Re: TV vs Cars; Worlds Largest Biz; E-Gaming
You said:
Unless you consider marketing unproductive, you are wrong about the lack of productivity on a tv.
. . You're right about that. However my point was that consumer adoption of television was not driven by productivity gain. People don't buy TV's to watch commercials. Well, normal people. <g> In this regard PC's are very different from TV's.
You said:
To penetrate much more than it has already penetrated, prices have to continue to decline...
. . Prices have to decline or usefulness has to increase. I believe we'll see both of those. Because the capabilities of the PC will continue to expand, eventually PC's will attain TV and car-like penetration, averaging 2+ units per household. With increasing PC use, household members will no longer be able to share a single machine--similar to increasing per capita car ownership in the post-war era. Hell, I'm a household of one, and I use 3 PC's and a notebook machine. But then I ain't a representative sample. <g> Ten years from now, though, I may very well be a representative sample. <shudder>
You said:
As far as the gaming machines go, I think I had the price close enough for govt. work when I said they were around $300-600...
. . As an astute investor you know very well that there is a tremendous difference between a $200 price point and a $600 price point for game consoles. You may recall the NeoGeo, which was marketed as the upscale console near the $600 price point. Sales: near zero.
* *
I agree with your point that demand for gaming ability will not by itself hold up PC ASPs. That's why I don't think games are the killer app that will drive the next upcycle in industry, TDFX notwithstanding.
. . As is often the case, the next killer app may be one that none of us has yet even imagined.
PX
P.S. Hey, you didn't say whether you still like ISIP or not. <g> |
