• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Why a Wii U price cut wouldn't make sense

Status
Not open for further replies.
At this point, the only way they're getting people like me to buy one is dropping the price. They've had a year to convince me that the WII U was a $300+ device and failed. The perceived value of the system has diminished, and at this point it's unlikely to go back up.

I will never buy one (Knock on wood) at the current retail price. The consumer in me knows it'll go down.
 
Trust me. I want the WiiU to sell well more than all of you combined. :)

But the OP's comment about how selling at more of less is bad I disagree with. They should price drop this holiday. Big fat price cut combined with titles could boost sales like the 3DS.

But what's the point of boosting sales if they're losing money on each unit sold that they are never going to make back? If Nintendo ends the generation having sold 200 million Wii U consoles but lost the $10billion they have in the bank, was it worth it?

I suppose that's good for consumers (cheaper hardware) and third party publishers (who have a larger base to sell to and don't have to eat the hardware losses), but my point was that it makes zero sense for Nintendo.
 

Neiteio

Member
FACT: I just had a big Nintendo Land party this weekend that sold everyone on the WiiU. Absolute hysterics playing Luigi's Ghost Mansion.

SOLUTION: Let me throw the world's biggest block party and I will sell everyone on the WiiU.
 

RagnarokX

Member
Trust me. I want the WiiU to sell well more than all of you combined. :)

But the OP's comment about how selling at more of less is bad I disagree with. They should price drop this holiday. Big fat price cut combined with titles could boost sales like the 3DS.

I agree that they should drop the price, but anything more than $50 is probably asking too much. Nintendo may have a deep warchest, but they can't just risk cutting into it so deeply when they don't have other sources of revenue. Sega is the only company in your examples that was similar to Nintendo and they ended up going out of the console business.
 

Duxxy3

Member
They can't cut the price if the price cut makes them lose money on each system sold. Nintendo just won't do it.
 

ronito

Member
Price isn't THE issue.
But it is AN issue.

Nintendo is caught in a catch 22 issue.

If they don't cut the price they will not sell the software necessary to recoup the costs they're already taking.

But if the do cut the price there's not enough software out there to sell to recoup the costs.

However, I think it's too late already. I don't think Nintendo is going to cut the price I think they'll keep the price as is and do a bundle. But I don't think that is enough to entice people away from the PS4 and Xbox1.
 

U2NUMB

Member
I am personally holding out hope for a price cut. I just assume shortly after I buy one it would get cut in price .. and I think at this point they just need to get more install base .. pretty much at any cost as in the next few months we know where the press will be focused.
 
Trust me. I want the WiiU to sell well more than all of you combined. :)

But the OP's comment about how selling at more of less is bad I disagree with. They should price drop this holiday. Big fat price cut combined with titles could boost sales like the 3DS.

P.S. My daughter loves Scribblenauts so please keep making them :D
 

jay

Member
They should raise the price. As long as they make profit on every unit sold, what's the problem?
 
It wouldn't matter either way. Cut the price and you run into a $269.99 500GB ps3 bundled with GTA V, the biggest game of the year. There is even a $199 12GB ps3.

Without proper third party support it's going to be a niche product. How viable that is only Nintendo can answer.
 
The games are the largest problem, but the price is going to be significant once the new consoles are out. $50 extra gets you a tremendously more powerful system and far more 3rd party support.
 

ronito

Member
I am personally holding out hope for a price cut. I just assume shortly after I buy one it would get cut in price .. and I think at this point they just need to get more install base .. pretty much at any cost as in the next few months we know where the press will be focused.

But install base only makes sense if you have product to sell into said base. Right now there's just not enough.

If I was Iwata, first priority would be to come up with a monthly fee gaming service (like PSN) and then lower the price.

I mean $5 a month and maybe you get two classic titles for 3 months and discounts on the eshop their profit problem is fixed.

No one wants the Wii U right now. No one wants the games. Ok, well if you give them the games you know they love for a low monthly price with pad compatiblity, plenty of critics would be turned into believers.
 
FACT: I just had a big Nintendo Land party this weekend that sold everyone on the WiiU. Absolute hysterics playing Luigi's Ghost Mansion.

