The good price drop

I would guess that the only time you will see a $99 price tag is right before the launch of Xbox Next. The problem with console prices this time around is the actual cost of the elements that compose them. If you consider what's all in the box for $149 right now, it's really not a bad deal.
 
[quote name='jeffreyjrose']I would guess that the only time you will see a $99 price tag is right before the launch of Xbox Next. The problem with console prices this time around is the actual cost of the elements that compose them. If you consider what's all in the box for $149 right now, it's really not a bad deal.[/quote]

I heard Microsoft loses some money for every console being sold. They only get their money off XBL service, accessories, and stuff. An Xbox takes about $200+ money to make, which PlayStation 2 takes about less, and Nintendo actually makes profit.
 
[quote name='gamefreak117'][quote name='jeffreyjrose']I would guess that the only time you will see a $99 price tag is right before the launch of Xbox Next. The problem with console prices this time around is the actual cost of the elements that compose them. If you consider what's all in the box for $149 right now, it's really not a bad deal.[/quote]

I heard Microsoft loses some money for every console being sold. They only get their money off XBL service, accessories, and stuff. An Xbox takes about $200+ money to make, which PlayStation 2 takes about less, and Nintendo actually makes profit.[/quote]

Yeah, their 'entertainment division' (of Microsoft) actually loses money because of the Xbox. But they don't care because of two reasons. One, they're entering an extremely competitive marketplace with success, and two, they've got so much money coming from pc software revenues and such that it really doesn't matter during this round of consoles.
 
[quote name='jeffreyjrose']Yeah, their 'entertainment division' (of Microsoft) actually loses money because of the Xbox. But they don't care because of two reasons. One, they're entering an extremely competitive marketplace with success, and two, they've got so much money coming from pc software revenues and such that it really doesn't matter during this round of consoles.[/quote]

Yep, supposedly they've been losing money on hardware since day 1, unlike Nintendo and Sony, which I'm pretty sure always made sure that they made some profit on all hardware as well as software.
 
Its great that Microsoft can loose a ton of money on the Xbox. It allows for a more powerful system. It also allows for the hard drive, which Im sure would have been cut if Microsoft had to make money on every Xbox sold.
 
Well...its cut next time...thats the only downside...a company can only do that for so long and not have to abbandon their ways...next time there is no hardrive and I shudder to see whatelse they cut...
 
[quote name='karmapolice620']Well...its cut next time...thats the only downside...a company can only do that for so long and not have to abbandon their ways...next time there is no hardrive and I shudder to see whatelse they cut...[/quote]
Im sure even if Microsoft does offically announce that the Xbox Next wont have a hard drive, the consumer response will be so negative that they put a small one back in. After all, having a hard drive is really popular, with the ability to have DC and custom soundtracks.
 
It probably will, but not for a few years yet. The lowest I could possibly see it going is 125 bucks, probably after XBN launches...unless they bring out a remodeled version of the original XBox, which might somehow be able to break the $100 mark.
 
[quote name='karmapolice620']They already anounced that it wont in a press release[/quote]

Do you have a link to the PR? I know that is the very strong rumor and the CEO of M-Systems came out a while back saying the Xbox2 won't have a HDD, but he's the guy making the flash memory so of course he doesn't want it to have a HDD.

I read in a mag that the official specs for the nextbox are nailed down, but hadn't heard anything from an official source about those specs.
 
[quote name='alongx'][quote name='jeffreyjrose']Yeah, their 'entertainment division' (of Microsoft) actually loses money because of the Xbox. But they don't care because of two reasons. One, they're entering an extremely competitive marketplace with success, and two, they've got so much money coming from pc software revenues and such that it really doesn't matter during this round of consoles.[/quote]

Yep, supposedly they've been losing money on hardware since day 1, unlike Nintendo and Sony, which I'm pretty sure always made sure that they made some profit on all hardware as well as software.[/quote]

Thats a negitive my friend....what does the other systems have the xbox doesnt? Custom parts...say it with me...."cus....tom". The Xbox is a glorified old PC. WOO! They all take a loss....all of them. Thats why you never see games systems cheaper (maybe 3 bucks) elsewhere. Because Nintendo makes negative 150 per gamecube at release and Wal-mart makes $0. It's all in the games...so all you with the modchips! Thank you kindly for doing your best to kill the business. Companies that dont make money cause you "backed-up" your game, or worse own systems and dont buy any games, I.E. = Dreamcast - go out of business. (Or at least lose a console that was far superior to the PS2 and had a company that had a 15 year foothole in the market, with name brands and being the only 128 system in town for years.)
 
Oya, before you flame me...I realize that all the fanboys know it was Sega's fault for making a system so easy to steal from. I mean, fanboys couldnt help cracking all the games and posting them on Peer to Peer sharing rooms with the tagline "Dreamcast Fans". Heh,------If those are the "fans", I'd hate to see the people who hated the dreamcast.
 
