eldanielfire said:
PAOerfulone said:
If the Switch 1 is going to do it - It's not going to come thanks to the three major markets (North America, Europe, and Japan - Although I still think they have some room to sell in Europe.) It's going to be in the smaller markets in the Rest of the World where they have to get it done.
Ideally, with Nintendo opening more and more offices and operations in smaller countries and markets like Thailand, Taiwan, Singapore, and many other countries along Southeast Asia, they'll more than likely keep Switch 1 around and producing it, albeit at a much smaller scale so that they have a great entry level system with a massive library already available to offer these markets.
And since the production of Switch 1 will be so low, they could even afford to sell it at a significantly cheaper price that's affordable for these markets - Hell, maybe they'd even be willing to sell at a loss. Because the production will be so low, that the losses wouldn't amount to much and would be absolutely dwarfed and immediately made back/covered by the hardware and software sales of Switch 2 in the three main regions of the world.
|
I think in that last quarterly report, Nintendo mentioned something about the Switch 1 being open to cheaper markets. But it's gonna have to get cheaper IMO to exploit those markets.
As for your last paragraph, sadly Nintendo never sells at a loss. Whcih is a shame, I genuinely don't think given the direction of tech markets and their increaisng costs and production time of games that they or anyone will ever get so close to topping the 160 million mark again, it's basically now or never for Nintendo to have the world's best selling console forever.
|
The statement "sadly Nintendo never sells at a loss" is not entirely accurate. I believe it was the 32GB model of the WiiU that initially sold at a very slight loss. If memory also serves though 1 game purchase with the system put them back to profitable. I cannot remember if that had to be a first party game or not. That said, while it does set precedent, I find PAO's idea unlikely. It would be smart of them in my opinion but ... I share your skepticism.
Edit: precedent not president [SMH]
Last edited by The_Yoda - 20 hours ago