SOLUTION: Let me throw the world's biggest block party and I will sell everyone on the WiiU.

Sold everyone on the WiiU? Did everyone go to the store and bought one? If not, then you didn't sell them on it.
 

Jobbs

Banned
I'm still not sure why it is that they take a loss on each wii u -- from what I understand, while it's somewhat more powerful than PS360, it's still rather dated tech if we think in PC terms.

Is it the controller? Is a big gamepad with a screen strapped to it really THAT expensive to produce?

Keep in mind that I'm a huge Wii U fan, I've had mine for a couple weeks now and I'm really in love with it. But even I'll admit it seems to cost a bit too much.
 
I agree that they should drop the price, but anything more than $50 is probably asking too much. Nintendo may have a deep warchest, but they can't just risk cutting into it so deeply when they don't have other sources of revenue. Sega is the only company in your examples that was similar to Nintendo and they ended up going out of the console business.

Nintendo currently has $8.77 billion in Cash, Deposits and Liquid Investments, a marked decrease from the 2009-2011 period.

They have already been significantly tapping into that warchest to fund Wii U development. It just doesn't look good to shareholders to deplete your Assets in a desperate attempt to keep your business solvent.

It's a sign of contraction and it raises loads of questions into the legitimacy of Nintendo's corporate strategy, the exact opposite of what shareholders desire.
 

Fandangox

Member
Every time someone brings up the whole "Nintendo would lose a ton of money they'd never make back by cutting the price", all I can do is to remind them that Nintendo is rolling in billions; cash. No other gaming company can confidently say that at this moment.

You have to start making executive decisions that are more long term than short term. If Sony can take billions in losses, then Nintendo should be ready to lose some chump change to make shit happen.

Sony/Microsoft's other divisions keep constant revenue.

It doesn't matter how much cast Nintendo has. Their only significant way of revenue is still Video games. That pile of cash is not getting any bigger by other divisions, but the only division they have.

What's the point of risking all that money they made on a previous generation for a business strategy that may not even pay off? It makes sense for them right now to ride it out until they have more software ready and have 3ds profit to cover some of the losses.
 
I'm still not sure why it is that they take a loss on each wii u -- from what I understand, while it's somewhat more powerful than PS360, it's still rather dated tech if we think in PC terms.

Is it the controller? Is a big gamepad with a screen taped to it really THAT expensive?

Keep in mind that I'm a huge Wii U fan, I've had mine for a couple weeks now and I'm really in love with it. But even I'll admit it seems to cost a bit too much.

SeAbwcP.png
 

shink

Member
Don't they make it up with software sales?
So if there is a pricecut, and it spurs software sales that could potentially be beneficial no?
 
The reason they haven't dropped the price is probably because the games just aren't there yet. A price drop with not too many compelling games won't make it sell more, or at least will make it rise quickly but then fall very quickly to low levels again.

I think if they don't drop it by black friday or Super Mario 3D World, then it'll definitely be Mario Kart 8.
 

mishakoz

Member
But what's the point of boosting sales if they're losing money on each unit sold that they are never going to make back? If Nintendo ends the generation having sold 200 million Wii U consoles but lost the $10billion they have in the bank, was it worth it?

I suppose that's good for consumers (cheaper hardware) and third party publishers (who have a larger base to sell to and don't have to eat the hardware losses), but my point was that it makes zero sense for Nintendo.

No, its good for Nintendo.

By the time they sell 100 million Wii Us, they will hopefully be making a profit or at least even on hardware. So lets say they make 75 million on an average ~$120 loss. Thats -9 billion. Thats rough, but not unheard of. So, you havbe a 9 billion dollar loss, but you now have 75 million Wii U's in the wild. If each person buys 3 games on average, that roughly $25 in licensing fee's (more if they are all first party) so lets say from 60 million of those, they recoup roughly $40 in licensing and 1st party title money.

The last 15 million buy more titles, things like Wii Fit, etc. so they bring in way more, lets say $150. Thats about 8 to 10 games, still on the low side for some gamers but lets just give that number. Nintendo makes a profit off of them, probably more.

