How soon would you expect to see a 360 price cut?

[ironman]

greenmedic88 said:

ironman said:

That's because you haven't learned to think outside the box. Do you really think Natal is going to be like that? That would be a recepie for a flop day one. No, the devs over at lionhead are smarter than that. 

@Lord N: Nobody ever said Natal would be the saving grace, but it combined with heavy bundling and Halo Reach will move enough consoles to pull away from the PS3 once again. 

@ greenmedic: 

Yes you can purchase a remote, but even with that it's still rather clumsy. Anyway, the average consumer will not purchase the remote because it's "too much of a hassle". Also, you have to remember, the PS3 slim is out and the price was cut by $100.00, those two facters are pretty much the only reason it's sales numbers are doing so well, not because it has a built in bluray player. 

Also, your analysis that mostly consumers have a price point at which they will purchase the console regardless of what it is bundled with is a fallicy at best. The moment you start bundling a console with games or paraphernalia that the consumers were wanting to buy (without increasing costs), you increase the perceived value of the bundle and those consumers will be more inclined to purchase said bundle.

Show definitive proof to support your claim.

Demonstrate at least one solid example where a bundle has had a significant and permanent change (ie rising plateau effect) to sales of a specific console.

I don't think you realize how large Natal and Reach will be. As long as you think people will just snub their noses at those, then there can be no convincing you. Anyway, take a look at the sales numbers for bundles...did they undersell? Or did they move consoles? I think you will see a trend where the latter is true. 

And you misinterpret what was said: the $100 price drop (ie the drop from $399 to $299) was what moved the PS3 Slim; not the fact that it came in a cheaper housing with fewer components that cost SCE a lot less to manufacture.

No, what moved the slim was the fact that is smaller and sexier. Many people who already had a "phat" went out and purchased a slim. Yes the pricecut did help , but it wasn't the only factor. So, no, I did not "misinterpret" what you were saying I just disagree wholeheartedly. 

No claim was made about BD player functions having any sort of positive effect on the sales of $299 PS3 slim units. But the $299 SKU permanently increased PS3 sales significantly despite this. To repeat what was said: that feature was irrelevant for consumers strictly looking for a cheap BD player which were commonly available around the same time the $299 Slim debuted.

Erm read the OP, he stated that the PS3 had an edge over the 360 due in part to it having a blueray player.  

The PS3 BD remote's fine. I have yet to hear from anyone who complained about how difficult it was to use. You're simply making up an argument to support your opinion. The only complaint has been over the lack of an IR remote interface, typically among those who paid a lot of money for Harmony remotes that won't work with the PS3 Bluetooth interface.

No, I don't disagree with you that the remote works fine, but the average consumer isn't going to purchase an remote so they can use the clumsy interface (by clumsy I mean not as simple as a stand alone unit). I'm sorry but this is not made up, if bluray was the deciding factor, and it was such a big deal, why has the PS3 STILL not caught up to the 360 in terms of overall sales. Bluray just doesn't matter when it comes to the PS3, and it never really has. Market adoption was slow and by the time it started picking up, cheaper standalone units were available. To top it off, some very nice upconverting DVD players were made available, you know, the ones that used software to "upconvert" the 420P to a simulated 1080P. Why, when DVDs still hold the majority of marketshare, would anybody think that bluray was a selling point?