How much do you think a $200-250 price will help Wii U? | |||
| Massive Boost over weeks | 14 | 14.29% | |
| Substantial Boost | 29 | 29.59% | |
| Moderate Boost | 42 | 42.86% | |
| Little or no effect | 13 | 13.27% | |
| Total: | 98 | ||
I don't think people are going to respond to bundles as well, a $250 price with Mario 3d world and Wind Waker would be perfect
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbchUmHiEvZ1m3b9HgW5syg
VIDEO GAME MUSIC MASHUPS
tak13 said:
|
Announcement is announcement it will directly affecting potential sales of their current product, it doesn't mater when they will release it will slowdown Wii U sales, and i doubt they will release NX on 2017, it will happen thou if current tech and media is still depend on TV, today we have internet and social media site, and also information is very easy to spread. the same goes with PS4 and Xbox One with the reveal of their product has the same year with the release.
| sc94597 said: 1. How do you determine that $229 is "impulse-buying territory" and $249 is not? Again we don't know the demand curve of the Wii U, and we don't know how certain prices will affect the willingess to pay of hundreds of millions of different consumers. We can guess, but guesses are tough things. You'd have a point if XBO/PS4 were close subsitutes for a Wii U, but they really aren't. It's like saying the price cut of the apple isn't enough because I can buy oranges for a close price. There is a point where I will say, "I just want a fruit and the apple's are too expensive for what I will pay knowing their usual price so I will get an orange instead", but after a certain point I will say, "I really want an apple, so I am going to get an apple. Oranges were subsitutes when I wanted a fruit, but now I want an apple specifically" At that point the consumer end of the market is relatively inelastic (doesn't respond to price changes quickly.) So then we must consider the values of said individuals and how they might change. But we have no idea how the values of individuals in the market might change. Maybe people will be saturated with XBO/PS4's and want a system that gives alternative games to complement their first console. Maybe people are truly not interested in the Wii U at any reasonable price. Marginal value is always time-dependent. Therefore demand is time dependent. And then equllibrium prices are time-dependent. Because of this, it is really hard to pinpoint what this, "impulse-buying territory" is. For me personally, $250 is not much different from $230. It's not even a game's worth of savings. Neither of which are close to "impulse-buying territory." For somebody not interested in any games on the Wii U their willingness to pay might be less than $100. For that reason, it is very possible that no price will save the Wii U, similar to how $99 didn't save the Gamecube, which was a much closer console to its competition. 2. This isn't a binary thing. Nintendo could still care about the Wii U, support it, and making money from its sales without taking a loss on its hardware, but at the cost of marketshare. If they think they can sell a lot more software then they will probably make that cost-benefit-risk analysis when they formulate any price-cut decisions and predict future sales. However, a lot of titles don't seem to benefit from a larger userbase. An example is The Legend of Zelda. It's a game that has its best and worst selling titles on the same platforms, and some of its best selling titles on Nintendo's average selling platforms. On the otherhand a game like Mario Kart could gain a lot of sales from a larger userbase. However, the safest thing for Nintendo to do is to not abandon the Wii U by leaving a huge drought at the end of the generation (like they had done with Wii) while still planning for expanding their marketshare with their next platform(s) and maximizing software sales on said platform(s.) I do think a price of $199 will greatly benefit sales, especially in markets like Japan, but that isn't always necessarily a good thing. Profit maximization always comes first. |
1. Basing on the previous consoles obviously. You are right that PS4/Xbone aren't as close substitutes for a Wii U as they are for each other, as they have a much higher perceived value. Wii U can become the secondary console at best, but the price has to reflect the value the product has and that particular role it plays. In this case - it has to be much lower. $50 isn't much, really. As you said, the equilibrium price changes over time. In this case it goes down. Let me remind you that $299 is the launch price of the Wii U! The market showed that this price was too high back then, so it is highly unlikely that in the 3rd year $249 is the equilibrium price. $229 is closer to it, looks much better on the shelf - when people compare it to Xbone it's not just a simple $100 cheaper, it's more than $100 cheaper! (most people probably won't calculate, just note that it's over $100 cheaper) And as you said in previous post, most people don't analyze whether it's a full game less or not. It's about the impression. This $20 difference can go a long way when compared to the competition. Moreover, N should do its utmost to get Wii U to the "gift range". So that it's just at the right price to be a gift for a kid (especially not for your own kid). Personally, I think this price would put Wii U somewhere in this area. It would be a bold move, unlike a $50 drop, but at the same time wouldn't be as much of a hit as $100 would. Personally I think that $199 is the sweetspot now, but $229 could be "close enough" and is worth exploring, especially considering the 3DS experience. I mean, Nintendo remained passive for so long, they could finally make one semi-brave move.
