The problem with Nintendo trying to leapfrog specs over the PS4 is that it will result in a higher BoM, but will still fail to convert third party developers into diverting support to their platform. 

Third party developers know for a fact that Nintendo's own software will always sell higher than anything they can put on a Nintendo platform. 

It nintendo WiiU Gamepad fault.

I bought a WWHD bundle. Cost me $250. That's it. Lets say I bought a PS4. Costs me $299. Then I also gotta buy PS+, which is another $50. And another $50 for the rest of its life. I don't think its the same price. I could own a Wii U for 4 years and it costs me $250. Or I could own a PS4 for 4 years and it costs me $500.

I'd add that Nintendo learned the hard way that if it's unpopular, you don't get so much from selling it cheap. In fact it can even lower the value perception. I still can't believe a 99.99$ GC could not sell more.

it would be cool if they released Zedla U only on the wii U. That should squeeze them an extra million units of wii U as a final goodbye to the awesome system.

1) Good design (be smart about how you do things. XB1/PS4 > Wii U design wise) (x10 power? almost same price?)

2) Economics of scale (the more of x you make, the cheaper you can buy parts y,z,n)

3) Research & developement costs (both MS and Sony got a good deal by AMD, chip didnt take much R&D).

4) Sony & MS are bigger names, I bet they can get better contracts done than Nintendo.

5) Sony & MS are willing to sell at a slight loss and make it back through service fee's.

Nintendo choose to make their console with a 80-100$ gamepad controller.

Its just a bad design choice thats bitten them in the arse so to speak, and made it hard for them to sell the unit cheaper than it does.

Honestly judgeing from this, what NX needs:

1) no gamepad

2) amd cheap chip (low R&D) + get a good contract

3) start a Nintendo service like PS plus, to off set the sale at loss, strategie.

The cost of owning a system can go many ways.  For example, you don't "have to" buy PS+.  I did and have played online games less than 50 hours (almost all of that was Diablo III) in the 2-3 years had it.  I have it for the games and discounts it provides.  I figured it up and due to getting PS+ on sale for $30 a year has saved me well over $100 in games I would have bought if I didn't buy PS+ to get them free or discounted.

I like Nintendo, but their games are notorious for holding price and not going on sale.  I already own a dozen PS4 games that I paid less than $20 for.  Some of these games were only 6-9 months old when I bought them.  Now, this is specific to me because I am a high volume gamer. I buy ~20 games a year, so that $10-20 difference on each title comes out to $200-400 a year, or $1000-2000 over the course of the system's life.

I think each gamer has different habits that shape the perceived value any console has.  Buying peripharals, services, games, hard drives, etc. can vary greatly so really all we can say is the base consoles cost X or Y.

You already said it yourself. Nintendo games are notorious for holding price. This means that my collections value is always high. Years down the road, my Wii U collection will most likely be worth more than your PS4 collection. Perceived value or not, that is a real value years down the road. In the end, I could sell a few Wii U games, and end up owning most of the games you buy at that value.

NX should plonk a I3 and a powervr gpu in.

Which means something if you view these as investments.  I don't personally.  I still have NES and SNES cartridges in storage because I have emotional attachment to them.  So it doesn't matter to me if some old game I own is worth $1 or $100.

Again, this comes down to individuals and I can understand how people with different models come to different valuations of a product.