NES/SNES Classic Editions

[WarriorOfGandhi]

I think catching a home run baseball is an appropriate metaphor. You're perfectly within your rights to get it autographed, sell it on eBay, and maybe get enough money for a mortgage payment. But if you give it to a kid sitting next to you, you're making them (and yourself too in the long run) much happier for it.

 

[Taro Tsujimoto]

Reports are starting to come out that those who preordered more than one unit from Amazon are having their orders reduced to one unit. Entirely possible we could see another round of preorders from them now that they have additional stock.

 

[void]

I had ordered one from amazon.co.uk when they first announced it. I wonder if they're actually going to honor it.

 

[Taro Tsujimoto]

BACK UP AT WALMART GO GO GO: https://www.walmart.com/ip/Super-NES-Classic-Edition-Universal/741659089

(Perhaps they did the same as Amazon and reduced all preorders to one unit?)

EDIT:

 

[Hunter Gathers]

Got a Walmart one so I can cancel my ThinkGeek one.

 

[Commander Clueless]

Uh oh here we go again.

Are we not all sitting around talking about it? Was "SNES Classic" not the top trend on Twitter at one point yesterday? Is it not all over the news that it's sold out already? Are the few people who got one not gloating about it? Are people going crazy wanting one?

There is so much hype about it. That's the reason. That's huge in the sales world. Viral marketing is the best. It gets people talking about your company and your product with 0 overhead and you get the added bonus of selling all your stock of an item. It's a dream.

But seriously, I don't feel like getting into this argument again. It's good business to generate hype wont say anything more about it because I have discussed it here to hell and back.

First of all, you brought it up.

Second, I'm not arguing against anything you just said. If you read what I said again, you'll probably notice I'm talking about profit and not marketing.

All the marketing in the world earns Nintendo zero profit if they don't have the units to sell to meet that demand.

Artificial scarcity might be profitable in the long run off of the hype train, but if they go the same route as the NES Classic, that hype train comes to a screeching halt when the product is no longer manufactured. All they have left is a pile of hype that festers into negativity.

Besides, one could argue the hype was already off the charts.


I've seen the theory that it redirects people to their Switch virtual console which I could maaaybe see...except the problem there is a) that's still a different market than a relatively cheap novelty item and b) they can't keep those things in stock either.Besides, one could argue for such nostalgia-based products, the hype was already off the charts.



It seems far more likely to me that they simply don't have the manufacturing capacity to meet demand....but hey, that's just speculation.

 

[aleshemsky83]

Is the switch VC up yet?

 

[syz]

Is the switch VC up yet?

They haven't even announced plans for a Switch VC. They'll have classic games available through their subscription service but they've barely said anything about that, either (other than it'll only be NES games at launch, and probably not very many of them.)

 

[KingBran]

Sorry, got to agree with Osprey on that one. It's a pretty jackass move, and kudos to HG for not doing that.

Yup, definitely did the right thing.

Still don't see a definition of "the right thing" here.

I would call it the dumber thing that's for sure. If people are willing to pay 500% of its value why not make money on that? Sounds dumb not to do it. Besides, people are getting their orders reduced to 1 unit anyways.

I would say it's the "nice thing", but "right thing"? Completely subjective and lacks lots of context. Glad they feel better about themselves and posting it on the internet like some hero lol. I will take $500 cash over hero on a small hockey internet forum any day.

 

[KingBran]

First of all, you brought it up.

Second, I'm not arguing against anything you just said. If you read what I said again, you'll probably notice I'm talking about profit and not marketing.

All the marketing in the world earns Nintendo zero profit if they don't have the units to sell to meet that demand.

Artificial scarcity might be profitable in the long run off of the hype train, but if they go the same route as the NES Classic, that hype train comes to a screeching halt when the product is no longer manufactured. All they have left is a pile of hype that festers into negativity.

Besides, one could argue the hype was already off the charts.


I've seen the theory that it redirects people to their Switch virtual console which I could maaaybe see...except the problem there is a) that's still a different market than a relatively cheap novelty item and b) they can't keep those things in stock either.Besides, one could argue for such nostalgia-based products, the hype was already off the charts.



It seems far more likely to me that they simply don't have the manufacturing capacity to meet demand....but hey, that's just speculation.

And taking advantage of that maybe? They are Nintendo. They can print money. Whether they don't want to invest it in manufacturing or not, they get their hype, they get people talking and they get their money. It's still a strategy. The Wii sold over 100 million units. Sorry I don't buy the manufacturing capacity excuse in this case.

