The whole argument that people make that "Nintendo underestimates demand specifically to let their product seem artificially rare and thus valuable" doesn't make sense. It seems to be an example under the banner of "all publicity is good" because "scarcity begets publicity" but this misses the point of the banner. "all publicity is good" only works when you want awareness to inspire an action in a greater population of people. For celebrities it's useful almost all the time since they always have products out or coming out (e.g. branded items, TV shows, films, records etc..) to lead the awareness towards. For a physical item, especially a launch, of a business the publicity only works if they newly-aware masses can buy the product. Scarcity removes this outcome, meaning Nintendo gain nothing. There's only a short window between the general public learning of something and wanted to buy it for Nintendo to capitalise on - meaning this strategy can actually lose you sales (i.e. that NES Mini).
Nintendo estimates demand and then produces product to meet. They don't create a surplus because they are a very cautious conservative company (which is why they still have a lot of funds despite heavy recent losses). Thus, when they do under-estimate, it's an accident that they scramble to meet. Some companies take the risk of over-producing and hoping to sell fairly quickly (rather than keep lots of stock in a warehouse somewhere), while Nintendo takes the risk of not having extra product to capitalise on a runaway success (but their ultimate loss for a failure is low).
For the Switch, preliminary info from pre-ordering availability suggests they have over-estimated the stock required for the UK, while under-estimating the stock required in the US. There isn't some secret scarcity-based strategy going on; estimating demand is just difficult.
Log in to comment