[quote name='Mookyjooky'][quote name='alongx'][quote name='jeffreyjrose']Yeah, their 'entertainment division' (of Microsoft) actually loses money because of the Xbox. But they don't care because of two reasons. One, they're entering an extremely competitive marketplace with success, and two, they've got so much money coming from pc software revenues and such that it really doesn't matter during this round of consoles.[/quote]

Yep, supposedly they've been losing money on hardware since day 1, unlike Nintendo and Sony, which I'm pretty sure always made sure that they made some profit on all hardware as well as software.[/quote]

Thats a negitive my friend....what does the other systems have the xbox doesnt? Custom parts...say it with me...."cus....tom". The Xbox is a glorified old PC. WOO! They all take a loss....all of them. Thats why you never see games systems cheaper (maybe 3 bucks) elsewhere. Because Nintendo makes negative 150 per gamecube at release and Wal-mart makes $0. It's all in the games...so all you with the modchips! Thank you kindly for doing your best to kill the business. Companies that dont make money cause you "backed-up" your game, or worse own systems and dont buy any games, I.E. = Dreamcast - go out of business. (Or at least lose a console that was far superior to the PS2 and had a company that had a 15 year foothole in the market, with name brands and being the only 128 system in town for years.)[/quote]

You're wrong, my friend. Nintendo has never lost money on a console. It's a pricing/business practice that they just don't believe in. And if you think Walmart doesn't make money off console sales, you're a fucking moron. Retailers don't carry items that they don't make money on. Oh, and I have about 25 games for my cube, and about 35 games for my two boxes. And all of the systems this time around are glorified pcs. Look what's inside of them: processors, disc readers, graphics cards, motherboards, and some type of digital memory saves via hard drives or memory cards.
 
[quote name='Mookyjooky']Companies that dont make money cause you "backed-up" your game, or worse own systems and dont buy any games, I.E. = Dreamcast - go out of business. (Or at least lose a console that was far superior to the PS2 and had a company that had a 15 year foothole in the market, with name brands and being the only 128 system in town for years.)[/quote]

Say it with me everyone, "Piracy did NOT kill the Dreamcast". The Dreamcast died because of piss-poor market timing on Sega's part. The Dreamcast was released in between major console releases, something akin to releasing a $300 console today. No matter how good the console was, if a $300 console were released today with slightly lower specs that what is being predicted for the PS3/XboX Next/GameSphere, would a lot of people buy it? Answer: No. They'll wait the 2-3 years to get the next generation of consoles, even though those consoles fail to fulfill their marketing hype. If Dreamcast had waitied 2 years to release and beefed up the system, with built in broadband and/or hard drive/zip drive, my guess is that they'd still be around, and either Xbox or Gamecube would be out of market.
 
[quote name='Mookyjooky'][quote name='alongx'][quote name='jeffreyjrose']Yeah, their 'entertainment division' (of Microsoft) actually loses money because of the Xbox. But they don't care because of two reasons. One, they're entering an extremely competitive marketplace with success, and two, they've got so much money coming from pc software revenues and such that it really doesn't matter during this round of consoles.[/quote]

Yep, supposedly they've been losing money on hardware since day 1, unlike Nintendo and Sony, which I'm pretty sure always made sure that they made some profit on all hardware as well as software.[/quote]

Thats a negitive my friend....what does the other systems have the xbox doesnt? Custom parts...say it with me...."cus....tom". The Xbox is a glorified old PC. WOO! They all take a loss....all of them. Thats why you never see games systems cheaper (maybe 3 bucks) elsewhere. Because Nintendo makes negative 150 per gamecube at release and Wal-mart makes $0. It's all in the games...so all you with the modchips! Thank you kindly for doing your best to kill the business. Companies that dont make money cause you "backed-up" your game, or worse own systems and dont buy any games, I.E. = Dreamcast - go out of business. (Or at least lose a console that was far superior to the PS2 and had a company that had a 15 year foothole in the market, with name brands and being the only 128 system in town for years.)[/quote]

dude, get some facts. http://www.planetgamecube.com/news.cfm?action=item&id=3419. That link is 2 years old, cout it, 2 years. Hmmmm, gamecube $99 two years ago. I wonder how much it costs now? and stop the fucking piracy shit. piracy didn't ruin the dreamcast, sega's head being permanetly stuck in their ass did.
 
[quote name='wubb'][quote name='karmapolice620']They already anounced that it wont in a press release[/quote]

Do you have a link to the PR? I know that is the very strong rumor and the CEO of M-Systems came out a while back saying the Xbox2 won't have a HDD, but he's the guy making the flash memory so of course he doesn't want it to have a HDD.

I read in a mag that the official specs for the nextbox are nailed down, but hadn't heard anything from an official source about those specs.[/quote]

Yeah, it would kinda suck for the Xbox 2 to not have an HDD, but I can totally understand if Microsoft chose to go that route. Although, I think they should offer an add-on HDD, like the PS2 did. That way, we can choose to spend the extra dough if we want it.

Quick question: How many people still have more than 50,000 blocks of memory left on their HDD?
 
