By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - How Much Will The Wii U Drop!? <(^_^<)

 

The Wii U's First Price Cut Will Be...

$100 123 24.60%
 
$90 0 0%
 
$80 9 1.80%
 
$70 21 4.20%
 
$60 7 1.40%
 
$50 307 61.40%
 
$40 6 1.20%
 
$30 9 1.80%
 
$20 3 0.60%
 
$10 14 2.80%
 
Total:499
zorg1000 on 07 July 2013
Einsam_Delphin said:
Cold-Flipper said:
Einsam_Delphin said:

And on the flipside, Nintendo now has other means of profit that they didn't have with the 3DS, but I guess you'd have to be looking at the big picture to understand that.

The big picture is that Nintendo is a business first and they wouldn't consider dropping the price that much in order to stay competitive. Do you really believe that a $100 cut would do that much more than a $50 cut and that it would make up the difference that much? It isn't like the system is extremely expensive by today's standards anyway so its main problem is games and / or concept not price. If you count innflation the Wii U would've cost about $303 if released in 2006. If you take $50 off, it would be $260 in 2006 or extremely close to Wii's launch price.

Basically, you expect Nibtendo to sell the Wii U for $216 (2006 $) which is less than the Wii even though Wii U is clearly more advanced for its time. (In parts, features) I really don't think the extra $50 off would drive sales to the extreme that would make it outweigh the losses they'd be making.


The Wii U be selling like jank, that shows people don't like the price, hence it needs to be lowered. It needs games definitely, and a price cut on top of them would really sweeten up the deal like it did for 3DS. I do believe a $100 cut would do a lot more than $50 cut. This is something I had went over many times and I'm too lazy atm to repeat. :L

3DS needed a price cut cuz it had only 2 big games in the second half of the year, 3D Land and Mario Kart. Wii U has 8 moderately big exclusives in the second half of this year plus this will be its second holiday season and u will see tons odf deals/bundles.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

Around the Network
archbrix on 07 July 2013
Einsam_Delphin said:
archbrix said:
Einsam_Delphin said:
Idk, I wasn't around sites like this during last gen, plus I'm not too interested in what went on with the PS3 right now.

Well, if Nintendo were to follow your advice and reasoning on how to handle the WiiU's pricing you'd likely witness a lower scale example of what went on with the PS3 regarding company losses.



Why's that? I'd like to know since as I said I hardly know anything of what went down financially during that gen. I find it a bit hard to believe that Sony was in the exact same financial position Nintendo is in now. I think I remember Sony releasing new models and dropping the price many times just in the first year. What I'm suggesting is a single $100 drop preferably coincideing with MK8 and that's it for a good number of years like with the 3DS. Besides, it's better to base things off current events over happenings from years ago involving a different company.

They're not in the same financial position. Sony lost several billion dollars. That's why I said a "lower scale" example because my point was that Nintendo would still continue to post yearly losses, which isn't going to fly with them. The "lose a bunch now and hope to make it up later" idea you suggested and your continued comparisons of WiiU to 3DS (profit and losses) are what I found fallacious.

Now, what you're saying about dropping $100 to coincide with Mario Kart 8 next April (something I agreed was possible earlier) - that's not as far fetched because that would mean no price drop this year and big sales regardless of price because of the holidays, their upcoming games, and no real competition from PS4/XB1's limited stock... all with little to no loss at all on the WiiU hardware. So even if the $100 (or perhaps $80) price drop in April 2014 put them in the red with the hardware a little more than they may like, their fiscal year profits (end of March 2014) would be safe and they'd be almost guaranteed to post a profit. In fact, this may be why they're waiting until April to release Mario Kart - so that they can drop the price upon its launch after their earnings report.



Lonely_Dolphin on 07 July 2013
zorg1000 said:
Einsam_Delphin said:
Cold-Flipper said:
Einsam_Delphin said:

And on the flipside, Nintendo now has other means of profit that they didn't have with the 3DS, but I guess you'd have to be looking at the big picture to understand that.

The big picture is that Nintendo is a business first and they wouldn't consider dropping the price that much in order to stay competitive. Do you really believe that a $100 cut would do that much more than a $50 cut and that it would make up the difference that much? It isn't like the system is extremely expensive by today's standards anyway so its main problem is games and / or concept not price. If you count innflation the Wii U would've cost about $303 if released in 2006. If you take $50 off, it would be $260 in 2006 or extremely close to Wii's launch price.

Basically, you expect Nibtendo to sell the Wii U for $216 (2006 $) which is less than the Wii even though Wii U is clearly more advanced for its time. (In parts, features) I really don't think the extra $50 off would drive sales to the extreme that would make it outweigh the losses they'd be making.


The Wii U be selling like jank, that shows people don't like the price, hence it needs to be lowered. It needs games definitely, and a price cut on top of them would really sweeten up the deal like it did for 3DS. I do believe a $100 cut would do a lot more than $50 cut. This is something I had went over many times and I'm too lazy atm to repeat. :L

3DS needed a price cut cuz it had only 2 big games in the second half of the year, 3D Land and Mario Kart. Wii U has 8 moderately big exclusives in the second half of this year plus this will be its second holiday season and u will see tons odf deals/bundles.



