A great story for those us of who know what it's like to deal with retail retards.

[Fe 26]

One of my favorite questions-

New game comes out. One week later starts the question- when will this game drop in price?

I've been polite about it so far but it's getting closer and closer every time to me pulling a date out of a hat. "Oh, that's slated to drop to $30 August 18th", or something. Temptation has been resisted every time but it's getting tougher with each version of the question.

James

You say, "10 days past you get the fuck out my store and quit acting like dumbass"

[Schlep]

diffx, Roufuss: Yeah, it's a really slow EB. Plus there was some trade-in deal to get $20 for my 2 $5 games if they were traded in towards MGS3.

[Fe 26]

If idiots would stop bitching about games being $5 less, or games dropping in price after 2 weeks, or whatever, then less people would explain it.

Why do you wonder who people talk about you like you are some sort of stuffed green grouch when you continue to talk so rudely of others?

Nope. The demand for gas is inelastic, in that raising the price will not have much of an effect on demand, at least in the short term (the short term being, with regards to gas, at least 4 or 5 years, the time it takes for people to replace their cars). Same with food, gas, metal, or wood. Things that have no necessity, like video games, are more elastic, and thusly, more subject to the laws of supply and demand. Raising the price of video games will immediately have an effect on demand.

Then why do gas prices go up when there is less gas in supply, or when there is more demand during the summer when everyone is on vacation and traveling? Are you trying to tell that you know more about business than the people who run the oil industry? Or how about the people who are currently upping the prices for wood, metal, wire, and any other thing used to build houses because such things are in demand, now that is loans are better in regards to building new homes? What you are saying, despite how logical it may sound, seems to come in contrast with the reality of what is going on.

Companies will always want to find the supply/demand equilibrium point, the point where the supply graph intersects with the demand graph. Any coincidence that both EB and GameStop charge, generally speaking, 10% less for their used games than their new games ($45, $37, $27, $18)? I guess they found that equlibrium point, slugger.

You are being way to simplistic about this. You are acting like there is only one way to deal with used games, thus making game sores just and right, and everyone should just deal. In the concept of supply and demand there are two vectors, the supply vector, and the demand vector. When it comes to the supply, there is little that can be done to influence it. They can offer incentives, but they have yet to do anything I’ve heard of to cause a boom in it. The company however can effect demand. Most of what a business does is to try to effect demand in the mind of the consumer. It does everything it can to get the consumer to want a product and to want it from their store. For starters it advertises the product to make people want it. But that doesn’t insure that people will shop at their store. They have to create a desire in people to go their store for the product. They do this by offering sells, specials, freebies, and lower prices. They sometimes even take a loss on one product to sell other products. Microsoft did this with the Xbox. They sold it at one point at a price lower than it cost to produce it. Why? To get into homes. Which would insure games sales later, or so they hope. They took a loss now, to insure profit later.

There are a multitude of concepts in business, and there are a multitude of ways to deal with each concept. There is no one way to deal with the concept of supply and demand. Treating people like they are stupid for not liking the way one company deals with the issue is wrong, and close minded.

It's as much a law in economics as F=mg is in Physics (and yes I realize the limitations of that).

True but to get anything done with physics in real life terms you can’t be as simplistic as you are being with the concept of supply and demand. The reason that calculus is so useful in Engineering, is it’s ability to take in a plethora of variables to produce useful data. You’re justification for your views are barely scratching the surface.

They charge based on what people are willing to pay. What the demand is. When they fuck this up, they end up with tons of games that nobody wants to buy at regular price. What the fuck do you think happened with this Circuit City sale? Doh!

If that actually hurt them, is yet to be seen. Did they sell the games at a loss? How many of the people who came in to CC also got products that where not on sell? How many people went in groups, and people in those groups payed full price for nongame related products? The sell did what it needed to do. It got old stock out of the store, and got a lot of people in their store. Yes CC did screw up S&D but they screwed up everything else too. Did they give anyone any reason to shop there over anyone else?

In the past, it was say, $39.99 for a used game like Ninja Gaiden instead of $44.99. But then perhaps demand was too high, so all the new games got gobbled up right when they were traded in. So the companies (correctly) raised the price. If anything, that keeps the market stable. OMG!

Keep it stable? From what? The crash of the used game market? Onozes. If anything, it is probably to keep the used games from detracting from the sells of new products. As long as the prices are high, it detracts people from buying them. As many people in here have stated, they usually just go on and buy the new copy.

[Diff-chan]

Then why do gas prices go up when there is less gas in supply, or when there is more demand during the summer when everyone is on vacation and traveling? Are you trying to tell that you know more about business than the people who run the oil industry? Or how about the people who are currently upping the prices for wood, metal, wire, and any other thing used to build houses because such things are in demand, now that is loans are better in regards to building new homes? What you are saying, despite how logical it may sound, seems to come in contrast with the reality of what is going on.

Gas prices may go up, because there is a change in supply or for whatever reason, but the demand stays pretty constant. If gas prices were to become $4 per gallon tomorrow, then demand is not necessarilly going to go lower immediately (which is what should happen, according to the laws of s-d). That's because people still need to drive, get to work, etc.That is what the term inelastic refers to. This also explains why the government can continue to raise taxes on cigarettes to gain revenue, because its hard for people to quit so if they were to raise taxes tomorrow people wont stop quitting tomorrow. Theyll just start paying the higher price.

Now, in the long run, people will trade in their bigger cars for smaller ones (this is what happened in the 1980s, after the gas problems of the 1970s here in the US) or they will quit smoking, but in the short term, these things are inelastic and not sensitive to changes in price.

Please, read what I wrote next time. Now, if videogames were to become $120 apiece tomorrow, most people would just stop buying videogames, so demand would plummet. So that's what the term elastic refers to. Very important concept, you know.