 

[Commander Clueless]

And taking advantage of that maybe? They are Nintendo. They can print money. Whether they don't want to invest it in manufacturing or not, they get their hype, they get people talking and they get their money. It's still a strategy. The Wii sold over 100 million units. Sorry I don't buy the manufacturing capacity excuse in this case.

See the problem I have with the "it's a strategy" approach is they aren't taking advantage as you said. I agree they've got the hype, why continue to **** off your fanbase?

For a company that can print money, it'd be pretty bizarre for them to...not to, wouldn't it? Right now, they have all the hype in the world like you said. They have people pleading with them to give them money. Why not take it?


Either they are...well, stupid (I doubt it), incompetent (doubtful, but possible), not interested in making more money (I highly doubt that), or they simply can't keep up with demand.

 

[syz]

Supply constraints are by far the most logical explanation for a shortage of any limited time piece of hardware. Few companies would be able to produce enough of these things to hit demand over the course of X months worth of production. They've probably set some sort of guaranteed profit benchmark off of this thing that they'll hit and move on. Again, the only reason for something like this to be limited in the first place is because they don't want to end up in a situation where they have extras. They looked at some graphs and went with the number that intersected highest between the lines marked "production cost" and "(projected) guaranteed sales." This isn't to say that they did a good job with those projections, but that's also a Nintendo trademark.

Tangentially, anybody who defends scalping and exploitation is precisely as much of an ******* as the people around them thinks they are.

 

[Beau Knows]

See the problem I have with the "it's a strategy" approach is they aren't taking advantage as you said. I agree they've got the hype, why continue to **** off your fanbase?

For a company that can print money, it'd be pretty bizarre for them to...not to, wouldn't it? Right now, they have all the hype in the world like you said. They have people pleading with them to give them money. Why not take it?


Either they are...well, stupid (I doubt it), incompetent (doubtful, but possible), not interested in making more money (I highly doubt that), or they simply can't keep up with demand.

The theory I heard is that they want people to buy the Switch and use the virtual console (although this isn't even out yet) to get their nostalgia.

That way they could get some of these people who have no interest in modern games and just want to play a few old games once in a while to their new system. Maybe they can sell some of these people Switch games, online service, etc. If people buy the SNES classic that will likely be good enough for 90% of the customers, they won't need to go the virtual console to get more games and won't buy any more Nintendo products.

So using the SNES classic to make a quick buck and get people talking about Nintendo without selling so many that you potentially satisfy all your potential consumers might make sense if you can then turn around and point them towards the Switch and it's virtual console.

Whether or not that is a sound strategy, I don't know. It's a lot easier for people to justify dropping $100 on some nostalgia then $400 for a Switch - without any SNES games included.

 

[KingBran]

See the problem I have with the "it's a strategy" approach is they aren't taking advantage as you said. I agree they've got the hype, why continue to **** off your fanbase?

For a company that can print money, it'd be pretty bizarre for them to...not to, wouldn't it? Right now, they have all the hype in the world like you said. They have people pleading with them to give them money. Why not take it?


Either they are...well, stupid (I doubt it), incompetent (doubtful, but possible), not interested in making more money (I highly doubt that), or they simply can't keep up with demand.

I really Really REALLY don't want to get into this again... Would be like the third time on just this forum I have discussed it with someone. I know you aren't being brash about it and I am thankful for that.

I will just say it doesn't PO your fanbase as much as it makes the people who get one more excited about it. Besides, someone who doesn't get an SNES classic lets say they release Starfox 2 on the Switch virtual console someday, suddenly its amazing and relevant again to get that game and they will sell lots of SF2 because of all the hype created.

I disagree with you saying the only options are that they are stupid, incompetent or not interested in making money. Hype is often worth so much more than the product the hype is about because people will constantly be talking about your company and its products much like we are now.

If everyone got an SNES Classic, nobody would care so much about it, this thread would probably have 10 less pages about it, there would a ton less tweets about it, a ton less of a big deal about it all over the world. That means less people talking about you and your company which means less future talk of anything even if its super amazing and exciting, people forget about you if you don't have some hype here and there.

