I think at this point they should go $299->$229->$199 or $179. The Wii U has been on the market for so long and is struggling so much that $50 won't change much. And $229 looks much better than $249, it's way closer to the impulse purchase territory and on the other hand, it's still $30 over the $199 price.

We all set different values on things...  I guess one can find levity in that.

How would you know the bolded? Real-world demand curves tend to be non-linear. A $50 price drop could very well mean a large increase in sales or a small increase in sales, depending on the shape of the demand curve and the elasticity of demand of the consumers. There is no way we can predict this very easily. The same can be said for a $100 drop, by the way. Also recall that in a lot of countries a $50 price cut isn't just that. For example, here in Pennsylvania there is a sales tax of $20 on a Wii U priced at $299. So if I were to purchase a Wii U it would really be $319. $249 would translate to $266.43. Now the difference here is how people percieve the price change. Going from $3XX to $2XX has shown to create larger effects in the minds of consumers than going from say $3XX to $3XX or $2XX to $2XX. Now you might say, well the same can be said for the $100 price-cut, but then the actual price would be $319 vs. $213. In the end you only get the effect of going from $3XX to $2XX, the same thing that happened when you only had a $50 price-cut. This is especially true for consumers who don't keep track of prices. They might think that $2XX is reasonable, but $3XX is not, but wouldn't really care if it is upper $2XX or lower $2XX. That is just how weirdly people think, and it is also why we always get the .99/.96 prices. 

So then why should Nintendo choose $249 > $229? Profits. Nintendo is a company that likes to maximize profits. If they sell at a large loss, then selling many more consoles will LOSE them money, not make them money. And then they have to do a cost-risk-benfit analysis to figure whether or not having more consoles in homes at such a large cost is worth it. In the end, I don't think Nintendo will say it is, as they are transitioning to their new unified platform. They'd probably rather take a profit-maximizing route and decrease the price only when the costs aren't so large through increments.  

Well ur prediction is kinda out of the question now that they have already announced a $299.99 bundle to release at the end of May, but if u really want to we can

1 month of sig control?

No.
they accepted wii U fate: just sell games (and DLC and amiibo) for those who have the system and expect that it could be enough for profiting.

F@ck !:P I had forgot  that,so I cannot bet on that but I can still believe what I expect,as a stubborn person!:P loool

1 month of sig control?I knew that you put this as the punishment of the defeated,this would be cruel,I imagine what you would force me to write!:P

I'll let u off the hook this time.....next time u won't be so lucky

X1 isn't way more powerfull, doesn't have more games currently and doesn't have a ton more coming (more, yes. a ton more, hell no), can't predict future suppor. Besides, wii u has much more exclusives while x1 main content is available elsewhere.

I'd say a 50$/€ Pricecut for the holydays is very possible, but not much sooner than that. Also not more than that.

Possible alternative/additional move: New model with bigger flash memory (128GiB should be feasible now for the same price the 32GiB did cost at launch) and better Gamepad battery

Va;ue may be subjective on an individual basis but it is not subjective re the marketplace-   You could sell an X box for more than you can sell a Wii U, so the       X -box IS more valuable than a Wii U --- Even a person that prefered a Wii U would buy an X Box at $200 instead of a Wii U at $300 given the chance because they could then trade or sell the X box at a higher value garnering a profit they could apply toward the Wii U