New Xbox 360 Priced at £150 in the UK

[JMcEntegart]

Still more expensive than in the U.S., of course.

New Xbox 360 Priced at £150 in the UK : Read more

 

[ps3hacker12]

You have to keep in mind, tax is included in all UK prices.

 

[Grandmastersexsay]

You have to keep in mind, tax is included in all UK prices, we don't pay taxes seperately, we pay em when we buy stuff

What do you mean you don't pay taxes separately? You have a horrible income tax in addition to the value added tax you are speaking of.

I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say. Are you trying to say the VAT has to be included in the listed price?

The US has no VAT and some states don't have any sales tax at all, but the reason everything is more expensive over there isn't just because you have high taxes. I was just reading a story on this site talking about how apple is being forced to offer a two year wwarranty for countries in the EU. Absurd regulations that stifle the free market also drastically impact your prices.

I don't know how you can stand such a large government over there. It's bad enough in the US, but no where near what you guys must suffer.

 

[intelx]

what he means is its taxes included, so out the door you pay £149 taxes included

in the states its 199 plus %7 taxes

same in my country, its taxes included the price on the counter thats how much you pay out the door

 

[ps3hacker12]

Im not saying its good or bad, just saying that its included in the price, thats all.

 

[daglesj]

You have to keep in mind, tax is included in all UK prices, we don't pay taxes seperately, we pay em when we buy stuff

What do you mean you don't pay taxes separately? You have a horrible income tax in addition to the value added tax you are speaking of.

I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say. Are you trying to say the VAT has to be included in the listed price?

The US has no VAT and some states don't have any sales tax at all, but the reason everything is more expensive over there isn't just because you have high taxes. I was just reading a story on this site talking about how apple is being forced to offer a two year wwarranty for countries in the EU. Absurd regulations that stifle the free market also drastically impact your prices.

I don't know how you can stand such a large government over there. It's bad enough in the US, but no where near what you guys must suffer.

Erm how exactly does making a company have to stand by its rather expensive products for at least 2-3 years in terms of them continuing to function a bad thing and stifling the free market?

I would rather pay a fraction more from my expensive toy knowing its covered for 2-3 years automatically without having to then pay on top for warranty or Apple Care.

Products should last for more than 12 months, especially those that cost in the realms of several hundred to thousands of £/$.

If a mandatory warranty makes a company take extra care in the production of its goods then I'm all for it. Otherwise its just more landfill. Who wants crap that just lasts 12 months?

How on earth it is that some people feel 'consumer rights' are a bad thing I really don't know. Too much corporate agenda kool-aid I suppose.

 

[SteelCity1981]

and for 200 dollars more you can get a much more powerful ps4....

 

[Shaun o]

I wonder if this one will have the red ring of death also.

 

[Marcus52]

what he means is its taxes included, so out the door you pay £149 taxes included

in the states its 199 plus %7 taxes

same in my country, its taxes included the price on the counter thats how much you pay out the door

Just to clarify, the taxes added on to the price listed isn't a U.S. tax, it's a state and local tax, and it varies. I'm not sure how low it goes these days, I would say 7% is pretty low. Here near Dallas, TX it's 8.25%. I've seen it over 12% at a resort town in Colorado - and that was 20+ years ago, no telling what it is now! So, yeah, state and local taxes alone can amount to something close to VAT in some areas of the U.S.

Of course you can often avoid state and local taxes by buying through a company that is located in another state (like through the internet). States have no jurisdiction over interstate business, so can't charge tax unless the item you buy is form a business with a presence in your state. Shipping costs might make that pointless, though, just like a country that isn't part of the EU buying from a country that is - we don't pay the VAT, so get an item at 15% less that it is listed for, but we still have to pay shipping and any import taxes that apply.

 

[computerguy72]

@steelcity1981 uh the ps4 will just have like 15 games that are $59.95 each and you have to wait 6 months even for that. So 10 games + console = $1,000 vs. a cheap XB360 and a load of used games you can get for $5. Maybe in a couple of years the math will be different but c'mon dude be realistic, there is a place for low cost entertainment.

 

[Grandmastersexsay]

You have to keep in mind, tax is included in all UK prices, we don't pay taxes seperately, we pay em when we buy stuff

What do you mean you don't pay taxes separately? You have a horrible income tax in addition to the value added tax you are speaking of.

I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say. Are you trying to say the VAT has to be included in the listed price?

The US has no VAT and some states don't have any sales tax at all, but the reason everything is more expensive over there isn't just because you have high taxes. I was just reading a story on this site talking about how apple is being forced to offer a two year wwarranty for countries in the EU. Absurd regulations that stifle the free market also drastically impact your prices.

I don't know how you can stand such a large government over there. It's bad enough in the US, but no where near what you guys must suffer.

Erm how exactly does making a company have to stand by its rather expensive products for at least 2-3 years in terms of them continuing to function a bad thing and stifling the free market?

I would rather pay a fraction more from my expensive toy knowing its covered for 2-3 years automatically without having to then pay on top for warranty or Apple Care.

