| thranx said: It was your sentance, i just reused it. You seem to think the general public are idoits and have not seen many deals like this. Either you don't go shopping or you are being naive on purpose. Thats why I reused your sentance so maybe you could see how your tone was. Againyou are the only one reading it that way. Everyone else is reading it just fine. Consumers are not iodiots, stop assuming they are.Wehter its a game machine, a hoiuse hold appliance, a cell phone, etc peoplea re very used to these deals. My mom has used similare deals and she knows nothing of games. Your reasoning is wrong because you are trying to read it as a common person apparently and are not doing the common person justice assuming they are have no reading comprehension or have never read a deal before when clearly many have and do know how it works. Your also assuming that you are different (better? i dont know) than the normal consumer. These ads are being made by the companies they are being sold in, not MS. I think best buy knows what consumers are used too. That would be why they used a very common and generic ad. So does game stop. And any where else this will be sold. |
Which sentence are you talking about? I can't see anything that you said that I'd said before you. And I don't think the general public are idiots, I think the "deal" is vague enough to catch people out who aren't gaming enthusiasts, and thus don't know to pay close attention to it.
As I said, the problem isn't the deal, it's how they're selling it. They aren't selling it the way that a "household appliance", a "cell phone", etc would be sold. To be clear, by "selling", I'm talking marketing, not actual sales.
Excuse me, but where did this "common person" thing come from? I would never use such a term, and I do not think of people in that way. And it's not reading comprehension - what I've been saying from the start is that someone who isn't a gaming enthusiast doesn't read the ad knowing that an Xbox 360 is usually $250 (and that MS isn't big on actual deals), or that Xbox Live Gold is usually cheaper than the price they're quoting. It's the lack of knowledge of the field that is the problem, and is what MS is exploiting. All I'm doing, when reading it, is ignoring the part of my mind that knows about gaming. And it reveals the problem that I've put forward.
yo_john117 - My problem isn't the "deal" itself. It's how they're selling it. That is, the marketing method.
sales2099 - I never said they're gullible, stop putting words into my mouth. My problem has never been the deal itself, but the marketing. They make it look, to the casual eye (again, this doesn't mean "casual gamer", this means someone reading without close inspection), like the deal is "buy an Xbox 360 for $99, get Xbox Live Gold with it". You and I know that MS would never do this. A non-enthusiast wouldn't.
d21lewis - Tell me, how would you read "Jump into Xbox experience for only $99"? The word "only" implies that that's the full price that you'll pay. This is then followed by "...for only $99 with new 2 year Xbox Live Gold contract at $14.99/month". There are three ways to read it - either there's the way that people in this thread understand it (which comes mostly from the fact that they know MS and actually saw information on what the deal really was first, prior to seeing how they're marketing it), there's "get the system for $99 with free Xbox Live Gold", or there's "get the system for $99 and then get Xbox Live Gold for $14.99/month if you want it". All three are valid readings of it. Let me say that again: all three are valid readings. And a formal reading of it favours the second interpretation, due to the repeated use of "only" and the choice of the word "at" before the monthly Xbox Live Gold price (which implies value rather than cost). The use of the word "contract" is the only thing that favours the first reading, and it's not inconsistent with the other readings.
