$56

A new report claims that the Kinect costs only $56 to produce, making Microsoft's profit margin with the $149.99 retail price look downright Apple-like.

Back in June, Microsoft unveiled its new motion gaming device at E3. It was one of the most hyped demonstrations of the event, and shortly after Microsoft revealed Kinect’s pricing at $149.99.

Sure, this definitely throws Kinect in at the “reasonable” price range, especially given that Microsoft’s rumored manufacturing costs were the same amount. However, an independent report that came out today argues otherwise.

A report by EETimes claims that it costs approximately $56 to create a Kinect unit, which could suggest that Microsoft is pocketing that extra $93.99. Before jumping down anyone’s throat, however, remember that Kinect’s prototype was extremely expensive. Microsoft told The New York Times it cost $30,000 to construct the original model, and it’s also rational to assume that the company invested a considerable amount in the research – after all, bringing this kind of technology to home gaming is pretty revolutionary. And of course, there is the alleged $500 million Microsoft allotted for advertising.

Regardless of Kinect’s cost versus its worth, it will remain a hot commodity. And on another note, right now you can make it pay for itself and then some. Hacking the device to link it to other systems is quickly becoming a trend, and former Google engineer Matt Cutts just announced $2,000 in prize money for innovative ways to hack Kinect. So anyone devastated by the possibility of being oversold on the it, start hacking away. And if you haven’t bought one yet, you’re in luck: The report lists all the components you need to make your own $56 Kinect.