Then there are the peripherals. Wiimotes are about 90% profit, so $35. Same with the pro controller. If each person who bought a Wii U buys at least one controller, they now have recouped a large portion of the negative. of course, some people could buy as much as four, which is a great deal of profit.

My math is great, but my point is they need a userbase they can mine for money. No userbase, no profit.
 

ChronoX

Member
There's no way in hell I'd pay anything above $200 for a Wii U, especially not in the state that its currently in and also based off of Nintendo's track record of third party support since the Nintendo 64. I have two friends who bought Wii Us and one of them is totally fed up and bored with it so he started getting into PC gaming and has never been happier. The other friend is grabbing at ANYTHING he can get his hands on to play. He's even jumping into genres he never liked. It's that bad. He's looking very depressed about his purchase lately. personally think a price drop will help the Wii U. It makes the barrier to entry a lot easier to swallow especially with their current problems.

Please understand
 

Coxswain

Member
The 'primary' model that they're pushing at the moment is $350. That's what people think of when they look at the Wii U, even though there's a less expensive model that is technically being sold.

Folding down some/all of the Deluxe pack-ins to the non-Deluxe model, presenting that as the 'primary' version of the console, and dropping the price of that new model to $250 would be effectively very similar to a $100 price drop, without incurring much more of a loss than a basic $50 drop.
They'd be free to have an actual "Deluxe" model on the market at $300, as long as they're careful to present the $250 model as the default.

The psychological barrier, cost-wise, that they're facing that prevents people from seeing the console as a good value is "$3xx", not relative pricing. It's enough to make people balk in a way that they wouldn't for a "$2xx" console.


(The non-pricing barrier is that it's viewed as having an anemic software lineup - which is the real reason that a price drop hasn't made sense up until this point, and still won't for another month or two - That perception has largely been true up until now, but will be significantly less so by the holiday season, as they've got a reasonably big released lined up every month up until then. Ideally, they'd want to plant a price drop right in the middle of that, with enough of a marketing push that everything comes together into something of a 'relaunch' of the system.)
 
But what's the point of boosting sales if they're losing money on each unit sold that they are never going to make back? If Nintendo ends the generation having sold 200 million Wii U consoles but lost the $10billion they have in the bank, was it worth it?

I suppose that's good for consumers (cheaper hardware) and third party publishers (who have a larger base to sell to and don't have to eat the hardware losses), but my point was that it makes zero sense for Nintendo.

Look at what's going on with 3DS right now, though. The price hasn't needed a cut since, and even with Vita dropping it's price in a way that would logically force the technically cheaper product's hand... it's able to stay where it is because it's garnered such esteem and value. The production costs have to have dropped significantly by now. I understand that 10-20 million at a loss is a hard pill to swallow, but a potential 100 million (minus that 20<) at profitable levels by generation's end could have been a very big gain, right?
 
Don't they make it up with software sales?
So if there is a pricecut, and it spurs software sales that could potentially be beneficial no?
overtime.

They have to credit all their customers who they sell the systems too which would be in hundreds of millions, and the increased box sales would come from stock that Nintendo has already sold into the channel, which means they don't see more money until they start selling more crates of super Mario Wii u to best buy and the like. They won't see the return for a while. If there was ever a FY to do it and cover up some losses, its one with Pokemon in it. I could see the cut happening around DKs launch in November, if September and October, now that major games are out, continue to be awful, but I can totally see them waiting until the march when Mario kart hits.
 
Price is not the issue.

What more can be said?

As a die-hard nitendo fan (with good money burning my hands) I feel all I have so far is Nintendo-Land to really justify my purchase of a Wii-U.
Price is not the issue, nore is it the new gimmick/approach, or the console's power: the way I feel it, the problem right now is my good old Nintendo itself.
 
