NotMyProblemAnymoreCunt
Biggest Trails Stan
Well it's most likely dumb assumptions
Securities firm believes Switch 2 costs $400 to make, Nintendo will sell at a loss – GoNintendo
Well it's most likely dumb assumptions
Guardian Monkey
Member
It should still hep with motion clarity. Plus they will have assload of indies that will hit 120hz.
Sakura
Member
Why do people think Nintendo doesn't sell systems at a loss?
The Wii U was sold at a loss, the 3DS was sold at a loss, the Gamecube was sold at a loss (at least once it was 99).
No idea on older consoles but I wouldn't be surprised if systems like the N64 were sold at a loss as well.
For sure they might be more adverse to selling at a loss, ie they aren't going to take a 200 dollar + loss per console like Sony might've for the PS3, but they aren't against selling at a loss when they need to.
The Wii U was sold at a loss, the 3DS was sold at a loss, the Gamecube was sold at a loss (at least once it was 99).
No idea on older consoles but I wouldn't be surprised if systems like the N64 were sold at a loss as well.
For sure they might be more adverse to selling at a loss, ie they aren't going to take a 200 dollar + loss per console like Sony might've for the PS3, but they aren't against selling at a loss when they need to.
blacktout
Member
My (totally baseless) suspicion is that they had a tiny margin on each unit (probably closer to $5 or $10 than $30) at $449, but that they'll be selling at a small loss under the 10% tariffs. This would explain why they suspended preorders over the higher tariffs. They couldn't afford to eat them because their margins were already extremely thin and they would have been selling the consoles at too great a loss to rationalize to their shareholders.
Bridges
Member
I do not believe that Nintendo will sell the console at a loss. If this is true, I expect the prices to raise. This is the same Nintendo that never dropped the Wii U price as it mega bombed its entire lifecycle.
Counterpoint: They did panic drop the price of 3DS. I'd have to look into this but I'm curious if post-price cut OG 3DS was being sold at a loss or not.
Counterpoint: They did panic drop the price of 3DS. I'd have to look into this but I'm curious if post-price cut OG 3DS was being sold at a loss or not.
Puscifer
Member
The same reason every console cost more to make and was sold at a loss. The PS5/X1 are literally miracles in how quickly they're profitable months after release vs years
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
I love how "securities analysts" can simply make things up based on no internal information and little actual analysis. Like they haven't done a tear down here.
They are simply guessing based on the price of the Switch 2 in the US.
I wouldn't go as far as to say the BOM is 100, that's a bit of hyperbole. Realistically, though, it's probably closer to 300 dollars.
It'll be really interesting to see what Sony can do with a handheld with a BOM of say 550 dollars that doesn't have to have the profit margins of the Switch 2 and as long as it generates additional software sales will be a plus-plus for Sony.
Nintendo recognizes that their primary region is Japan and so they can't have the Switch 2 priced so high there and if Sony were to make that 550 BOM handheld, they can't sell it even in Japan for the equivalent of 400 dollars, that's probably too high a loss, at best you're looking at selling it for the equivalent of 450, which would put it 110 dollars more than the Switch 2 in what could be the most important region for handheld sales.
Ultimately, what Sony does in the handheld space in response to Nintendo is going to be fascinating, but what isn't fascinating is the absolute garbage analytic companies put out that aren't based on anything.
It'll be VERY interesting to see how many units of Switch 1 sells in Japan once the Switch 2 is actually on the market, which will tell us how important pricing is in the rate of sales.
Ritsumei2020
Who did they think I was shilling for?
$100? Pfff. That shit is more like $50 at best
Lethal01
Member
They porbably just sell at a loss, as they have done constantly.
Baemono
Member
What do you mean by X1 ?
Bernardougf
Member
No they aren't
Hudo
Member
Doesn't mean paying 90€ for a video game is cheap.
I don't get these comparisons. Games are not movies, movies are not games. I find these comparisons not really meaningful. Consuming movies is a different form of entertainment (and different mode of consumption) than playing a video game than listening to music than reading a book than going to an opera than hanging out with friends.
It makes more sense to compare the price hike to the value it gives you as a video game, and I just don't see anything that justifies 90€ so far. Especially when we don't even know how the secondary revenue stream will look like.
asdasdasdbb
Member
Apparently they are. But are only willing to do so in Japan.
Ribi
Member
Nintendo would be stupid enough to not buy in bulk some old ass tech
diffusionx
Gold Member
As I said in the other thread, US gamers are now getting hit with the inflation that has spread throughout the economy but largely avoided them for the past few years.
Last edited:
Woopah
Member
North America is Nintendo's primary region, but you're right that Japan is also very important to them.
TKOFromTokyo
Member
You just made the point of the comparison in your critique. These are all forms of entertainment. You can entertain yourself in many ways. Some ways to entertain yourself are cheaper than others. Relatively speaking, video games provide a large bang for your buck than other forms of entertainment. Sure, you can go down the rabbit hole of trying to compare the value of this game versus that game. However, generally speaking video games are a cheap form of entertainment.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked