1. The definition says sellers, not seller. That definition best applies to a competitive market, say for wheat or copper. The link shows how a monopoly in this case which is Sony supplies the PS3. This differs from how say, your local farmer might consider selling wheat.
http://www.pinkmonkey.com/studyguides/subjects/eco/chap11/e1111301.asp
2. I never based my statements on anything but how consumers demanded the Wii or PS3 or Xbox 360. The Wiis overall demand is higher than the PS3 and the PS3s overall demand worldwide is likely higher than the Xbox 360. So therefore if all else remained the same, price/quantity supplied etc the Wii would sell more than the PS3 and the PS3 would likely sell a little more than the Xbox 360.
The whole concept of a mass market price is centred around a console being price elastic as the price approached certain levels. The mass market price is by definition the pricing level where demand is neither elastic or inelastic so the overall quantity demanded is the highest that it can be efficiently raised to.
2008 Holiday sales Xbox 360 America: 2,799,403 PS3 control: 1,322,439
2007 Holiday sales Xbox 360 America: 2,255,898 PS3 control: 1,380,959
The Xbox 360 price cut at its highest was 29% or 15% for the Premium or 11% Elite /~20% average
The Xbox 360 sales were 19% higher. There was some substitution between the different SKUs but on the whole the consoles prices are roughly at the mass market price point for the console as the elasticity is aproximately 1. However this year with the recession the mass market price will be lower, as we have seen demand dip now for all three consoles.
3. I never said anything about Giffin goods, consoles aren't Gucci they are a consumer product and they follow the same general rules.
Tease.
