Well... maybe... but we will never know.
Maybe those actions would help it to sell a bit more, but I don´t think they would avoid it to be a commercial dissapointiment.
All the WiiU problems came right at the launch and on the subsequent months: bad branding, pratically inexistent marketing/advertsiment, a long period of very few game launches, delays in titles like `Pikmin 3.....
In my opinion, it launch was bad-timed. Nintendo should have launched it later (in mid 2013 with a different brand, closer to the launch of its best games, and with a lower price.

The issues the WiiU had were totally on a different league compared to the PS3.

The PS3 was too expensive and it had a weak launch window lineup, other than that it was a very compelling product.

Yawn, you didn't propose anything that would save the Wii U. The only thing you proposed is for Nintendo burning money faster.

"just drop the price!", "just make more gaemzz!"

LMAO! Best advice to anybody with a failing product, just drop the price! Do you think money grows on trees, that Nintendo wasn't doing all it could to make more games for it? They were already losing money on the Wii U, the dev studios were already working overtime and stretched thin between saving the WIi U and 3DS.

I think before proposing solutions to Nintendo, you should read a Business 101.

If they really wanted to, they could have, but it isn't worth it in the long run. The Switch will make them more money than the Wii U if it were to be saved any day of the week. Also. the gamepad was ridiculously expensive for what it is, so they couldn't lower the price, they weren't greedy bastards in that aspect at all, they need to make some profit off of it.

 1. This is pretty obvious. Nintendo should have made a version without the gamepad to sell it cheaper. However, the problem was the games, so this would've had only a limited effect.

2. Much better idea. However, Nintendo had also the 3DS to save at the time. Instead of exclusivity, Nintendo should have focused on porting as many 3DS games as possible for Wii U. Not so surprisingly, Iwata unified the home/handheld console dev teams.

3. Otherwise a good idea, it's just that you already had access to Wii Virtual Console on the Wii mode, making this too having only a limited effect.

Saying Nintendo should've sold Wii U cheaper and make more games on it is merely pointing out the (obvious) problem. How they'd done it what had it cost would have been a nice to read instead.

Stop it. Right. Now.

U pad necessary for: Paper Mario Color Splash, StarFox Zero, Fatal Frame V, Super Mario Maker, Splatoon, Wonderful 101, Xenoblade X, Nintendo Land, Zombie U, Lego City Undercover, Kirby Rainbow Curve, party games

Great advantage for: Tokyo Mirage Sessions #FE, Hyrule Warriors, Mario Kart 8, WindWaker/TwilightPrincess HD, Smash Bros 4, Deus Ex HR, Batman, Mass Effect 3, Pikmin 3.

OffTV play: killer feature for other games and VC games.

But you can hardly call them taking advantage of the gamepad. Something like Splatoon, Starfox Zero, Zombi U made completely useless use of it. How did the gamepad was used in Smash Bros? I have the game, but right now can't think of how it was used in the game - if at all. And how did Lego City Undercover use the gamepad? I have that game too, but can't remember how it was used.

Off TV play was a good feature, though a Wii U without the gamepad had done better.

It's tough to really compare these two situations. They're apples and oranges to me. Nintendo probably couldn't afford to lose more than they were already at the time because the gaming business IS their business. They didn't have other big ventures to go along with gaming like Sony has (granted, some of Sony's divisions weren't and still aren't doing well). Plus, Sony had the luxury of still having big third parties around to keep things moving forward as their own games started rolling out better. For Nintendo, all they had was their first-party along with indies for Wii U. The 3DS at least had big third party titles like Yokai Watch, Monster Hunter, Dragon Quest, Shin Megami Tensei, etc. to go along with the Pokemons, the Smash Bros., the Marios, the Fire Emblems, and the Zeldas of the world. They probably took to the next direction once Mario Kart 8 and Smash Bros. didn't get the Wii U any further than they could've brought the console.

Plus, they probably had to mention the "NX" since Iwata mentioned it at the same time he announced the partnership with DeNA and Nintendo's first step onto mobile. I'm sure some feared that if Nintendo made that step onto mobile, that Nintendo would stop all hardware manufacturing. So the announcement of the "NX" at the DeNA live press conference was assurance to consumers that Nintendo wasn't going away from dedicated hardware anytime soon. The timing probably wasn't great, but it eventually had to be out there since mobile was becoming a thing for Nintendo.

Personally, I think Nintendo did all they could within the limits of the Wii U's life. They struggled initially with HD, but were able to put out great games nonetheless. Yes, their output declined overtime and it was kinda indicative when E3 2015 occurred with the limited Wii U games announced. Keeping the Wii U around longer would do little for Nintendo. The 13 million Wii U owners wouldn't suddenly jump to somewhere close to 20 million just because Nintendo stuck it out a little longer. Plus, they would only continue to earn marginal or moderate profits (even with the 3DS), which is nice if you're a smaller company, not a 125-year old first-party company.

I think this gen has shown that supporting two consoles at the same time isn't sufficient as it used to be due to longer and more expensive game development. I mean, your comment could be said about Sony and their abandonment of the Vita after like 1.5 years of big (even notable) first party support. So if you put that way for the Vita, then Sony doesn't deserve their fans' support as well. So all in all, there really wasn't a lot for Nintendo to do with the state the Wii U was in.

I'm actually happy they didn't try to save it. I've been able to test the Switch this weekend in Toronto, very in love with its design and concept compared to Wii U.

it should be launched 2 years earlier, and without gamepad, just the pro controller and wiimote+. Id should rely its marketing in the new graphics and AAA third party games and the improved motion capabilities due wiimote+.
Gotten wii sports resort HD, zelda SS HD, DKCR HD, as cross wii plataform. gotten all ps360 third parties too.
Then, by 2012, release gamepad as a optional accessory, bundled with zumbi U, or nintendo land. Beside some games, other games should be released without needing gamepad(like actually happened).
Pushed zelda BotW and switch for 2016 holiday.

Why would that work?
By 2010, wii started decline(even though still good sales), mainly by games on competition. PS360 kept good sales. Wii U in 2010 could canibalize sales from both. Without the gamepad, it could be cheaper than ps360(or on par), and would be the most powerfull console (for those who care), still, could keep wii crowd interested, showing better motion control due wiimote+ and sports resort, zelda SS, in a brand new system.
I should sell well in the first years(before ps4 and one). With good sales, thirdy party AAA games would still be on system. At least all games that were also on ps360 lanched after 2012.
Most big sale games on wii U didnt rely on gamepad. Splatoon, MK8, mario 3DW, NSMB, could easily be played without it. In between 2013 and 2016 it wouldnt be the most powerfull console. So, without gamepad, 200$ would sell much better, and it would have a selling point that ps4 and one didnt have(pricing, nintendo games and free online). And much more third party support would also help on droughts.
And few more decisions, like pushing wii U smash before 3DS version. Also, kill it by 2016 with the last great game, BotW. (along with switch, maybe...)
40M would be easily achieved.