"The only problem with Firefly being revived is that Whedon never wants to work with Fox again, so another network would have to buy the copyright from Fox, which would be hell of course since this is Fox we're talking about."
Actually this isn't a problem. When FOX canned "The Simple Life," E! was able to purchase the show and broadcast new episodes. They also have rights to continue the "franchise."\
Firefly's problem is that nobody likes it. Serenity was a failure. If Serenity earned 100 million at the box office, then maybe there would be a reason to bring it back.
But there isn't enough popularity in the sub-par show.
Joss Whedon needs to just stick to Astonishing X-Men (The comic book he is writing now, if you are TRUE Whedon freaks, you would have ALREADY READ year one of Whedon's run in Astonishing X-men)
"Also you have to remember that unlike a satelite tv service, video game hardware makers aren't the exclusive content providers. Sure MS makes some games but 3rd parties like EA and Ubi also make games and those games probably only give MS $5-10 a piece. Moreover there is no guarantee as to how many games someone will buy, when you get that free satelite hardware dtv or dish knows you'll be a customer for at least a year or whatever the contract was for."
Well then the statement that "the real money is made on games" is inaccurate. That was my point. I was using the satellite analogy to show that the real money is obviously NOT made on games, or else M$ (or another console maker) would give their console away for free to get people to buy the games.
If M$ was the only company to make games for it's system, then I would agree that the real money is made on games for Microsoft. But since it's not, I challenge the accuracy of that statement.
"Besides, the idea behind selling consoles is not to make money. The real money is made on games"
If this is the case, why not give the console to people for free?
If people who aren't even gung-ho get one for free, they probably will buy a couple of $60 games.
Dish Network and DirecTV figured out that the real money is to be made on programming, not equipment. That's why about 5-6 years ago they started to give everything, including installation, free to customers. All you had to do subscribe and Dish Network and DirecTV truly exploded onto the scene as a viable alternative to cable.
Why doesn't a console maker (Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft) go with an absolutely free console if the money is to be made on games? That model seems to work in satellite TV
"Too bad the Gamecube sold less units than the N64, which sold less than the SNES, which sold less than the NES. "
This is what I find interesting. Not only do people have choices (As opposed to 1985, when NES was clearly the top console), but I get the sense that more non-gamers had an NES back in the day compared to non-gamers having consoles today.
It seems like today consoles are branded as "something you buy if you are a gamer." The closest these non-gamers get to gaming today are games designed for casual gaming (small java games, pogo.com, etc), not consoles.
If Nintendo could really find a way to get those people back, they'd really have something. As it stands, Revolution is poised to be somewhat of a dud, except when it comes to unconditional loving Nintendo fanboys.
"Current numbers show their losses are Despite the losses, the Xbox1 was a *glowing* success."
Exactly. M$ is willing to take a loss to get a bigger market share w/r/t consoles. They figure eventually to make money (At a point in the future when Sony and Nintendo will face losses they cannot handle).
What I find intriguing (and please note that I am always attacking M$ trolls who unconditionally love Sony/Nintendo and this is no knock, just an observation) is that this seems like a back door way to get into the PC market.
Start out by making a console, then a console that can take advantage of PC's with Media Center XP and so forth...seems to like we are heading to Microsoft actually selling full blown PC's (or more accurately, consoles that have 100% PC functionality).
I am surprised that many of you M$ hating trolls have not picked up on this. I've seen many people ask why M$ wants into the console market, and I think the answer is that M$ came up with a clever idea to sell PC's without just doing it directly (And getting a lot of bad publicity as people would start screaming monopoly).
People are always applauding Nintendo for thinking outside the box, but I think this may be an example of thinking outside the box from M$ (of course it benefits them and not us, but Nintendo is a corporation too: their actions benefit them in the end too).
"That is a good point about there being networks for women, so why can't there be networks for men? It's just Spike plays so many shows, like Star Trek, and MXC that I like to watch and I wish I could watch them without seeing women being belittled and objectified during commercials. It's fine to cater to men's tastes, but it shouldn't be at the cost of female dignity and equality. Not that I watch Lifetime that much, but I don't believe there are commercials that blantantly offend and belittle men, and if there are then I don't feel that is right either. Is it really necessary to completely block out women viewers in order to appeal to men?"
