Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts
|
|
|
||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
| Frequently Asked Forum Questions | |
|||
|
||||
|
|
|||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Kool Aid vs FUD | |
| Posted By: Narcogen <narcogen@rampancy.net> | Date: 5/22/02 4:18 a.m. |
In Response To: Re: Doomsayers vs MS Kool-Aid (Kellen Squire) : Double-counterpoints: Gamecube is in the same situation. Oh, of course. There's no doubt of that at all. Sony isn't, that's all. : I seriously doubted my last girlfriend was a man, but, wow- once I got into
: Do that with Microsoft, then judge. It's hardly necessary. A little rudimentary mathematics is all that's needed. Take all the announced sales figures for the console itself, along with the attach rates for the various games, and the retail prices for the same. Add them up and you get a revenue figure. Now take the $1b advertising campaign, the Bungie purchase price (if we knew it) and the likely development costs (Bungie head count X median salary guess X amount of time between acquisition and release of Halo). Even lowballing most of those numbers, it is extremely doubtful MS has profited dollar one yet. One billion in advertising in one year is an awful lot. Halo has JUST NOW sold one million copies, and it's the most popular single game. Let's assume, for a second, that the total # of all titles sold is 10x that of Halo-- which I think is a generous assumption given the number of titles out there. That would be ten million games. Call the average price $50. That's five hundred million dollars-- or HALF a billion, the cost of the MARKETING alone. I
That's not even taking ANY of the hardware side into account, that's just the software-- where they are supposed to make the money! : XBOX is a strong first in a two-horse race, and is making the other player in
Wow... in horse-talk, we'd call that "wearing blinders"-- you can only call this a two-horse race by wilfully ignoring the PS2. It's early release doesn't make it an older generation. The PS2, Xbox and GC are all "next generation" consoles (IE, post-PS1 generation). As for strong-- I'm not even sure that's true at all. Xbox's lead over GC in the US was slim last time I looked, and it's dead last in Europe and Japan. Not sure how that works out to be a strong 1/2 or even 2/3. : Nice analogy, huh? : Anyway, I'm privy to Microsoft's internal information. One casual one-nighter
You'd do well to avoid such gross generalizations, I think. The only thing more common on these boards than "geeky by sensitive" computer programmers are people claiming inside knowledge with varying degrees of certainty. I neither belong to, nor do I claim to belong to, either category. : Then people can't complain about price gouging, and Microsoft has an
: Excuse me? PS2 was *already* $100 cheaper? What the hell are you talking
I never said MS had a choice, or was wrong to cut prices. No one has. The point was that doing so, even if it's the right choice, the only choice, lowers MS' margin. And the characterization of Sony's move as "scared" is not only speculative-- but a little bit amusing, given the PS2's installed base. A more accurate characterization might be to suggest that given their already insurmountable lead, Sony sought to make sure that MS would not gain any ground due to a price advantage. And yes, it already was cheaper. As in "Sony cut before MS". Regardless of the motivations, they did it first, even if they acted on MS' announced (or unannounced) intentions. : And, yeah. I'm sure they expected to outsell PS2. Woo. : Again, above. Microsoft lowered the bar, Sony and Nintendo had to follow
Again... that's a bit of spin. To say that Microsoft, with less (much less, at last count) than 10 million units sold had so threatened Sony with more than 30 million units sold by announcing an *intention* to cut prices that they were *forced* to "follow suit" : It's a lot better, console-to-console, than PS2 and Gamecube combined. To
I'm not being a pedantic bastard. Look. I like the Xbox. I *own* a bloody Xbox. I'm aware of it's technical superiorities, just as I was aware of the technical advantages of Beta, the AmigaOS, OS/2, the Macintosh, and dozens of other technologies which I've liked, used, and even continue to use, because of their inherent technological advantages. That does NOT mean I call them market leaders, or distort sales, revenue and profit figures to try and show that "Apple Rules, Microsoft Drools". To say that the Xbox, with its hard drive and ethernet, is better than "two consoles put together" is such a subjective, meaningless statement that it's hard to even evaluate. Does it play more games than those two consoles, put together? Well... no. So, are each of the Xbox's individual games twice as good? Well... since a lot of the games appear on more than one platform and some even look pretty much the