Well either way they're fucked because when they have a ton of manufactured wiius retailers don't buy they will have lost a shit ton of money as well. Wiius issues started when they designed this system to the point where they are losing money only 50 dollars away from ps4. If anything the design team needs to be fired although it was also signed off on.But yes, it seems that a price cut to 300 will be ineffective and at 250 they are losing over a hundred per system If they sell 9 million while taking that hit they lose 900 million which will hurt nintendo severely. Iwata and everyone else would be fired if they ever posted that kind of loss
 
The 'primary' model that they're pushing at the moment is $350. That's what people think of when they look at the Wii U, even though there's a less expensive model that is technically being sold.

Folding down some/all of the Deluxe pack-ins to the non-Deluxe model, presenting that as the 'primary' version of the console, and dropping the price of that new model to $250 would be effectively very similar to a $100 price drop, without incurring much more of a loss than a basic $50 drop.
They'd be free to have an actual "Deluxe" model on the market at $300, as long as they're careful to present the $250 model as the default.

The psychological barrier, cost-wise, that they're facing that prevents people from seeing the console as a good value is "$3xx", not relative pricing. It's enough to make people balk in a way that they wouldn't for a "$2xx" console.


(The non-pricing barrier is that it's viewed as having an anemic software lineup - which is the real reason that a price drop hasn't made sense up until this point, and still won't for another month or two - That perception has largely been true up until now, but will be significantly less so by the holiday season, as they've got a reasonably big released lined up every month up until then. Ideally, they'd want to plant a price drop right in the middle of that, with enough of a marketing push that everything comes together into something of a 'relaunch' of the system.)

No there's not. Basic model is discontinued; I can't find it in any store in Ontario, and if they still have it, it is probably an old shipment still unsold. Walmart Canada sold them for $199 with the launch games being $10 to get rid of the Basic bundles. Only Deluxe is available here.
 
The Wii U is definitely a lesson in the folly of making ridiculously expensive special-function hardware, especially when far cheaper hardware with far more functionality would've resulted in a much better platform. (The software is another question.)
 
Your logic is sound, OP. The vita was very much in the same position. Even though it was never going to take off at $250 with insane memory cards... it also wasn't bleeding money. They waited until they could lower the price without the risk of bleeding money if it didn't boost sales (because a price cut is not a guarantee of increased sales, often it's short term and falls right back to where it was).


Many people didn't understand this and thought that Sony would sell more vitas at a cheaper price... they probably would, but they would have made less money and the platform would have gotten weaker. When you're dealing with a system on life support it's very difficult to feel confident making bold moves.


If im nintendo I know sales are going to pick up when there's more software... i wait it out. And then when there is software and sales die down again... drop price. The wii U is not going to compete with the PS4 or Xbox 1 this gen (much like the vita isn't going to compete with the 3ds) but that doesn't mean that Nintendo can't still turn atleast a slight profit on it by being smart.
 

goldenpp72

Member
What more can be said?

As a die-hard nitendo fan (with good money burning my hands) I feel all I have so far is Nintendo-Land to really justify my purchase of a Wii-U.
Price is not the issue, nore is it the new gimmick/approach, or the console's power: the way I feel it, the problem right now is my good old Nintendo itself.

We've already seen how low Nintendo can go with the Gamecube, Nintendos userbase is no where near as big as some seem to assume, it's certainly big enough to sustain them but it's not enough for them to sell 50+ million systems alone these days. Not only fans buy Nintendo systems, but right now that is likely the case with the U and why it's dead for now. Obviously when more games hit, it will sell more, but the price will be an obstacle as the system is by far their most expensive system EVER.

Keep in mind, the Gamecube which was a beast in power was 200 dollars, the Wii which was slightly stronger was 250 dollars, suddenly their next system is weak as hell and cost 350 and they are losing money? Someone dropped the ball big time, either that or i'm missing some important factors, but considering the PS4 is probably going to be 10x the power of the system and cost 50 dollars more, it's pathetic.
 
Your logic is sound, OP. The vita was very much in the same position. Even though it was never going to take off at $250 with insane memory cards... it also wasn't bleeding money. They waited until they could lower the price without the risk of bleeding money if it didn't boost sales (because a price cut is not a guarantee of increased sales, often it's short term and falls right back to where it was).


Many people didn't understand this and thought that Sony would sell more vitas at a cheaper price... they probably would, but they would have made less money and the platform would have gotten weaker. When you're dealing with a system on life support it's very difficult to feel confident making bold moves.