2. It is. If you believe in your product, you are willing to invest in it and to compete. If you no longer believe in it, you cut the investments and try to ride it out getting as much low-risk profit as possible. Sony believed in PS3, MS believes in Xbone, Sony doesn't believe in Vita and so far N does look as if it didn't believe in Wii U. We have only two patterns in this industry.
Your example of games that do not benefit from larger userbase is totally flawed, as the mentioned game doesn't even exist on Wii U (Zelda - I'm not counting a remake), while the games that do exist are the staples and industry's liders when it comes to adoption ratio and dependance on the userbase. You have two 2D Marios, a "3D" Mario, MK, SSB, DK and some casual party games. Wii U has games that benefit the most from a large userbase. These games are N's 1st party titles. No point arguing this and theorizing.
In fact, I get this impression the whole time that you're just trying to look smart quoting a basic economy book, ignoring what the Wii U reality is and refusing to apply the knowledge to its current situation. I'm trying to give some answers and possible solutions for Wii U, while you only raise obvious questions and state general facts. Give a proper analysis, apply the theory, share your thoughts and results, don't just try to look smart, cause theory left in a void is worthless 
Oh, and by the way, just a general thought. If you launch a piece of electronics for $299 and in the 3rd year aren't capable of cutting the price price by $70 (let alone $100) without incurring serious loses, then I'm very sorry, but you are incompetent and should leave making hardware to someone else. I have no idea how Nintendo managed to mess up this bad. It's rather sad 
Wii U is a GCN 2 - I called it months before the release!
My Vita to-buy list: The Walking Dead, Persona 4 Golden, Need for Speed: Most Wanted, TearAway, Ys: Memories of Celceta, Muramasa: The Demon Blade, History: Legends of War, FIFA 13, Final Fantasy HD X, X-2, Worms Revolution Extreme, The Amazing Spiderman, Batman: Arkham Origins Blackgate - too many no-gaemz :/
My consoles: PS2 Slim, PS3 Slim 320 GB, PSV 32 GB, Wii, DSi.
I think all three consoles will have a $50 cut this year, probably all in the fall.
Yes, to $250. And later we'll see deals for a $250 deluxe bundle + extra game.
I believe this is enough to push some units and make a profit for Nintendo at the same time.
Bet with Teeqoz for 2 weeks of avatar and sig control that Super Mario Odyssey would ship more than 7m on its first 2 months. The game shipped 9.07m, so I won
Never, until JPY make a debut with higher value
sc94597 said:
Value is something in the mind of a human-being. The word you are looking for is, equillibrium price. Here is how mainstream economists define economic value. http://www.ecosystemvaluation.org/1-01.htm Thus, economic value is measured by the most someone is willing to give up in other goods and services in order to obtain a good, service, or state of the world. In a market economy, dollars (or some other currency) are a universally accepted measure of economic value, because the number of dollars that a person is willing to pay for something tells how much of all other goods and services they are willing to give up to get that item. This is often referred to as “willingness to pay.” It is often incorrectly assumed that a good’s market price measures its economic value. However, the market price only tells us the minimum amount that people who buy the good are willing to pay for it. When people purchase a marketed good, they compare the amount they would be willing to pay for that good with its market price. They will only purchase the good if their willingness to pay is equal to or greater than the price. Many people are actually willing to pay more than the market price for a good, and thus their values exceed the market price. |
But not many people are willing to pay more for a Wii U than what it sells for as there are not many people willing to pay the current selling price for a Wii U= MANY being the key word in the definiton you supplied- Relativly speaking MANY more are willing to pay more for the Xbox One than a Wii U because they already have and continue to do so
Certain Amiibo would be a better example for your definition
98% change it will happen. Once NX is formely announced a price drop will barely have any effect, so they will have to do it before the holiday's this year.
I don't really see it boosting sales to a massive degree(much like dropping the Gamecube to $199 did) so I think Nintendo would rather just keep making a small profit on each unit sold. That is assuming it is profitable?
HollyGamer said:
Announcement is announcement it will directly affecting potential sales of their current product, it doesn't mater when they will release it will slowdown Wii U sales, and i doubt they will release NX on 2017, it will happen thou if current tech and media is still depend on TV, today we have internet and social media site, and also information is very easy to spread. the same goes with PS4 and Xbox One with the reveal of their product has the same year with the release. |
Teasing isn't announcing. especially when they didn't even specify if it's a portable or home console.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
