AKA pooperscooper said:
The idea isn't to create high demand like you are making it seem. The idea is to make it seem more appealing. and the rebate will do that. and people will buy more while thinking of the rebate price. the second idea of this is to loose less money than an official price cut. And there was no contradiction. It's pretty obvious a 50 dollar rebate (mail in) in one country for a select period of time will lose less money than a new global price point... even if the cut was as little as 5 dollars per console (versus the 50 dollar rebate) they would still lose more. Why would people mind? It's either pay full price for it now and get money back or pay full price later and get nothing. Rebates are nothing new and people realize they are just a special deal for a limited time and the realize if they want one then no matter what they'll have to pay full price... just if they buy one now they'll get 50 dollars back. |
1st off, how does a rebate being in 1 country or worldwide change anything? Places with a rebate get a demand increase and places without a rebate don't. 2nd, Sony is trying to increase appeal and not increase sales?!?!? I think you need to look up the word contradiction. Ppl that buy the system while the sale is going on and mail-in the rebate too late are going to mind.
Bottom line is, you still haven't explained how, a mail-in rebate is better than store price cut for appeal. If a consumer sees 1 company doing permanent in-store price cuts, and then sees another company just doing a small temporarily mail-in rebate, you don't think that effects the way average consumers value the discount?
I think I've explained my opinion as clearly as it needs to be explained and most reasonable ppl are going to get it. I assume, you're either grasping at straws, trying to discredit it, or completely oblivious to the point. I really don't know much more obvious it could be. Either way, I think it's time to move along. It's evidently an old rebate that hasn't effected much of anything.
