Topic: Xbox just raised prices. Are Nintendo next?

I think Sony will before Nintendo.
While the situation is adapting, we're slightly over an exact month until Switch 2 launches. The launch needs to be a hit, and I think Nintendo will keep Switch 2 at $450 in the USA and the current prices in other countries instead of jacking it up right at launch.
Switch 2 could see a price hike in most or all regions before November though.

@GrailUK Most Americans don't really like the sitting president, and a good chunk who voted for him are starting to realize that they made a large mistake by doing so. There is a cult around him, which some of my family members are sadly apart of. They believe he can somehow do no wrong.. but that's besides the point here.

I think they already did. I'm not exactly a financial expert, but my guess is they're selling the console at a loss due to tariffs (and potentially without tariffs honestly it would likely still be sold at a loss) and they're gonna try to recoup that lost money through higher accessory and game prices. Basically, a more extreme version of how the console business already operates.

Welcome to America the land of the free and brave...oh wait where did that go.

To me it seems like Nintendo wanted to raise prices for a while and chose this as the best opportunity, because the inevitable backlash is being counterbalanced by the excitement over a new console. By tying the hike to a generation change they also get to argue that you're getting more for more money. What Microsoft just did is a much tougher sell, simply raising prices of existing products.

I'm a bit mad with Nintendo about it though, because it seems they raise prices simply because they feel they can. This last generation must have been insanely profitable, there was no need to rake in even more money.

Nintendo is a Business to make money for itself and shareholders. Did you ever think they were consumer friendly other then taking our money? First party games will always scalp buyers everyone knows this by now and if people don't then they shouldn't buy those games then. Tariffs is the reason why prices go up and that raises the production costs. If they raise prices to fast and to soon buyers will just wait. Doing so for small studios will basically be the nail in their coffins. Everyone needs to factor inflation is also to consider besides just price hikes. Remember the economy isn't isolated what happens other side of the world will come back to bite on the other side. We are interdependent whether anyone agrees or not. Market forces are Global and not island isolated. Take Oil/Gas that is Global but we can't live without it and so we have to pay the piper to get it. People need to get out of their "echo* chambes.

I'll just isolate this part: There's more to it than that. If you raise prices by too much you lose goodwill and potentially loyal customers. I am not naive, of course I am aware that Nintendo are in the business of making money. But there's a spectrum within which they can decide where to land, price-wise. Going from 60€ (Mario Kart 8 Deluxe) to 90€ (Mario Kart World) is not a must, it's a choice. With risks.

Nintendo is by far the most anti consumer game company out there & have been for over a decade; of course they will

Same reverse here. 90€ (Mario Kart World) most EU retailers instead went with 80€ (Mario Kart World).

@nomither6
“Anti consumer” is a word that the internet has adopted, overused, and killed. Like many others.

It used to mean that a company was intentionally deceptive, had awful customer service, made faulty products with no recourse available.

Now it just means “they raised their prices.”

…like every other company.

Maybe Nintendo, and Microsoft, are expecting reduced unit sales anyway, so figure they might as well raise prices to make the best of quieter sales period.

@NeonPizza I think the issue with any president is... fundamentally, the pool of candidates for president is more than 150 million people. It's a very hard job but one would still think there are some extremely skilled candidates out of that pool. So standards are and should be high. The expectation should be at very least not causing a lot of problems, so negative things are not surprisingly more of a focus than the arguably expected positive things.

Really, a lot of that is true with any job. If a babysitter does a great job with 30 kids but accidentally seriously injures 2, the focus will not be on the positive aspects. If that babysitter was voted as the best possible babysitter candidate out of millions the standards would be even higher. I would argue it's pretty bizarre tribalism to have anything except insanely high standards for that best possible babysitter candidate and that any major negatives at all should not be overlooked regardless of whether you initially chose that person or not. Granted, humans are humans, so no one is perfect, but people good at their job can successfully have only small negatives rather than big ones.

That said... general politics really has nothing to do with these price discussions. Tariffs relate to both the price and current politics, but there is no real reason in these threads to go beyond tariffs good/bad or what the effects of tariffs are.

I broadly agree with this sentiment but right wing American politics has increasingly become actually that bad, even when I try to look at things in fairly center ways, especially since things I would even maybe half agree with are being done in stupid ways that are clearly not working. (and to be fair, the other team is also bad a decent chunk of the time, I ain't defending them) I would be much happier if this was not the case, I would be much happier if I thought the (admittedly still cringe and annoying, I won't deny that) more obsessed anti-Trump people were far more wrong.

