While I agree with pretty much everything else, I find it hard to believe the Xbox One has reached 9.5M units sold through. 8.5M seems more likely to me.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
NPD Sales Results for November 2014 [Up3: NPD Data Error, AC:U #5]
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
Birgitte2004
Member
There aren't enough big releases to offer bundles year round including them. Unity won't be a "big" title come January, and the next known title which is big enough to move consoles en masse is probably Battlefield in March, and that's assuming MS can get the greenlight on a bundle.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
PS4 will not stay 399 forever though.
travisbickle
Member
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Look at this way. During elections why are projected winners named before every single vote is counted? Once you have enough data it's safe to make a call.
As Microsoft has said "It's a Marathon not a Sprint" and this very much true in regards to the PS4. XboxOne has shortened the gap but in doing so are sprinting for a short while in a Marathon, it will help them in the short run but over the course of every other Month PS4 is going to continue to sell well. Microsoft can't keep doing these insane bundles this was a chance for Microsoft to shout up and down to get in the mind of the Consumer Base and gain more traction, while Sony has the luxury of Slow dripping bundles or hell even a permanent Price drop.
The most telling thing that Microsoft to me is still going to lose by the end of the "Console Marathonm is that Sony STILL has a lead in the US, Microsoft DOMINATED the US with the 360, it's pretty telling that even with the amazing bundles and sales they are still behind in the Us. Consumers are fickle it's interesting friends who were once Hardcore Xbox Fans are now majority getting a PS4. Early strong start and marketing for "The Gamers" definitely helped them Out.
The most telling thing that Microsoft to me is still going to lose by the end of the "Console Marathonm is that Sony STILL has a lead in the US, Microsoft DOMINATED the US with the 360, it's pretty telling that even with the amazing bundles and sales they are still behind in the Us. Consumers are fickle it's interesting friends who were once Hardcore Xbox Fans are now majority getting a PS4. Early strong start and marketing for "The Gamers" definitely helped them Out.
Totally possible. I reached my estimation by taking the shipments given last quarter and then adding on an appropriate amount given what we know about the holidays so far.
Such estimations are decent (I'm taking 9 months of real sales and then fudging another 2), but are definitely prone to error, and it's totally possible to be off by a million. I'd split the difference and say 9M, maybe. I don't know. We're within 10% or so, which is about as good as we're going to get right now.
Bitch Pudding
Member
First of all: They wont. Not unless MS' console stays that much cheaper in the upcoming month, that is. So that's that.
Furthermore, the PS4 is Sony's cash cow. That's the PS4's primary derective: to generate positive cash flows and profits, as other Sony divisions are still struggling to do that. As long as the PS4 does a suberb job around the globle, there's just no real need for Sony to do anything.
Unless they don't continue to win those months, what I'm trying to tell you is that this train of thought is a slippery slope. Just because you think you can continue to win over most of the year doesn't mean you should continue to do nothing when you're losing the largest months of the year.
Sony might not react just yet but I can definitely see them reacting if Microsoft keeps the price war raging. I really hope it does because a lack of competition is never a good thing in this industry.
The US and UK pretty much do hold their own against the rest of the world, the last generation pretty much showed this to be true. Although I don't expect this generation to be as close as last generation, PS4 is probably going to end up with more than just a million unit lead.
Car and life insurance is Sony's cash cow, not the PS4.
EA and Microsoft aren't exactly enemies or rivals.
What makes you think they have to continue doing insane bundles? They just have to keep the price down and offering bundles with new releases. They don't need to outsell the PS4 by 1/3rd every month but matching and beating it is a good start.
Of course, but it's not like they didn't already waste an opportunity to further crush MS' sales this holiday season.
MS can always undercut their price point again.
December: Microsoft wins narrowing the gap to about 500k
January-May: Sony wins all these widening the gap to about 1M again. MS will stay at $349 bundling other game (Evolve?!)
June: MS drops XB1 to $299, Sony follows suit. Maybe a tie
July-October: PS4 sells shitloads for summer standards, XB1 sells OK
November/December: MS bundles Halo 5 and MCC at $249 ($229 BF) also RotTR at $249, Sony bundles UC4 at $299, sales roughly tie for Nov/Dec (maybe small MS victories depending on size of kitchen sink).
End of 2015: PS4 leads by ca. 1M-1.5M
January-May: Sony wins all these widening the gap to about 1M again. MS will stay at $349 bundling other game (Evolve?!)
June: MS drops XB1 to $299, Sony follows suit. Maybe a tie
July-October: PS4 sells shitloads for summer standards, XB1 sells OK
November/December: MS bundles Halo 5 and MCC at $249 ($229 BF) also RotTR at $249, Sony bundles UC4 at $299, sales roughly tie for Nov/Dec (maybe small MS victories depending on size of kitchen sink).
End of 2015: PS4 leads by ca. 1M-1.5M
Interesting. Your estimation may be more accurate than mine after all. BTW, do you think the PS4 can hit 20M sold through by holiday's end?
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
You can only undercut so many times. At some point I would imagine they would like to make profit on the systems being sold.
