Let's see how many marks of a poor analyst we can find...
* His first point is all about pricing. Poor analysts see value as defined primarily by price. So one strike against him.
* Point two is also about price. Only somehow it predicts Wii downfall from PS3 failure versus 360? Illogical conclusions based off of unrelated data, strike two.
* Relying on cliches in point three, like any good viral marketer or poor analyst. Strike three.
* Another cliched argument on number four, another viral marketer's best friend. Strike four.
* Focus on incrementally upgraded technology as the only value of matter in point five, poor analyst strike five.
* A total nonsense argument in point six with no solid evidence whatsoever to back it up and in fact going 100% contrary to actual data. Strike six.
* Oh look, incremental upgrade as the only value worth counting again. This guy's predictable. Strike seven...
* Trying to talk up the 360 with a feature that has near-zero profitability and no value to most consumers. Strike eight.
* Flawed statement based upon a single event triggered by a single game that is rapidly returning to normal. Bad analysts love to home in on temporary phenomenae as permanent indicators of progress. Strike nine.
Nine out of nine arguments failed to account for reality. And all of them were loaded with the most cliche'd of anti-Wii pro-360 viral marketer speak, the kind that's been in use roughly since the Wii launched. That's pretty sad.
Sky Render - Sanity is for the weak.
