Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 14, 2006, 04:25:43 PM
"Nintendo, on the other hand, took a completely different approach, and didn't want to stay in the game only to take a financial loss from day one. Instead of focusing on high-definition graphics and some of the extras that make technophiles drool, the company opted to try to expand its reach through simplicity--that is, innovate and capture the attention of the mass-market crowd rather than the hardcore gamer who is willing to spend money on a console, HD setup, and other accessories.
The result of that choice, says Nintendo of America president Reggie Fils-Aime, is instant profit.
"We will make a profit on the entire Wii proposition out of the box--hardware and software," Fils-Aime told Reuters. "That really is a very different philosophy versus our competitors. We are a company that competes only in the interactive entertainment space, so we have to make a profit on everything we do."
Nintendo expects to sell 6 million Wiis through March of next year, but analysts expect even better numbers. Michael Pachter of Wedbush Morgan Securities told GameSpot, "I keep hearing that they will crush the 6 million unit number (by something like 2 to 3 million). That would be good for everyone."
I don't know about you guys but I don't think bragging about how Wii is not that great of a bargain is the smartest move. He is basically saying "The competition has more bang for your buck but we feel need to gouge the early adopters (mostly Nintendo fans) probaly more so than any NIntendo console before".
Post by: Requiem of Darcness on September 14, 2006, 04:33:07 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 14, 2006, 04:34:29 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Requiem of Darcness
Is this supposed to be a big deal? Nintendo always makes a profit off their hardware. They have never subscribed to the loss leader philosphy of Sony and MS.
True but I have a feeling they are making the most profits out of any other console before, I just don't see that package costing anywhere close to the 250$ they are asking.
Post by: Arbok on September 14, 2006, 04:42:28 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: VGrevolution
True but I have a feeling they are making the most profits out of any other console before, I just don't see that package costing anywhere close to the 250$ they are asking.
Probably, although one could probably cite that due to Wii Sports being included, and Nintendo reaping what looks to be less, although still comparable, to the normal profit margin for a game release.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 14, 2006, 04:48:59 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: ArbokQuote
Originally posted by: VGrevolution
True but I have a feeling they are making the most profits out of any other console before, I just don't see that package costing anywhere close to the 250$ they are asking.
Probably, although one could probably cite that due to Wii Sports being included, and Nintendo reaping what looks to be less, although still comparable, to the normal profit margin for a game release.
That could be true, honestly I don't care so much about the profit they are making but to seemingly brag about it. I"m not sure that is a good message to send out into the public, it is almost in your face to those of us that buy one.
Post by: Darkheart on September 14, 2006, 04:51:08 PM
LOOK AT THESE FIGURES
600 Ps3 top model
500 Ps3 lower model
400 360 top model
300 360 low model
250 Wii
Now for all of you complaining that the system is 50 bucks from a 360 QUIT IT. Nintendo has been pushing this all along. They promised the Wii would NOT be another console and be doin its own thing, those 2 other consoles can NOT do what the Wii can. If this was just another cube Id complain but they kept their promise, the wii is the lowest next gen console on the market. If you dont wanna pay then vote with your dollars and dont buy the damn thing but I cant stand all this whining goin on the whole past day about this. Nintendo already said 250 would be their maximum theyd sell it for and they did just that.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 14, 2006, 04:53:14 PM
Post by: 31 Flavas on September 14, 2006, 04:54:08 PM
But that's beside the point, Nintendo doesn't have a major secondary business, like Sony and Microsoft do to subsidise the price of the system. So, while I am honestly a bit miffed at the (direct) $50 price increase... I don't hold it against them.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 14, 2006, 04:56:24 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: 31 Flavas
Also, Nintendo has indrectly rasied the price on us before. Gamecube and N64 both came with only 1 controller and no pack in game. Where as with the NES and SNES we got 2 controllers and a pack in (mario) game.
But that's beside the point, Nintendo doesn't have a major secondary business, like Sony and Microsoft do to subsidise the price of the system. So, while I am honestly a bit miffed at the (direct) $50 price increase... I don't hold it against them.
Does anyone have any figures on what NIntendo made/brokeeven/lost on their previous consoles? I could have sworn that they just broke even with GC (Maybe a SLIGHT profit) or a minor loss. Once again I want to reiterate what I sad, I am not complaining about the price but am concerned that being so blatant about it being profitable could look bad image wise. It is like they are saying the competition is giving you a better bang for your buck since they are losing while they are making profits.
On a side note: I personally do not like the strategy of Sony and MS to take huge losses on systems, I am completely fine with no or profits wth a console, in fact I consider it good business. Hopefully like was suggested this profit is mainly coming from the the Wii sports being packed in and not necessarily the true production costs of each system package (even at that I still worry about the image these comments made by Reggie could make).