Spike TV is actually a television network for men, just as openly as Lifetime is. The thing is, just because these networks have programming designed for men, does not mean that they operate the same.
With Lifetime, you get loads of made-for-TV movies (think Meredith Baxter-Berney) and female oriented drama's and comedies. That sure sounds like a network for women.
With Spike TV, you get programming that tends to appeal to males, but you also get something else: scantily clad women. Those are things you expect from a network that is designed to appeal to men.
Of course Lifetime does not have many scantily clad men, but this is not to preserve dignity or equality. It's simply because the viewers of Lifetime are not into it.
Compare Lifetime to Spike. Lifetime tends to showcase women, which women like.
Spike TV gives men eye candy in the form of provocative women, which men like.
"Is it really necessary to completely block out women viewers in order to appeal to men?"
Your question can be turned upside down, i.e. is it really necessary to completely block out MEN in order to appeal to WOMEN (Lifetime)? I don't know any men who can stand to watch Lifetime for more than 5 seconds. Obviously Lifetime turns off men. Spike TV turns off women.
If you want SpikeTV to not block out women, you should get Lifetime to not block out men.
"Man Show was possibly the worst idea ever. Put that shit on Spike TV who already has lost all hopes of not alienating female viewers."
I agree the Man Show should be on Spike TV, but who cares if Spike TV alienates female viewers? It's a television network FOR MEN, just like Lifetime is a television network FOR WOMEN.
I don't see men complaining that Lifetime alienates male viewers.
"G4 has apparently canceled two more of their holdover shows from the TechTV days. G4TV.com and Filter have been been put under the axe. "
G4TV.com and Filter were always G4 shows. They were G4 shows that appeared on the original G4 and came over to G4TechTV (Which is now of course G4) They were never produced by TechTV.
How can factually incorrect stories make it to Slashdot???
"Of course, I dont think consumers care quite enough to give up DirectTV so it is mostly a moot point."
They would if there was enough bad PR that the NFL wanted out of its NFL-DirecTV exclusive Sunday Ticket Deal and that the NFL had a way get out of the contract.
"I guess the Japanese are smarter when it comes to gaming."
On a previous thread on this subject, I suggested that if Nintendo released XBOX 360 (with a different name of course), but same specs, same launch titles, etc, that it would do well.
The person from Japan who I was replying to agreed.
Thus I don't think the Japanese are smarter when it comes to gaming. They are just total Nintendo and Sony (Japanese companies I might add) fanboys and M$ (american company) haters.
"The Xbox 360 is set to make exactly the same splash in Japan that the original Xbox made. Which is to say, not very much."
Yes, but are we surprised? Sony and Nintendo are Japanese companies. Microsoft is an American company, perhaps an iconic American company.
Something tells me that if Nintendo released the XBOX 360 (with a different name) of course, same name, same specs, same launch titles, it would do well in Japan, SIMPLY because of the name Nintendo.
And that, my friends, is when you know that you have a video game market that doesn't really count. People in the US who know cars inside and out know that most Japanese cars are better than American cars.
Why can't people in Japan accept that it's possible for an American company to make a console that might be better than something made by a Japanese company?
"But there weren't the rampant allegations of having to wait 4 months to get the one you pre-ordered 6 months ago."
Is Microsoft to blame with the idiot stores like EBGames/Gamestop took pre-orders BEFORE THEY EVEN KNEW WHAT THE LAUNCH DATE WAS, let alone know how many they would have?
You can't blame the manufacturer for problems with a few retailers.
Arrested Development was a critically acclaimed show, but regular people didn't like it. It never got watched and has now been canned.
Same must apply for video games: just because a game is highly touted by every critic doesn't necessarily mean that regular people want to buy and play the game.
From your linked wikipedia article re: network effect:
"Network effects were used as justification for some of the business models for dot-coms in the late 1990s."
I wonder how those turned out...
Nobody has a solid game catalogue, as you put it, at launch. It will never happen because time is always needed after launch for developers to properly make use of the console's specs.
