It costs MS more than $92 each...however, they said that is the number of consoles in the shipment, they didn't say that ALL of them were damaged. Perhaps only half of them or a third of them were actually damaged and the others were spared.
That may have been raw manufacturing cost. Since there are plenty of other costs associated with bringing a product to market, most notably warranty cost which we all know Microsoft is well aware of. Since they are only out the manufacturing, packaging, and shipping costs they probably have a pretty good case with the 2mil lose they are suing for. Also nice to see for once somebody isn't suing for ridiculous punitive damages since I'm sure MS could make a good case for the other loses of revenue they are not receiving by having 21,600 less consoles in consumers hands.
Maybe they finally took a hint from Nintendo and Apple and tried to start making a profit, since that would do well with stock owners, but forgot to tell people so they still think they are actually ripping off Microsoft buying hardware for cheaper than it costs.
just because the consoles _now_ cost $92, does not mean the original ones coat that much, and that is just replacement cost on the manufactured units. I thought that MS was now profitable, if only barely, on the units.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Did Microsoft just accidentally tell everyone that the units only cost them about $92 each?
Maybe that's the actual cost of the consoles O.o
Wait. Doh. That's what you were saying anyway...
I fail at comprehension.
$92.592592592 to be exact
That does seem kinda odd, I thought they were selling them at a loss?
If DHL doesn't cover the losses, the 360's price will probably jump over that nice 50% markup.
Microsoft's way of exploiting the weak
It costs MS more than $92 each...however, they said that is the number of consoles in the shipment, they didn't say that ALL of them were damaged. Perhaps only half of them or a third of them were actually damaged and the others were spared.
Nah. That was when they were built for the first year or so. Now they're making a profit I think
Either way the games and live are profitable.
That may have been raw manufacturing cost. Since there are plenty of other costs associated with bringing a product to market, most notably warranty cost which we all know Microsoft is well aware of. Since they are only out the manufacturing, packaging, and shipping costs they probably have a pretty good case with the 2mil lose they are suing for. Also nice to see for once somebody isn't suing for ridiculous punitive damages since I'm sure MS could make a good case for the other loses of revenue they are not receiving by having 21,600 less consoles in consumers hands.
kal326: The units likely cost much more than $92 to built. The GPU and CPU alone probably cost that, at least.
They were likely able to salvage most of the components. But that takes manpower, and they probably had to replace cases/etc.
@schmitty338
"...21,600 consoles were totally messed over..."
As for the "It seems" part, Engadget has been using that kind of stuff to fluff up their articles for a long time. There ya go: 21,600 dead 360s.
Maybe they finally took a hint from Nintendo and Apple and tried to start making a profit, since that would do well with stock owners, but forgot to tell people so they still think they are actually ripping off Microsoft buying hardware for cheaper than it costs.
Microsoft, you are naughty!
just because the consoles _now_ cost $92, does not mean the original ones coat that much, and that is just replacement cost on the manufactured units. I thought that MS was now profitable, if only barely, on the units.