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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Did Microsoft just force Nintendo's hand?

Tagged games:

 

Should they reduce the price of the Wii U?

Yes, it's overdue. 220 61.45%
 
No, it's fine. 97 27.09%
 
Not sure. 41 11.45%
 
Total:358
S.T.A.G.E. on 19 January 2015
JEMC said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:


So? It doesn't matter. What do you want from the company? Wii money? Nintendo had been making hand over fist out of the gate. You couldn't expect massive amounts of money so soon? Money was starting to come back into the company at a profit regardless. The PS2 sales were being used to offset the loss of the PS3. Sony takes great risks with their consoles hence why they initiated the 10 year profitability plan. Microsoft later adopted this plan so they could follow behind them with the Xbox 360 until Sony pulls the plug on the PS3. The PS3 was no longer a problem until the Vita launched. Watch. The day Sony pulls the plug on the PS3 is the day Microsoft pulls the plug on the 360. The VIta was (and still is) the big gaping hole in Sony's losses from 2011 forward. The PS3 sales have been offsetting the losses the Vita has caused thus far.

Sony took the risks and because of it since the 90's your family, my family and many other peoples families were able to to buy CD's, DVD's and Blu Rays at at fair market price from the 90's until now. Until Sony launched their consoles at a loss people could barely get their hands on those formats.

Sony's strategy is not the question here.

You said that Nintendo should drop the price of the Wii U to $250 and still make a profit (something that we don't know if it's true, btw), like Sony did with the PS3 after 4 years. But what we have to remember is that Sony is (or was) willing to take heavy losses on its hardware in their first years because they could get the money back from the other sides of the company, but that's not the case with Nintendo. Nintendo needs to profit from both software and hardware to still be profitable.

Look what happened in the last 2 years: even with the 3DS being profitable and its first party games, Nintendo has lost money because of the Wii U. And that's because they followed Sony/MSoft's strategy and sold their console at a loss. Nintendo can't do that, they need every machine to be sold for a profit and get back all the money they invested on it to use that money again in the next console.

That's the point here, Nintendo needs to focus on getting back all the money they can first, and once that goal is on track, try to get back some of the lost marketshare.


The Wii U hardware is old tech and its obvious that what is holding it back in possible cost today (if at all) is the tablet. Nintendo always operates at a profit. They never take very much risk when it comes to putting their hardware together for profitability. They even profitted during the Gamecubes situation (which most companies wouldn't have coming in third). Nintendo took the risk so now they need to take some responsibility, businesswise for their marketshare. They need to market that product as best they can. I still maintain that they should drop the price down to $250 to differentiate themselves from Microsoft by $100, because outside of that tablet thats where the consoles price should be. Microsoft will drop the price again and Nintendo got knocked off by them during the holiday season rather quickly. Everyone knows the Wii U is the weakest so why doesn't Nintendo just own up to it and try to remarket themselves as the cheaper option with their own spread of games? Come on, man. Microsofts console was only $50 more expensive than the Wii U during the holiday season..and Nintendo let themselves get trampled by Microsoft. Who was actually trying...Microsoft or Nintendo? If you say Nintendo...I don't know, bro. I don't know.



Around the Network
JEMC on 19 January 2015
S.T.A.G.E. said:
JEMC said:

Sony's strategy is not the question here.

You said that Nintendo should drop the price of the Wii U to $250 and still make a profit (something that we don't know if it's true, btw), like Sony did with the PS3 after 4 years. But what we have to remember is that Sony is (or was) willing to take heavy losses on its hardware in their first years because they could get the money back from the other sides of the company, but that's not the case with Nintendo. Nintendo needs to profit from both software and hardware to still be profitable.

Look what happened in the last 2 years: even with the 3DS being profitable and its first party games, Nintendo has lost money because of the Wii U. And that's because they followed Sony/MSoft's strategy and sold their console at a loss. Nintendo can't do that, they need every machine to be sold for a profit and get back all the money they invested on it to use that money again in the next console.