I'm sure the less than stellar sales had much more to do with it than anything else, as it wouldn't make much sense to cut the price if the 3DS was selling like hot cakes.

Lonely_Dolphin on 07 July 2013
archbrix said:
Einsam_Delphin said:
archbrix said:
Einsam_Delphin said:
Idk, I wasn't around sites like this during last gen, plus I'm not too interested in what went on with the PS3 right now.

Well, if Nintendo were to follow your advice and reasoning on how to handle the WiiU's pricing you'd likely witness a lower scale example of what went on with the PS3 regarding company losses.



Why's that? I'd like to know since as I said I hardly know anything of what went down financially during that gen. I find it a bit hard to believe that Sony was in the exact same financial position Nintendo is in now. I think I remember Sony releasing new models and dropping the price many times just in the first year. What I'm suggesting is a single $100 drop preferably coincideing with MK8 and that's it for a good number of years like with the 3DS. Besides, it's better to base things off current events over happenings from years ago involving a different company.

They're not in the same financial position. Sony lost several billion dollars. That's why I said a "lower scale" example because my point was that Nintendo would still continue to post yearly losses, which isn't going to fly with them. The "lose a bunch now and hope to make it up later" idea you suggested and your continued comparisons of WiiU to 3DS (profit and losses) are what I found fallacious.

Now, what you're saying about dropping $100 to coincide with Mario Kart 8 next April (something I agreed was possible earlier) - that's not as far fetched because that would mean no price drop this year and big sales regardless of price because of the holidays, their upcoming games, and no real competition from PS4/XB1's limited stock... all with little to no loss at all on the WiiU hardware. So even if the $100 (or perhaps $80) price drop in April 2014 put them in the red with the hardware a little more than they may like, their fiscal year profits (end of March 2014) would be safe and they'd be almost guaranteed to post a profit. In fact, this may be why they're waiting until April to release Mario Kart - so that they can drop the price upon its launch after their earnings report.



Well you're just assuming they'd lose moneys, just like I'm assuming it'll be profitable for them in the end due to various factors (3DS n WiiU game sales, lengh of gen). Of course, only Nintendo really knows whether or not it'd be a move worth taking.

I guess I should have talked more about the timing of the price drop, as I can see how that's important in all this. At the very least it would likely have kept people from thinking I'm saying the price drop has to come this year.

Cold-Flipper on 07 July 2013

Einsam_Delphin said:

The Wii U be selling like jank, that shows people don't like the price, hence it needs to be lowered. It needs games definitely, and a price cut on top of them would really sweeten up the deal like it did for 3DS. I do believe a $100 cut would do a lot more than $50 cut. This is something I had went over many times and I'm too lazy atm to repeat. :L

I know you went over why the $100 cut would work better because the basic is already $300 so people wouldn't take much notice. I agree with you that it would work better, I just don't think much better. Besides, if you remember, I agreed with you that a price cut of $100 would be ideal if it was financially possible. I just don't believe they will do it and again, it might not even be worth it.

Honestly speaking though, why would Wii U be selling well at the moment? It is having the longest and worst game drought I've ever witnessed. If the launch line-up didn't make somebody buy a Wii U at launch, why would that same line-up make that same person buy one 7 months later? It is quite obvious why the Wii U isn't selling and the price is far from the current issue. I say Nintendo plays the wait and see game. I believe that they're going to actually. Don't cut price this year (as you said) and see how much the games can help the system. If it picks up significantly a price reduction won't even be needed, if it picks up decent enough only a $50 cut would be needed, and if it continues to sell like crap then a $100 cut might be absolutely needed.



Around the Network
cuberandgamer on 07 July 2013

It technically has a price drop. How many retailers are selling the wii u for $350? lol jk



Zero999 on 08 July 2013
Einsam_Delphin said:
Cold-Flipper said:

Einsam_Delphin said:

I'd think it'd always be worth it to take a loss if it means you make much more later than you lost initially, unless the loss now would cause you to go bankrupt, but that's not likely the case here. Since Nintendo isn't just going to vanish within a year, long-term is uber important, especially with how long this generation could last going by the previous one. Of course I'm no business major so perhaps there's more to it than that. What I do know for sure though, is that we don't even know how big a loss overall they'd be taking, if any. Let's just say that decide to $100 price cut around MK8's release. Let's also assume that by that time, Wii U is paying for itself. So with a $100 drop, I'd think it take 2 or 3 Wii U game sales to make a console profitable. Now with MK8, SM3DW, SLW, Wii Fit U, Pikmin 3, DKCTP, and many others having released already at this point, and oncoming titles like SSB4, Yoshi Yarn, SMT x FE, etc., plus the $100 drop increasing overall game sales, I think it's safe to say a favorable game to console ratio can be reached. Then of course there's the 3DS which should really be rocking by this point. So yeah they'll still be selling Wii U's at a loss, but overall I think they'd still be profitable.