[quote name='Grave_Addiction'][quote name='wubb'][quote name='karmapolice620']They already anounced that it wont in a press release[/quote]

Do you have a link to the PR? I know that is the very strong rumor and the CEO of M-Systems came out a while back saying the Xbox2 won't have a HDD, but he's the guy making the flash memory so of course he doesn't want it to have a HDD.

I read in a mag that the official specs for the nextbox are nailed down, but hadn't heard anything from an official source about those specs.[/quote]

Yeah, it would kinda suck for the Xbox 2 to not have an HDD, but I can totally understand if Microsoft chose to go that route. Although, I think they should offer an add-on HDD, like the PS2 did. That way, we can choose to spend the extra dough if we want it.

Quick question: How many people still have more than 50,000 blocks of memory left on their HDD?[/quote]

Me! And I have a lot of soundtracks and game save files on there!!!
 
[quote name='Grave_Addiction']Yeah, it would kinda suck for the Xbox 2 to not have an HDD, but I can totally understand if Microsoft chose to go that route. Although, I think they should offer an add-on HDD, like the PS2 did. That way, we can choose to spend the extra dough if we want it.
[/quote]

Only problem is that without a built in storage solution, developers won't be able to take advantage of the HDD to ease load times. As the majority of consumers will probably not buy the add on, most developers will not require it be there to play their games.

I'm hoping PS3 has a HDD and is backwards compatible. That will make my next gen system choice pretty easy. Although I'm sure I'll miss whatever Rare comes out with plus the big name exclusives on the nextbox.
 
[quote name='gamefreak117'][quote name='jeffreyjrose']I would guess that the only time you will see a $99 price tag is right before the launch of Xbox Next. The problem with console prices this time around is the actual cost of the elements that compose them. If you consider what's all in the box for $149 right now, it's really not a bad deal.[/quote]

I heard Microsoft loses some money for every console being sold. They only get their money off XBL service, accessories, and stuff. An Xbox takes about $200+ money to make, which PlayStation 2 takes about less, and Nintendo actually makes profit.[/quote]

Actually that's a myth, all three lose money, but Sony loses the least amount of money, because all it's parts come from internal divisions. Where as MS and N order there parts from various dealers.
 
[quote name='karmapolice620']They already anounced that it wont in a press release[/quote]

So there is no official PR?
 
MS will not drop to $99 unless ps2 does it first. Sony is right where they want to be with ps2 right now as far as thier 10 year plan for ps2 is concerned. There is no reason for sony to drop price at this time.
 
Yeah theres really is no way in hell it's going down till $99. Except for if you see it used at gamestop when xbox2 is out or something. Judging by the size of the xbox I definitley believe microsoft loses money when they sell them. Which is pretty damn funny to me.
 
Whoever says sony loses money on hardware is wrong. The more ps2's sony sells the better thier 'end' price becomes. If they are losing money on ps2 hardware after shipping 70 million units, then someone is stealing from them.
 
[quote name='Medium_Pimpin']Whoever says sony loses money on hardware is wrong. The more ps2's sony sells the better thier 'end' price becomes. If they are losing money on ps2 hardware after shipping 70 million units, then someone is stealing from them.[/quote]

You have a very simplistic concept of what is known as 'economy of scale.' This is the expectation that mass production will allow larger procurement orders for lower prices and improvements in manufacturing efficiency all adding up to lower cost per unit. This is all well and good but there is a limit. Vendors can only offer lower prices up to the point of their own costs. Toshiba is not going to take a loss on the PS2 RAM chips no matter how high an order Sony places. Likewise, there is a point after which any new manufacturing efficiencies are unlikely to present themselves without the expense of extensive re-engineering of the product.

Nintendo has always claimed they don't take a loss on hardware but this has never been verified by an external audit. Analyst in the semi-conductor industry have found this claim for te initial releases of the N64 and GameCube very doubtful, especially since Nintendo is entirely reliant on outside vendors for their hardware components. It beggars belief that these vendors would offer a special deal to Nintendo and none of their other customers.

Sony is no stranger to losing money on consoles, especially at launch. THe PS2 was intended to ship with its primary chips produced at .18 micron rules but Sony made that commitment before anyone had actually succeeded in mass production of .18 parts. As a result there major delays and Sony had to produce their two generations of Japanese PS2 unit with the .25 chips originally intended only for proof of concept and developer kits. These chips would have been quite expensive due to their size even if the yield per wafer were close to 100%. It wasn't. They had a horrific yield level and a final cost per unit for the first shipping PS2s several hundred dollars greater than the introductory price.

Getting the PS2 on retail shelves on time was a very costly undertaking but one that ultimately paid off when .18 chip production got up to speed and the software began selling well. Sony may still take a small hit on each PS2 sold at the current price and bundle but this is minor and well worth doing to prevent the competition from gaining ground.
 
[quote name='karmapolice620']yeah it cost like 75 for nintendo to make a GCN...but hey...its a damn good console...so I dont blame em...[/quote]

I wonder how many people buy these to run linux and no gasmes on it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top