same... that probably doesn't make sense, either. Does the hard drive make it better? Well... maybe. But so far it's being used for the same kind of functions that memory cards serve for, and the other capabilities-- such as game expansion-- have only been used to date to give us ever more revealing DOA3 costumes. Yawn. It's a feature with a lot of potential, but it is as yet unrealized. And lots of products and technologies with great potential don't end up living up to it. Does the ethernet make it better? Maybe, but both the other consoles either do or will have adapters. Is that better than having it built-in? Arguable. There are plenty of those who cited the DC as being much better than the PS2. We saw how that went. Basically, what I said was that to choose an Xbox over the competitor, most people will want to see concrete demonstrations that it is "twice the console" as the competitors. Apparently consumers don't see it yet, or Xbox would be selling at twice the rate of their competitors combined. Somehow it isn't happening yet. Maybe if you write more forum post replies like this one to people who already own Xboxes, that'll work itself out. : Hey! You're right. : And I'm sure the good folks at Sony and Nintendo are calling their buddies in
Good grief. What does the South American market have to do with anything? : So was Sony. So was Nintendo. And they both did. You realize that these
If you'd even bothered to read my posts in this thread, you would know I was aware of that. What's your point? I'm just saying that simply because it's a known fact that MS was prepared to lose *some* money in the endeavor does not automatically mean that no loss of any amount might not qualify the project as a failure. : 733t g003y. I think you've got something stuck in your keyboard. Better have a look at it. : Nah. Microsoft might be losing more than they wanted to, but they aren't
I think I can agree with that. After all, if they really had exceeded their worst case scenario, the Xbox really WOULD be doomed, and they'd likely already have binned it along with Microsoft Bob. Clearly that's not the case. I'm just emphasizing the "losing more than they wanted do" over the "not losing as much as they thought they might". All the latter means is that perhaps they were even more pessimistic about their chances than even their critics. : And, hey, remember the carbon paper firms that controlled the evil carbon
Good grief, who was talking about evil monopolies? And at any rate-- I'm sorry, no matter how much you, I, or anyone else loves his or her Xbox, it's not a paradigm shift in the industry. It isn't a revolutionary invention destined to change the face of gaming, the way the Xerox machine and the PC did to the office. It's just a gaming rig with a hard drive and ethernet. It's evolutionary, parts-bin innovation, nothing that by its mere nature or existence is going to unseat one of-- if not the-- largest consumer electronics company in the world. That doesn't mean that it can't happen. But I think it's a fair estimation to say the following things: 1) It is far from inevitable that MS will claim the #1 console spot with either the current or succeeding iterations of the Xbox. 2) It is nearly impossible that MS will claim the #1 console spot with the current iteration of the Xbox (in other words, have the largest installed base). 3) It is likely that Microsoft will continue with the product for at least one more iteration (by that I mean an "Xbox2", not just the Xbox Live service). 4) It is conceivable that future products from Sony, Nintendo, or perhaps even an unknown third party will continue to succeed to compete successfully against future Xbox iterations in a way that hasn't happened in the PC industry because game consoles are less dependent on legacy software. 5) In the current situation, MS can at *best* be described as second in a field of three or first in a field of two if you exclude the PS2 (which I think is a gross distortion of the market, given that the gap between the three consoles (about one year) is shorter than the usual gap between console generations (2-3 years). That, and the gap in installed base between Sony's PS2 and the other two machines is so great during that one year that it dwarfs any gap between the GC and the Xbox, rendering said gap rather unimportant-- unless you're one of those who believes there's really only room for 2 consoles in the market and the #3 player is doomed to extinction. In short... it may be possible that MS will one day rule the the console gaming roost. But I'd say that it's more possible than probable, that it won't happen with the current machine in the forseeable future, and that, at least at the moment, there are no indications that it is happening. It's a speculation based more on MS' financial resources and corporate history than it is on the performance of the product in the marketplace.
