Of course what I said makes sense. Microsoft wants a 100% launch attach ratio, because they know left up to the people it wouldn't accomplish it a second time. The Xbox can survive without the Kinect because Kinect is not essential. Its not like the Wii or the Wii U. Its relevence is no different than what Sony uses the Eyetoy for. You're putting it on a pedestal. Wait until MS drops the bundle and see how well it sells there after.

if it was worth it, people would have bought it without it forced upon them when buying an XBone.
the fact that they dont want to sell an xbox one on its own, says a lot about the kinect. They are probably scared that people wont buy it voluntarily and their years of research will go to waste.
I still think they will do another one eighty and launch a bundle without kinect, maybe on launch, maybe 6 months later, maybe 2 years later, but they will.

Microsoft is not taking a risk with the Kinect, hence why they are force bundling it. They will not leave the profitability to chance this time around.

Uh.. if people don't care about Kinect as you claim, then "force bundling" it resulting in a higher price tag than the competion is quite a risk. That's like saying Sony wasn't taking a risk with BluRay. Of course they were.

Allard already responded to this, but yeah, the point stands. Dropping Kinect and lowering the price to be at par with Sony if not lower (assuming it really costs $150 or so) would be far from a risk. Profitability is kind of being left to chance here ... they are hoping that people will see value in Kinect 2 and, through word of mouth and other means, people will make the jump to Xbox One with the $100 price difference being justified in no small part by Kinect 2.

Personally, I think it is a bad idea, and it is a risk I would not take if I was in MS's position. You and I are actually on the same page with this ... I recall you questioning the value of the Kinect in the past, or am I wrong?

They want it and theyre getting it. It will be worth it in the long run, because they wont have a broken userbase.

It doesnt matter though. 

It has nothing at all to do with anything.

He was saying its up to them to make sure people see the One is worth the extra $100.

Of course, everything in the box is worth the asking price. Its Penello's job to make sure the public see that value. If he does his job well, the Xbox One will sell well. If he doesnt, then the public wont want the Xbox One. Its really that simple.

Look at the PS3 launch. It was $600. It was great value for what you were getting (An $800 machine), but Sony simply couldnt sell it. It flopped. They pulled its arse out of the fire eventually, but for a hell of a long time they failed at what they had to do.

This isn't a case of being scared people wouldn't buy without, but pushing a feature you see would be the future, in order to differentiate yourself from your competitor.  Microsoft very likely though Sony would include the camera with the PS4 and price it at $500.  They also likely though the PS4 was going to only have 4GB GDDR5, and then did their announcement with this in mind.   Sony ends up doubling the RAM on them, drops the camera as a pack in and prices it $100 less expensive.  In short, Microsoft miscalculated.

Alright... let me add to that the lack of faith on microsoft and the trust lost by years of exclusive droughts and unit failures aaand... no! It turns out the Xbox1 is many times more expensive than the PS4.

Yep, I've been calling bullshit on Microsoft for the longest about the Kinect being "needed" for the XboxOne to run and I accused them of force bundling the Kinect. I turned out to be right. They can keep it in there, its not like I am buying the Xbox Just yet (LOL). I cannot blame them for doing it, but I am just that type of person who calls a company on their bullshit. Its not going to help their chances of winning in America at all, because people will look at two things lineup and price if they have no brand loyalty.

A feature you want integrated into games on your system ends up resulting in what is used to make the feature so needed.  Same with Microsofty trying to push the whole cloud computing and always on.  They do want a system that is totally integrated with the Internet, and also happens to totally integrate with your motion, movement, voice, and so on.  Of course, when early adopter don't find it cool, and rebel, you have problems on your hand.  And that is where Microsoft is with the ONE at this point.  You do have the faithful partisans who will end up arguing everything Microsoft does is golden and defend it on forums like this, but they aren't necessarily the norm.