers looking to upgrade will more likely pick the PS4 as it should be a no brainer, as more of their early adopter friends picked up that console.
Brutal times ahead...
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
I'd really wish somebody would publish a book giving more information about he economics of the console and game industry.
The one must finish the year with at least 9 millions sold
They are at least at 5M now, 1,5M will be probably sold only in america between black friday and christmans, and probably another million in the rest of the world in the same period, plus there are september and october too.
They had a bad start, can't do worst, so it must get better
They are at least at 5M now, 1,5M will be probably sold only in america between black friday and christmans, and probably another million in the rest of the world in the same period, plus there are september and october too.
They had a bad start, can't do worst, so it must get better
Aren't they best off with just doing more console game bundles? Have two pack in games for the holiday kind of thing. Both consoles are already giving away one free game, like PS4 here comes with Wolfenstein and XB1 I think comes with Fifa, so up the ante and throw in two games.
Free games aren't the same as a lower price. If you don't want the games, they aren't worth squat (save maybe a sell-on with Added Faff).
Well I figure it's about acquiring new users that haven't made the leap yet in the most cost effective manner possible. So make the package more tempting to these new people with extra games, extra controller or what have you. Bundles seemed to work well for them in the Xbox 360 era so make the package more exciting rather than just a green box.
There is zero logic in saying Sony dropped the price of PS4 before it was even launched....
You wont find any financial analyst making that argument, the only place you're likely to hear that sort of rebuttal is on gaming forums where people can come up with any sort of explanation they want and generally aren't accountable for the accuracy or plausibility of their statements.
Its makes just as much sense as saying a new SKU bundle with less items is a price drop. As in, neither statement makes any sense.
The kinect-less SKU is not a price drop, but does present a lower cost of entry option for the gaming console.
A new SKU dropping the price of entry makes 50% sense to call it a retail price drop. A choice in SKU content prior to release makes 0% sense to call it a retail price drop.
I never saw the word "retail", only "price drop".
You keep inferring words and meanings that simply are not posted. I was taking the posts as exact wording and meaning.
You said the PS4 had a price drop when the camera was removed from the bundle, I read that to mean you saying the camera was removed before launch in other words it was a part of the original SKU. If that is not what you were saying I apologize.
And BTW I do think timed exclusivity is a smart move for MS but I'd add that investment in 1st party efforts which to some degree they seem to be doing is a good idea. From what I can see they have made some tough but on balance good decisions post E3 from a year ago.
I agree somewhat that timed exclusivity is a good move. It makes the platform seem more attractive overall. However, I don't think it will be a major changer and isn't one of the primary drivers for new purchase decisions. Now if MS got GTA or COD for 9 to 12 months as exclusives, then that's a completely different story. MS needs a couple of good crosses and hooks, not just a single jab in this fight. I question the overall effectiveness at an ongoing cost per new sale perspective.
The trouble I see with first party titles is it's a long play with risks and presents no immediate relief. There's no formula to follow to guarantee all the investment will blossom into a mega-hit.
I think MS has to quickly gain sizable numbers early on to have the perception of being competitive. With these moves they're playing a medium to long game, when I feel they need an immediate short-term game.
The trouble I see with first party titles is it's a long play with risks and presents no immediate relief. There's no formula to follow to guarantee all the investment will blossom into a mega-hit.
I think MS has to quickly gain sizable numbers early on to have the perception of being competitive. With these moves they're playing a medium to long game, when I feel they need an immediate short-term game.
Sure. But if you infer some words into the originally posted words, they make some sense regards 'price drop'. No amount of inferring can make a removed camera (which wasn't so much removed as chosen not to be included as standard) prior to launch make sense as a 'price drop'.
Or basically, I don't think your come-back holds any water.
If MS was able to sell the XB1 for less than the PS4 and provide consumers with timed exclusives and some really good first titles that are not available on Playstation they would be able to do well. Its not enough to have pricing parity with weaker hardware and the same games.
They could make games moderately dollars cheaper on the system, include some games with the system at POS and invest in some good first party titles to even out the offering on the platform. They are never going to get the power back and I think releasing XB1.5 is a bad precedent but just like the 3DS vs VITA weaker hardware by no means tells the whole story.
Yep. I said before E3 that MS should immediately use the two SKUs to straddle the PS4 price with $350 / $450.
It simultaneously makes Kinect look cheapish and CoreBone look kinda good value.*
Reluctance to compete on price in the short term means they're likely to be harmed in the long term and loose far more.
*
If MS drop KinectBone to $449 then that's now effectively a $150 price drop!
Yes, they need to be willing to trade off some short-term losses to even be alive after 2 years. I think it would go a long ways even if MS only hit $360 and $460 on the XB1 and XB1+Kinect bundles.
Yes, they could pack in a game or two and would likely cost them less financially ... but there's something mental with most consumers where the lower the cost the better it seems. Even if it means they will be paying more once all things are considered. For instance, I think they will perceive a $350 console with an add-on $60 game ($410 total) to be a better value than a $399 console with a pack-in game. Maybe they subconsciously value having a choice of which game they pickup as worth the extra cost. Or maybe they know games go on sales and the old games usually used as pack-ins can be had for $20-$30.
Yes, they could pack in a game or two and would likely cost them less financially ... but there's something mental with most consumers where the lower the cost the better it seems. Even if it means they will be paying more once all things are considered. For instance, I think they will perceive a $350 console with an add-on $60 game ($410 total) to be a better value than a $399 console with a pack-in game. Maybe they subconsciously value having a choice of which game they pickup as worth the extra cost. Or maybe they know games go on sales and the old games usually used as pack-ins can be had for $20-$30.
Similar threads
