Agreed. But how much do you think it costs to produce? $75, $100, or $50?

I never said or implied that the gamepad doesn't cost more to produce than a typical controller nor did i say/imply that there is a set in stone profit margin for controllers.

I agree that $150 would put it out of consumer interest in America/europe which is why I think it's smart that Nintendo are not selling them seperately at retail outside of Japan until 2013.

My post was aimed at posters who seem to think it would add  $150/$100 to the console budget.

Well that's the thing, it might be adding $150/$100 to the console's cost. We can't really tell, because profit margins aren't set in stone. I wasn't sayin you thought they were. The gamepad could be $150 as an attempt to provide a profit source for Nintendo, or it could be $150 because the price of the controller is high and therefore a lower price would sell at a loss. It is hard to judge the gamepad because there aren't good comparisons to work with. We will have to wait for a tear down, which due to its uniqueness and high price will happen in conjunction with the Wii U teardown.

The gamepad's high price is an idication that it has a high production cost at the moment. Controller profit margins are normally considered high. At $150 it indicates the cost of production is almost three times as much as a typical controller. Since it is so expensive there is good reason to believe the profit margin is lower than a typical controller, meaning that the gamepad's production cost could be well over three times the cost of a typical controller. This no doubt is a contributing factor to the overall production cost of the Wii U and could explain why it is selling at a loss.

On the bright side, Nintendo has essentially two expensive compenents in the Wii U, the console and the controller. Reducing the cost of production will fall on both compenents, allowing for a faster overall price reduction as opposed to a product relying on only the console's parts to become cheaper. The Wii U will, in my mind, without a doubt be profitable next year with a flexibility to have a price drop if needed depending on the competition/sales.

Weird too see Nintendo doing this, but as a multi-billion company they must know what they're doing and are willing to take the risk.

You have to factor in the cost of doing buisness in Europe ...

There are higher regulatory costs, labour costs and taxes which all translate to it being more expensive to produce/sell anything throughout most of the Eurozone; and this results in goods being more expensive.

Probably not the biggest loss in the world, as was mentioned, they sold the GameCube at a loss at launch too.

Hopefully for them the Wii U does better than the GameCube, lol.

WiiU is doomed, confirmed?

OT: I didn't think that the price was high, was the one I was expecting, well the high-end of my expectations, but still reasonable. The loss may not be that big, hopefully.

And, that confirms it, I'm not getting a WiiU at launch, because of what Nikkom said.

I approve this message.

Yes, at the end of its lifecycle when they dropped the price to $99.  That was the first ever selling loss for a Nintendo console.  The second, obviously, was the 3DS.  I'm skeptical that Wii U is the third.

GameCube was sold a loss twice in its life cycle, once at launch (roughly $10-$20 loss/unit IIRC) and again when they dropped to $99 initially.

That`s the first time i hear concrete details about the GC loss. Thanks!

So, in the end, there`s even a chance that there might not be any loss or that it may be small. That`s good.