Let's say the games REALLY suck for XBOX 360 (I don't think they do, but whatever). If everyone and their grandma today had an XBOX 360 that they were able to get on launch day, they would all say this console sucks, the game sucks, and XBOX 360 would fall much faster and harder than Dreamcast.
On the other hand, if you keep people dying to have one, they are more likely to dismiss a bad review of a game, or even a bad review of all launch titles. They still HAVE to have XBOX 360. It's not like their friends have it, but some mythical people on the internet say the launch games suck. Big whoop. By the time everyone has one in their living room, Halo 3 will be out and no one will care or remember that in the US, Kameo: Elements of Power was actually a launch title.
I honestly don't think they are purposely creating a shortage, but since they do, they will take advantage of what I said above.
And there is NOTHING wrong with launching a console at holiday season. If Revolution is ready for a launch in May, but they purposely wait until November for the holiday season, there will be no negative press, but MS wants to launch 360 in time for the 2005 Christmas season and there is a big ruckus. Frankly you are stupid NOT to launch a console during the Christmas Season.
"Then you say BestBuy should follow WalMart's example of selling other items at 300% markup. In either case, one sale is subsidizing another sale and, in your example, BestBuy subsidizes the rebate with the same item being marked up."
But at least with Wal*Mart's that have groceries, I can go in and only buy groceries.
Best Buy will never do this because they don't want anyone to buy a "loss leader" product and only that, and walk away.
Even with Wal*Mart's 300% mark up on things, it's still cheaper than competitors (this would never happen at Best Buy), so the "idiots" who are lured into Wal*Mart because of cheap grocery are not being suckered into buying some non-grocery item that costs less at Target. It may cost less to WM, but we can't get that price. The idiots who are lured into BB are simply scammed, no question.
"I had read that retailers like to sell prepaid gift cards, and that they're highly profitable because consumers lose them or let them expire."
Even in California, where it is illegal for a gift card/certificate to expire, these cards are good money makers and in some way take advantage of the customers.
Jack In The Box sees so much revenue potential in the card that they are giving customers 2 free tacos for getting a gift card with $10 or more.
Mickey D's is giving free $1 gift cards with certain purchases, to show off their new gift card system.
Although gift cards are not as bad as rebates, retailers honestly don't have them for our benefit. They have them because market research shows some certain amount of money is never used, meaning easy profit for the store.
Even if more gift cards were redeemed, if you've ever had a business class, you know everything revolves around cash flow, and gift cards are the epitome of cash flow.
"Why else would they be selling it for $90 after rebate?"
Because they have market research that suggests only a small % of people who buy a product because they saw the ad (with the after-rebate price in big letters) actually send in the rebate, or send it in correctly.
In your scenario, the printer may not be worth $150, but actually $140. It should retail for 140, but the store jacks it up to 150. They advertise the 90 after-rebate price which people in the store, and out of all the people who buy at 150, only 30% are going to get $60 back from the company.
Contrast this with simply selling the printer at the regular price of 140 or 150. Nobody will buy it because it's too expensive. The evil scam known as a rebate is a ploy to generate sales. Any company with good business sense would be willing to give some money back to some consumers if they generate huge profits.
"If you want to give me a lower price, give me a lower price."
Exactly. Is it SO revolutionary of a concept TO JUST GIVE US THE LOWER PRICE???
Rebates only exist as a way to jack up the price and make money off the 70% of people who won't correctly send in the rebate.
For example, let's say an item should cost $49.99.
Best Buy will come up with a brilliant idea. Sell it for $69.99, but offer a rebate that supposedly makes the effective price of the item say $19.99.
BB advertises the price to be $19.99, but with tiny lettering about rebates. Now idiot consumer goes into the store, lured in by the ad, buys the item for $69.99, and forgets to mail in the rebate.
What's the problem here? THE ORIGINAL PRICE OF THE ITEM WAS $49.99. Best Buy not only got people to come in and make purchases with the alluring ad, they were able to use the rebate system as a way to JACK UP the original price of the item.
It's scam written all over it.
If you want to people to come in and ACTUALLY take a loss on a item, then just slash the price for that item to get people in the store. Some of these places do it on Black Friday, but why not for other days?
