LittleTokyo said:
Yes you can argue that demand is real high, but the real question is... why can't Nintendo meet demand, or at least come closer? The Wii hardware, as previously stated, can't be *that* hard to produce. My guess is initially the controller strap recall presented some issues. But there has to be something else behind the shortage. In January, I was willing to give Nintendo the benefit of the doubt, but now it's mid February and both the Wii and DS Lite are still hard to find.
I imagine the strap presented almost no issue at all. Don't know why people think that was a major problem.
For starters, they didn't try to get retailers to return units with the old strap so they could be repackaged. They kepts the old ones moving through the channel, and let anyone that got one of the old ones know what steps to take if they wanted a replacement. And I'd bet the number of people that actually went through the process (which they said could be up to a couple of weeks) was relatively small.
And really, has anyone seen the comparison with the new straps? They didn't switch to jewel encrusted titanium. They're virtually identical. They added 0.4 millimeters in diameter.
Anyway, Nintendo has pretty much shown that it's not really a manufacturing issue. As someone mentioned, they announced they're making 7 million by the end of next month, but only plan on shipping 6 million.
Some of the problem initially extended from the fact that it's a much bigger hit than most people expected. I mean I posted a link to one of those old threads just 2 or 3 months before launch, and the responses are hillarious now since the consensus seemed to be Nintendo had screwed up almost everything they could - the price was too high, specs were too low, and the timing meant it would get cruished by Sony's PR machine.
But once it became apparant they had a hit on their hands, Nintendo has not decided to go to any expense to get as manty units into the hands of people as possible (they defintiely could have sold more if they started airlifting everything), but rather seems intent on increasing distribution at a measured pace. It's financially conservative, and they may also see some benefit in holding back (which is debatable)