Nintendo shares rise on 'less than $300' statement

by Blake Snow { Jan 20th 2006 at 6:00AM }

Shares of Nintendo rose 7.7 percent on the Osaka Securities Exchange today. This comes off of Reggie Fils-Aime's interview confirmation that the Revolution "will cost less than $300,'' and will go on sale before Thanksgiving in November.

From the article: "Nintendo's market share has narrowed to about 14 percent for its existing GameCube console as Microsoft and Sony Corp. introduced products with a hard drive, DVD player and Internet connection. Microsoft started sales of its Xbox 360 in November for between $299 and $399. Sony plans to sell its PlayStation 3 device around the second quarter."

We blog about games, not the stock market. But what could the rise be attributed to? Differentiation from higher priced competitors?

[via Infendo]

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

mike @ Jan 20th 2006 7:02AM

erm surely anything more than $200 is a complete ripoff the tech is not exactly cutting edge like the ps3/360

although the controller may be expensive at first ?

takao @ Jan 20th 2006 7:27AM

well the controller tech is based on bluetooth as far as i heard so i doubt the tech is really expensive.. after all they are making millions of them so the price will drop through that alone

that aside it will have wireless networking and flash memory (for save games) included so i think 200 is quite a good deal since you don't have to buy overpriced memory cards or w-lan adapters

Hunting_Phoenix @ Jan 20th 2006 7:53AM

First off, let me say that I am extremely excited about Revolution, and it will probably be the first system I buy at launch, ever.

But I have to play the devil's advocate. What *if* it's $299? Or $250? For months everyone has said that it will release at a $99-$200 price point. With some industry folks apparently saying $99-150 is more likely. At $200, I will probably still go buy it. At $250, now I'm not so sure! $300 no! Not only will I not pay so much for a system, and never have, but probably won't for some time in the future.

So what do you all think a $200+ price point will do to revolution sales? After months of hearing "probably less than $150," (which to my knowlage, other industry members guess, Nintendo's said only "less than $500" and "less than $300" to the best of my knowlage) can the big N actually price in that $200 range without tying their own noose???

WizarDru @ Jan 20th 2006 8:14AM

There's a fairly famous cartoon showing Peter Pan leading the kids out the window telling them "I"m taking you to a fantasy Never Never Land which doesn't reflect events in the real world!" To which Wendy replies: "We're going to Wall Street?!?"

Stock prices fluctuate daily and are affected by a host of factors, not the least of which is 'irrational exubarance'. If Reggie says something good one day, stocks may go up. If Ninty releases strong sales figures, stocks may go up. The reverse can also be true. But, if Nintendo releases bad news but the future prognosis for profitability is good, stock can go up on BAD news, too.

You want to know why all these analysts release their appraisal of a market they don't necessarily understand that well? Because they're trying to influence the market, just like we see here. Remember: Nintendo is a games COMPANY...they are always focused on the games market, because that's all they do. MS and Sony are much larger companies that have lots of other revenue streams to draw upon. Ninty has to focus on their core market, because that's virtually all they do.

Shad Genki @ Jan 20th 2006 8:16AM

Obviously, Nintendo has a better chance at selling more units at a $200 price point than $300. But you don't really think they're going to compete against $400 systems at $200 do you? I am thinking the price will be $249. It's less than $300, but it's enough to be profitable.

brit @ Jan 20th 2006 8:23AM

Microsoft and Xbox are slowly pricing me out of the market - i'm not gonna pay $500-$700 just so that i can play the same games as last time, at more per game, then get a whole new HDTV so I can tell the slight difference. Whatever.
I'm more into the idea of Twilight Princess and all those retro classics on Nintendo. Although Project Gotham Racing does look great - it just such a massive outlay to a casual gamer. Nintendo have got the right idea. I hope they include a conventional controller too though.

brit @ Jan 20th 2006 8:30AM

oops, i meant microsoft and SONY are pricing me out slowly. There has to come a point when the discerning casual gamers say no to paying the increased price per game, especially when it's usually just an update of a last gen game. Step forward Nintendo - hopefully putting some fun back into gaming

heat @ Jan 20th 2006 8:47AM

"First off, let me say that I am extremely excited about Revolution, and it will probably be the first system I buy at launch, ever."

same here, but i could care less about the price

Alex K. @ Jan 20th 2006 9:29AM

i have always predicted $249.

Why?

Nintendo's target for a console launch has always been $199.

But I think inflation has eventually taken its toll. Look at the DS, it's over $100. Even for a new handheld for Nintendo, that's atypical for them.