In Wal*Mart's with a grocery department, Wal*Mart takes a loss on its entire grocery dept (yes, the ENTIRE dept operates at a loss) to get people in the store to buy the stuff they have 300% mark-ups (From their paid price) on. Best Buy can do the same thing, without trying to be greedy in a SCAM sort of way.
I wonder what biased Slashdotters would say if Nintendo fakes a shortage of Nintendo Revolution when they launch time approaches.
My guess is that the M$-bashers would believe there really was a shortage of Revolution (since Nintendo is such an awesome company and they aren't some evil corporation, right?).
Why do Slashdotters (Especially those M$-bashers) have to be so god-damned biased????
"If it's that big a problem, the 360 should detect when it's jarred or moved and immediately spin down the drive."
If you read the easy to read XBOX 360 manual, YOU WOULD SEE THAT IT CLEARLY SAYS TO NOT CHANGE THE 360 FROM VERTICAL TO HORIZONTAL OR VICE VERSA WHILE THE SYSTEM IS TURNED ON.
Since these idiots don't bother to read the manual, they get what they deserve in problems that come about because they assumed the risk of f**king around with the XBOX 360 without reading the manual.
"... but see, FPS games have so much more variety, because sometimes you kill the other guy HERE, and sometimes you kill him over THERE. Then, if you're feeling particularly frisky, you can kill him with a DIFFERENT WEAPON.
Variety! "
Yes, but that too is repetitious. I think the popularity over FPS is the multiplayer aspect. The Sims BOMBED, yes totally BOMBED in taking their game online. I have NEVER played the single player version of an FPS, but always sent straight to the multiplayer.
On a geek level, it's same reason IT folks love bzflag. It's all about killing the virtual manifestation of other real people.
That's what makes The Sims the best selling PC game of all time. Will Wright created a game that women just drool over. He might as well just have called it "Dollhouse." The game allows women to play like they were little girls again, but without anyone questioning whether they have grown out of anything or not.
That is the revolution behind this game, not exactly the game play.
"The FCC may soon allow cable/sat companies to sell individually customized TV channel packages."
^^^^^^
Emphasis on the word ALLOW. Comcast, the biggest offender of raping people into packages, will never do it, even if allowed to do so. They make so much money off rape, why would they offer a la carte?
To get people to not go to Dish? They have other hooks to keep you from Dish (in the SF Bay Area, the only way to see Giants/A's/Sharks/Warriors in HD is on Comcast because Comcast provided FSN- Bay Area the HD truck and made them sign an exclusive deal).
Even Time Warner Cable and other not so rapist-like cable companies make a lot of money on tiers.
A la carte doesn't make sense for cable co's, so it won't happen.
"in order to get the 10 channel "HD Pack" I have to subscribe to 200 crappy-looking "digital" channels that I never, ever watch. Technically, I should be able to subscribe to only the major networks HD channels (ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC) but they repeatedly say I can't do it without purchasing the entire digital tier. "
You probably have Comcast (and thus no choice), and they are raping you (but you have no choice). It has nothing to do with the FCC, just greedy Comcast.
I was once living in KC with Time Warner Cable, and there you COULD get HD programming WITHOUT getting the digital tier. Just pay for the HD pack and the rental of the HD cable box, and you had all the HD they offered.
Comcast just likes to extort people. Sorry my friend (I have Comcast too, and I hardly watch digital cable channels too)
"Though that may sound somewhat optimistic for the 360, I think these new consoles suffer the NeoGeo problem -- Lots of hype, lots of tech, but way too expensive for what you get back, in my opinion. The games sure look shiny, but that only gets you so much."
But NeoGeo did not have the kind of ridiculous demand that XBOX 360 has...are you suggesting otherwise? Are you even suggesting that the hype for NeoGeo comes anywhere close to that of XBOX 360? Even when PS3 and Revolution come out, I doubt the hype and demand will match that of 360.
I love the XBOX 360, but I have to say: I think they (M$) watched a certain episode of South Park where Cartman builds Cartmanland, and advertises that no one can enjoy it except him. His point is to keep Kyle away, but it turns out the advertising gets everyone interested. Everyone wants to go to a theme park that they are not allowed to go to. We all want what we can't have.