Showing 31 comments

  1. tony at 9:56am 28th February 2011 i m not a fan of kinect or xbox 360microsoft always goes the cheap route when it comes to xbox 50 cent piece of hardware that the xbox didnt come with that scratches your games 50 cents come on fuckers been gettin over and kinect been hack i(i think with in that first week out lol) so the firmware wasnt that hard to make for it
  2. Guest at 4:08pm 17th January 2011 Thats weird that everyone is talking about marketing and ads? cause I have not seen a single kinect commercial except on xbox live . I can see production. But advertisement ? no the only ads for kinect that I have seen have been the ones where they talk about them in free cons. Where then the journalists write about it . Besides who cares if ti sells right , thats teh difference between failing companies and succesful ones. let it lie . Seems she is just whining to whine . Which no offense women do best.
  3. Guest at 6:46am 28th December 2010 I just "stumbled" upon this and would have to say, Molly McHugh should find another profession. That's like saying your car cost $6,900 and sells for $24,000. It's JUST the price in parts, not including manufacturing costs. Utter pile of journalism here, if you could call it that.
  4. Samuel at 3:39am 18th December 2010 As has already been brought to light here, this is yet another example of retarded sensationalist journalism in action. Molly, you're only accounting for the cost of the parts to Microsoft to build the Kinect, and not including other, far more significant costs, such as labor, R&D, distribution, marketing, tax, legal expenses, simple factors of supply and demand, selling at a price point that allows for at least something of a profit margin to be made, etc. If you honestly believe that it costs Microsoft *only* $56 to produce the Kinect and that they're literally making a $94 (168%) profit on each unit sold, then you're a fucking idiot. As a matter of fact, I'll assume that anyway for your idiotic article. I think I'll go ahead and block this site from ever appearing again on Stumbleupon. Such ignorance and deliberate stupidity angers me.
  5. @Frank_The_Bison at 9:57pm 6th December 2010 $56 to make it, plus a $40 game is $96, so technically they are only adding $54 to the over all price.
  6. Other Ben at 7:03pm 22nd November 2010 OMG! I'm gonna put a second mortgage on my house go buy as many shares of MS as I can! Their stock is gonna like triple or something... I mean it's like simple math. Although, I do think it's kind of evil of them to make all that profit for their shareholders... who are like everybody... who own mutual funds... OMG! it's so clear to me now! It's all those greedy people who invest in their 401K's that enable these bloated corporations to rip off people who spend their money on game console accessories. They are the real victims here. I mean... how dare Microsoft design bleeding edge technology to only cost $56 to produce! They should make it so it costs them like $856 at least! that way when you buy it for $949 you know you haven't been ripped off because the profit margin is only like 10% which is almost reasonable in my opinion. Vote Obama 2012 woo!
  7. ore masta at 1:45pm 22nd November 2010 if you were a champion, youd do the research yourself and make a working technological device
    1. seriously at 7:54am 23rd November 2010 Yes if you live at home with parents and you don't need to feed yourself, or a children, or a family, otherwise your "research for yourself" have to be paid anyway....
  8. Biffinum at 3:32pm 19th November 2010 I'm just lovin the comments...... So you mean to say that MS makes ALL that PROFIT....?? Woah... I need to invent something great that only costs me $56 to build..... But if only I can get the MILLIONS to do the research and development and OH more millions for Marketing... ***Checks in pocket...*** "Oh wait I have $100.. I'm gonna be rich (^_^)......
  9. Ben at 8:58am 18th November 2010 Hmm, ok, a 200% increase is kind of a lot, sure--but think about this: it costs about 50 cents to stamp out a game disk, and 50 dollars to own one--that's a 10,000% increase. But both of these scenarios neglect costs OTHER than raw materials, which, GASP! corporations DO have. Lots of them.
  10. Al Giordino at 8:40am 18th November 2010 ...the general selling price equation of technical hardware is 3*(cost of production). From there the marketing people take over. By this it seems entirely reasonable.
  11. lulz at 9:37am 18th November 2010 Sounds like Ms. Molly here doesn't know how 'profit', 'continual testing with updates', and 'research and development' works.
  12. Black Sheep at 9:39am 16th November 2010 Please, Kinect is not revolutionary and the games are junk. Stop doing free ads for MS, they are already spending $500 million on it.
  13. Random at 2:37am 16th November 2010 Wow, Microsoft employs faeries that would assemble all those parts for free? And have unicorns doing the marketing and packaging, also for free. And of course, they have gnomes to handle the sales directly to the final consumer, and don't need to go through a store who will take a good amount of these 93 "extra" dollars. Nice piece of journalism there.
  14. idiot mcblogwritter at 5:57pm 15th November 2010 capitalism. look it up noob.
  15. eflows at 5:51pm 15th November 2010 This just in -- you have to pay people to invent stuff.
  16. guest at 5:00pm 15th November 2010 i think ur confusing "gross margin" with "profit margin"
    1. Tinysmerf at 8:06am 15th January 2011 I think your confusing "ur" with "your".
  17. Lakawak at 4:57pm 15th November 2010 Apples and other fruit cost NOTHING to make (assuming you get enough rain naturally) and $1 or more per pound to own! That is an ininite profit margin!
  18. Duh McDuerston at 4:51pm 15th November 2010 This just in! A Whiskey Coke only costs a bar about 30 cents to make, $5 to own! Bars are ripping you off!
  19. Graham at 4:51pm 15th November 2010 Microsoft is not selling the hardware, they are selling the experiance it provides. These cost analysis studies are interesting, but the user still needs to make a value judgement based on much more than the physical product.
  20. stageone204 at 12:56am 15th November 2010 Thank god for this article! I would have never known that companies are out to make money, and don't like giving their products away for no gain.
  21. lurker at 9:16am 13th November 2010 Again, a total BS post.. But it is interesting that there is no "ripoff" in the title of this article like the iphone teardown.. :)
    1. ioman at 10:56am 13th November 2010 It's only a ripoff if people are not enjoying it right? :)
  22. Lennyp at 6:29pm 12th November 2010 $56 to make the hardware and how much to develop the firmware, design the physical package, make the hardware work, meet UL, CE, etc standards, maintain the software, and, and, and...
    1. Steve at 7:11pm 12th November 2010 Great point, I'm pretty of people complaining about the profit margins of Apple and Microsoft because all they are looking at is the hardware cost. One of the reasons the margins are so high is to cover the upfront development costs, lets take those into account and see how things change.
      1. P J at 8:02pm 12th November 2010 Well at least the software couldn't have taken too much time or money to develop, considering someone wrote drivers for the Kinect in a reported three hours after its release without any of the proprietary technical specifications. http://www.osnews.com/story/24014/Kinect_Already_... http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/linux-open-sou...
        1. PJ_IS_MORON at 9:00pm 12th November 2010 you are moron!!! Driver just provides raw data. it doesnt create a model of human body that kinect is tracking.
          1. lolz at 1:13pm 20th December 2010 you forgot the 'a' after you said are. lolz
            1. PJ_IS_MORON_IS_MORON at 10:31pm 11th January 2011 PJ_IS_MORON_IS_MORON. lolz
    2. peter at 12:02pm 8th January 2011 exacatly, the cost of research and development that lead to the creation of kinect and its capabilities are pretty high I assume
Close Suggestion Dead Space 2 Lullaby trailer
View Article