Alex K. @ Jan 20th 2006 9:34AM

and even if Nintendo's system isn't that great, just by telling us that making gaming affordable and fun again is their goal, while we're hearing sony and MS saying how they want to control our living rooms with the multimedia features and out-HD each other, i'd take nintnedo any day, because microsoft and sony are just fighting for marketshare while totally disregarding what consumers want.

nintendo is the only smart one around here. By focusing on gameplay first, they are actually doing what will gain them marketshare in the long-run. Whereas MS and Sony's graphical battle will lead them down the road of high priced consoles that no one wants to buy. How the heck is sony/ms going to follow up with xbox 3 and ps4?? they can't just make the graphics better again! Both companies have no grasp on how to enhance gameplay in ways that don't involve copying Nintendo's ideas.

I'll bet you that PS4 and Xbox3 (if microsoft bothers) will feature controllers similar to the revolution in function (although probably with more buttons and in a more conventional shape).

Hunting_Phoenix @ Jan 20th 2006 9:56AM

"same here, but I could care less about the price"

Yes, I could care less too. The expression you're going for is "I *couldn't* care less." ;)

And I'd like to add, that is a dangerous attitude to have. You should get in contact with me, because I have some oceanfront property for sale in Wisconsin.

You should always care what something costs, at least in relation to what you're getting. People who just want things without thinking about what it's really worth drive Hummers. Don't be a Hummer driver! :P

Captain Obvious @ Jan 20th 2006 9:58AM

On Monday/Tuesday, the Japanese market took a huge tumble and they had to stop trading (!) because Livedoor.com apparently didn't disclose they were going to lose 1 million dollars. All tech stocks were affected in Japan as investors were in a frenzy selling them off. And the international markets here were affected (401k anyone?)

So if one company with a million dollar loss can cause all tech stocks to tumble in Japan and the entire exchange stops trading and it affects the world market, then the news above doesn't phase me at all. Plus they're probably just recovering from earlier in the week.

blah @ Jan 20th 2006 11:41AM

I would pay $250 for a Revo. Why not? You can't buy an Xbox 360 for $300 I don't care what ANYBODY says. You can't save games on it so whats the point of even playing them? A save cart costs about $40 bucks. Even if you buy the cheap Xbox you're still not going to get out of the door with out spending OVER $400 bucks. Also don't forget Revo games will probably be atleast $10 cheaper than 360 games.

And to say the Revo hardware isn't worth $300 is flat out BS. You act like MS spends exactly $300 on their over powered hardware and that their hardware is soooooooooooooooo much more advanced. Ohhhh it has 3 cpus big f*ing deal. That and maybe a little more ram is ALL it has over the Revo.

Let me tell you. They DON'T spend $300 on each console they build. It's probably closer to $700 or even $800. Don't forget MS is taking a HUGE hit on every console sold. Just because it costs $300 in the store doesn't mean they spent $300 building it. So why shouldn't the Revo cost $250+ to build? What is so unbelievable about that?

Also I'd pay extra $ for the Revo just for the satisfaction of knowing the fucking thing won't break in a week like our 360 did. (and the new one we got sent broke in less than a week.. not to mention the fact that we have a combined 6(3 belong to my new roommate) xbox's laying around 5 of which are broken and 1 that you have to reset 100 times before the game will finally play and it's not even a fucking year old, and don't even get me started on PS2's because we've purchased even more of those than xbox's)

theNotoriousBEN @ Jan 20th 2006 12:25PM

I totally agree with you, blah. I never understood why durability has never been focused on as a major concern for PS2 and Xbox owners. There have been scattered news reports about bad hardware and I've read a few complaints but nothing that has affected sales or pushed Sony or MS to make improvements. I myself am on my second Xbox and I play no more than a few hours a month at most.

Nintendo's products are built to last and that in itself makes them worth more. Why do you think Hondas are worth more than Hyundais? Sure the NES had issues... It took some blowing on the cartridge and positioning the game "just so" in the deck to get the game to play after a few years. Even so, my NES still works- 20 years later. Very impressive for Nintendo's first attempt. As for my Gamecube, that sh!t is indestructible! My daughter has used it as a stool and a drum, taken it by the handle and beat the cat with it, and used games as teething rings but I haven't had a single glitch.

I'd love to buy a 360 but there is no way in hell I'm going to pay $400 if I'm just going to have to replace it. No matter what the Revolution ends up costing, at least I'll feel comfortable knowing I'll only have to pay for it once!

