Lol @ calling Nintendo "Greedy" ,fortunatley being greedy is likely to put you out of business in pretty much any business.

The consumer doesn't like Nintendo to the extent that the demand will remain the same even if Nintendo where to double or tripple their price , Nintendo have found a balance between consumer demand and profitability , maintaining this balance enables them to prolong their profitability.

 I was going to write up a reply to this, pointing out the economic flaws in your logic, but it's become clear that you're just here to troll.

I already ripped into him yet he has not replied.

Trolls are good at being guile with their insults but tuck tail and run when logic and reason come around.

Apple, MS, Google and other companies make about the same profit margins.

Making money is not a crime.

The OP was just trolling it seems. He probably wanted Ninty to drop the price so he could justify getting one. Apparently his desire to bash the Wii > desire to buy one... is that possible? Maybe he just has this view: Desire for Wii

 I reported him for trolling. I suggest others do the same.

If Nintendo was in a monopoly position, the OP might have a point, but there two companies in direct competition, PCs as a viable venue for video games, and countless thousands of other entertainment options to turn to. There is no indication of price fixing or collusion between any of these competitors.

Nobody is forcing people to buy $250 Wiis. They want to buy them. If they feel they're being ripped off, they can get a PS2 for $100-150. Or they can buy some DVDs, or novels, or a go-kart, or visit a brothel.

Okay, that last one might be a little problematic.

Surprisingly enough I own a Wii.

Most people have read only my original post, which i'll admit wasn't a very good statement of how it is.

Still, my main gripe is with no intention of reducing the price over time like the traditional model of console business. It's true that this can be done to stimulate sales when demand falls, and demand for Wii certainly hasn't fallen. Was the model for the Wii designed around a potential low sale scenario? It could be this, and thus would allow Nintendo to still make a sizeable profit despite low numbers, ala GC.

I'd be interested in knowing exactly how much Nintendo makes on each console sold, and whether or not the manufacturing costs have fallen very much since launch.

I'd admit that Nintendo have done something useful in the form of developing the first decent motion controller for main stream consoles, but i'm still not happy with the machine itself.

At the end of the day, it's fantastic for the business, but no so great for the consumers in my view - even if they are willing to pay inflated costs on eBay etc. Clearly there must be excess demand that Nintendo is not tapping into at the moment.

I'd like to see someone post something to do with the Economics that doesn't resemble the "if demand falls, price will fall" argument I see here. It's not totally explained by this.

Why isn't the "if demand falls, price will fall" argument completely valid in this case? A product has more than one "price." It has the perceived value, the retail price, and the worth. If the perceived value is still as high as the retail price (due to demand) why should they lower the price. The worth is something that could be considered re-sale value. Both the perceived value and the worth of a Wii is simply as high or in some cases higher than the $250. Thusly unless the demand can eventually be out supplied, the price will never be dropped. It would create an even greater demand on the Wii and supply will never reach demand.