Post by: Darkheart on September 14, 2006, 05:08:26 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: VGrevolution
Did I say anything about not buying it? I just don't think this is a smart move to be bragging about how profitable the Wii hardware is, it could have some terrible ramifications, that is reality not whining. I want Nintendo to suceed and I hate to see them do something that could potentially damage that.
No not really but its been all over these forums today and I felt like venting my opinion. As far as I am concerned, YEA I would brag about its profitablity, we are only dissapointed because we have hyped ourselves as Nintendo fanboys and girls to think the Wii would launch at a 200 pricepoint. But think about it, to me why not capitalize on the moment anyways.
Reason 1. The ps3 and wii
The wii compared to the lowest model of ps3 is still HALF the price
Reason 2. Launch
We all know that launches sell out so why not make money off of it. Price cuts can come in the future if the console has a harder time selling at its current pricing.
Reason 3. Ds
The Ds is at 130 right now and it can make more money by staying at its current price. The Wii being at 200 and having a 70 dollar difference is insane. Now with the Wii being 250 they can keep up both the Wii and Ds's price. This way when the Xbox 360 does a price cut Nintendo can easily slash their console to 200 and keep in the game and STILL make a profit. Likewise with the Ds if the PsP does a cut Nintendo can lower it to 100.
Post by: iMoron on September 14, 2006, 05:08:30 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: VGrevolution
True but I have a feeling they are making the most profits out of any other console before, I just don't see that package costing anywhere close to the 250$ they are asking.
... So you think that making the CPU more eficient and yet more powerfull than the Cube's CPU is cheap...
Or the graphic card... Or the remote and its sensor... or the self loading drive bay... What about the plastic? I read they are using a cuality plastic...
And the game... thrue, it could go for $40 by itself...
... Besides, they are not making a huge profit... most likely $10 per console... or even less... but a profit none the less...
So... they make profit... maybe this should have been directed to share holders and investors alone, to avoid people from complaining about them making a profit...
Lame... weak...
... And... I remember that the N64 costed $250 when it realesed! It was that price for a short time since, short time... Then it was $200. They made a profit...
The GameCube was lossing like $7 for a few months... then it made a profit shortly after...
Post by: 31 Flavas on September 14, 2006, 05:09:26 PM
If you don't like now Nintendo is making it's money, you've always got Microsoft's "consumable" microtransactions and Sony's propritary Memory Sticks and RootKit loaded DRM music.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 14, 2006, 05:13:52 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: iMoronQuote
Originally posted by: VGrevolution
True but I have a feeling they are making the most profits out of any other console before, I just don't see that package costing anywhere close to the 250$ they are asking.
... So you think that making the CPU more eficient and yet more powerfull than the Cube's CPU is cheap...
Or the graphic card... Or the remote and its sensor... or the self loading drive bay... What about the plastic? I read they are using a cuality plastic...
And the game... thrue, it could go for $40 by itself...
... Besides, they are not making a huge profit... most likely $10 per console... or even less... but a profit none the less...
So... they make profit... maybe this should have been directed to share holders and investors alone, to avoid people from complaining about them making a profit...
Lame... weak...
... And... I remember that the N64 costed $250 when it realesed! It was that price for a short time since, short time... Then it was $200. They made a profit...
The GameCube was lossing like $7 for a few months... then it made a profit shortly after...
Well if some of the rumblings are to be believed the Wii hardware costs less than 99$, even with the nunchuck/remote, component, and Wii sports I don't see them coming close to the 250$ price point when you go production/material cost of each system package. Then again this all relies on the Less than 99$ manufacturing/materials cost for the Wii hardware, which could definately be wrong. I still would love to see the final specs, since some of the games are looking pretty stunning, and do look next generation (look no further than Mario Galaxy and Metroid Prime 3).
Post by: zakkiel on September 14, 2006, 05:42:58 PM
QuoteAnd why, exactly, would we believe these rumblings?
Well if some of the rumblings are to be believed the Wii hardware costs less than 99$
Post by: IceCold on September 14, 2006, 05:51:02 PM
Post by: wandering on September 14, 2006, 05:54:57 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 14, 2006, 06:12:21 PM
Post by: KnowsNothing on September 14, 2006, 06:14:37 PM
Post by: Arbok on September 14, 2006, 06:17:17 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: VGrevolution
Well if some of the rumblings are to be believed the Wii hardware costs less than 99$, even with the nunchuck/remote, component, and Wii sports I don't see them coming close to the 250$ price point...