Bryan @ Jan 20th 2006 1:37PM

I believe that part of the reason for the stock boost was that the analysts were hearing good things about the Revolution and all the buzz it was creating from within the gaming industry, but stock analysts can't really make a move based on "hearsay" that people like us talk about or read in the gaming magazines. I'm sure they've been wanting to move for some time, and just needed the words to echo out from the Regginator's mouth. That's kinda why this is all news that most of us have already heard in the past, but much of that information never came directly from Nintendo.

About the cost to manufacture vs. MSRP, Nintendo's track record has been that on EVERY system they make/made (with the exception of a few weeks when the GameCube first dropped to $99), Nintendo has never lost money on a sale of a system. We can expect that the Revolution would follow the same tradition. It's entirely possible, considering that the system also comes in a very compact package that physically restricts the size and power of the hardware you can stuff inside. And Nintendo has said since the beginning that the hardware specs wouldn't be competitive with the X360 or PS3, which also equates to a lower manufacture cost.

Regardless of whether you're for or against the Nintendo Revolution, you can't deny the fact that Nintendo has created some big waves across the industry. Of course, whether these waves lead to permanent shifts remains to be seen. They've made progress with their DS, so let's hope the trend continues.

Prof_Chaos @ Jan 20th 2006 1:52PM

Nintendo's products are definitely made to last. I still put regular use in on my N64 and my GC runs for about 10 hours a week and it was a launch model. Correct me if I'm wrong but MS apologists were saying that the reason all the 360's were breaking down was that they were the first iteration of the thing. If that's the case and people should know better than to buy it at release why sell it at all. Do some friggin' testing and make sure the thing works properly. Another thing about that is how did that fire hazard get approval by CSA and UL as safe and suitable for extensive home use. It gets so hot you could scald yourself on it and the brick is even worse. Don't these people understand that entertainment centres are not built for ventilation, especially with your DVD player, HD terminal, VCR, Receiver, etc.. This is a toy. Kids will play with it.

But I digress, Nintendo will most likely differentiate themselves from MS and Sony this gen. In fact I wonder why we keep comparing Ninty to either of them. They're obviously not targetting the same market. Rev will probably end up selling more units than either because it will be a cool, cheap second system with games and play styles that can't be had with anything else.

monsterzro @ Jan 20th 2006 2:24PM

console pricing is worse than upgrading your pc for the latest game. I would love to get all 3, but I have other responsibilities, so I would probably choose the Revolution since I have kids and I love Nintendo's library.

Heck, I'm waiting for the Xbox to drop to 50 bucks so can finally see what the big deal is about Halo.

It'll happen...look at my beloved Dreamcast, they're like 25 bucks now!

heat @ Jan 20th 2006 2:45PM

"Yes, I could care less too. The expression you're going for is "I *couldn't* care less." ;)"

see: http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ico1.htm

Matt @ Jan 20th 2006 10:23PM

I will buy a revolution no matter if it is the same price as ps3 and 360 because it will be worth it. Imagine playing mario kart revolution or super smash bros revolution online against others all over the world. I have all nintendos game systems, duplicates of most (over 100 regular NES systems and 10 top loaders) and they all work. I took my gamecube apart and painted it sky blue and you should see how well it is designed. I can see why it can be used as a drum. So revolution will provide years of entertainment. I will probably also purchase a PS3 after it's been out a year and gets some great games. I've really had lots of fun with my PS2 so I can't slight sony either.

skyrous @ Jan 21st 2006 1:29AM

I'm surprised more people don't complain about durability of game systems. I still have my gamecube bought 2 months after it came out, I thought about a ps2 at the time but i'm glad i didn't bother.

I don't know a single person who is using their original ps2's. Sony's massive hardware numbers are inflated because they make junk systems.

These things only have to last 5 years and we're on to the next generation. Why can't they be built to last that long?

revo4life @ Jan 22nd 2006 6:06AM

the reason they say under 300USD is cause they dont wont 2 put off tech geeks who will start 2 think that rev is cheap so its is under powered. I KNOW FROM how ALL THE HOME CONSOLEs nintendo priced that rev will be from $200 to $250.

Many of u think that rev is underpowered is wrong. Remeber too much power currrpts.

Lets look at N64.
if u look at it now its powerless compared to what we have today. i have tried 2 emulate an n64 on my PC by downloading emulators and roms(games LEGALLY but the game play is so slow on my PC even though its superfast. The REASON: N64 is not built like a pc it works differently It doesnt have MHZ its something totally different so Tech geeks cant say anything about specs they do not understand. The rev has new graphical technolygy as told by thier patents. The loading times on thier games are barely anything. The graphcal ablities of Gcube compare to Xbox yet cube is cheaper to make. Whats thier to complain about? You cannot SEE specs. End of story. No go play your video games