They refuse to do proper sales on the Switch hardware, and yet all they have to do is have a decently discounted sale and if they sell 1 game per console they're already back in the black.
All their profit comes from the games, whereas the choice of buying a console for the consumer is high% the price of the console and only low% the price of games.
So I guess I'm not sure what the source of the confusion is. It's not like anything weird or unusual is going on compared to the rest of Nintendo's 35 years in the console market, or compared with the console market in general.
This would also be an opportunity to generate revenue on retro gaming: if they make it easy to use, people will buy it. They could make an emulator for steam which then includes its own marketplace "in game". Despite the large availability of retro roms, I keep buying old final fantasy games for about 15€ each on android just because it's easy and requires no configuration.
Switch: ~$40 profit[1]
PS4: ~$18 profit[2]
Xbox One: ~$30 profit[3]
As for software, a Forbes estimate from 2006 put the console manufacturer cut at around 11.5%, however that could be different nowadays.
This also changes with exclusivity deals in which the fee is presumably waived. I believe Sony would gain a little extra from licensing the Blu-ray technology on top of that.
But yeah, you're right. Much like printers and ink cartridges, the money is in the contents, not the device.
Disclaimer: I'm not in any way a part of the industry, just an interested fan of the medium so take this with a grain of salt and feel free to provide any knowledge you might have
[1]: https://www.polygon.com/2017/4/5/15195638/nintendo-switch-co... [2]: http://allthingsd.com/20131119/teardown-shows-sonys-playstat... [3]: http://allthingsd.com/20131126/microsofts-xbox-one-cost-90-m... [4]: https://www.forbes.com/2006/12/19/ps3-xbox360-costs-tech-cx_...