That's the point here, Nintendo needs to focus on getting back all the money they can first, and once that goal is on track, try to get back some of the lost marketshare.


The Wii U hardware is old tech and its obvious that what is holding it back in possible cost today (if at all) is the tablet. Nintendo always operates at a profit. They never take very much risk when it comes to putting their hardware together for profitability. They even profitted during the Gamecubes situation (which most companies wouldn't have coming in third). Nintendo took the risk so now they need to take some responsibility, businesswise for their marketshare. They need to market that product as best they can. I still maintain that they should drop the price down to $250 to differentiate themselves from Microsoft by $100, because outside of that tablet thats where the consoles price should be. Microsoft will drop the price again and Nintendo got knocked off by them during the holiday season rather quickly. Everyone knows the Wii U is the weakest so why doesn't Nintendo just own up to it and try to remarket themselves as the cheaper option with their own spread of games? Come on, man. Microsofts console was only $50 more expensive than the Wii U during the holiday season..and Nintendo let themselves get trampled by Microsoft. Who was actually trying...Microsoft or Nintendo? If you say Nintendo...I don't know, bro. I don't know.

Well, of course it was MSoft who was trying harder, but at this point Microsoft and Nintendo doesn't have the same goal.

Microsoft still wants to be nº 1 (at least in their homeland) so they actively pursue that goal, even if they gave to price their console much lower than they want and loss money in the process. After all, they originally entered the market to stop Sony from dominating the living room with a multimedia, multitask capable machine. But Nintendo is in the business for the money and with the Wii U being a failure, their goal is to get back all they money they can and learn from their mistakes.

Now, to be clear, I do belive that Wii U needs a pricedrop, but I don't think Nintendo will do it until they can drop the price while still profiting from the hardware. Because of that, as I said earlier in this thread, I expect them to announce a $50 price cut at E3, maybe with a redesigned (and cheaper) Wii U or GamePad.



Please excuse my bad English.

Currently gaming on a PC with an i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070

Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet    Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.

S.T.A.G.E. on 19 January 2015
JEMC said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
JEMC said:

Sony's strategy is not the question here.

You said that Nintendo should drop the price of the Wii U to $250 and still make a profit (something that we don't know if it's true, btw), like Sony did with the PS3 after 4 years. But what we have to remember is that Sony is (or was) willing to take heavy losses on its hardware in their first years because they could get the money back from the other sides of the company, but that's not the case with Nintendo. Nintendo needs to profit from both software and hardware to still be profitable.

Look what happened in the last 2 years: even with the 3DS being profitable and its first party games, Nintendo has lost money because of the Wii U. And that's because they followed Sony/MSoft's strategy and sold their console at a loss. Nintendo can't do that, they need every machine to be sold for a profit and get back all the money they invested on it to use that money again in the next console.

That's the point here, Nintendo needs to focus on getting back all the money they can first, and once that goal is on track, try to get back some of the lost marketshare.


The Wii U hardware is old tech and its obvious that what is holding it back in possible cost today (if at all) is the tablet. Nintendo always operates at a profit. They never take very much risk when it comes to putting their hardware together for profitability. They even profitted during the Gamecubes situation (which most companies wouldn't have coming in third). Nintendo took the risk so now they need to take some responsibility, businesswise for their marketshare. They need to market that product as best they can. I still maintain that they should drop the price down to $250 to differentiate themselves from Microsoft by $100, because outside of that tablet thats where the consoles price should be. Microsoft will drop the price again and Nintendo got knocked off by them during the holiday season rather quickly. Everyone knows the Wii U is the weakest so why doesn't Nintendo just own up to it and try to remarket themselves as the cheaper option with their own spread of games? Come on, man. Microsofts console was only $50 more expensive than the Wii U during the holiday season..and Nintendo let themselves get trampled by Microsoft. Who was actually trying...Microsoft or Nintendo? If you say Nintendo...I don't know, bro. I don't know.