Not saying that's the actual price to produce the unit, but if it does cost $99 to manufacture I can actually see that coming much closer than you assume.
For one thing, you have to factor in the heavy R&D that went into something like the Wii, that remote I'm sure took a lot of time to perfect, while products don't advertise themselves also so you also have to factor in marketing costs. Retail chains will also take a cut of that $250 pie for doing the actual selling, so squeeze out some more money there, and you get closer and closer to the $99 point. Not enough so Nintendo probably wouldn't make a profit, but enough so that it doesn't have the huge disparity one would simply assume looking at the $99 cost (again, just assuming that might be true).
Post by: wandering on September 14, 2006, 07:51:40 PM
Quote
Wandering that is an awesome picture to choose out of the Mario Galaxy ones!
Thanks, I like it too!
Post by: Kairon on September 14, 2006, 08:14:59 PM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 14, 2006, 08:32:00 PM
That's plenty of bang for my masculine deer.
Post by: jasonditz on September 14, 2006, 08:43:59 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: wandering
I am a bit surprised, honestly. Didn't they say Cube was initially sold at a slight loss? But really, there's nothing to complain about here. A company selling a product for profit? Oh noes! And there's nothing wrong with Reggie 'bragging' about it, either. Anyone with an interest in the console will want assurances that Nintendo won't go the way of Sega.
You're right, the Cube was sold at a slight loss and later break even for a long time.
On the other hand, there's a valid complaint. Sony's willing to subsidize my hardware purchase, so is Microsoft... why should I pay cost + margin for a Nintendo console when I can get a different one for cost - subsidy? Sure, it's a higher overall cost console, but it's a compelling argument from a value perspective, and it's a question that's going to get asked now. Nintendo can clearly justify it, but if Reggie wasn't going around bragging about it in the first place, we would've never known.
Post by: Kairon on September 14, 2006, 08:49:56 PM
This means that the Wii is the best of both worlds: it needs to compromise neither desirable aspect, it can be BOTH cheaper to consumers AND profitable to the manufacturer, a win-win for all!
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Mario on September 14, 2006, 09:02:26 PM
The only relevant facts are
$600 = Bad
$250 = Good
It doesn't matter how much it costs the companies, that doesn't make it good value for US. We don't buy the chips and wires inside (they are of NO value to us), we buy the experiences, and some would argue (obviously everyone here) that Wii offers better experiences, so it would be the best value even if they were all the same price.
Post by: jasonditz on September 14, 2006, 09:10:25 PM
Moreover, why doesn't Majesco get back into the business of Sega Genesis manufacturing? Surely those could be made profitably for $30-$40 these days.
Post by: KDR_11k on September 14, 2006, 09:12:39 PM
Post by: wandering on September 14, 2006, 09:17:50 PM
Quote
The Gamecube is being sold profitably at $100 a pop, wouldn't that, being an even lower end price, be even more appealing to customers?
As far as I can tell, the GameCube doesn't have a motion sensitive controller...
Mario didn't say the price trumped all concerns. He said customers care about the experience and the price, not how much the manufacturer paid for the internal components.
Quote
This is aimed at shareholders, not the general customer base. Or mabye those customers who think Nintendo is on the verge of bankrupcy.
That's what I was figuring.
Post by: King of Twitch on September 14, 2006, 09:24:10 PM
Today Microsoft is subsidizing your console, tomorrow they're subsidizing your living room.
An extra $50 from the 4 million early Wii adopters puts $200 million in their bank account to stop this campaign.
Post by: jasonditz on September 14, 2006, 09:24:19 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: wandering
As far as I can tell, the GameCube doesn't have a motion sensitive controller...
That sounds sort of like what I was trying to say, that end price ISN'T the most important thing to the customer.
Post by: Kairon on September 14, 2006, 09:39:39 PM
But the extent to which a company subsidizes a console is WAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYY down that list. If it's on the list of consumer concerns at all.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: SixthAngel on September 14, 2006, 09:45:24 PM
When Nintendo makes money off of things like the console they don't have to rip the customers off in other aspects. Nintendo lets you use the SD cards you already have and buy ones they don't make a profit off of, the xbox memory cards cost about $40. Why don't people talk about how Nintendo gave up a chance to make profit and helped us out by going SD cards?
Post by: jasonditz on September 14, 2006, 09:53:16 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Oh, okay.
But the extent to which a company subsidizes a console is WAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYY down that list. If it's on the list of consumer concerns at all.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Not directly, sure, but it translates into things the customer would care about. Subsidy is not fully distinct from end price.
