Quantcast
Xbox One price-cuts incoming - To match PS4's

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Xbox One price-cuts incoming - To match PS4's

ethomaz said:
g911turbo said:
ethomaz said:
Seems like a desperate move if true... but won't change anything...

I'm thinking here how much the sales on US are bad to make a company cut the price so early.


You really think a 100 price drope will not change ANYTHING?  

Heap... it will increase the sales for a little moment but that won't be enough to PS4... even if the PS4 was $100 expensive the situation will be the same... price didn't matter the gamers already made their choice... when this price cut happened PS4 will have a user awe close to 20m while Xbone will be passing 10m.

PS4 is a dreaming machine for gamers.

Yeah, you certainly sound like you've been using a dreaming machine.



Around the Network

That needs to happen if MS wants the Xbox One to be as close as possible to the PS4 sales-wise....or they can be happy with sales in the 40-50 million range.. That's an option, too!



                
       ---Member of the official Squeezol Fanclub---

when you have to release a new sku, potentially dumping a "core part of the experience" in favor of dropping the price, less than 6 months after the consoles launch, you know it's not setting a good tone for the rest of the consoles lifetime.

Xbox apologists can say what you want but all a price drop is going to do, so early on, is make people on the fence wait a little longer hoping for further reductions.



DucksUnlimited said:
ethomaz said:
g911turbo said:
ethomaz said:
Seems like a desperate move if true... but won't change anything...

I'm thinking here how much the sales on US are bad to make a company cut the price so early.


You really think a 100 price drope will not change ANYTHING?  

Heap... it will increase the sales for a little moment but that won't be enough to PS4... even if the PS4 was $100 expensive the situation will be the same... price didn't matter the gamers already made their choice... when this price cut happened PS4 will have a user awe close to 20m while Xbone will be passing 10m.

PS4 is a dreaming machine for gamers.

Yeah, you certainly sound like you've been using a dreaming machine.

PS4 will and close to 20m machines shipped lifetime in 2014... they shipped ~5m in 2013... 13+ million in 2014 will be easy task.



JoeFlex said:
DonFerrari said:
JoeFlex said:
DonFerrari said:
JoeFlex said:
Given Sony's level of preparation, it would be interesting if they managed to drive costs down (somehow) and responded with a price cut to keep their edge going.


Like they never cut price, right?

*fixed*

I'm referring to them being able to cut their price in a very short period of time in a sustainable way in order to counter MS, assuming this "report" is true.

As already posted, Sony cut the price by US$100,00 basiically for 3 years in a row (and took a big financial hit for it), but yes they could cut strongly if needed, but I really doubt Sony and MS will play a cut price war... Sony cutted because it had poor sales and knew the console wasn't interesting/affordable to a lot of people at the time, not because MS was selling better (and that is why MS didn't cut as much, because they were satisfied with their selling rate and profit margins). Unless MS is obligated to cut because of poooooor sales them I don't see them doing it, and Sony would answer with a cut just if MS rise took to much from them, after all both are in the bussiness for the money not the numbers.

Yes, but that was a different Sony, and a significantly more financially capable one too. I am not inclined to think they would be so willing to do so given their current financial troubles. They only have so many buildings to sell in order to obtain profitability. This goes back to my post about them being able to do this ... (wait for it) ... .sustainably.


They were in a worst situation during PS3 release... and do you really think they sold buldings to cut PS3 price??

About Sony not be willing to cut, there I can agree, it will depend on a conjecture of factors. The same happened during gen 7th, MS were capable of cuting but weren't willing. Now it may be sony time, we will discover with time.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Around the Network
mutantsushi said:

And if PS4's lead continues to grow, with XBone sales dropping off disproportionately after initial enthusiast/early adopter demand, PS4 will gain additional advantage and sales just from the "buy what your friends have/play" dynamic.  MS was also able to extend their initial lead last-gen because their major advantage in install base meant they had the bigger game library and continued to attract more 3rd parties well into the gen, even after PS3 reached it's "turning point" it still had to make up lost ground.

But again, there is no reason to think this rumor is true.  There has been a flurry of news about leaks from MS, and those leakers' identity being discovered by MS.  Selectively providing false info to suspected leakers is the obvious way to prove they are the leaker.  Dropping the BluRay drive would itself not save a signifigant amount of cost, certainly not $100.  While it might prevent 2nd hand sales and thus boost long term profit, that would also destroy MS' retail partners' profits and create major problems in relations there... when MS is certainly relyin on retail partners right now to keep sales solid.

