$400 X360+Halo bundle revealed. No X360 price cut despite PS3 Slim and WiiU launches?

[Troll_Whisperer]

Lostplanet22 said:

Troll_Whisperer said:

Lostplanet22 said:
it is better to sacrifice profit to get more marketshare?

That's what I'm asking. I guess your answer is no.

But marketshare is a long term investment, I think they could've sold much more last and this holiday season and they could've hurt PS3 and WiiU more if they reduced the price. That in turn would've made the Xbox brand stronger, which is always good before launching a next gen console. It could bring more X720 sales and it may be more beneficial to do that in the long term.

 

MS make a lot of profits on HW as it is and I think it would've been smart to cut the price last year. They'll still profit on HW and get more Xboxes out there.

No, it is certainly not long for consoles, the Wii's almost 50% marketshare back in the day did not do that much, sega's bigger marketshare in Europe with genesis did not help them at all, many EU gamers know what a Genesis/megadrive is but ask what a saturn is and they will answer 'A planet? A giant electronic German store?'. The most profitable region for MS (for every console sold) is probably going end up being Japan where they had an amazing attach rate were Xbox 360 owners were eating more MS points than they would rice/sushi or noodles (or cats)*


*yeah cats remember shoko Nakagawa...http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_xgr9IqyR4Xw/S076S6jpx3I/AAAAAAAAAX0/SXYpj-ufOMc/s640/japanese-girl-eating-cat.jpg.

Marketshare is not an absolute insurance, but it helps. As I said above, without PS2's marketshare PS3 wouldn't have survived the first year after launch.

Also, the WIi's marketshare will probably ensure that the WIiU is at least a moderate success, as many people will jump from Wii to WiiU. It may still sell much less than Wii, yes, but at least the marketshare attained will help selling a few extra million during the first couple of years.