Post by: Arbok on September 14, 2006, 10:00:02 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Mario
Nobody cares that Sony are taking a loss with PS3, or that Nintendo will make money from Wii.
Exactly. Joe Average isn't even going to know one way or the other anyway. You tell someone who is a casual gamer that Sony probably lost money when they sold him his PS2, and he will likely be surprised by that fact. In the end, it simply doesn't matter.
Post by: jasonditz on September 14, 2006, 10:03:54 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: SixthAngel
How dare a company actually make money off a product they sell!
When Nintendo makes money off of things like the console they don't have to rip the customers off in other aspects. Nintendo lets you use the SD cards you already have and buy ones they don't make a profit off of, the xbox memory cards cost about $40. Why don't people talk about how Nintendo gave up a chance to make profit and helped us out by going SD cards?
Might be interesting then to ask why Nintendo stuck it to us so bad on memory cards this generation.
As for why people don't talk about it, I'm going to say it's because the competition has internal hard drives, so memory cards aren't really going to be a big factor this generation.
Post by: Kairon on September 14, 2006, 10:19:18 PM
Bottomline is that companies will price for as much profit as they believe they can, and the only power for a consumer is to decide whether or not to buy the finished product. And despite the profit they're making off the systems, the Wii is still a lower price than its competitors.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: IceCold on September 14, 2006, 10:22:26 PM
Post by: 18 Days on September 14, 2006, 10:33:32 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: 31 Flavas
But that's beside the point, Nintendo doesn't have a major secondary business, like Sony and Microsoft do to subsidise the price of the system. So, while I am honestly a bit miffed at the (direct) $50 price increase... I don't hold it against them.
INFLATION.
It's real.
I'd like to point your attention to the NES, SNES and N64.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 14, 2006, 11:22:06 PM
. BTW I was reading a bit more in the hardware of the Wii and I guess Nintendo is using some of the best materials for the casing (I can believe it, it does look like a sturdy machine), so it is possible that 99$ is off.
Post by: wandering on September 14, 2006, 11:58:28 PM
Post by: JonLeung on September 15, 2006, 04:42:06 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on September 15, 2006, 05:29:03 AM
Post by: jasonditz on September 15, 2006, 05:55:36 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
What about the 360's ridiculous price for accessories? I mean, $130 CDN for a WiFi adapter that is built in to the Wii?! Come on..
Please, if you know someone that's considering buying one of those, take an Official Xbox Magazine, roll it up really tight, and hit him with it.
There's absolutely no reason to spend that kind of money for Wifi, especially when Microsoft has given 360 owners a standard ethernet port. Amazon.com has Linksys WGA11B Wireless bridges for US$19.99. Those will work just fine.
Post by: couchmonkey on September 15, 2006, 07:33:23 AM
Reggie is saying this more for investors than us. I don't think it's so bad that Nintendo is making a profit, although I do feel the company might hurt it's own "non-gamer" strategy with this. Then again, this time next year, the system will probably only be $200.
Post by: Arbok on September 15, 2006, 07:40:47 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
That's an interesting chart, 18 Days. Where'd you get that? I hope it gets updated with the Wii ('cause I'm too lazy to figure it out). Well, I'm guessing that it would be pretty close to the Nintendo 64...
-_-'
It's going off of today's inflation so the Wii on that chart would be *drum roll* $250, just like the PS3 is $500/$600.
Post by: Ian Sane on September 15, 2006, 08:01:03 AM
I also think it's pretty dumb to annouce that Nintendo is making a profit off of the hardware right after releasing the price and having almost everyone think "that's not as cheap as I was hoping." It's just bad timing. Plus it makes all those "we've got to keep costs down" excuses for skimping on the hardware look pretty selfish. All this talk about making things affordable and in reality they were just talking about lowering costs for THEM to make more profit. I think a cheaper console that breaks even would make more money off of game sales and third party licences than a more expensive one that makes a profit off of the hardware but might not sell as well without any real price advantage. But then Nintendo might just be doing this initially for the early adopters and then when it's time to sell to the non-gamers they lower the price. That's kind of a dick-headed thing to do but it would work.
It doesn't help Nintendo's incredibly justified reputation for trying to squeeze every last dollar out of everyone.
Post by: couchmonkey on September 15, 2006, 08:06:02 AM
Sony will give you one great deal, they will actually lose money! Buy a PS3, everybody's doing it. Well, 500,000 people like me are.
Post by: Spak-Spang on September 15, 2006, 08:11:39 AM
I am sure Nintendo's pricing needs to be profitable because they are actually giving us alot of great gaming opportunities at some great prices. Remember online is free, but Nintendo still needs to invest alot of money in that network. Setting everything up for the virtual console costs money, and I am sure the profits for the virtual console go partially to maintaining free online.