Well, of course it was MSoft who was trying harder, but at this point Microsoft and Nintendo doesn't have the same goal.

Microsoft still wants to be nº 1 (at least in their homeland) so they actively pursue that goal, even if they gave to price their console much lower than they want and loss money in the process. After all, they originally entered the market to stop Sony from dominating the living room with a multimedia, multitask capable machine. But Nintendo is in the business for the money and with the Wii U being a failure, their goal is to get back all they money they can and learn from their mistakes.

Now, to be clear, I do belive that Wii U needs a pricedrop, but I don't think Nintendo will do it until they can drop the price while still profiting from the hardware. Because of that, as I said earlier in this thread, I expect them to announce a $50 price cut at E3, maybe with a redesigned (and cheaper) Wii U or GamePad.

Well good thing for Nintendo, playing it safe (as usual) turned a profit right before fourth quarter 2014. They could've been more competitive against Microsoft and sold more consoles featuring Super Smash (which I believe caused a 200% increase in sales) but no. After four years of losses it must feel so good to be back. If Nintedno couldnt take any risk before Microsoft passed them in sales, they probably never will. Sucks for them but thankfully they are back in profit mode.

I'm gone. 
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/nintendo-reveals-profit-turnaround-as-wii-u-sales-/1100-6423240/



torok on 19 January 2015
Samus Aran said:
 

Nintendo made a lot more profit than Sony during the PS2 days.


Remember, you have to remove the GBA profits to do a comparison between PS2 and GC. Just claiming that selling 160M consoles will give you less money then selling 21M is insane. Just the fact that they sold 7 or 8 times more software will make them surpass GC by miles with royalties. What sense does that make?

Edit: It will make way LESS sense if you mean Sony, the entire company, vs Nintendo. You can't factor in the other divisions if you want to compare just the 2 consoles. Profit-wise, PS2 crushed the GC, it's simply obvious with that massive marketshare.



Bet with jetforcejiminy: PS4 will pass the Wii lifetime numbers.

ofrm1 on 19 January 2015

Price isn't the problem with the Wii U. The tablet is.



Around the Network
generic-user-1 on 19 January 2015
ofrm1 said:
Price isn't the problem with the Wii U. The tablet is.


said noone that ever played with it..

Cream147 on 21 January 2015
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Cream147 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:


It would differentiate the Wii from the competition being its hardware is still older than the current gen hardware to the average consumer. Much like the Wii it needs to be sold as an affordable way to gain access to Nintendo games. Nintendo needs to take the affordable route and Microsoft inadvetantly is making them an example while trying to fight Sony for Marketshare. Microsofts battle isnt about profitability right now, but rather marketshare.

Nintendo has to swallow their pride and accept the fact that after twenty years, he who holds the third party holds the power. If they don't they are a secondary console to the majority who own their platform. They know what they have to do if they want to be a primary for the majority.


But that's the point. The ship has long since sailed on the Wii U - it will never achieve mass market popularity now. They might as well just allow it to be moderately profitable with cult popularity like it is now and try to capture the mass market next time around, rather than do a price cut such that they're selling below their costs and making a loss again.

If Nintendo didnt make the controller the way they did the Wii U would've been profitable from day one. They can still afford to drop the console down to $250 and still profit. Even the PS3 which launched at $600 eventually became profitable four years after launch and tweaking of the hardware specs.


There's no point discussing ifs, buts and maybes with regards to what would have happened if they didn't make the controller as they did. That's in the past - besides which if they hadn't done that they'd clearly have had to make the console more powerful to give it some kind of USP other than Nintendo software.

If they can drop the price to $250 and profit, then I guess they should, but I think it would only give a small uptick in sales. The Wii U is a platform that is simply reaching only one type of consumer - Nintendo fans. Price drops aren't going to change that - the only thing that would is if third parties decided to support the console with their big multiplats, which they won't.