Or... you dont know.

[Fe 26]

Gas prices may go [i]up/i], because there is a change in [i]supply[/b] or for whatever reason, but the demand stays pretty constant. Read what I wrote next time.

why bother to up the price, if there is no way to actually effect the demand?

[Diff-chan]

It does affect it, but in the long term. Really, the one reason I can see for upping the price is to... increase revenues.

[Fe 26]

People do drive less. Most of the business world that sells goods to the public through stores, and the torrest industry bitch about it big time. People still go to work, but they are less likely to go on trips, or go shopping for leasure as much.

[Diff-chan]

If that actually hurt them, is yet to be seen. Did they sell the games at a loss? How many of the people who came in to CC also got products that where not on sell? How many people went in groups, and people in those groups payed full price for nongame related products? The sell did what it needed to do. It got old stock out of the store, and got a lot of people in their store. Yes CC did screw up S&D but they screwed up everything else too. Did they give anyone any reason to shop there over anyone else?

Did they sell these games at a loss? From what I know of the videogame business, certainly. But they needed to get rid of the games. If EB were to fuck this stuff up they would end up with a lot of unsold stock. But they dont. EB does a LOT of fiddling around with the # of copies any given game has at any given store at any one time. Im sure GameStop does the same sort of micromanagement too, telling stores to send back extra copies and moving them around, etc. These guys have been in the videogame business a long time and they know what theyre doing.

Keep it stable? From what? The crash of the used game market? Onozes. If anything, it is probably to keep the used games from detracting from the sells of new products. As long as the prices are high, it detracts people from buying them. As many people in here have stated, they usually just go on and buy the new copy.

Look at the big picture. If EB charged too little for the used games, and they fly off the shelves, then the supply of gameX in the store is zero. Which means theyre not gonna sell any. Which also means that theyre probably charging too little. If you run a parking lot in, say, Los Angeles, and it is filled to capacity 99% of the time, you're gonna raise the price, no? Same concept.

Now, if EB charged too much, then they would have a glut of them, and they would basically be stuck. Thats what happened more or less with Circuit City. Then they would have to clear them out and lose money.

People do drive less. Most of the business world that sells goods to the public through stores, and the torrest industry bitch about it big time. People still go to work, but they are less likely to go on trips, or go shopping for leasure as much.

Stop being overly technical. I said it was less sensitive to these sorts of supply-demand rules, less sensitive then something like videogames. That doesnt mean that its bulletproof. Of course some will drive less for leisure but the bulk of driving is done to/from work and that's gonna remain relatively unchanged.

Another example is textbooks. Textbook prices have increased a lot over the past 10 years, but most students dont have a choice but to buy them. Of course, some people will not buy them, or discover workarounds, but most, most (but not all) will just be forced to pay the higher price.

[Fe 26]

Look at the big picture. If EB charged too little for the used games, and they fly off the shelves, then the supply of gameX in the store is zero. Which means theyre not gonna sell any. Which also means that theyre probably charging too little. If you run a parking lot in, say, Los Angeles, and it is filled to capacity 99% of the time, you're gonna raise the price, no? Same concept.

Now, if EB charged too much, then they would have a glut of them, and they would basically be stuck. Thats what happened more or less with Circuit City. Then they would have to clear them out and lose money.

You are being way to simplistic about this. You are acting like there is only one way to deal with used games, thus making game sores just and right, and everyone should just deal. In the concept of supply and demand there are two vectors, the supply vector, and the demand vector. When it comes to the supply, there is little that can be done to influence it. They can offer incentives, but they have yet to do anything I’ve heard of to cause a boom in it. The company however can effect demand. Most of what a business does is to try to effect demand in the mind of the consumer. It does everything it can to get the consumer to want a product and to want it from their store. For starters it advertises the product to make people want it. But that doesn’t insure that people will shop at their store. They have to create a desire in people to go their store for the product. They do this by offering sells, specials, freebies, and lower prices. They sometimes even take a loss on one product to sell other products. Microsoft did this with the Xbox. They sold it at one point at a price lower than it cost to produce it. Why? To get into homes. Which would insure games sales later, or so they hope. They took a loss now, to insure profit later.

There are a multitude of concepts in business, and there are a multitude of ways to deal with each concept. There is no one way to deal with the concept of supply and demand. Treating people like they are stupid for not liking the way one company deals with the issue is wrong, and close minded.

Another example is textbooks. Textbook prices have increased a lot over the past 10 years, but most students dont have a choice but to buy them. Of course, some people will not buy them, or discover workarounds, but most, most (but not all) will just be forced to pay the higher price.

Do you really want to bring textbooks into this? That shit is a mixture of bad politics, area manapolies, and complete bullshit. Sure some of that high price of text books goes into making them, and yes that is going to be a high cost sense unlike harry potter, only a few people are going to buy it. There is also a lot of bullshit in there, like the college book store jacking up the price, and the publishing company jacking up the price because, hey, you gotta have their book for <inster name> class.

[Diff-chan]

I took a mathematical modeling course and one thing we did was model populations... mathematically. We made some preliminary equations and they turned out to be partial differential equations. So we evaluated them and the results we came up with applied to real-world scenarios. But the way we evaluated the PDEs were just using normal mathematical methods. Likewise, you can come up with real-world ways to raise demand, freebies, two-for-ones, selling at a loss, etc., but all you end up doing at the end is plopping that raised demand into the normal, simplistic elementary work of supply/demand curves.

Im not discussing this with you any longer IronPlant. You go to college, burn one of your general education requirements and take an introduction to economics course. It's enlightening and you'll learn a great deal about the way things function in society.