I want Nintendo to be a successful and profitable business so that is never goes away. I don't care how much money the other companies bleed. Nintendo is doing great things with the Wii.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 15, 2006, 12:28:13 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
Ian, you're right about the timing of hte announcement.
Sony will give you one great deal, they will actually lose money! Buy a PS3, everybody's doing it. Well, 500,000 people like me are.
I still refuse to buy into the argument that PS3 is a great deal for every gamer, most of us don't want a blu-ray player so why should we pay that much for it? Like I said before great deals are fine if you get what you REALLY want with it. As I said before they could build it into a 60 inch Plasma TV for 3000$ or something, that would be a "Good deal" but what about those that only want the system? That isn't a good monetary deal for them!
Post by: RickPowers on September 15, 2006, 01:05:50 PM
Post by: Ceric on September 15, 2006, 01:27:59 PM
(Then use it for a house warmer.)
Post by: couchmonkey on September 15, 2006, 01:32:26 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 15, 2006, 02:22:12 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: RickPowers
If you have an HDTV, the PS3 is a great value. If you don't, it's not. It's pretty much that simple, sadly.
I have an HDTV and I still think the PS3's value is a load of crap since I don't want a buggy bluray player that I will never buy DVDs for.
Post by: Arbok on September 15, 2006, 05:47:31 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: RickPowers
If you have an HDTV and actually care about Blu-Ray, the PS3 is a great value.
Fixed.
Post by: Nick DiMola on September 15, 2006, 06:20:40 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: ArbokQuote
Originally posted by: RickPowers
If you have an HDTV and actually care about Blu-Ray, the PS3 is a great value.
Fixed.
Amen to that. Blu-Ray is absolute Sh!t. Forget this DRM crap, I am sick of the MPAA and the RIAA controlling our media, and it pisses me off even more that Sony is trying to profit with it. Screw them and their rootkits and all their DRM BS. I choose DVI and whatever hi-def disk eventually comes out that is unencrypted.
Aside from that, the only travesty in price is the Wiimote+Nunchuk at $60. Unacceptable. The $250 price tag is still very reasonable, but the controller combo needs to go for $50 in a packaged form at the most, if Nintendo doesn't get this they are blind.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 16, 2006, 02:13:11 AM
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=conewsstory&refer=conews&tkr=NTDOY:US&sid=ayhv5sy.t2No
Post by: UncleBob on September 16, 2006, 04:24:06 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Mr. Jack
Amen to that. Blu-Ray is absolute Sh!t. Forget this DRM crap, I am sick of the MPAA and the RIAA controlling their media
Not to get into a totally different arguement, but I fixed that statement for you.
*They* create the media (the music, the movies, the games) and they own it as long as the copyright holds. Remember, when you buy a copy of a game, movie or music, you aren't buying the rights to do whatever the heck you wish with it... it's still their media.
Post by: KDR_11k on September 16, 2006, 04:34:42 AM
Post by: 18 Days on September 16, 2006, 06:12:45 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: ArbokQuote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
That's an interesting chart, 18 Days. Where'd you get that? I hope it gets updated with the Wii ('cause I'm too lazy to figure it out). Well, I'm guessing that it would be pretty close to the Nintendo 64...
-_-'
It's going off of today's inflation so the Wii on that chart would be *drum roll* $250, just like the PS3 is $500/$600.
Lol thank you. I just stared blankly at that post, my eyes not believing what I was reading.
Also
Where did I get it?
I dunno! Did you ever try looking at the image's address? BECAUSE IT WILL TELL YOU!
Post by: IceCold on September 16, 2006, 12:08:23 PM
Quotewould be a perfect time to buy the stock now.. whoever dropped it probably thinks that the (relatively) high price will cause it to sell less at launch. They obviously don't know much about the gaming industry; the Wii will still sell out and the stocks will soar at launch time..
Originally posted by: VGrevolution
On a related note NIntendo stocks drop 3%.
The usual disclaimers
Post by: Kairon on September 16, 2006, 09:47:57 PM
The usual disclaimers
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: jasonditz on September 17, 2006, 05:32:37 AM
Post by: Nick DiMola on September 17, 2006, 07:50:11 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
No, you buy the medium but you don't buy the duplication rights to the material held on that medium. What DRM does is lock down the medium in a way that prevents you from doing things that copyright does not restrict and extends corporate powers into areas not intended or even expressly excluded by the law.
Couldn't have said it better. DRM is an excuse to take away what is rightfully yours.
Post by: jasonditz on September 17, 2006, 07:57:55 PM