If im nintendo I know sales are going to pick up when there's more software... i wait it out. And then when there is software and sales die down again... drop price. The wii U is not going to compete with the PS4 or Xbox 1 this gen (much like the vita isn't going to compete with the 3ds) but that doesn't mean that Nintendo can't still turn atleast a slight profit on it by being smart.

While the logic makes sense i feel the comparison to vita doesn't. Vita has always received a less investment from sony, while a good chunk of nintendo's company is dedicated to wiiu and their biggest teams are on the system so eeking out a profit is much less preferrable when the investment is so much bigger
 

RedSwirl

Junior Member
The OP is basically explaining in long form that, once again, Nintendo can't play by the same loss-leading rules as Sony and Microsoft because it doesn't have other businesses to subsidize its game console. This is how the Gamecube made more money than the PS2 (or just as much) while selling only a fraction as many consoles. Nintendo could probably "fail" this console generation and still come out profitable.

At the very least a price drop won't make sense until there's actually something to play on the console. To be perfectly frank, I'd buy one at $350 after 3D World, 101, Mario Kart, Wind Waker HD, and Smash come out.

We really haven't seen the true limits of Sony's and Microsoft's loss-leading approach to console games. I guess we saw the logical conclusion with a gaming-only company like Sega (which wasn't as tightly-run as Nintendo), but the situation with Sony and Microsoft hasn't really played out yet. Sony's got a lot of momentum with the PS4 but I don't think the company would continue PlayStation if it sustained another PS3-sized loss. If rumors are true, Microsoft's investors aren't pleased with the Xbox venture's revenue, and this next console generation is probably its last chance.

It is a real possibility that Nintendo, with its current business model, could end up simply outlasting one of the other two console manufacturers.

Don't they make it up with software sales?
So if there is a pricecut, and it spurs software sales that could potentially be beneficial no?

The OP covered that by estimating there's no way Nintendo would sell ENOUGH software to make back the cost of a $100 price cut.
 

shink

Member
overtime.

They have to credit all their customers who they sell the systems too which would be in hundreds of millions, and the increased box sales would come from stock that Nintendo has already sold into the channel, which means they don't see more money until they start selling more crates of super Mario Wii u to best buy and the like. They won't see the return for a while. If there was ever a FY to do it and cover up some losses, its one with Pokemon in it. I could see the cut happening around DKs launch in November, if September and October, now that major games are out, continue to be awful, but I can totally see them waiting until the march when Mario kart hits.

Ah that makes sense, didn't think of that. I'm thinking MK too as the best time for a price drop.
 
While the logic makes sense i feel the comparison to vita doesn't. Vita has always received a less investment from sony, while a good chunk of nintendo's company is dedicated to wiiu and their biggest teams are on the system so eeking out a profit is much less preferrable when the investment is so much bigger



Oh, of course. I didn't mean it was the same in terms of importance or amount of money potentially gained or lost. I just meant in terms of pricing... sometimes sticking with a higher price actually makes sense. If you are going to sell 20k systems a month at $350 or 22k system a month at $250... you stay at $350. Both the vita and wii u, up to this point, haven't had any reason to think a price drop alone would increase sales.


Now... after this winter, when there's now a 2d mario, 3d mario, zelda remake, mario kart closing in, etc... they will be in a much, much, MUCH better position than the vita because a price drop could bring more sales because it has compelling games that people want. A price drop won't turn it into the PS4... but it will help, for sure. But I agree with the OP that before then... nah. It's gonna sell like shit either way, might as well take as little of a loss and kill time until the software shows up.
 

Duxxy3

Member
We've already seen how low Nintendo can go with the Gamecube, Nintendos userbase is no where near as big as some seem to assume, it's certainly big enough to sustain them but it's not enough for them to sell 50+ million systems alone these days. Not only fans buy Nintendo systems, but right now that is likely the case with the U and why it's dead for now. Obviously when more games hit, it will sell more, but the price will be an obstacle as the system is by far their most expensive system EVER.

