First Ring Daily 1201: App and Weekend Fears

RSS | SoundCloud | YouTube | iTunes | Google Play

Tagged with

• First Ring Daily

Share post

Conversation 4 comments

• bkkcanuck

  11 February, 2022 - 10:39 am

  <p>Paul Thurott, Selling a device at a loss and locking it in and subsidizing it… is in fact very anti-competitive. This makes it very difficult and expensive to enter the console market by potential other competitors such as ASUS or other. They cannot compete on console price, and they cannot compete by locking in customers because they have little to now catalogue. It effectively limits the console markets to companies with very deep pockets and chases out all sorts of other competitors. </p>

  Log in to Reply

• Paul Thurrott

  Premium Member

  11 February, 2022 - 12:59 pm

  <p>It’s been the business model for all videogame consoles since the Nintendo Entertainment System in the mid-1980s. </p>

  Log in to Reply

• bkkcanuck

  11 February, 2022 - 2:40 pm

  <p>So what, it does not mean it is not anti-competitive. Apple has been using the same console model for iPhones since they were first introduced (back even before you could develop 3rd party apps). If the legislators are going to make changes to the law to change the console model… it should be changed for all console markets (subsidized/un-subsidized; mobile phones/sony playstation/microsoft x-box). There is actually already laws that cover similar situations (FTC ‘tied selling of two products’)</p>

  Log in to Reply

• prebengh

  13 February, 2022 - 4:01 pm

  <p>If laws are changed to require Apple and Google to open their stores I think the same must apply to Microsoft and Sony for their game stores.</p><p>I know that they both sell their consoles at a loss or break even, but that is the way they have chosen to do business.</p><p>They probably know that if they should sell their consoles at a price where they actually make money, they would probably be so expensive that their numbers would drop significantly.</p>

  Log in to Reply