[quote name='$CASH$']Not often but it has happened as others have already mentioned. I do agree though that a $100 price drop is a little severe so they should have dropped it $50 6 months ago. Then with this $50 drop they could announce a $250 price point at E3. $250 is more in line with what I feel the 360 is worth.
You can completely take the 40 GB PS3 comparison out of the picture and look at it this way. What other piece of tech from 2005 has still kept 88%(350/400) of it's value? Nothing comes to mind. Multi-core processors, HDTV's, GPU's, hard drive capacity, you name it. They've all become significantly cheaper yet the 360 keeps plugging along at 88% of it's launch price. Evidently, there are plenty of people that think the 360 is a good buy at $300. I'm just not one of them.[/quote]
Just for one last comment before dinner, I pose to you a question to both answer yours and ask a new one. What piece of hardware that is produced by only a single company has kept around 75% of it's value over its lifespan? I'll give you one answer. The iPod. This is not new for products that have one producer, where there is no competition on a micro level to compete directly with every component, where a ATI and Nvidia would duke it out with GPUs, Intel and AMD would compete with processors, Samsung and Pioneer and Vizio etc. would compete for HDTVs. If we were in a situation where the Xbox 360 could be produced by several companies, then your argument might have a bit of traction. But that simply isn't true.