@JaxonH actually you answered it yourself. There will be less than willing to pay for ot and therefore market price or value went down. So in the end it all boils down to square strategy. Are they willing to charge full price at less sonthey can sell less or are they willing to match the market price. Its their pricing strategy and not what you or i thinks. So we circle back to my general post above where square can price their product. Just what is their pricing strategy. Further to that i stand by that MS paid the lost sale. The lost sale that square could have sold at full price at launch. So now the price would have gone down.
@JaxonH with all due respect, i believed, it should be discounted if you studied finance. In any case, first thing first and general principle, the seller can decide on any pricing point.
Now back to your argument though, you anchor your belief that xbox has paid its due. But if i follow your logic and basic finance, the reason it should be discounted is that ps4 also paid its due for various reasons:
1. Microsoft paid it for them. Think about it, if they both release at the same time in both consoles, then they will have priced initially at full at launch and then drop at the same time. But microsoft paid for it not to be released on the same time. So the lost revenue and lost interest will have been compensated by MS. And therefore, at this same time, they should be priced lower already. In other words, MS is the one who paid in behalf of all ps4 owners.
2. There is time value of money. While time value is more applicable for interest, we can use this by analogy that the time wait has a cost that square enix has to pay for not releasing earlier.
3. Reagrdless of your logic and how beautiful it is, its a fact that its a year old game and therefore its value may have depreciated already.
In any case, you may not agree but its the reason economist and finance analyst dont always agree.
Comments 2
Re: Rumour: Lara Croft's Rise of the Tomb Raider Rushes PS4 on 11th October
@JaxonH actually you answered it yourself. There will be less than willing to pay for ot and therefore market price or value went down. So in the end it all boils down to square strategy. Are they willing to charge full price at less sonthey can sell less or are they willing to match the market price. Its their pricing strategy and not what you or i thinks. So we circle back to my general post above where square can price their product. Just what is their pricing strategy. Further to that i stand by that MS paid the lost sale. The lost sale that square could have sold at full price at launch. So now the price would have gone down.
Re: Rumour: Lara Croft's Rise of the Tomb Raider Rushes PS4 on 11th October
@JaxonH with all due respect, i believed, it should be discounted if you studied finance. In any case, first thing first and general principle, the seller can decide on any pricing point.
Now back to your argument though, you anchor your belief that xbox has paid its due. But if i follow your logic and basic finance, the reason it should be discounted is that ps4 also paid its due for various reasons:
1. Microsoft paid it for them. Think about it, if they both release at the same time in both consoles, then they will have priced initially at full at launch and then drop at the same time. But microsoft paid for it not to be released on the same time. So the lost revenue and lost interest will have been compensated by MS. And therefore, at this same time, they should be priced lower already. In other words, MS is the one who paid in behalf of all ps4 owners.
2. There is time value of money. While time value is more applicable for interest, we can use this by analogy that the time wait has a cost that square enix has to pay for not releasing earlier.
3. Reagrdless of your logic and how beautiful it is, its a fact that its a year old game and therefore its value may have depreciated already.
In any case, you may not agree but its the reason economist and finance analyst dont always agree.