Oh, its not only likely, but it also will happend. (Not all of them, but for quite a significant portion), unless somebody wants to argue with all microeconomic theories in the world.
Is the Used Game Market Damaging the Industry?
- Thread starter archangelmorph
- Start date
Oh, its not only likely, but it also will happend. (Not all of them, but for quite a significant portion), unless somebody wants to argue with all microeconomic theories in the world.
That could be a minor problem
. I wonder if they could get around it by creating their own retailer chain or something, sell it online and stuff like that. On the other hand they could just also buy back the games for more what the chains do. The last thing we want though are more rich lawyers.I know, a study can be done to show anything you want, but still, following strict scientific protocols on how such studies should be conducted it should be possible. The question who would be willing to do such a study and pay for it. The publishers would, only if that would benefit them and they knew the outcome
...No one has said in this thread that u shouldn't be allowed to sell the game.
I guess there are two arguments in one here. Do you as person have the right to sell your possessions? Sure, I can not for the life of me see anyone trying to argument the fact that you as a private person are not allowed to sell your game if you so want. The question though is, should the retailers that sold you the game once benefit from it once more? For something that someone else has created? Especially as that sale not only benefits them but also might hurt the developers of the game?
Of course it can be argued that the retailer has taken a risk when bying the new game from the publisher as well as the used one, as you never know if it is going to sell and since they take the risk they should also benefit from it. On the other hand so has the publisher, that has funded the development of the title and has spent lots (maybe) of money on exposing the title on the TV, press and so on but that might see the rewards of the risk they have taken to be inhibited by the retailers second hand market.
Still, the bottom line is that no one is doing anything illegal, and there should be strong arguments as to why games should be concidered so different than any other product as to be excluded from the normal rules/laws of tradeing...
Except for every post I've written, and your refutations of which consist of little more than "I love video games, so consumers shouldn't have rights."
Platon said:
And this question is already answered if you look at the fact that the software industry is still an industry, and used goods sold by retailers with no kickbacks to the original manufacturers have been around as long as there have been goods.
I think the overall answer is that if the industry feels they are losing too much money to used sales, they should find a way to adapt their business model to that instead of trying to strong-arm retailers through monopolistic tactics or convincing the government to take away consumer rights. As of now, there is very little making a new purchase more valuable than used except that new software has a level of guaranteed availability that used software does not.
Look at the auto industry. Used sales are roughly half of the entire auto market! (Don't say games don't depreciate...see any used copies of Metal Gear Solid 3 going for $50 on Ebay? That's what I thought.) Manufacturers dealt with this by introducing used certification programs, which help them benefit from used sales by offering consumer incentives without trying to take away anyone's rights. Obviously, "used game certification" is relatively useless, but a smart and creative publisher should be able to find some way to benefit from and adapt to the used market.
Regardless of the fat margins even cutting the margins in half would still encourage retailers to sell used games as it increases their revenue and profits. If you reduce the margins in half (still better than new games margins) by cutting the retail price you increase demand and induce more sales. Its the sales as a pub or a dev you have to be worried about and not margins of the retailer as the sales of used games increases it has a detrimental effects on new game sales.
I think GameStop has some type of formula that they use to help determine trade in price and retail price of their used games. GameStop takes in way more games then they actually sell through the used channel. They take in as much games as they can to promote additional sales. However, the numbers of games that they take in and the back buy price has to be measured, which in turn helps them determine the used retail prices so they margins remain high. The profit margins are around 50% but the margin on an actual used games seems something like 70-75%. Trade ins that don't sales + other costs eat up that 20-25%.
archangelmorph
Veteran
This sentiment proves entirely how little you actually read/understood of my posts..
*sigh*
Examples
archangelmorph said:
archangelmorph said:
archangelmorph said:
archangelmorph said:
If you really think that i've somehow been saying that taking away consumer rights is somehow a good thing or in anyway justified then to be honest I'm not sure what thread you've been my friend..
Last edited by a moderator:
Looks like Circuit City is going to get in on the used games market after a successful 10-store trial period. Along with Gamestop/ebgames publishers can't be too happy about two major chains concentrating on used games now. http://www.smartmoney.com/news/on/index.cfm?story=ON-20080206-000902-2040
Well they do build a lot of those packed in the same area for some reason. I've seen three Gamestops in the same freaking mall. Compared to one big CC store in the area.
Similar threads
