logisticalnightmare said:
Purple said:
eva01beserk said:
Supply constrained would mean that retailers and consumers wanted more but nintendo dint hve it. Thats completly the oposite of what I sugested as that nintendo had it, but retailers and consumers dint want it so stores did not have it. So you would never have heard of something like that.
|
"Supply of demand constrained" :P
In all seriousness, I remember a knowledgeable Neogaf poster mentioning Nintendo have a storage problem and it's costing them quite a lot of money. You'd assume they've slowed down production now (which would cost them quite a bit of money too).
I wouldn't be surprised if the number of Wii U's out there is quite low. Although anything less than 200k seems unlikely.
|
Anything less than 200k in NA I hope you mean. Japan alone has 60k with a tiny country and a population of 125m. na is a bigger market, bigger cland mass and has 3 times the population.
|
200k? Are you serious now? Demand worlwide for the wii u was under 30k. If you asume NA as 50% of the market then that would be 15k a week, that would be like 14 weeks of stock available for the demand at the time. Do you really think retailers would hold on to that much stock of a product that was not selling?
80k was already 3 weeks of stock for that time, wich is still a little low, so I asume that on shelfs retailers wpuld not want more than a month of stock, so 120k would be the most they would want, around the world.
Since you seem to be 100% sold on seeces argument that retailers want 8 weeks of stock in shelves, this only makes sence for a product that is selling well. For a product tha dosent, like the wii u was at the time, 4 weeks would be to much.