Slashdot Mirror
"The only problem with Firefly being revived is that Whedon never wants to work with Fox again, so another network would have to buy the copyright from Fox, which would be hell of course since this is Fox we're talking about."
Actually this isn't a problem. When FOX canned "The Simple Life," E! was able to purchase the show and broadcast new episodes. They also have rights to continue the "franchise."\
Firefly's problem is that nobody likes it. Serenity was a failure. If Serenity earned 100 million at the box office, then maybe there would be a reason to bring it back.
But there isn't enough popularity in the sub-par show.
Joss Whedon needs to just stick to Astonishing X-Men (The comic book he is writing now, if you are TRUE Whedon freaks, you would have ALREADY READ year one of Whedon's run in Astonishing X-men)
"Also you have to remember that unlike a satelite tv service, video game hardware makers aren't the exclusive content providers. Sure MS makes some games but 3rd parties like EA and Ubi also make games and those games probably only give MS $5-10 a piece. Moreover there is no guarantee as to how many games someone will buy, when you get that free satelite hardware dtv or dish knows you'll be a customer for at least a year or whatever the contract was for."
Well then the statement that "the real money is made on games" is inaccurate. That was my point. I was using the satellite analogy to show that the real money is obviously NOT made on games, or else M$ (or another console maker) would give their console away for free to get people to buy the games.
If M$ was the only company to make games for it's system, then I would agree that the real money is made on games for Microsoft. But since it's not, I challenge the accuracy of that statement.
"Besides, the idea behind selling consoles is not to make money. The real money is made on games"
If this is the case, why not give the console to people for free?
If people who aren't even gung-ho get one for free, they probably will buy a couple of $60 games.
Dish Network and DirecTV figured out that the real money is to be made on programming, not equipment. That's why about 5-6 years ago they started to give everything, including installation, free to customers. All you had to do subscribe and Dish Network and DirecTV truly exploded onto the scene as a viable alternative to cable.
Why doesn't a console maker (Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft) go with an absolutely free console if the money is to be made on games? That model seems to work in satellite TV
"Too bad the Gamecube sold less units than the N64, which sold less than the SNES, which sold less than the NES. "
This is what I find interesting. Not only do people have choices (As opposed to 1985, when NES was clearly the top console), but I get the sense that more non-gamers had an NES back in the day compared to non-gamers having consoles today.
It seems like today consoles are branded as "something you buy if you are a gamer." The closest these non-gamers get to gaming today are games designed for casual gaming (small java games, pogo.com, etc), not consoles.
If Nintendo could really find a way to get those people back, they'd really have something. As it stands, Revolution is poised to be somewhat of a dud, except when it comes to unconditional loving Nintendo fanboys.
"Current numbers show their losses are
Despite the losses, the Xbox1 was a *glowing* success."
Exactly. M$ is willing to take a loss to get a bigger market share w/r/t consoles. They figure eventually to make money (At a point in the future when Sony and Nintendo will face losses they cannot handle).
What I find intriguing (and please note that I am always attacking M$ trolls who unconditionally love Sony/Nintendo and this is no knock, just an observation) is that this seems like a back door way to get into the PC market.
Start out by making a console, then a console that can take advantage of PC's with Media Center XP and so forth...seems to like we are heading to Microsoft actually selling full blown PC's (or more accurately, consoles that have 100% PC functionality).
I am surprised that many of you M$ hating trolls have not picked up on this. I've seen many people ask why M$ wants into the console market, and I think the answer is that M$ came up with a clever idea to sell PC's without just doing it directly (And getting a lot of bad publicity as people would start screaming monopoly).
People are always applauding Nintendo for thinking outside the box, but I think this may be an example of thinking outside the box from M$ (of course it benefits them and not us, but Nintendo is a corporation too: their actions benefit them in the end too).
"That is a good point about there being networks for women, so why can't there be networks for men? It's just Spike plays so many shows, like Star Trek, and MXC that I like to watch and I wish I could watch them without seeing women being belittled and objectified during commercials. It's fine to cater to men's tastes, but it shouldn't be at the cost of female dignity and equality. Not that I watch Lifetime that much, but I don't believe there are commercials that blantantly offend and belittle men, and if there are then I don't feel that is right either. Is it really necessary to completely block out women viewers in order to appeal to men?"