Notice how nobody cares about the Wii U? There is no hype for it. There was no exclusive Zelda game, there was no groundbreaking graphics, no crazy fun new way to play your games... It was an HD Wii. No hype, less sales, nobody cares. SNES Classic comes, tons of hype, No VC for Switch yet so to the people who don't emulate or even know what that is the only way to play classic games are these classic re-creations. THEY WANT ONE SO BADLY, but not everyone gets one. So they keep up in the news and checking Nintendos website then blamo! The switch will get a VC and all these classic games will be coming and those people go buy a swith for them or their kids.

When before, they may never have even thought about it because nobody was talking about it.

We are gamers, we are in the thick of it. The common person is not. That's where the majority of sales are made for things like this. Especially Nintendo. Because even non-gamers grew up playing Nintendo.

Its a business strategy whether you or anyone else likes it or not. People can complain that it doesn't make sense or Nintendo comes off as stupid and making less money because they cannot meet demand but it's the complete opposite. But it only works if you get tons of hype. Something Nintendo is great at doing.

 

[KingBran]

Supply constraints are by far the most logical explanation for a shortage of any limited time piece of hardware. Few companies would be able to produce enough of these things to hit demand over the course of X months worth of production. They've probably set some sort of guaranteed profit benchmark off of this thing that they'll hit and move on. Again, the only reason for something like this to be limited in the first place is because they don't want to end up in a situation where they have extras. They looked at some graphs and went with the number that intersected highest between the lines marked "production cost" and "(projected) guaranteed sales." This isn't to say that they did a good job with those projections, but that's also a Nintendo trademark.

Tangentially, anybody who defends scalping and exploitation is precisely as much of an ******* as the people around them thinks they are.

Talking about hype being a business strategy is not defending scalping. Please try again.

The theory I heard is that they want people to buy the Switch and use the virtual console (although this isn't even out yet) to get their nostalgia.

That way they could get some of these people who have no interest in modern games and just want to play a few old games once in a while to their new system. Maybe they can sell some of these people Switch games, online service, etc. If people buy the SNES classic that will likely be good enough for 90% of the customers, they won't need to go the virtual console to get more games and won't buy any more Nintendo products.

So using the SNES classic to make a quick buck and get people talking about Nintendo without selling so many that you potentially satisfy all your potential consumers might make sense if you can then turn around and point them towards the Switch and it's virtual console.

Whether or not that is a sound strategy, I don't know. It's a lot easier for people to justify dropping $100 on some nostalgia then $400 for a Switch - without any SNES games included.

Nintendo does this. All. The. Time. And people keep saying "its a manufacturing problem" All. They. Time.

Round and round we go, again and again. People will keep saying its a manufacturing problem when Nintendo can produce over 100 million Wii's.

They are mad they didn't get their NES/SNES classic and they think it hurts them more if they didn't have short supply of things.

It's basic business. Supply / demand. If you have too much supply, there will be little demand. For instance, the Wii U. They made A TON of those things because the Wii sold so well expecting the Wii U to do the same without really making any hype for it. It failed hard. Enter the Swith with no VC. Then come out with a couple nostalgic hard to get VC machines.... Limit them, create TONS of demand. People get all sadface and angry when they cant get one. Then announce the VC for the Switch and sell lots more Switches to the common person.

Its smart. It's all about hype. Hype = money.

Okay, I am officially done explaining how hype is sometimes so much more valuable then product. In this case, that is exactly what is happening. If you chose to ignore that because you are mad, that's not my fault.

 

[Commander Clueless]

Supply constraints are by far the most logical explanation for a shortage of any limited time piece of hardware. Few companies would be able to produce enough of these things to hit demand over the course of X months worth of production. They've probably set some sort of guaranteed profit benchmark off of this thing that they'll hit and move on. Again, the only reason for something like this to be limited in the first place is because they don't want to end up in a situation where they have extras. They looked at some graphs and went with the number that intersected highest between the lines marked "production cost" and "(projected) guaranteed sales." This isn't to say that they did a good job with those projections, but that's also a Nintendo trademark.

Very true, although I think that then begs a few questions:

1) Did they not adjust projections after the NES Classic debacle

and

2) Considering the massive demand for these products, why are they still a limited run? I mean, I get it as a little side project, but at this point they stand to make a big buck on them. Maybe they will bring them back in the future.

The theory I heard is that they want people to buy the Switch and use the virtual console (although this isn't even out yet) to get their nostalgia.

That way they could get some of these people who have no interest in modern games and just want to play a few old games once in a while to their new system. Maybe they can sell some of these people Switch games, online service, etc. If people buy the SNES classic that will likely be good enough for 90% of the customers, they won't need to go the virtual console to get more games and won't buy any more Nintendo products.