I've borderline never heard discussion by them about improving LEGAL immigration in my life, and that includes the years I was republican, and it always bothers me to no end.

Also considering how immediately unpopular it is, this tariff issue is only technically a Republican issue, in that they're scared to say anything or look ununited, any other Republican in charge would've known not to do this. It's only politics because Trump of all Republicans got elected.

anyway this is the last time I talk about politics this bluntly on the internet ever again byyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyye

@rallydefault whats your point? to shame me and praise nintendo ?

It depends entirely on what tariffs on Vietnam looks like after the 90 day pause is over. If the tariff rate goes back up to 45%, then there will absolutely be a Switch 2 price increase.

Recently, Trump announced that he would lower the 145% China tariffs, which makes me somewhat optimistic that he will also lower tariffs on other countries post-90 day pause. So as an example, Vietnam would get tariffed by 15-20% instead of 45%, which is a tariff rate that I could see Nintendo eating without raising prices.

@westman98
This is good insight.

I heard Vietnam tariffs had been lowered from 46% to 32% before the 90 day 10% rate was enacted, but I'm not sure whether that's actually the case. So much misinformation out there.

But ya, even if we reach a deal with China the rate will still be 50% minimum. In which case Sony will have to raise prices like MS and even then, they'd be eating $100 at minimum. And there's always the chance no deal is reached or a deal is reached but rates are higher than 50%. Nintendo is going to benefit greatly. Even if they have to raise prices to $499.99 the PS5/XSX could be $600-700 next year. At least $599.99.

@kkslider5552000
This is my frustration. One side has no plan for reforming illegal immigration while the other has a terrible plan. Seems to be the case for just about everything. One side has a terrible plan while the other has none, or both have no plan or both have a terrible plan lol.

Tariffs though are such a complex topic that demands nuance and immense levels of research, and even then there's no concensus among economists. So how can I, some random nobody, construct a well informed opinion on the matter? Won't stop me from trying though 😉 In general I think trade has been rather one sided against the US and tariffs are a tool that can and should be used to rebalance the deficit. However. There's a right way and a wrong way to go about it. And this isn't the right way. If I were in charge, I'd have implemented a 5% tariff increase across the board, with another 5% increase set to take effect Jan. 1st each year for the next 4 years until either the cap is hit to rebalance trade with that country, or a maximum of 25% is reached, whichever comes first. That way companies have enough time to react, and it's not so aggressive it angers everyone and incentivizes retaliation.

Furthermore, we will see whether the president does the right thing with regard to giving that money back to the people. If tariff revenue is used to issue checks to all citizens, I'll have a much higher opinion of how they are being handled (though I still disagree in terms of strategy- what I mentioned previously). If checks are not issues to citizens I will have a much lower opinion on how it's being handled. I suppose paying off debt would also be acceptable but given we are being affected by higher prices, I think at least 50% should be refunded to citizens, and maybe the other 50% goes toward paying down debt. I feel that's reasonable. Enough tariff revenue has already been generated to issue $50 checks to 350 million citizens. By the end of the year it could be $500-2000 (since higher rates go into effect July). If we got half that would be $250-1,000, more than offsetting any increased costs of video game consoles, accessories and games.

To better understand changes in prices and quantity demanded, I'll share the following from Investopedia:

What Is Quantity Demanded?
Quantity demanded is a term used in economics to describe the total amount of a good or service that consumers demand over a given interval of time. It depends on the price of a good or service in a marketplace regardless of whether that market is in equilibrium. The relationship between the quantity demanded and the price is known as the demand curve or simply the demand. The degree to which the quantity demanded changes with respect to price is referred to as the elasticity of demand.

What Is a Demand Schedule?
In economics, a demand schedule is a table that shows the quantity demanded of a good or service at different price levels. A demand schedule can be graphed as a continuous demand curve on a chart where the Y-axis represents price and the X-axis represents quantity. In the following Demand Schedule I took the liberty of calculating the revenue for each price point and highlighting the ideal price which maximizes revenue.

How Do Companies Select Ideal Price?
This isn't Investopedia, this is my explanation. It's Price multiplied by the Quantity Demanded at that price. So in the Demand Schedule, multiply the 2 numbers together to calculate Total Revenue. Here is an example of a Demand Curve and it's Revenue Curve. The Maximum Revenue is the highest point on the curve. Mathematically this would be found by taking the derivative of the Revenue function, setting it equal to zero, and solving.

@nomither6
Shame you.

Why would I praise Nintendo?