Nintendo Drops GameCube Price to $150

DarkZero writes: "According to Planet Gamecube, Nintendo, as was expected, has dropped the price of the GameCube to $150. As the consoles currently stand, the GameCube is $50 cheaper than both the X-Box and the PS2, letting it retain half of its price edge on its competitors. Neither Sony nor Microsoft has commented on it yet, but Microsoft might decide to lower the price of the X-Box a little bit more in retaliation. Yay, competitive pricing!"

Comments

A Fine Example

[TheNecromancer]

This is how capitalism should work! Competitive pricing is great for all involved: the consumer gets the best possible deal for the product, while the manufacturer is rewarded with high sales for their product. It also encourages companies to create products that satisfy the consumer's needs(aka - what the buyer wants).

Way to go!

Re:Yeah capitalism!

[Rick_T]

> That's low enough for me! I'm off to get my
> GameCube. Really, that's about as much as I'm
> willing to pay for a non-upgradable piece of
> hardware that will be obsolete in a year...

You mean something that's usually non-upgradable and obsolete in a year like, ohh, a video card for a PC? Some of the fancier graphics cards cost more than a console!

Unless things get *really* lousy in the console market, video game consoles have a staying power greater than a year. Even the *Dreamcast* was around longer than a year!

Consider the Playstation. There are still games being released for that old beast.

Last time MS dropped their prices...

[WEFUNK]

...to match their competitor they nearly drove Netscape out of business.

Just a thought...

As much as competitive pricing is a good thing, I hope there's some margin left at the end of the day or this market will turn into a winner take all for whoever's got the motivation and money to stick it out.

Re:Last time MS dropped their prices...

[ArhcAngel]

But unlike the IE-NS analogy where giving a binary application away for free doesn't increase per copy cost. The XBox is a tangible product that costs $$ to produce. Once IE reached a certain code base the cost drops Significantly to sustain. Giving away code is as easy as the copy command. Giving away an XBox is not. Even Microsoft with their Billions cannot afford the kind of drain giving away hardware would entail. Unless of course they start charging for IE.

Re:Last time MS dropped their prices...

[Anne_Nonymous]

Sony has revenues of about $20 billion. In its best year Netscape had revenues of about half a billion dollars. Additionally, Sony has been an expert manufacturer for years and knows how to control costs, while Microsoft is a long term player in the software business, and hasn't ever had variable costs before. Sure, sure, Microsoft doesn't fight fair, but in this arena they don't have much of an advantage and will not bankrupt Sony. Duh.

Re:Last time MS dropped their prices...

[Snowfox]

But unlike the IE-NS analogy where giving a binary application away for free doesn't increase per copy cost. The XBox is a tangible product that costs $$ to produce. Once IE reached a certain code base the cost drops Significantly to sustain. Giving away code is as easy as the copy command. Giving away an XBox is not. Even Microsoft with their Billions cannot afford the kind of drain giving away hardware would entail. Unless of course they start charging for IE.

MS is no longer interested in selling the XBox. They're interested in selling the monthly online service that will soon be available for it, and they continue to be interested in selling software.

They also continue to be interested in establishing a foothold in your living room so that they can blend your television (your eyes) into the .NET communication infrastructure.

The money to be earned from games will be dwarfed by the money to be gained by establishing a monopolistic control over real-time communications, which would seem to be Microsoft's current goal.

Re:I had a friend

[macshit]

Microsoft and Sony will use their cash to push Nintendo out of the hardware market.

It's not quite that easy -- Nintendo also has tons of cash, because of the success of the GB/GBA; they're actually quite good at making money, even if they lag a bit in the hype department. Microsoft could probably do it if they bled money like mad for a long time, but I'm not sure even MS is that crazy.

All the players in this war are strong, and I think they're all in it for the long haul. And remember, Nintendo, unlike MS & Sony, doesn't do anything else except games -- they can't afford to lose.

Like Gillette...

[sdo1]

Give away the razors and sell them the blades...

-S

Wow, and this is stifiling innovation?

[Neck_of_the_Woods]

Someone should bring this up in all the little court cases Microsoft is having right now. Pricing, innovation, quick to market, online services...when was the last time you saw microsoft work this hard to get market share? Seems to me, the layman, that this competition thing makes them work a bit harder, get product out a bit faster, and make something worlth having. Then again, it might just be a cheaper piece of shit with one good game. At least with other products on the market I can pay 1/3 less for that pos.

Microsoft could bundle DVD kit instead

[Mr.Sharpy]

Instead of lowering the price on the XBOX, Microsoft could bundle in their dvd kit at the current $199 price for value added competition instead of direct price competition. It would be a smart move for Microsoft because 1) producing that kit is probably cheaper than lowering the price of the xbox $50, 2) it provides a great advertisement angle--"More raw power than Gamecube and a FREE DVD Player!", and 3) people are suckers for 'free' stuff and value added items.

Because the price gap between the Xbox and Gamecube is now just $50 dollars, I think consumers on the fence will be looking beyond just the price and more towards the things the consoles can do. And with the DVD kit, the Xbox wins the features competition, not necessarily because people would actually use the DVD features; but just because people like a bargain.