Both Sony and MS can be expected to drop prices in tune with reductions in production cost... Last I read, this gen should be able to do so quicker and more often than last gen, due to the basic hardware being very similar to standard PC hardware.  CPU/GPU fab continues to progress, and they both should switch to a smaller process node sooner rather than later.  That will help both of them sell more, just because more consumers are open to a reasonably priced console (and one with more games by that time).  That aspect doesn't really affect the proportional share of each console though, and as long as MS retains Kinect that will be a disproportionate restraint on reductions in production cost.  Incidentally, Sony just bought a memory producer so should soon be able to produce GDDR in-house, making any MS advantage in DDR vs. GDDR less relevant.

This is fairly significant although early adopters dictating what their friends buy over say the next year or so is far from given. One could arguably say that the year lead the XB360 had over the PS3 resulted in a more robust XBL userbase during the first year of the PS3, but one could just as easily explain this by pointing out that PSN simply wasn't on par with XBL at the time. The cost difference was a hard sell as well.

Dropping the optical drive on the other hand, would have little to do with shaving costs and everything to do with being the sole distribution outlet for both software and media. MS would pretty much have to sell specific game voucher cards in addition to XBL money cards to sell retailers on stocking the SKU, but I'd be curious to see the buying trends on these. From what I would gather, the primary consumers of money cards or game download cards would be those who don't have credit cards (not an insignificant number) and a smaller pool of consumers who use them as gifts. 

As for other cost shaving measures; this was more what SCE had to rely upon simply to reduce losses. They had to shave $100 off a $600 console that was still costing them over $800 to produce in 2007. They saved some on manufacturing costs by cutting the PS2 Emotion Engine CPU, 2 USB ports and the media card readers and later dropped the PS2 GPU along with the CBE and RSX die shrinks, but they were still losing money off of every unit sold until 2010 if memory serves me correctly. 

MS, on the other hand, not only hit profitability sooner per unit, but was also able to avoid a series of price cuts simply to spur sales. The original MSRP was $400 for the "Pro" and $300 for the non-HDD "Core." Technically, MS only dropped $100 off of both the price of their standard SKU (just console with HDD; currently the 250GB SKU) and $100 off their entry price SKU (currently the $200 4GB SKU). Granted, the same money bought better and better features (bigger HDD, HDMI port, NAND memory, standard wireless constroller), but it doesn't change the fact that MS essentially only dropped $100 off the original 2005 prices, which is pretty incredible over 7 years. 

By contrast, the PS3 went from $600 and $500 SKUs all the way down to the current $250 and $200 SKUs. They had to cut MSRPs before redesigns and streamlined manufacturing processes could bring them into profitability as a result. 

We'll see how quickly both manufacturers are able to cut costs with new designs and streamlined manufacturing, but they're already starting from lower points from a parts/manufacturing cost standpoint. I've seen discrepancies on the BoM estimates, but I estimated the PS4 was closer to $300 before teardowns were even available based upon the reported builds, but I've seen estimates that have it pegged closer to the $400 MSRP. MS is always going to have the handicap of the Kinect 2.0 as an added cost until they offer a console only SKU. 



Nothing quite like fisting early adopters.



Sony should answer with a price hike.

A $499 PS4 with included hardware BC

I'd buy that in an instant.



“It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it.”

- George Orwell, ‘1984’

Well if it doesn't have a blu-ray drive but a larger hard drive it could work.

Since digital games are *generally* MSRP for a majority of the time, MS could make a killing off the royalities from each game sold digitally. So if say the person buys 5 games digitally at full MSRP, MS is already making their money back. I'd imagine someone buying the model will buy more then just 5 games over the life time. Forcing the consumer to go digital is defenitely going to help MS with their future plan as well as their bottom line.

It would suck for those that want to re-sell or watch blu-ray movies/dvds but that's about it. Oh and Skylanders since they don't sell it digitally. MS just needs to be more aggressive with their digital pricing ala Steam.



It's just that simple.

I hope a no optical drive Xbox One does not happen. Buying games digitally would murder my internet data cap. Download a 250 GB game. Are you crazy?! If my internet were that good I'd be on Steam. I'm thinking a cheaper Xbox One could be subsidized by cable companies.