| |
|
| Replies: |
| Death of the Xbox? | FunkDaddy | 5/20/02 4:34 p.m. |
| Re: Death of the Xbox? | PCDestroyer | 5/20/02 4:46 p.m. |
| Re: Death of the Xbox? | Surrepticius | 5/20/02 4:58 p.m. |
| Death of the Xbox??...My @$$ | Mutti | 5/20/02 6:48 p.m. |
| Re: Death of the Xbox??...My @$$ | Mr. Bobo | 5/20/02 8:07 p.m. |
| Re: Death of the Xbox? | ferrex | 5/20/02 6:03 p.m. |
| Hurrah! | Kellen Squire | 5/20/02 11:00 p.m. |
| Re: Death of the Xbox? | Kanen Faud'r | 5/21/02 3:12 a.m. |
| Re: Death of the Xbox? | ferrex | 5/21/02 1:24 p.m. |
| Re: Death of the Xbox? | Kanen Faud'r | 5/21/02 2:12 p.m. |
| What about the profits from... | Ulf | 5/21/02 3:08 p.m. |
| Gross vs. Profit | Narcogen | 5/21/02 10:39 p.m. |
| Re: Hard Drive | NthDegree256 | 5/21/02 11:12 p.m. |
| Re: Hard Drive | NthDegree256 | 5/21/02 11:13 p.m. |
| hard drive vs. memory card | Narcogen | 5/22/02 1:38 a.m. |
| Re: hard drive vs. memory card | Mark Levin | 5/22/02 1:46 a.m. |
| nice feature, just not essential | Narcogen | 5/22/02 4:39 a.m. |
| Re: hard drive vs. memory card | Miguel Chavez | 5/22/02 1:51 a.m. |
| Re: hard drive vs. memory card | poena.dare #CP# | 5/22/02 2:23 a.m. |
| Re: hard drive vs. memory card | Mark Levin | 5/22/02 3:21 a.m. |
| DVD Consortium Charges | Narcogen | 5/22/02 4:48 a.m. |
| Re: DVD Consortium Charges | Louis Wu | 5/22/02 8:30 a.m. |
| Re: DVD Consortium Charges | Narcogen | 5/23/02 1:33 a.m. |
| Re: DVD Consortium Charges | Mark Levin | 5/23/02 2:15 a.m. |
| Re: DVD Consortium Charges | Narcogen | 5/23/02 3:05 a.m. |
| Re: DVD Consortium Charges | Mark Levin | 5/23/02 3:09 a.m. |
| Re: DVD Consortium Charges | Narcogen | 5/24/02 4:14 a.m. |
| xbox as music player | Narcogen | 5/22/02 4:45 a.m. |
| The Console Cave | Narcogen | 5/22/02 4:42 a.m. |
| Re: hard drive vs. memory card | SpudBoy | 5/22/02 1:52 a.m. |
| PGR ghosts and Myth Filmz | Narcogen | 5/22/02 5:04 a.m. |
| Re: Gross vs. Profit | vector40 | 5/21/02 11:28 p.m. |
| Grosse Profit Pointe | Narcogen | 5/22/02 1:44 a.m. |
| Re: Gross vs. Profit | Miguel Chavez | 5/22/02 1:22 a.m. |
| Profit vs. Revenue | Narcogen | 5/22/02 1:52 a.m. |
| Doomsayers vs MS Kool-Aid | Narcogen | 5/21/02 9:38 p.m. |
| Re: Doomsayers vs MS Kool-Aid | Kellen Squire | 5/21/02 10:57 p.m. |
| Kool Aid vs FUD | Narcogen | 5/22/02 4:18 a.m. |
| *blink* | Kellen Squire | 5/22/02 6:29 p.m. |
| Well, uh banshee "challenge" *NM* | Black_Jackal | 5/22/02 6:47 p.m. |
| WHAT THE !@#$! | Black_Jackal | 5/22/02 6:51 p.m. |
| Re: WHAT THE !@#$! | Narcogen | 5/23/02 2:40 a.m. |
| SUPERFUD! :) | Narcogen | 5/23/02 2:38 a.m. |
| Dratness! | Kellen Squire | 5/23/02 8:30 a.m. |
| Re: SUPERFUD! :) | Kellen Squire | 5/23/02 9:43 a.m. |
| Good Grief, this is great. *NM* | vector40 | 5/23/02 9:25 p.m. |
| Re: SUPERFUD! :) | Narcogen | 5/24/02 4:09 a.m. |
| Re: SUPERFUD IS FINALLY REPLIED TO | Kellen Squire | 5/24/02 12:23 a.m. |
| Jesus. | Zapf Dingbats | 5/24/02 12:58 a.m. |
| Re: Jesus. | Kellen Squire | 5/24/02 8:24 a.m. |
| Re: Doomsayers vs MS Kool-Aid | Miguel Chavez | 5/22/02 1:33 a.m. |
| Re: Doomsayers vs MS Kool-Aid | Narcogen | 5/22/02 4:54 a.m. |
| Re: Death of the Xbox? | Cunbelin The Longwinded | 5/23/02 5:40 a.m. |
The HBO Forum Archive is maintained with WebBBS 4.33. |