360 enjoyed the benefits of being a year early and ~half the price and still couldn't beat PS3 in ROTW.
Sorry, brand loyalty is that strong and price is extremely unlikely going to change that, particularly when X1 was one year late to many markets.
Yes, it's possible. Not likely (Based on sales patterns historically, 18M-19M is more likely) but possible.
Would it be far fetched to say the XB1 is already profitable if the PS4 is already is? San bundles, just strictly hardware?
They could in theory, but then there are shareholders, consumers who feel that MS is only desperate and one day the price difference is so irrelevant it doesn't help any more.
At least people now understand that Kinectless SKU was always planned as a price war machine, not something seriously trying to compete at a $399 price parity.
Why do people insist on this?
Its not like there is a bigger entire out there, one who keto people fear.
Didn't answer my question.
It's not about making profit on the systems, it's about making profit on the services, commissions(game sales) and accessories.
Why do people insist on competition? $300 bundles with 6 games is why people insist on competition....
I was addressing more the second part.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
If that's the case why not give the consoles away and make it up on all those huge numbers of people people who buy the games and sign up for Xbox Live. It is about making profits on the systems and the other stuff as well.
Why are 360 and PS3 (systems that came out nearly a decade ago) still not even 99 dollars? It's about making money.
Sony and MS fighting is like fencing on the blades of an attack helicopter.
BTW the attack helicopter really enjoys apple products.
Consoles aren't free to produce or advertise and having the console at the very least cover most of its own cost is preferable
The Microsoft store had the Xbox 360 + Kinect and Xbox 360 250 GB for $99.
If you completely ignore the lead Sony enjoyed with the PS2 your comment almost makes sense.
Hint:
If brand loyalty really mattered that much over price they wouldn't have lost so much market share to the Xbox 360 last generation
If you think the gap WW will decrease to 1M, you are not basing it on facts at all, but rather on your own opinion as this is next to impossible.
Sony and Microsoft fighting is the absolute best case scenario of this generation.
Read what I said again but this time do it slower.
Last generation it was a 1 million unit difference, I said that I doubt this would happen again this generation...
kinoki
Illness is the doctor to whom we pay most heed; to kindness, to knowledge, we make promise only; pain we obey.
I don't think anyone believes that XBO is profitable at a hardware level. Going forward Microsoft is probably producing far less consoles a month than Sony (500k to 1500k, perhaps) and are recieving a lesser discount for parts. Hence, it's more expensive to produce the units. They also haven't fully worked through the units they've already produced. Early reports also suggested that XBO was more expensive to produce.
Now add in storage, bundled games, overshipping consoles to retailers, the unbundling of Kinect (if you add that they might have ordered 1 million Kinect a month for 12 months and that it might have been as expensive to produce as the console itself this hurts even more), and other costs I doubt that the hardware is profitable. I also doubt Microsoft really cares at this point. They've already payed for the consoles, going forward it's money that flowing back to them.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Profitable consoles is even more preferable. Which is why Microsoft isn't going to undercut prices for the next 4 years just so people on a forum can claim victory. They're trying to run a business here.
justsomeguy
Member
So would you say the wii "won" last gen? Because in my limited experience, many people's Wiis sat in a cupboard gathering dust after the gimmick factor wore off. It may have won sales but that doesn't tell the whole story Imo.
Not saying that ps4 & xb1 is comparable to that situation, as their game libraries and overall user experience are so similar, but just making the point that "winning" sales isn't the only metric of success.
Sigh is this denial or a failure of reading comprehension? Ms and Sony don't need to keep each other in their toes. Apple does that. Google does that. Steam does that.
____________________________________________________________________
I'm always at a loss how cheap people are. Especially those who prefer their niche games on dedicated hardware. Have fun finding that last piece of software in the bargain bin while your developers close down or start to think different.
Profitable consoles aren't preferable if it comes at the cost of market share.
Market share is worth many times more in profit than any profit that could be made on the sale of a console. You're comparing a small short term return to a decade long return on services and commissions.
Microsoft's ability to run Xbox has nothing to do with the amount of profit they make on every Xbox One. For god sakes Microsoft has like 9 different billion dollar businesses and is the second largest company in the world.
Are you honestly saying that Microsoft and Sony shouldn't compete because it ignores the rest of the tech industry? You might have a point if Apple, Google or Steam actually affected the console gaming industry in any major way.
Microsoft also doesn't need to ignore Apple or Google in order to continue to compete with Sony.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
I think he was just speaking in terms of how you can take one years results and quantify them to make a safe prediction for the overall generation.
Market share only matter to a certain extent. They are only worried about being blown out of the water not being 2nd place by 20 or 30%. Just because Microsoft has money elsewhere does not mean they will offer the Xbox Division a blank check.
"Competition" cuts both ways. I was able to get an Xbox One for $329 with four games and a year of Xbox Live Gold because PS4 won eleven of the first twelve months in Microsoft's primary market. Had things been roughly comparable (which I think Microsoft honestly expected to start happening when Titanfall came out), the deal on offer would not have been nearly as compelling. Maybe $399 with a single game, which is ostensibly what their bundle was before a $50 "seasonal" price cut and Black Friday blowouts.
