IncGamers: Michael Pachter has made a prediction regarding the retail model of Microsoft’s next console, which most of us are calling the Xbox 720 until we know any better.
Pachter, gaming analyst at Wedbush Securities, believes that Microsoft will adopt a pricing model similar to that of a smartphone – with a low up front cost and a rolling subscription.
0°
0°
10°
0°
Ad 
20°
Unless of course your Pachter. Then you make the comment and expect people to think you're a genius.
Think about it this way:
1. MS would need to partner with a cable company, and therefore share any profits of the subscription service.
2. $99 would never cover the cost of the console itself, meaning MS would be taking a MASSIVE loss. And would have to rely on consumers continuing to pay their contract.
3. This would mean the minimum contract term would have to be 2 years, and for the first year or two, MS' financials would look terrible.
On the other hand, they could charge $399 at launch, and sell to the core gamers for a year or two. Then down the line offer this subscription system, which would then work.
There's also a big issue with this idea as a whole, and that is that the Xbox 720, will use an immense amount of power compared to a cable box. It will also have a PSU and fans to keep it cool, because it is a game machine, and machines like this are not terribly reliable, at least not as reliable as a simple cable box. Unless they can figure out a way to power on part of the Xbox 720, without too much load on PSU and CPU, I can't see this being very viable in the long term.
You're not factoring in the added charge for XBL. or that more than likely a cable company will be paying them. Especially to have it exclusively tied to them.
Nevermind that we're not talking about gamers, but the general consumer. $99 for a cable box with a social features that also plays console games will be a more appealing notion. Also pretty sure a system could be made with a low power/always on consumption mode for just for watching, and a full on mode for playing games.
The only thing that would truly ruin it for all parties would be another RROD incident. People might be stupid enough to pay $600 over two years for something that'll likely be $400 day one, but if they have to go through several while missing shows, they wont go near it no matter how much damage control is done.
Also, how about just ignoring Pacther's $99 price point. Xbox3 could be $600~$400 day one and $199~$299 with a two year $15 XBL/month deal would be appealing.
oh hold on I feel something.. Be right back.
Edit: Very good point, aviator.
It appears as though we have a silent Pachter fan in our midst.
And yes gears is a MICROSOFT ip, because only a retard would alienate pc, ps3 & nintendo. It is not an epic ip and there is no 3 game deal,...it is an every game deal.
Even if that isn't true a subsidized next generation console is smart if you are willing to spend more over time then cough up all that money at once it's an option.
I don't understand the hate over an analyst who job is to predict he doesn't need to be right.
Many of the people here have no cooth, let alone intelligence, just mindless hate and drivel. They don't understand his job at all-they just worship plastic.
That puts pay to all of those people crying "economy! economy!" when people say that a console with beefy specs is going to cost a load of dosh that people don't currently have, despite splashing similar amounts on iPhones and iPads.
But why do people buy iPhones? Cos its cheap to buy then a smaller fee per month.
I doubt as many would buy if it was the outright cost only.
I think Pachter is off a lot of the time but not on this. Bobshi your point about the economy is a really good reason to do this. The next generation of consoles won't be as expensive to produce as most seem to think and get money from the cable company and the consumer would be a smart way for MS to sell a ton of consoles.
Verizon sells Direct TV in my area since they couldn't sell Fios. No reason why MS couldn't do a deal with the cable company that allows the Xbox to act as the cable box. You get Live and cable and they both make money. That may be the reason for the "always on" section of the leaked 360 specs. A separate APU for the cable box features in the 720 that would be far better than what Motorola is offering now.
I'd consider dropping my Motorola stock if I had some.
I mean, how do you keep a job when 99.9999999% of the time you get everything wrong?
I know it's a prediction, but sooner or later your employer HAS to get tired of you being wrong.
We could have a spider monkey do his job and come up with better predictions.
His job is to look at current trends and predict game sales, future console pricing etc. Companies also come to him for advice and he gets to play free games.
No one can predict the future his job is to guess by researching on going trends. The hate he gets is so unjustified.
I can imagine a lot of people will be willing to part with $99 down, as opposed to $299-399.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
I could easily see it happening with an IPTV provider like BT Vision, however.
Microsoft Mediaroom already runs BT Vision's set top box.
I predicted this years ago but was wrong about which generation. I thought MS was further along with partnerships and software tech but I guess deals and hardware wasn't there.
MS tested the waters with streaming apps. Read a bout talks of cable Companies buying Xbox 720's(then 360) and offering them as rental options. Would be much cheaper for a company like Comcast to use the console because new HD 3D set top boxes cost $600-$800(DCX3400-m and up)
The console set top box would be massivley more appealing to consumers considering Comcast and others wont disable certain functions and services due to copyright issues etc.
I am leaning towards more on the failure rate.
Don't forget the leaked document did mention similar TV things and the inclusion of a DVR and it is also clear from the document that Microsoft is aiming to be the only box in your living room.
It can't do that without 'decent' live TV.
I think the big hang up for everyone is thinking of MS as a Hardware provider. There is more than just Motorola making cable boxes so why not a robust box that does more than just cable tv? But I think it is a legitimate point to bring up. MS has begun dabling more and more in hardware but they don't have that proven track record yet if you ask me.
Cable providers are shaking in their boots as to what to do about the emerging markets of Netflix and the like for online streaming content. Cable TV as we know it is dying and they are trying to find different ways to compete. The reality is that Cable providers are as much TV providers as they are internet providers...and Internet is the way moving forward... So they look to someone like MS...give us a box that we can program in our cable tv service to, gives users access to the internet and gaming... all through the TV using the existing cable / internet subscription that we all have become used to.
At the end of the day guys, there is a reason why Comcast and Verizon have created "Apps" for the 360...and lets not forget AT&T actually has a portal to allow the 360 to be a 2nd unit.
I got to admit right or wrong, people have been knocking on patcher on this site and small few others all the time and for a long time. What seems to escape the lot of you, he is still employed wedbush securities entertainment software publishing and retail sector. If what he does was so easy, then why is he getting paid to do it and you aren't?
Seems pretty plausible.