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

Forums - Gaming - It's a bad thing the Switch isn't being sold at a loss?

vivster on 06 February 2017
etking said:
It is a bad thing that Nintendo is not able to produce the extremely weak and outdated hardware at a much lower cost. If they could produce it for 120$, selling it for 200$ would be within reach, provided that both Nintendo and the retailer share the 80$ profit. At 300$ it cannot compete with PS4 at all. Early adopters will get ripped off and then Nintendo will be forced to reduce the price at E3 because nobody is going to buy the system.

I'm fairly certain that the strong demand for the Switch will last at least until E3. Don't expect a price drop before next year.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Around the Network
skunkfish on 06 February 2017

What if Nintendo decided to drive the price down and lose $100 per unit? If they sold 10 million like that in the first year, it would put a $1 billion dent in their finances...



naruball on 06 February 2017
skunkfish said:
What if Nintendo decided to drive the price down and lose $100 per unit? If they sold 10 million like that in the first year, it would put a $1 billion dent in their finances...

Not sure if serious.

In the unlikely case that you are, let's jus say that's not how it works. That's not how any of it works.



TheWPCTraveler on 06 February 2017
Intrinsic said:
TheWPCTraveler said:

That is the "bill of parts." In other words, you ignored labour costs, shipping costs, and the cut that the retailer/distributor receives upon sale. You're also ignoring the massive amount of money it takes to perform R&D to create the device and properly market the damn thing (though that is not a cost that directly scales with the quantity of devices sold).

By the way, your S7 costs $500 on Amazon. And it released last year. I'd hazard a guess that a device of that caliber from Samsung would cost $300 by holiday 2018, but the Switch will also most likely have gone down in price by that point.

You also ignored that the Switch has a larger battery, a fan inside, and comes with a controller. It also comes with a(n overpriced) dock. (The Switch should've just come with a 6" 1080p screen just to take advantage of display manufacturers mass production, to scale prices down better, but that's just me).

So why does the Switch cost $299, again? Even with all that I said, I still don't see myself paying more than $250 for it, but I can see how it's priced that way.

No..... thats the same breakdown of costs used for things like the PS4 when it launched. The PS4 came in at $384 when it launched back in 2013.

And the bolded part..... you do realize what the key difference between smartphones and game devices are right? With one your business with them ends after purchase, with the other your business with them starts after purchase.

I don't know why people seem to think that peices of plastic (with a board, chip and sensors) controllers are expensive. They aren't, the PS4 controller, for all its motion sensing, trackpad, sticks, buttons lights, batteries...etc doesn't cost more than $16 to make.

Anyways, forget about all this.No point.....

I missed the point of the thread entirely, so I apologize. I thought of it the same way I thought NCL goes about, which is the opposite of what this thread is about.

That said, if Nintendo is serious with the whole "we have enough room to maneuver a price drop" business, then all things considered, the Switch tablet alone should cost below $140 to manufacture.
Assumptions: Dock+Joy-Cons = $40 (+$10, due to how retailers and distributors work), price cut is off JP price ($260 pre-tax) and is ~$40. Retailer cut is assumed to be at 20%.



 
I WON A BET AGAINST AZUREN! WOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

:3

Alkibiádēs on 06 February 2017
Intrinsic said:
spemanig said:

I like it when companies make enough money to give me more games.

Funny, PS2/XB, PS3/360.... were all sold at an initial loss....... yet the all gave more games than nintendo. Go figure.....

Lets not forget that ideally, these consoles primary way of making money is from selling games. 

Sony and MS did NOT give more quality first party games than Nintendo though. You can't give Sony and MS credit for third party games. 

Nintendo on the Wii gave us masterpieces/decent games like Super Mario Galaxy 1 & 2, The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword, Metroid Prime 3: Corruption, Xenoblade Chronicles, Super Smash Bros. Brawl, Donkey Kong Country: Returns, New Super Mario Bros. Wii, Sin & Punishment: Star Succesor, Punch-Out!, Wii Sports Resort, Mario Kart Wii, Super Paper Mario, Kirby's Epic Yarn, etc. 



"The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must" - Thoukydides

Around the Network
naruball on 06 February 2017
Alkibiádēs said:
Intrinsic said:

Funny, PS2/XB, PS3/360.... were all sold at an initial loss....... yet the all gave more games than nintendo. Go figure.....

Lets not forget that ideally, these consoles primary way of making money is from selling games. 

PS2/XB/PS3/360 had mediocre first party support actually. 

actually, that's just your opinion. So not really. Also, in terms of ps3 first party games even the critics would disagree with you (with several ps3 first party games getting the most GOTY awards). Actually.



TheWPCTraveler on 06 February 2017
naruball said:
skunkfish said:
What if Nintendo decided to drive the price down and lose $100 per unit? If they sold 10 million like that in the first year, it would put a $1 billion dent in their finances...

Not sure if serious.

In the unlikely case that you are, let's jus say that's not how it works. That's not how any of it works.

Well, it's closer to a loss of $80 per unit (for a price drop of $100) due to retailer cuts. But, that's still an extra $100 in the pockets of likely customers for the Switch. It's not as if that money will disappear. 



 
I WON A BET AGAINST AZUREN! WOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

:3

vivster on 06 February 2017
Alkibiádēs said:
Intrinsic said:

Funny, PS2/XB, PS3/360.... were all sold at an initial loss....... yet the all gave more games than nintendo. Go figure.....

Lets not forget that ideally, these consoles primary way of making money is from selling games. 

PS2/XB/PS3/360 had mediocre first party support actually. 

Source?

I can't say much about PS2/XB but the PS3 and 360 had amazing 1st party support. That's what tough competition does.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Barkley on 06 February 2017
Alkibiádēs said:
Intrinsic said:

Funny, PS2/XB, PS3/360.... were all sold at an initial loss....... yet the all gave more games than nintendo. Go figure.....

Lets not forget that ideally, these consoles primary way of making money is from selling games. 

PS2/XB/PS3/360 had mediocre first party support actually. 

Eh..... EH????

PS2:

Ratchet & Clank 1-3 + Gladiator + Size Matters + Secret Agent Clank

Jak & Daxter 1-3 + Jak X + Jak Last Frontier

God of War 1 + 2

Wipeout Fusion + Pulse

Gran Turismo 3 + 4

Dark Cloud 1 + 2

Twisted Metal: Black

Sly Cooper 1-3

Ape Escape 2

Everybody's Golf 3 + 4

Singstar (A bijillion versions if that's your thing)

Buzz (Multiple Quizz Games)

Socom 3

 

I won't bother listing the other consoles.



Alkibiádēs on 06 February 2017
naruball said:
Alkibiádēs said:

PS2/XB/PS3/360 had mediocre first party support actually. 

actually, that's just your opinion. So not really. Also, in terms of ps3 first party games even the critics would disagree with you (with several ps3 first party games getting the most GOTY awards). Actually.

GOTY awards are about as valuable as the Oscars. 

http://www.cartoonbrew.com/award-season-focus/proof-that-oscar-voters-are-clueless-about-animation-109456.html

^ This is an entertaining read for people who think those awards actually mean something. 



"The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must" - Thoukydides