So using the SNES classic to make a quick buck and get people talking about Nintendo without selling so many that you potentially satisfy all your potential consumers might make sense if you can then turn around and point them towards the Switch and it's virtual console.

Whether or not that is a sound strategy, I don't know. It's a lot easier for people to justify dropping $100 on some nostalgia then $400 for a Switch - without any SNES games included.

I've heard that theory as well, and it makes a little sense I suppose. They may get a few more Switch sales out of it, although they probably encouraged just as much piracy to be honest.

I agree entirely, though - the people that would drop $100 on a novelty item for Christmas or something vs a $400 console (plus subscription fees for the virtual console, no?) are different markets.

 

[Beau Knows]

I've heard that theory as well, and it makes a little sense I suppose. They may get a few more Switch sales out of it, although they probably encouraged just as much piracy to be honest.

I agree entirely, though - the people that would drop $100 on a novelty item for Christmas or something vs a $400 console (plus subscription fees for the virtual console, no?) are different markets.

Agreed. The SNES Classic seems aimed at those who aren't into emulation, and those who just feel like they have to buy everything Nintendo makes.

They can make good money off the 2nd group with this, those people will still buy the Switch and Nintendo pockets some extra coin here.

But the first group, to me doesn't seem likely to spend $400 just to be able to buy SNES games or a subscription or whatever Nintendo offers. I'm not sure how Nintendo could move those people to the Switch. The online-enabled classic games idea was neat, maybe if they offered a massive library of those games from NES to Gamecube that would justify the cost for some. Personally I would never pay that much to play old games, it would need to be more of a bonus feature to the console.

 

[Commander Clueless]

I really Really REALLY don't want to get into this again... Would be like the third time on just this forum I have discussed it with someone. I know you aren't being brash about it and I am thankful for that.

Well it is a forum, so feel free to stop responding at any time. It's supposed to be fun, not annoying.


The problem isn't about hype and its value. The problem is I don't see how Nintendo is profiting from that hype. How does hype = money if you don't have the product to sell?

Supply and demand is a concept for price determination. Nintendo has not taken advantage of this, as they haven't increased their prices as demand has increased well beyond supply. Scalpers have definitely taken advantage of it. If they introduce a second run of these at a higher price point, then yeah.


You used the Wii as an example of your point multiple times, but I think it's actually the opposite.

The Wii had plenty of stock issues at launch. The demand was far above initial projection so they built more over time. Same as what they are doing with the Switch which can't seem to stay in stock either (at least in Canada). In contrast, this is a limited production run. In all likelihood, they can't keep up with demand in a short span as syz said.



The Wii U "failed hard" for many reasons and you mentioned many of them. Having too many of them was not a cause, it was an effect.


And finally, as I've said before in this thread, the idea of generating more interest in the Switch virtual console is a possibility, but it seems misguided at best. They are two very different price points and different markets. Sure, they may gain some more interest in the virtual console, but they also lose a lot of potential buyers of just the classic console (not to mention losing sales from those that want both).

How many people do you think want it just to have the nostalgic little guy sitting on their TV stand? I'm guessing quite a few.



You mentioned basic business, but to me basic business would be making a product people want and then selling them that product. Nintendo appears to disagree with this notion.

EDIT: I actually left out one potential reason that I've heard and does make sense: Nintendo is trying to be a "collector's item" company. If so, fine I guess, but they really are leaving money on the table to do it.

 

[Mach85]

Still don't see a definition of "the right thing" here.

I would call it the dumber thing that's for sure. If people are willing to pay 500% of its value why not make money on that? Sounds dumb not to do it. Besides, people are getting their orders reduced to 1 unit anyways.

I would say it's the "nice thing", but "right thing"? Completely subjective and lacks lots of context. Glad they feel better about themselves and posting it on the internet like some hero lol. I will take $500 cash over hero on a small hockey internet forum any day.

I don't know if you're trolling or just like trying to be edgy, but it's not about being a hero on a hockey forum, it's about having sympathy. We realize what it would be like if we weren't able to get our hands on a unit (and we really want one) so being able to give someone else that opportunity without making them have to meet a minimum level of disposable income to be able to do so first is something that makes sense, since we would want someone to do the same for us if we were in the same position. It's called being a mature and considerate adult.