We're already seeing faster price cuts then we ever got out of PS3 or 360, and neither or those were the market leader while Nintendo was still primarily focused on selling the Wii.
We're already seeing faster price cuts then we ever got out of PS3 or 360, and neither or those were the market leader while Nintendo was still primarily focused on selling the Wii.
What metric of success are you suggesting instead? Net income?
Do we have actual numbers ?
The last we heard was 13,5 Mio. PS4 and 10 Mio. Xbox1 (think both sold to retailers and not sold through)
But this was before MS winning November.
Bitch Pudding
Member
Interesting idea. But let me tell you one thing: All that matters is cash which is not the equivalent to markt share. Maybe MS' biggest problem these days are the market shares of most of their hardware products, but it isn't cash. In Sony's case it's the other away around, so far as we speak about consoles.
i assume the gimmick factor wearing off means that the real measure of success is software sales. i mean, the really-reals, since people played it for one session of wii sports and that was it. oh there were 900 million units of software sold on the platform, meaning about 9 pieces of software to every wii owner, but that was basically wii sports.
That's funny because Phil Spencer said in a interview that he does have a blank check.
Market share and attachment rate is way more important than slightly profiting off console sales.
Cash =/= Market share, I agree.
But Market share + high attachment rates = profit.
The last hardware cycle went on so ridiculously long that Nintendo basically "won" early enough to eventually set themselves up for failure with the Wii U. Sony got their ass kicked early on, and very gradually made moves that helped set them up for PS4 with things like PS+, better support from smaller developers, etc.
The Wii is an unambiguous "winner" in terms of hardware moved while still being the company's primary system, and the amount of software sold. But it was also the second generation in a row where "winning" was not enough to offset some incredibly dumbfounding decision making about the next product. It even applies to Microsoft. Look at how much backpedaling they've had to do in the last eighteen months. Nothing about Xbox 360's success in the back half of the previous hardware cycle (where it routinely outsold the Wii) made the average consumer any fonder of the Xbox One's original vision.
The Wii is an unambiguous "winner" in terms of hardware moved while still being the company's primary system, and the amount of software sold. But it was also the second generation in a row where "winning" was not enough to offset some incredibly dumbfounding decision making about the next product. It even applies to Microsoft. Look at how much backpedaling they've had to do in the last eighteen months. Nothing about Xbox 360's success in the back half of the previous hardware cycle (where it routinely outsold the Wii) made the average consumer any fonder of the Xbox One's original vision.
Nintendo's problem is that too many of the customers viewed what they were paying $29 to $49 for on the Wii as easily replaced by inexpensive or free mobile games. If stuff like Super Mario Galaxy were the best selling Wii games, they'd be having an easier time selling the Wii U with its current software lineup.
Honestly I would say the metric of success is the ability to retain and gain market share and attachment rates over a generation compared to the last generation.
Net income doesn't hurt either.
I think this is a reasonable consideration as well.
SmartWaffles
Member
PS4 was sold through, Xbox One number was sold in.
Aquamarine
Member
PS4 was worldwide shipments as well.
All reported sales figures in IR documents are always sell-in. Sony only estimates worldwide sell-through.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Market share is only one part of the puzzle. You could lose market share and do just fine. You could win market share and do terribly.
Gamecube would not have been a massive success or the PS2 a failure by this metric.
Which is why I said attachment rate so much.
A console that has sold a 1000 consoles with 3 games each isn't going to be doing as well as a console that has sold 700 console with 6 games each.(for the sake of this lets just say they make the same off of all the commissions and each console sale.)
And you can typically reduce whatever figure they offer by 1-3M as an assumed stock in channel. So, if a system has sold 20M according to financial reports, you might assume 17M-19M of those are in homes. Roughly.
Yes, I misunderstood your assertion and edited. I apologize.
travisbickle
Member
Estimates are XB1 @ 4.9 in the US incl. Nov, that's why people find it difficult to see how MS is close to 10 million globally. And others suggest the "10 million soon" figure was essentially their shipments up to Christmas.
Nightengale
Member
XB1 was 10 milion "soon"
PS4 was 13.5 million as of 30th September
The "soon" muddies the timing.
PS4 was 13.5 million as of 30th September
The "soon" muddies the timing.
They don't need each other to stay competitive. Sure the consoles are selling great. For now. So are more people chaining themselves to the devaluing of software and ignoring consoles at the same time. That thinking that still rationalises as it was pre-Apple is just wrong. Faux pas or not we are always underestimating it. Even if MS is the only one left to compete with no other console out there they wouldn't slow down their aggressiveness. The casual market would never come. Well perhaps if shit was $200.
PS. Ms is like the 30-something largest company in the world. Apple is like 15-20(just looking at profits, looking at the war chest neither makes it in the top 100). Learn Chinese people. it'll be good when your grand kids need to learn it in school.
Similar threads
- Locked