Spike TV is actually a television network for men, just as openly as Lifetime is. The thing is, just because these networks have programming designed for men, does not mean that they operate the same.
With Lifetime, you get loads of made-for-TV movies (think Meredith Baxter-Berney) and female oriented drama's and comedies. That sure sounds like a network for women.
With Spike TV, you get programming that tends to appeal to males, but you also get something else: scantily clad women. Those are things you expect from a network that is designed to appeal to men.
Of course Lifetime does not have many scantily clad men, but this is not to preserve dignity or equality. It's simply because the viewers of Lifetime are not into it.
Compare Lifetime to Spike. Lifetime tends to showcase women, which women like.
Spike TV gives men eye candy in the form of provocative women, which men like.
"Is it really necessary to completely block out women viewers in order to appeal to men?"
Your question can be turned upside down, i.e. is it really necessary to completely block out MEN in order to appeal to WOMEN (Lifetime)? I don't know any men who can stand to watch Lifetime for more than 5 seconds. Obviously Lifetime turns off men. Spike TV turns off women.
If you want SpikeTV to not block out women, you should get Lifetime to not block out men.
"Man Show was possibly the worst idea ever. Put that shit on Spike TV who already has lost all hopes of not alienating female viewers."
I agree the Man Show should be on Spike TV, but who cares if Spike TV alienates female viewers? It's a television network FOR MEN, just like Lifetime is a television network FOR WOMEN.
I don't see men complaining that Lifetime alienates male viewers.
"G4 has apparently canceled two more of their holdover shows from the TechTV days. G4TV.com and Filter have been been put under the axe. "
G4TV.com and Filter were always G4 shows. They were G4 shows that appeared on the original G4 and came over to G4TechTV (Which is now of course G4) They were never produced by TechTV.
How can factually incorrect stories make it to Slashdot???
"Of course, I dont think consumers care quite enough to give up DirectTV so it is mostly a moot point."
They would if there was enough bad PR that the NFL wanted out of its NFL-DirecTV exclusive Sunday Ticket Deal and that the NFL had a way get out of the contract.
We can only hope...
"I guess the Japanese are smarter when it comes to gaming."
On a previous thread on this subject, I suggested that if Nintendo released XBOX 360 (with a different name of course), but same specs, same launch titles, etc, that it would do well.
The person from Japan who I was replying to agreed.
Thus I don't think the Japanese are smarter when it comes to gaming. They are just total Nintendo and Sony (Japanese companies I might add) fanboys and M$ (american company) haters.
"The Xbox 360 is set to make exactly the same splash in Japan that the original Xbox made. Which is to say, not very much."
Yes, but are we surprised? Sony and Nintendo are Japanese companies. Microsoft is an American company, perhaps an iconic American company.
Something tells me that if Nintendo released the XBOX 360 (with a different name) of course, same name, same specs, same launch titles, it would do well in Japan, SIMPLY because of the name Nintendo.
And that, my friends, is when you know that you have a video game market that doesn't really count. People in the US who know cars inside and out know that most Japanese cars are better than American cars.
Why can't people in Japan accept that it's possible for an American company to make a console that might be better than something made by a Japanese company?
"But there weren't the rampant allegations of having to wait 4 months to get the one you pre-ordered 6 months ago."
Is Microsoft to blame with the idiot stores like EBGames/Gamestop took pre-orders BEFORE THEY EVEN KNEW WHAT THE LAUNCH DATE WAS, let alone know how many they would have?
You can't blame the manufacturer for problems with a few retailers.
Arrested Development was a critically acclaimed show, but regular people didn't like it. It never got watched and has now been canned.
Same must apply for video games: just because a game is highly touted by every critic doesn't necessarily mean that regular people want to buy and play the game.
From your linked wikipedia article re: network effect:
"Network effects were used as justification for some of the business models for dot-coms in the late 1990s."
I wonder how those turned out...
Nobody has a solid game catalogue, as you put it, at launch. It will never happen because time is always needed after launch for developers to properly make use of the console's specs.
Let's say the games REALLY suck for XBOX 360 (I don't think they do, but whatever). If everyone and their grandma today had an XBOX 360 that they were able to get on launch day, they would all say this console sucks, the game sucks, and XBOX 360 would fall much faster and harder than Dreamcast.
