By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 said:
Dallinor said:
Kasz216 said:
10: Disagree. The average gamer still doesn't play games online. Also, PS3 has always been free online wise, so this isn't going to change the dynamic any.

9: Agree, possibly. It depends how it works out really. At worst it should have a very loyal small niche group who will spend a lot of time there. So it'll help. It's just a matter to see how much.

8. Disagree, Brand Loyalty is strongest among the poor. Who need things to cost less. Most brand loyalty is going to be lost during a price gap. Brand Loyalty is becoming less and less important as well due to the internet. There are two kinds of brand loyalty. The Apple (I buy apples because they are cool!) loyalty... and I buy Sony because I've had their products before and know they are good. With time and ways to research products, and Brand loyalty doesn't mean anything.

7. Agree. For the short term anyway. Long term wise it may hurt them.

6. Disagree. Nintendo supported the gamecube too. I don't see people buying PS3's when the PS4 is out, like how people were buying the PS3. I see it happening more like people are buying the gamecube now that the wii is out... exactly. Sure it's got blu-ray, but by then you gotta think there will be cheaper blu-ray platforms.

5. Disagree. The PS3's lineup isn't diverse enough yet in my opinion and only hits a few demographics. That should mostly be fixed by the end of this year, though the PS3 will still be hurting in categories like RPGs. Not everybody likes EVERY game.

4. Agree. Though not until blu-ray makes a lot more serious inroads. The early adopters mostly will want Blu-ray players so they can show off their blu-ray players. Showing off your PS3 as your blu-ray player really doesn't come off as impressive, which a lot of early adopters go for.

3. Agree. Though a price cut would help maximize the sales potential drummed up by said games.

2. Disagree. Almost nobody buys things based on potential... Why? See Ryan Leaf. Potential means nothing on it's own. A potentional millionare still can't buy a cup of coffee if he doesn't have any real money.

1. Disagree. This isn't new. Just like online, It's not like RROD is getting worse. So it's not going to affect sales anymore then it's already effecting them.

Do you actually have some evidence to back that statement up?

Personally, I know quite a few wealthy people who stick to purchasing the same brands, TV's, Car's, Even flying with the same airlines.

While at the other end of the spectrum, I also know a few not-so-wealthy people who couldn't care less what products they purchase as long as they work.

"who need things to cost less?"- Perhaps you're mistaking strong sales at a low pricepoint for 'brand loyalty'?

My personal experiences completly contradict your statement, so I'd be interested to see if there are some reports, proof about this matter.

Ah your talking about rich vs poor... I got it now.

I'm talking Middle class vs Poor. The extreme rich aren't as high in number so really don't matter as much in this case. A lot of them likely would of got PS3's already.

One of the main reasons of brand loyalty is lack of time to research said things. Those that are very wealthy, like those who are poor have less time to research.

What?? Are you saying then that if consumers researched products, the said consumers would never become brand loyal? The main reason for brand loyalty is not because people have "a lack of time to research things". A 'lack of time' is not even an issue.

Brand loyalty exists for a variety of reasons. In order to become hard core loyals, consumers must feel that a brand is offering them the right features, the right price, and the right level of quality.

Consumers make a concious decision to focus their purchases on a particular brand because they percieve that brand to be superior to others. This is done through advertising, the company sucessfully achieving the company-consumer bond etc.

If a consumer doesn't pay attention to other brands, and has simply slipped into a habit of purchasing the same brand again and again and cannot be bothered to switch, the consumer cannot be said to be brand loyal at all.

Also, the Airlines and Cars thing isn't brand loyalty.

It's Deal loyalty and Brand Value.

I understand the definition of brand loyalty. In the situation I'm talking about there are no deals with the airline. It's simply a case where the consumer feels that the service/product is superior to others, and continualy purchases the product, and is willing to pay a higher price becuase of it. Brand value? If a consumer repeatadly purchases a brand because of the 'image' it gives them, this is considered brand loyalty.

You go on the same Airline because repeated visits give you extra perks. You get an expensive car because it's an expensive car with a fancy name attached to it.

A fancy brand name? If a consumer repeatadly purchases the same brand of cars, because they believe the cars to be superior to others, (because of image/attention etc.) they are said to be brand loyal.

Still the money lost is an important factor as well. Which will still likely make it more prominant among those who can't afford to lose the money.

Those who don't have time to do research, and who are also spending a large portion of their income on said products are most brand loyal is the point i'm making.  Though people who just don't have the time to do research will also be fairly brand loyal.

Arguably yes, poor consumers are the most 'loyal' of hard core loyals.

If they're brand loyal despite having lots of time on their hands... then they're just lazy.

You seem to have made the assumption that brand loyalty is blind loyalty. And that the very wealthy and the poor are guilty of it becuase they don't have the time/research to find out about different products.

This is simply not true.

However of course it has to cross their price threshold first. Hence why you need to have a price near to your competitors to cash in on said brand loyalty. The middle class are the most likely to do things like read up about said consoles, look up games about them, talk to people about them and just make a decision based on which they actually think they'll like best on a well rounded informed decision.

You seem to be trying to express this notion that brand loyalty is biased and narrow-minded, and that because the middle class are well informed they will be least likely to participate in it.

Brand loyalty is not entirely blind or narrow-minded. It's built from human desires, satisfaction and personal preference. It can take a long time to build, or it can take a matter of days. The company essentially builds a relationship with the consumer, through appealing advertising, appealing products and appealing pricing. A basic human response to something they like is to try it again.

Humans build loyalty to many things, other humans, favourite places, their home town, a football team etc. Brand loyalty is essentially human nature.

The thing about Sony is that hard core Sony loyals will not be detered by price. The company offers premium products at a premium price almost across the board. It's the "switchers" or the "shifting loyals" who will be most detered by a high price.

As for brand loyalty most prevalent amongst the poor:

"A new survey conducted for GMA by the polling company(TM) showed that 76 percent of Americans in all demographic groups consider a product's brand before making a final product selection."

http://retailindustry.about.com/library/bl/02q2/bl_gma061302.htm

Richeld and Schefter: "A large group of customers are influenced by brand...these customers are looking for long term relationships [with a company] customers need to feel that they are part of a brands crusade".