Why didn't the 800XL do well in the UK?

[Ross PK]

Thanks.

[Pengwin]

Unfortunately the earlier Atari 8-bits weren't readily available in the UK and when Sinclair started to release machines at under £150, they pushed atari out of the UK market.

 

I think that by the time the XL range came over to the UK, Sinclair and Commodore had already dominated the 8-bit market.

[thomasholzer]

Oi, you already posted that question in the Retro Gamer issue thread. Anyway, XL was the second best selling foreign computer in the UK, that's extremely successful, if you ask me.

 

Anyway, here's my cut & paste:

 

Atari 800XL was the third best selling 8-bit computer in the UK (after Spectrum and C64, Amstrad CPC and BBC were joint 4th), but also the second best selling foreign computer (behind C64, ahead of Apple ][) in UK.

(The XL was voted 'Best computer of the year' twice by UK Which (or Which Computer, not sure) magazine.

Had loads of UK based software support: Gremlin, Mastertronic, English Software, Ocean, US Gold, Electric Dreams, Domark, Zeppelin Games, Level 9, Codemasters, Tynesoft, Atlantis, Players, Atari UK, Rainbird, Red Rat, Hi-Tec, Digital Integration, Llamasoft, Novagen etc...hardware: Maplin, Silica Shop..etc.

UKs Page 6 (Atari 8-bit magazine)..longest lasting 8-bit computer magazine in the world (16 years)

Edited February 21, 2008 by thomasholzer

[www.atarimania.com]

The 400 and 800 were available in the UK as early as 1981 courtesy of Ingersoll but they were very expensive. Because of this, the Atari software market never really took off in the UK in the early eighties. People could get many imported titles but only at crazy prices. That's why we ended up with such a fragile situation with just very few programs released compared to all the other well established computers...

 

Had loads of UK based software support: Gremlin, Mastertronic, English Software, Ocean, US Gold, Electric Dreams, Domark, Zeppelin Games, Level 9, Codemasters, Tynesoft, Atlantis, Players, Atari UK, Rainbird, Red Rat, Hi-Tec, Digital Integration, Llamasoft, Novagen etc...

Loads? Most of these publishers only released a handful of games for the platform.

 

--

Atari Frog

http://www.atarimania.com

[FastRobPlus]

Did you see the Computer History Museum's C64 25th birthday event?

Al Acorn of Atari was there and said that the Atari home computer was never considered Atari's core business, and was only ever given enough focus to remain viable.

I think that statement says a lot about Atari's commitment to foreign markets.

[deathtrappomegranate]

FastRobPlus and Atari Frog are both right.

 

The early A8s (400/800) were very expensive in the UK, and the XLs were too little, too late.

[Shaun.Bebbington]

Unfortunately the earlier Atari 8-bits weren't readily available in the UK and when Sinclair started to release machines at under £150, they pushed atari out of the UK market.

 

I think that by the time the XL range came over to the UK, Sinclair and Commodore had already dominated the 8-bit market.

That is part of it. Another reasons are that the number of software companies supporting Atari when compared to Sinclair, Commodore or even Amstrad were much fewer. All of the best games of the day weren't, as far as I recall, ported to Atari as a rule. The number of magazines supporting Commodore and Sinclair were not only in greater proportion, but they were more interesting and focused more on gaming that the typical Atari mag - which had a greater appeal to the typical computer user back in the day.

 

Most of the Atari mags that I have didn't seem to write balanced reviews, they seemed deliberately favourable just because the game was on Atari rather than reviewing the product objectively as a game.

 

Also, the number of outlets selling Atari machines were fewer than Sinclair, Commodore or Amstrad - you could usually pick up a Speccy or C64 at any independant computer retailer, whereas you'd have to look for Atari 8-bits.

 

Now, if XXL had been active back then

 

Regards,

 

Shaun.

[Rybags]

Probably the same reason they had shocking runs here, and virtually everywhere else in the world.

 

Priced too high against competition, ie the Commodore 64.

 

Shocking marketing by Atari (outside the US, at least). Actually, that should read "shocking lack of marketing".

[mimo]

Yep, lack of marketing certainly. Also it was a pretty fledgling market, and I guess that a lot of computers were bought by un-knowledgeable parents for their kids. When offers for the ZX81 for £100 in every newspaper and the Atari 400 was more than double the price, and you had to buy a dedicated cassette recorder and could only be bought at intimidating specialist shops then you can guess the outcome

[www.atarimania.com]

Shocking marketing by Atari (outside the US, at least).

Fortunately, there are some exceptions: the Atari did very well in Germany, the Netherlands or Chile. You can also thank the Tramiels for selling the computers in Poland or (former) Czechoslovakia. Most of us wouldn't be here otherwise.