On the other hand, if you keep people dying to have one, they are more likely to dismiss a bad review of a game, or even a bad review of all launch titles. They still HAVE to have XBOX 360. It's not like their friends have it, but some mythical people on the internet say the launch games suck. Big whoop. By the time everyone has one in their living room, Halo 3 will be out and no one will care or remember that in the US, Kameo: Elements of Power was actually a launch title.
I honestly don't think they are purposely creating a shortage, but since they do, they will take advantage of what I said above.
And there is NOTHING wrong with launching a console at holiday season. If Revolution is ready for a launch in May, but they purposely wait until November for the holiday season, there will be no negative press, but MS wants to launch 360 in time for the 2005 Christmas season and there is a big ruckus. Frankly you are stupid NOT to launch a console during the Christmas Season.
"Then you say BestBuy should follow WalMart's example of selling other items at 300% markup. In either case, one sale is subsidizing another sale and, in your example, BestBuy subsidizes the rebate with the same item being marked up."
But at least with Wal*Mart's that have groceries, I can go in and only buy groceries.
Best Buy will never do this because they don't want anyone to buy a "loss leader" product and only that, and walk away.
Even with Wal*Mart's 300% mark up on things, it's still cheaper than competitors (this would never happen at Best Buy), so the "idiots" who are lured into Wal*Mart because of cheap grocery are not being suckered into buying some non-grocery item that costs less at Target. It may cost less to WM, but we can't get that price. The idiots who are lured into BB are simply scammed, no question.
"I had read that retailers like to sell prepaid gift cards, and that they're highly profitable because consumers lose them or let them expire."
Even in California, where it is illegal for a gift card/certificate to expire, these cards are good money makers and in some way take advantage of the customers.
Jack In The Box sees so much revenue potential in the card that they are giving customers 2 free tacos for getting a gift card with $10 or more.
Mickey D's is giving free $1 gift cards with certain purchases, to show off their new gift card system.
Although gift cards are not as bad as rebates, retailers honestly don't have them for our benefit. They have them because market research shows some certain amount of money is never used, meaning easy profit for the store.
Even if more gift cards were redeemed, if you've ever had a business class, you know everything revolves around cash flow, and gift cards are the epitome of cash flow.
"Why else would they be selling it for $90 after rebate?"
Because they have market research that suggests only a small % of people who buy a product because they saw the ad (with the after-rebate price in big letters) actually send in the rebate, or send it in correctly.
In your scenario, the printer may not be worth $150, but actually $140. It should retail for 140, but the store jacks it up to 150. They advertise the 90 after-rebate price which people in the store, and out of all the people who buy at 150, only 30% are going to get $60 back from the company.
Contrast this with simply selling the printer at the regular price of 140 or 150. Nobody will buy it because it's too expensive. The evil scam known as a rebate is a ploy to generate sales. Any company with good business sense would be willing to give some money back to some consumers if they generate huge profits.
"If you want to give me a lower price, give me a lower price."
Exactly. Is it SO revolutionary of a concept TO JUST GIVE US THE LOWER PRICE???
Rebates only exist as a way to jack up the price and make money off the 70% of people who won't correctly send in the rebate.
For example, let's say an item should cost $49.99.
Best Buy will come up with a brilliant idea. Sell it for $69.99, but offer a rebate that supposedly makes the effective price of the item say $19.99.
BB advertises the price to be $19.99, but with tiny lettering about rebates. Now idiot consumer goes into the store, lured in by the ad, buys the item for $69.99, and forgets to mail in the rebate.
What's the problem here? THE ORIGINAL PRICE OF THE ITEM WAS $49.99. Best Buy not only got people to come in and make purchases with the alluring ad, they were able to use the rebate system as a way to JACK UP the original price of the item.
It's scam written all over it.
If you want to people to come in and ACTUALLY take a loss on a item, then just slash the price for that item to get people in the store. Some of these places do it on Black Friday, but why not for other days?