Keep in mind, the Gamecube which was a beast in power was 200 dollars, the Wii which was slightly stronger was 250 dollars, suddenly their next system is weak as hell and cost 350 and they are losing money? Someone dropped the ball big time, either that or i'm missing some important factors, but considering the PS4 is probably going to be 10x the power of the system and cost 50 dollars more, it's pathetic.

coughridiculouscontrollercough
 

thefro

Member
We really haven't seen the true limits of Sony's and Microsoft's loss-leading approach to console games. I guess we saw the logical conclusion with a gaming-only company like Sega (which wasn't as tightly-run as Nintendo), but the situation with Sony and Microsoft hasn't really played out yet. Sony's got a lot of momentum with the PS4 but I don't think the company would continue PlayStation if it sustained another PS3-sized loss. If rumors are true, Microsoft's investors aren't pleased with the Xbox venture's revenue, and this next console generation is probably its last chance.

Well, for both companies a big reason for the loss-leading approach was to try to be the media box hooked up to the TV and making money that way. Of course, that ship's already sailed and neither's going to snatch up 80% of that market like they probably hoped at one point
 

Coxswain

Member
No there's not. Basic model is discontinued; I can't find it in any store in Ontario, and if they still have it, it is probably an old shipment still unsold. Walmart Canada sold them for $199 with the launch games being $10 to get rid of the Basic bundles. Only Deluxe is available here.

Well, it was available the last time I checked (when I bought one). Still, that only really underlines the point: It's a $350 console in most people's eyes, never was a $300 one, and wouldn't need a full-on '$300/$350 to $200/$250" drop to be perceived as a $100 drop.
 

tokkun

Member
1. How do fixed costs factor into this? Does Nintendo's loss on each console sold include amortized R&D costs?

2. How do you value the potential damage to the brand if the WiiU fails? How about the weaker position Nintendo would be in for their next console?

3. How about the argument that there is a positive feedback ratio between hardware sales and tie ratio? (i.e. larger installed base -> more third party support -> more games sold)

4. How about the argument that Nintendo has a rapidly closing window to build an audience large enough to sustain profitable games prior to the PS4 and XB1 launching, and that taking a loss now might be necessary to keep the platform alive long enough that it can sell for a profit in the future?
 

Raysoul

Member
$100 is too much, $50 is ok. Better tactic is sell a $300 Nintendo Land bundle and a $350 2 game bundle. Also, advertise the shit out of the console.
 

Duxxy3

Member
$100 is too much, $50 is ok. Better tactic is sell a $300 Nintendo Land bundle and a $350 2 game bundle. Also, advertise the shit out of the console.

$50 price drop or 2 game bundle would do nothing to improve sales. Just more money lost.
 
coughridiculouscontrollercough

I don't think it's so much the controler itself, rather the inability of its creators themselves to show its true potential to the masses that hurts, so far.

And goldenpp72, while I understand and mostly agree to what you say, I think it was the Wii that was "ridiculously underpowered" rather than the U.
N64 had cartridges but Mario 64 on launch, GC had mighty Smash Broth for starters, technicaly crappy Wii had Wii Sports and new Zelda day 1...
I'm looking at my U and still wondering when will it make sense. It could cost 100$ right now, I would still feel the same about it.
 

hamchan

Member
This makes sense to me. Before price dropping they need to find more efficient production methods to reduce costs. It seems they really put themselves into a catch-22 situation by designing the console around the gamepad, which has increased costs so much that their pricing is closer to their next gen competitors instead of current gen.
Any cost benefits they get from using old tech is pretty much undone by the gamepad.
 
Let me help:

1. Price drop
2.create install base
3. Publishers make games, sell dlc.
4.wii u parts get cheaper as time goes on, no longer sold at loss
5. Install base grows larger, game sales increase.
6?
7. Profit!!
 

foxuzamaki

Doesn't read OPs, especially not his own
FACT: I just had a big Nintendo Land party this weekend that sold everyone on the WiiU. Absolute hysterics playing Luigi's Ghost Mansion.

SOLUTION: Let me throw the world's biggest block party and I will sell everyone on the WiiU.

I like this idea
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom