My comparison was more than fair. The Wii U Premium 32GB is £229.99 on Amazon without any games; the Wii U 8GB Basic version actually costs more at £259.99 and isn't available directly from Amazon. If you want to claim that a 99p HDMI cable adds more value to the Wii U then... well, I don't know what to say. As for storage, you can buy a Xbox 360 250GB for less than £200 making that a much better purchase. For some the Wii U controller will make it a more attractive purchase, of course, but for many others it won't - personally I consider it a gimmick and would much prefer a standard controller.
You are completely ignoring facts which I've already pointed out. The Wii U Premium does come with a game: NintendoLand. On top of that, many of the new Premium bundles have replaced NintendoLand with NSMB Wii U + Luigi U or Zelda WW HD at the same price.
In your first post, you quoted the price of the cheapest 360 and PS3 models:
The Wii U is currently £229.99 on Amazon, while the Xbox 360 is £129.99 and the PS3 is £165.
My point is, you cannot argue the basic versions of one and then blemish facts by using the most expensive Premium version of the competitor. Either like for like, or don't compare at all.
As for the Basic bundle, although denied by Nintendo, it has pretty much been removed from market. Meaning any stock that does exist on the internet will have outdated prices/listings if they have stock. The RRP of the Premium has fallen to the point where it replaces the Basic for most retailers.
And yes I am claiming that including an HDMI cable in the box is adding value. Doesn't matter if it costs 99p or £99, at least it is included. If only they'd done the same with the 3DS charger in EU, but that's another topic.
That doesn't make any difference to the consumer - they just see the price.
Of course it matters, because by the end of this year the releases are going to dry up for both. You have an existing library and anything from here on is going to be released on new consoles only. Whether the consumer wants to look at it that way or not is completely up to them. The point is that hardware which is almost 10 years old is going to be cheaper to produce. There is just no getting around that. Retailers can offer larger cuts on both the PS3/360 due to their refund margins and because the costs of the new consoles eat it up.
That's not true, as the improved GPU performance is held back by a much slower processor. Developers have widely criticised the Wii U. In fact many crossplatform titles perform worse on the Wii U, like Batman: Arkham City and Call Of Duty: Ghosts.
It may not be true for some developers when they don't put the effort in. Using Activision / IW / Treyarch is not helping your case. Neither is EA who will port games with an updated front cover and call it new. The specs are on paper more powerful.
I'm not saying that the 360 250 GB or PS3 500 GB is bad value. Of course it is, and it's only going to get cheaper over the next 2 years. But if you're going to compare then don't try swindle facts to suit your argument.