Back when the Wii was just codenamed the Revolution there was lots of speculation about the low price of the new system.  IGN (1)(2) considered around $200 and even sub-$200 launch prices!  Infact just a month before the US price was officially announced there was speculation and rumors of a price around $170. 

Personally I remember being slightly disappointed before launch when $250 was confirmed after such speculation.  I thought it would hurt Nintendo as a lower price like $200 would mean more mass market appeal.

MAN I WAS AN IDIOT! 

If the Wii was released at $200 that adds up to almost half a billion in lost revenue in North America alone!  A lower price wouldn't have increased sales considering the supply situation.  It would have just left a lot of money on the table.

you are not at all, nintendo just thought waaaayy more hours about it then you ;)

For the most part, cheap things always sell. Higher priced items are always left to the wealthy crowd. Think about it. PCs are less expensive than Macs and PCs have the larger marketshare. Wii sells more than PS3. Im sure Gap button downs sell better than Ben Sherman button downs. Sure you may get a little more for more money, but for most people, the cheaper way will get than just what they want. At least thats my opinion.  A cheaper prices yields a larger potential market.

If they had been really super confident, they would have started production at 4 million Wiis a month...:)

loadedstatement said: For the most part, cheap things always sell. Higher priced items are always left to the wealthy crowd. Think about it. PCs are less expensive than Macs and PCs have the larger marketshare. Wii sells more than PS3. Im sure Gap button downs sell better than Ben Sherman button downs. Sure you may get a little more for more money, but for most people, the cheaper way will get than just what they want. At least thats my opinion. A cheaper prices yields a larger potential market.

That may be true, but usually in that case the more expensive item makes up for selling less by making more profit per unit sold.  You can't exactly say that about the PS3.

stranne said: If they had been really super confident, they would have started production at 4 million Wiis a month...:)

 Yeah, if only they had been more aggresive with production increases then there would be at least 25 million sold,  maybe more.

About Wii costs and so, this might be a little (or perhaps a lot) off topic, but I'll ask.

Another thread here said that Sony made 6 dollars pr Ps2 sold now, and Ps2s are selling at 80-100 dollars, right? That means the Ps2 costs roughly 90 dollars to make today. The Wii is much more powerful than that, yet Nintendo's average profit pr Wii sold worldwide, is over 90 dollars. For USA the average is then about 60 dollars. 250-60 = 190.

That means the Wii costs 190 to produce, while the Ps2 costs 90.
Let's say the Wii hardware (only GPU, CPU and that stuff I don't know anything about) costs 50 dollars more. That means all the motion-sensing stuff, the online abilities, and so on, only costs roughly 50 dollars. Why are there then no other consoles that have an additional SKU with motion sensing?

Rugger08 said: stranne said: If they had been really super confident, they would have started production at 4 million Wiis a month...:)  Yeah, if only they had been more aggresive with production increases then there would be at least 25 million additional sold,  maybe more.

Fixed.

Oyvoyvoyv said: About Wii costs and so, this might be a little (or perhaps a lot) off topic, but I'll ask. Another thread here said that Sony made 6 dollars pr Ps2 sold now, and Ps2s are selling at 80-100 dollars, right? That means the Ps2 costs roughly 90 dollars to make today. The Wii is much more powerful than that, yet Nintendo's average profit pr Wii sold worldwide, is over 90 dollars. For USA the average is then about 60 dollars. 250-60 = 190. That means the Wii costs 190 to produce, while the Ps2 costs 90. Let's say the Wii hardware (only GPU, CPU and that stuff I don't know anything about) costs 50 dollars more. That means all the motion-sensing stuff, the online abilities, and so on, only costs roughly 50 dollars. Why are there then no other consoles that have an additional SKU with motion sensing?

First there are few things to consider, which are what does average mean. If we look at WW, how PS2 sells in different monetary regions. For example at the late last year PS2 was more than 200USD in Finland. Another thing is that how much it makes profit to who. The ratil may get bigger share from PS2 than what they get from Wii. Now if we look at CPU:s, Emotion Engine is custom built unsymmetric dual-processor, while Broadway is customised G3. I'm not sure about the EE manufacturing process, but Broadway is made with 90nM process, while EE started with +200nM. Same goes for Graphics Synthetisizer, which is custom built GPU, while Hollywood is customised from Atis standard GPU. Sony have added features to PS2, which raise costs while they have pushed costs down otherwise. You need less materials for Wii, since it's smaller. Nintendo may have more efficient shipping process. So, in general, Nintendo doesn't have any tech in Wii, which wouldn't be used anywhere else (except for CPU and GPU, which propably aren't used anywhere else anymore, but were when they were designed). Conclusion is, that Nintendo has more effient design-manufacturing-shipping process than Sony, while it's hard to say how low Nintendo can push Wiis costs. Besides, Wii is more than double the price of PS2 (varies regionally).

Are you sure that $6 isn't what the retail outlet makes? If it really is what Sony makes then that's very very low considering how long the PS2's been out and how much the hardware's been revised.