Products should last for more than 12 months, especially those that cost in the realms of several hundred to thousands of £/$.

If a mandatory warranty makes a company take extra care in the production of its goods then I'm all for it. Otherwise its just more landfill. Who wants crap that just lasts 12 months?

How on earth it is that some people feel 'consumer rights' are a bad thing I really don't know. Too much corporate agenda kool-aid I suppose.

Taking choice away from the consumer is never good.

In the US you can buy an extended warranty if you want one. The people who don't want to pay for that longer warranty aren't forced to. Companies aren't in business to provide jobs or provide a service to the community. They are in business to make money. Every time the government forces a business to do something, the consumer pays for it.

Maybe if the government always made the right decisions, maybe government intervention would be a good thing. But they're not. They are a bunch of bungling idiots with no understanding of business or the products they are regulating. They can't do anything right.

The free market's survival of the fittest might anger the consumer from time to time, but it ultimately gives the consumer the largest voice. They can vote with their pocketbook. It's the ultimate form of democracy.

 

[LolMeister]

Taking choice away from the consumer is never good.

In the US you can buy an extended warranty if you want one. The people who don't want to pay for that longer warranty aren't forced to. Companies aren't in business to provide jobs or provide a service to the community. They are in business to make money. Every time the government forces a business to do something, the consumer pays for it.

Maybe if the government always made the right decisions, maybe government intervention would be a good thing. But they're not. They are a bunch of bungling idiots with no understanding of business or the products they are regulating. They can't do anything right.

The free market's survival of the fittest might anger the consumer from time to time, but it ultimately gives the consumer the largest voice. They can vote with their pocketbook. It's the ultimate form of democracy.

If the guarantee for a product to function for a defined period is removed, doesn't that make purchasing extended warranties mandatory for the consumer?

Retailers already reap a large percentage of profits from selling their extended warranties than the actual goods themselves. Manufacturers can lower build quality and quality assurance without falling foul of the law since there is no expectation for it to work at all. It becomes more beneficial for them to design points of failure that can be described as user's fault to squirm their way out of an expensive warranty contract. Now I have no confidence that the product I am purchasing will still function on day 2.

Warranty is protection for the consumer, we expect the product to be functional for a reasonable time and replaced if faulty. The government enforces consumer rights protection for the consumer. You have the choice to extend your piece of mind to 2, 3, 5 or even 10 years because the confidence that the product will function for at least the first 365 days in your possession is there. Like you said, businesses are there to make money from us, that's why we need these laws to outline fair expectations and responsibilities for both sides.

 

[Grandmastersexsay]

Taking choice away from the consumer is never good.

In the US you can buy an extended warranty if you want one. The people who don't want to pay for that longer warranty aren't forced to. Companies aren't in business to provide jobs or provide a service to the community. They are in business to make money. Every time the government forces a business to do something, the consumer pays for it.

Maybe if the government always made the right decisions, maybe government intervention would be a good thing. But they're not. They are a bunch of bungling idiots with no understanding of business or the products they are regulating. They can't do anything right.

The free market's survival of the fittest might anger the consumer from time to time, but it ultimately gives the consumer the largest voice. They can vote with their pocketbook. It's the ultimate form of democracy.

If the guarantee for a product to function for a defined period is removed, doesn't that make purchasing extended warranties mandatory for the consumer?

Retailers already reap a large percentage of profits from selling their extended warranties than the actual goods themselves. Manufacturers can lower build quality and quality assurance without falling foul of the law since there is no expectation for it to work at all. It becomes more beneficial for them to design points of failure that can be described as user's fault to squirm their way out of an expensive warranty contract. Now I have no confidence that the product I am purchasing will still function on day 2.

Warranty is protection for the consumer, we expect the product to be functional for a reasonable time and replaced if faulty. The government enforces consumer rights protection for the consumer. You have the choice to extend your piece of mind to 2, 3, 5 or even 10 years because the confidence that the product will function for at least the first 365 days in your possession is there. Like you said, businesses are there to make money from us, that's why we need these laws to outline fair expectations and responsibilities for both sides.

What you arr advocating is reason why products cost so much more in the EU and why their economy is failing.

Government intervention is what has turned the US from the strongest manufacturing nation in the world, into the biggest importer in history.

 

[gopher1369]

"Absurd regulations that stifle the free market also drastically impact your prices. "

The law in the EU states that if a product fails because of a fault that was present at the point of sale then that product must be repaired/replaced/refunded by the retailer.

It means that: if you broke it, no replacement, if it's due to normal wear and tear, no replacement, if it's faulty due to an inherent manufacturing fault, the retailer (not the manufacturer) is liable for the cost of a repair/replacement/refund (any of those 3 options, at the retailers discretion).

Please explain how this is absurd, because to me it seems very reasonable.

What seems absurd to me is if I bought a $1000 dollar TV, it breaks after 13 months due to an inherent fault and that's my bad, my money ost through no fault of my own.