In Wal*Mart's with a grocery department, Wal*Mart takes a loss on its entire grocery dept (yes, the ENTIRE dept operates at a loss) to get people in the store to buy the stuff they have 300% mark-ups (From their paid price) on. Best Buy can do the same thing, without trying to be greedy in a SCAM sort of way.
I wonder what biased Slashdotters would say if Nintendo fakes a shortage of Nintendo Revolution when they launch time approaches.
My guess is that the M$-bashers would believe there really was a shortage of Revolution (since Nintendo is such an awesome company and they aren't some evil corporation, right?).
Why do Slashdotters (Especially those M$-bashers) have to be so god-damned biased????
YES WE GET THAT YOU DON'T LIKE MICROSOFT.
Give a rest people.
"If it's that big a problem, the 360 should detect when it's jarred or moved and immediately spin down the drive."
If you read the easy to read XBOX 360 manual, YOU WOULD SEE THAT IT CLEARLY SAYS TO NOT CHANGE THE 360 FROM VERTICAL TO HORIZONTAL OR VICE VERSA WHILE THE SYSTEM IS TURNED ON.
Since these idiots don't bother to read the manual, they get what they deserve in problems that come about because they assumed the risk of f**king around with the XBOX 360 without reading the manual.
"... but see, FPS games have so much more variety, because sometimes you kill the other guy HERE, and sometimes you kill him over THERE. Then, if you're feeling particularly frisky, you can kill him with a DIFFERENT WEAPON.
Variety! "
Yes, but that too is repetitious. I think the popularity over FPS is the multiplayer aspect. The Sims BOMBED, yes totally BOMBED in taking their game online. I have NEVER played the single player version of an FPS, but always sent straight to the multiplayer.
On a geek level, it's same reason IT folks love bzflag. It's all about killing the virtual manifestation of other real people.
Women.
That's what makes The Sims the best selling PC game of all time. Will Wright created a game that women just drool over. He might as well just have called it "Dollhouse." The game allows women to play like they were little girls again, but without anyone questioning whether they have grown out of anything or not.
That is the revolution behind this game, not exactly the game play.
"The FCC may soon allow cable/sat companies to sell individually customized TV channel packages."
^^^^^^
Emphasis on the word ALLOW. Comcast, the biggest offender of raping people into packages, will never do it, even if allowed to do so. They make so much money off rape, why would they offer a la carte?
To get people to not go to Dish? They have other hooks to keep you from Dish (in the SF Bay Area, the only way to see Giants/A's/Sharks/Warriors in HD is on Comcast because Comcast provided FSN- Bay Area the HD truck and made them sign an exclusive deal).
Even Time Warner Cable and other not so rapist-like cable companies make a lot of money on tiers.
A la carte doesn't make sense for cable co's, so it won't happen.
"in order to get the 10 channel "HD Pack" I have to subscribe to 200 crappy-looking "digital" channels that I never, ever watch. Technically, I should be able to subscribe to only the major networks HD channels (ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC) but they repeatedly say I can't do it without purchasing the entire digital tier.
"
You probably have Comcast (and thus no choice), and they are raping you (but you have no choice). It has nothing to do with the FCC, just greedy Comcast.
I was once living in KC with Time Warner Cable, and there you COULD get HD programming WITHOUT getting the digital tier. Just pay for the HD pack and the rental of the HD cable box, and you had all the HD they offered.
Comcast just likes to extort people. Sorry my friend (I have Comcast too, and I hardly watch digital cable channels too)
"Though that may sound somewhat optimistic for the 360, I think these new consoles suffer the NeoGeo problem -- Lots of hype, lots of tech, but way too expensive for what you get back, in my opinion. The games sure look shiny, but that only gets you so much."
But NeoGeo did not have the kind of ridiculous demand that XBOX 360 has...are you suggesting otherwise? Are you even suggesting that the hype for NeoGeo comes anywhere close to that of XBOX 360? Even when PS3 and Revolution come out, I doubt the hype and demand will match that of 360.
I love the XBOX 360, but I have to say: I think they (M$) watched a certain episode of South Park where Cartman builds Cartmanland, and advertises that no one can enjoy it except him. His point is to keep Kyle away, but it turns out the advertising gets everyone interested. Everyone wants to go to a theme park that they are not allowed to go to. We all want what we can't have.