 

[KingBran]

EDIT: I actually left out one potential reason that I've heard and does make sense: Nintendo is trying to be a "collector's item" company. If so, fine I guess, but they really are leaving money on the table to do it.

Yeah but... they're not leaving any money on the table, they are making a lot more than they would if everyone who wanted an NES/SNES Classic got one and there was no hype about Nintendo products.

Especially considering they have another vessel that they can use the sell those games in the future (switch) to sell more to the casual person. I can see the headlines now... "Miss out on NES/SNES Classic? All games available on Switch now!"

 

[Mach85]

Yeah but... they're not leaving any money on the table, they are making a lot more than they would if everyone who wanted an NES/SNES Classic got one and there was no hype about Nintendo products.

Especially considering they have another vessel that they can use the sell those games in the future (switch) to sell more to the casual person. I can see the headlines now... "Miss out on NES/SNES Classic? All games available on Switch now!"

How do you figure? I think the premise is flawed, that there would be no hype. People were interested in the SNES Classic the second it was announced. I don't think there's any reason to believe this scarcity caused people to go out and get units who wouldn't have already gotten them. And it seems more logical that there are more people who want units who can't get them, meaning that's causing them to leave money on the table. I don't see how Nintendo only producing a certain amount of units so obviously equates to many, many people suddenly deciding they HAVE to have a system from years ago.

 

[KingBran]

How do you figure? I think the premise is flawed, that there would be no hype. People were interested in the SNES Classic the second it was announced. I don't think there's any reason to believe this scarcity caused people to go out and get units who wouldn't have already gotten them. And it seems more logical that there are more people who want units who can't get them, meaning that's causing them to leave money on the table. I don't see how Nintendo only producing a certain amount of units so obviously equates to many, many people suddenly deciding they HAVE to have a system from years ago.

How do I figure?

I've already explained it a few times this thread.

Get a $80 product hyped up. hype hype hype! It sells out everywhere. MORE HYPE!!! People upset / sad they didn't get one. Then say... hey, buy this $350 machine over here and you can play all those games plus many more!

That's how. It's a limited $80 piece of plastic. I am pretty sure Nintendo will do just fine and the hype is worth more than selling a few thousand more of those than getting people to buy the Switch.

 

[Commander Clueless]

Yeah but... they're not leaving any money on the table, they are making a lot more than they would if everyone who wanted an NES/SNES Classic got one and there was no hype about Nintendo products.

Especially considering they have another vessel that they can use the sell those games in the future (switch) to sell more to the casual person. I can see the headlines now... "Miss out on NES/SNES Classic? All games available on Switch now!"

In the short term, they are absolutely leaving money on the table.

In the long term, I'm still not sure it's a great idea.

My major trip ups on the idea are:

a) The demand for the Switch was already sky high, and apparently above manufacturing tolerance

b) The Switch is not a "casual" console in the same vein as the classic editions. It costs 4 times as much. It's a different market. Spending $100 on a fun little gimmick is not even close to the same thing as wanting to play retro games so bad they go out and buy a $400 console. I don't think the crossover is as significant as you seem to, but I suppose that's just opinion.

c) For all the extra Switch sales and subscriptions that may be generated from limiting classic stock, you also have to account for lost revenue from the people who would buy both - a large market of hardcore Nintendo fans.


and, less significant but still important:

d) Upsetting your fanbase. You have made fun of a few pissed off people in here, but you have to think that anger is not limited to this forum.


If Nintendo is smart, IMO, they will make more of these in the future. If they do that, I can see the point (although I'd consider it annoying and a wee bit dishonest...or at least I would if I was going to buy one ).

 

[Engebretson]

Nintendo of America President urges consumers not to pay over retail price for SNES Classic

Reggie Fils-Aime, the president of Nintendo of America, said the company did not manipulate the scarcity of the NES Classic last year. Also, problems “outside our control,†and not limited stock, were behind the SNES Classic’s disastrous pre-order debut at many retailers last month.

Fils-Aime, in an interview with the Financial Times, also said that supply of the throwback console, which launches Sept. 29, will be consistent enough that gamers shouldn’t pay more than its $79.99 list price if they’re buying through an auction site.

“I would strongly urge you not to over-bid on an SNES Classic on any of the auction sites,†he told the Financial Times, adding that Nintendo had “dramatically increased†production of the SNES Classic.

 

[SolidSnakeUS]

Don't worry everyone, he's full of ****. He's usually full of ****.