1st off, when a business drops the price of something it doesn't always mean they are now losing money on said product. They normally wait until they can still at least break even. (In Nintendo's case for sure)

The only way Wii U will get a $100 cut is if Nintendo feels that they have made enough money on Nintendo Land by the time May 2014 rolls around. If that happens they could go all the way because NL would become a free giveaway that they don't lose money on. Essentially, they would only be dropping the actual system by $60 or so instead then.

If not, I wouldn't expect them to do it. 


Huh? I thought Nintendo Land was a pack in with the Deluxe? How could they make money off it, and why would that game be more important than every other method of profit? o_O

those extra $50 on the deluxe are mainly because nintendoland, just like wii sports represented $50 of wii's price. so basically they're making money of it.



Lonely_Dolphin on 08 July 2013
Cold-Flipper said:

Einsam_Delphin said:

The Wii U be selling like jank, that shows people don't like the price, hence it needs to be lowered. It needs games definitely, and a price cut on top of them would really sweeten up the deal like it did for 3DS. I do believe a $100 cut would do a lot more than $50 cut. This is something I had went over many times and I'm too lazy atm to repeat. :L

I know you went over why the $100 cut would work better because the basic is already $300 so people wouldn't take much notice. I agree with you that it would work better, I just don't think much better. Besides, if you remember, I agreed with you that a price cut of $100 would be ideal if it was financially possible. I just don't believe they will do it and again, it might not even be worth it.

Honestly speaking though, why would Wii U be selling well at the moment? It is having the longest and worst game drought I've ever witnessed. If the launch line-up didn't make somebody buy a Wii U at launch, why would that same line-up make that same person buy one 7 months later? It is quite obvious why the Wii U isn't selling and the price is far from the current issue. I say Nintendo plays the wait and see game. I believe that they're going to actually. Don't cut price this year (as you said) and see how much the games can help the system. If it picks up significantly a price reduction won't even be needed, if it picks up decent enough only a $50 cut would be needed, and if it continues to sell like crap then a $100 cut might be absolutely needed.



Twas worth it for the 3DS, which I don't think had many quality games before the price cut either, yet they still had a cut. Not that I'm saying they should price cut before the games get there of course, but they likely did this because they want their games to sell more than anything else as that's where most profits come from. In order for their games to sell well, their console needs to sell well, as game sales are limited to the console's install base. Just look at NSMBU. The game could clearly sell more than it has based on it's uber high attach ratio and previous installments, but it's physically impossible for it to do more than it is right now with the Wii U's current install base of 3 million. NSMB2, which launched near NSMBU, has already sold 6 million compared to U's 2 million. 10x the install base definitely made the difference here, and is why they should always be shooting for a higher install base by any physically possible and reasonable means, like bundles, remodels, oh, and price cuts!

Lonely_Dolphin on 08 July 2013
Zero999 said:
Einsam_Delphin said:
Cold-Flipper said:

Einsam_Delphin said:

I'd think it'd always be worth it to take a loss if it means you make much more later than you lost initially, unless the loss now would cause you to go bankrupt, but that's not likely the case here. Since Nintendo isn't just going to vanish within a year, long-term is uber important, especially with how long this generation could last going by the previous one. Of course I'm no business major so perhaps there's more to it than that. What I do know for sure though, is that we don't even know how big a loss overall they'd be taking, if any. Let's just say that decide to $100 price cut around MK8's release. Let's also assume that by that time, Wii U is paying for itself. So with a $100 drop, I'd think it take 2 or 3 Wii U game sales to make a console profitable. Now with MK8, SM3DW, SLW, Wii Fit U, Pikmin 3, DKCTP, and many others having released already at this point, and oncoming titles like SSB4, Yoshi Yarn, SMT x FE, etc., plus the $100 drop increasing overall game sales, I think it's safe to say a favorable game to console ratio can be reached. Then of course there's the 3DS which should really be rocking by this point. So yeah they'll still be selling Wii U's at a loss, but overall I think they'd still be profitable.

1st off, when a business drops the price of something it doesn't always mean they are now losing money on said product. They normally wait until they can still at least break even. (In Nintendo's case for sure)

The only way Wii U will get a $100 cut is if Nintendo feels that they have made enough money on Nintendo Land by the time May 2014 rolls around. If that happens they could go all the way because NL would become a free giveaway that they don't lose money on. Essentially, they would only be dropping the actual system by $60 or so instead then.

If not, I wouldn't expect them to do it. 


Huh? I thought Nintendo Land was a pack in with the Deluxe? How could they make money off it, and why would that game be more important than every other method of profit? o_O

those extra $50 on the deluxe are mainly because nintendoland, just like wii sports represented $50 of wii's price. so basically they're making money of it.



Ah I see. Thanks for explaining!

Cheebee on 08 July 2013

They will likely just drop the Basic bundle, and make the Deluxe 299. That way WiiU will be $100 cheaper than PS4, and include a game. Also, they will do Mario 3D World and MK8 bundles, that's a given.



Nintendo Network ID: Cheebee   3DS Code: 2320 - 6113 - 9046