 

--

Atari Frog

http://www.atarimania.com

[carmel_andrews]

Rybag's/Mimo etc...Marketing...Is that what you call it, I thought that Atari's Sales?marketing effort (UK anyway) was at the very least 'Non Existent'...remembering that Tramiel was more interested in the ST etc then Atari's previous offerings

 

According to an article i read about tramiels time at atari...Atari couldn't lower the RRP on computers etc during the warners period due mostly to the fact that warners Atari were'nt 'vertically integrated' like tramiels commodore was and the fact that because of the way atari was structured (production/manuf'g wise) atari weren't making much on each unit sold

[AEX]

Rybag's/Mimo etc...Marketing...Is that what you call it, I thought that Atari's Sales?marketing effort (UK anyway) was at the very least 'Non Existent'...remembering that Tramiel was more interested in the ST etc then Atari's previous offerings

 

According to an article i read about tramiels time at atari...Atari couldn't lower the RRP on computers etc during the warners period due mostly to the fact that warners Atari were'nt 'vertically integrated' like tramiels commodore was and the fact that because of the way atari was structured (production/manuf'g wise) atari weren't making much on each unit sold

 

OK, I'll keep this short and sweet if I can

 

"Tramiels time at Atari" has nothing to do with the pricing of Atari Inc. XL pricing in the UK or elsewhere, and could not have had any impact of the initial launch of the 600/800XL be it marketing or otherwise, because that was an Atari Inc. product.

 

Without going into wild speculation about the future of the XL's under Atari Inc. (apart from the possible technical route the systems where heading) it should be noted that the majority of the XL products were actually sold by Atari Corp at MUCH lower prices than Atari Inc. had, and even undercut C64's for a time as they depleated LARGE inventory of XL product. Marketing was CUT to the bone on the XL range after August '84, and pricing did the talking as far as the Tramiels were concerned.

 

RRP/SRP (Rec. Retail Price or Suggested Retail Price) is a baseline figure provided by a manufacturer to a reseller. Most resellers sell below the RRP, and although Atari may have "bought in" CPU's etc where Commodore had MOS, this didn't effect the product margin or have any real connection to Atari's RRP of their products. To say Atari could not lower RRP because it may not have operated like CBM is not correct.

 

I do not know how much margin Atari Inc. made on any XL, but its possible to take a hit on hardware initially to facilitate a set percentage sell through into the market and create a successful "launch" base for a product. Once a satisfactory share is obtained and costs lower due to increased production and natural savings etc etc, then profit on hardware is made gradually. Atari also understood by this time that software and not hardware was the key, so its possible under Atari Inc. no XL product made money, especially when you consider how much inventory Atari Inc. had manufactured knowing the dire state of its finances circa late '83 and '84.

 

The 800XL was well received in the UK and other European countries, but it was "pushed" out the door by the Tramiels not only to ensure they sold inventory, but to inject much needed capital into the cash-strapped Atari Corp.

 

Karl

[ilaskey]

The 400 and 800 were available in the UK as early as 1981 courtesy of Ingersoll but they were very expensive. Because of this, the Atari software market never really took off in the UK in the early eighties. People could get many imported titles but only at crazy prices.

I was one of those crazy people that bought a 400 as soon as they were available - mainly because I lived near Maplin's in Southend which had a great range of Atari stuff they imported from the US. To put the prices in perspective, I worked in a bank at the time and my take home salary was £120 a month. My (32k) Atari 400/810/410 combination cost me £800 - 6 months pay! Most games were £30-£40 and in extreme cases £80. The upgrade for the 400 from 32K to 48K was another £100 (would have been more but they kept the 32K board). There used to be some kid about 14 who was their Saturday help and he just sat there tapping away all day with the Macro Assembler doing amazing things.

 

As far as the 800XL goes - I knew a lot of 8bitters and many went for that (I ended up with a 130XE). Because of the circles I moved in I knew maybe 1 or 2 C64 users, 1 Spectrum, 1 ZX81 and about a dozen 400/800 people :-)

[carmel_andrews]

As far as I can remember uptill tramiel bought out Atari...there wasn't much if any supprt for the A8, the situation improved only slightly after the Tramiel Buy out but that was largely due to the St software development subsidizing the A8 software development...And anyway post the tramiel buy out, the UK games market had already being established and supported machines had being pretty much settled on...and Atari in any form wasn't going to get much of a look in (as far as the A8 was concerned)

 

Atari 8bit wasn't the only 8bit machine that suffered this way

 

Consider the BBC/Acorn (from a games perspective), The MSX (only very few british s/w co's supprted that system), the c16/C+4, The Dragon (died mostly due allegedy to widescale 'piracy'), tatung einstein, oric atmos, camputers lynx, elan enterprise, Memotech mtx...etc.etc.etc

 

ilaskey...Are you any relation to the famous "Laskey's"...Who used to have a couple of shops in TCR (Tottenham Court Road)...A sort of 'Junior' Version of Dixons/Curry's etc (if memory recalls, Laskey's also used to stock the A8...I recall buying a couple of XEs there at clearout prices)

Edited February 28, 2008 by carmel_andrews

[Plastron]

It was all about cost of the Machine i got my first Atari 400 Second hand in around 1980 it was an xmas present for me and my borther and thats about all we got that year. My first 1050 disk drive cost around £250 at 5% inflation that around £800 in todays money. I got a pinoeer 115 DVDR for £17 new the other day how things have changed.

 

Games at £30 was about as cheap as it got until Englisgh Software came along. If you think about it these people must have made good money. Then you had the much cheaper option of the Specy with good games at cheap prices so the Atrai was struggling.

 

Then Atari UK (Railway Terrace Slough) finally got a few of us together and started to make games but it was too little too late the ST and the Amiga were arleady out. Atari UK were not so good to develop for either MoonBase was never done for that reason Andy Mills cancelled the game and sent them thier down paymnet back as he got so fed up with them(see the high table score in Plastron there a meeage there to Atari from position 6 down). If they had been 5 years before they may be stood a chance to get things moving but they were not.

 

my 2 pence worth