Doctorslim said:
Yes, but if it's really costing that much to where they have to charge up to 6.99 for a 4 hour rental, then they are using this as a cash grab. Just think, why put something on the market that's overpriced because it costs you so much in the first place? To make money from the consumer by ripping them off |
That is complete bullshit. A cash grab would be something with little to no risk and really big profit margins.
A) We know that the risk of this service is huge
B) We have no idea about the profit margins on this thing
What you're doing here would be like saying that the X1 was a cash grab for MS or the PS3 was a cash grab for Sony.
Oh and just to add to this question about which of the 2 is actually the cash grab, lets look at EA Access
Risk? Close to none. They use games that have already covered their costs of development when they put them up on the service and the 10% discount on new games can easily be redeemed by the fact that the margins on digital games are higher for EA, thanks to the lack of retail. Also EA can basically get out of this service as fast as they want since they have literally no sunk costs at all.
Profit Margins? Again, debatable. The point of the subscription is, aside from the money it brings in normally, to get people to buy more EA games and DLC online, since those have as mentioned above higher profit margins. What we of course don't know is how many new sales would be lost through people rather waiting for games to hit the vault.
So sorry, if at all EA Access qualifies as a cash grab here and that is not to say that that service can't be of value to people.
