Kasz216 on 06 November 2009
| binary solo said: Let's not kid our selves that MS took on the extended warranty of RROD out of some sense of honour or the essential goodness of the company. Their hand was forced by the high failure rate, and had they not provided extended coverage for RROD their console would have died out this gen and would be well back in third place by now. Either that, or they would have been forced into a radical redesign of the 360 to really eliminate the cause of RROD. MS is not a more honourable corporation than Sony. And Sony isn't more honourable than Ninty. And Ninty is not more honourable than MS. Whether to "do the right thing" by a consumer with a faulty product outside warranty comes down to the economics of the issue every time. Will it cost the company more to sort out the problem at no charge, or will it cost the company more in lost sales to not fix it for free? MS knew they stood to lose a lot more by not extending coverage. Sony, rightly so far it seems, decided it doesn't stand to lose by sticking to 1 year warranty for any PS3 faults. That's the advantage of having a reliable machine with a low failure rate. |
I would actually argue Nintendo is more honorable... by necessity.
As you say, it comes down to economics... and being a small company it's a larger risk to try an alienate your consumers... since if Nintendo alienates it's consumers... it has no buissness. Unlike Sony or Microsoft who could wait until consumers comeback by the profitability of their other departments. Or at least hold on longer if facing general losses.
