FK j00 GAME (GAME PLC pricing structure)

X

Xavier

Guest
printer ink isn't cheap anyhow, the ink in epsons specifically is shot out at 9pl which means ludicrously fine pigments - at the end of the day they're charging a reasonable amount and made the price of the printer more enticing by taking a risk and assuming a minimum number of refills per printer sold.

when you buy an epson printer they guarantee the print head for five years as long as you use their inks - third party pigments are generally crap and if you want to use someone elses product and bollocks up your nozzles epson shouldn't be responsible for it... so using such countermeasures as you originally mentioned is the only logical way to proceed

epson specifically have cut lots of corners with such models including fixed heads and nozzles - lexmark do even cheaper printers at £30 but in comparison neither of these can equal what a £200 printer could do three years ago - you get what you pay for...


oh, and as to not wanting to pay £50 for that cheap inkjet? noones forcing you to...
 
D

Durzel

Guest
Originally posted by Xavier
Would you prefer they made a loss selling you the printer and then didn't sell any ink to recoup the lost $$$. ?

Of course they could always take the subsidy off, triple the prices of some printers and then you'd be moaning about the fact you can't afford the latest printer. it's just like prepay mobiles - the four network subsidised the handsets and recouped money on talktime...
Click to expand...
No one ever said it was unfair, it was merely stated that this is how the system works.

Ultimately your question boils down to your usage patterns I guess. If you bought an inkjet printer and printed out your 2-page C.V every other month, then the cost-to-usage ratio would be excellent. If, on the other hand, you use it frequently then you'd soon find paying £60+ (colour and black carts) over and over would become an expensive pastime. But then, no one ever said it was "fair" or "unfair" - that's just the way it is. I think somewhere in your opening vitriol you missed that point.

I can't believe the bunch of whining freeloaders people in general seem to be turning into... the world isn't out to get you, nor are evil capitalists at the top of every company grubbing their hands at the thought of the 1000% markups they've managed to slip onto the latest pc title
Click to expand...
This statement, and the one you make later on about "prices that the market will bear" - contradict eachother. You're correct in the second analysis, and wrong in the first. Commercial entities charge whatever they think people will pay for a product - the cost of manufacture, etc is largely irrelevant. It only becomes relevant when the cost is close to that incurred in manufacturing/distributing, etc the product, and it never is.

To give you a real-world example, I bought some gadgets for my car recently. In the UK they retail for £1500 + VAT + fitting. I got them from Japan by importing them myself for less than half the cost. Why aren't they 1/2 the cost in the UK? Because £1500 has been shown to be a price that UK enthusiasts will, on average, be prepared to pay. You can count import duty, etc (but then businesses get tax relief) and even then it doesn't come close to double the original cost. So the real reason these costs are so high is because the UK companies selling this equipment are trading off people's inability, inaction or sheer laziness in taking the initiative and importing it themselves.

the game costs £39.99 because that's what they've been told to charge - hence RRP.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

You can't blame the system then extol the virtues of it in the same breath. The point is, GAME (and everyone else) charges what they believe people will pay, what they deem the game to be worth (by anticipated demand), etc. I suspect what GAME charges is actually considerably more than they get the game in for in the first place, especially as they would buy in huge bulk quantities. That doesn't make them "teh evil" though, it just makes them a regular profit-making business.

Companies like virgin and HMV are primarily music retailers and can afford to make less on their games as the markup on audio cd's is far bigger... if you don't agree with paying so much the only way it will ever change is for game to shift more copies, hence buy in greater volume and negotiate lower buying costs - which require your support (and therefore custom) not for you to nip round the corner to a music shop and then make derogatory comments at the wrong party.
Click to expand...
An interesting viewpoint, if a little blinded by corporate allegiance. Consumer power works on the premise that if something is priced uncompetitively, you buy it elsewhere where it is cheaper. Doing this en massé sends a clear message to the powers-that-be that the prices they're charging are uncompetitive. If you believe actually buying it at this inflated price would somehow lead to a price reduction, you're living in cloud cookoo land. Perhaps you also believe that UK motorists enraged by petrol prices should in fact buy more of it in the vain hope that the petrol companies will sit up and say "Guys, we've made a fortune off these saps, lets stick the price down because we're such caring people.". Wake up and smell the coffee please :)

Likewise if people didn't want to spend £40 on neverwinter nights then it wouldn't sell - incidentally after visiting my local GAME on Saturday I noticed that NwN had totally sold out... so much for any consumer disgust or uprising...
Click to expand...
It sells to people that either don't have a frame of reference about pricing, or don't care to look elsewhere. Neither of which are indicative of anything, except maybe that the clued-up Internet-going cognoscenti make up a minute percentage of the market. But then we already knew that. Look at piracy? Seems like everyone on IRC pirates games and therefore it's hard to see how games companies make any money... looking at it holistically, all the IRC pirates make up a tiny percentage of game buyers (or rather, non-buyers).

You'll still be playing it in 6+ months time with one charge of £40, which is about half of the amount you'd be paying for the likes of DAoC... couple that fact with the ability to design, host and DM your own worlds and I really can't see any reason to kick off, let alone post a thread just because a game that's been developed for half a decade costed £10 more in GAME than you'd have expected to pay...
Click to expand...
At the end of the day, you can't condemn people for paying for goods legitimately from retailers that are prepared to sell it for less than GAME, especially in the lofty position of having free hardware donated to you. People in glass houses, etc..
 
X

Xavier

Guest
Originally posted by Durzel
No one ever said it was unfair, it was merely stated that this is how the system works.

Ultimately your question boils down to your usage patterns I guess. If you bought an inkjet printer and printed out your 2-page C.V every other month, then the cost-to-usage ratio would be excellent. If, on the other hand, you use it frequently then you'd soon find paying £60+ (colour and black carts) over and over would become an expensive pastime. But then, no one ever said it was "fair" or "unfair" - that's just the way it is. I think somewhere in your opening vitriol you missed that point.
Click to expand...
Sorry mate but I think you're wrong there - inkjets aren't designed for that use - if you find yourself in that bracket of high usage then it's a case of wrong tool for the job - if you're printing loads (e.g. a small office) then that's what lazer printers are for with 1000's of pages per toner cartridge...


This statement, and the one you make later on about "prices that the market will bear" - contradict eachother. You're correct in the second analysis, and wrong in the first. Commercial entities charge whatever they think people will pay for a product - the cost of manufacture, etc is largely irrelevant. It only becomes relevant when the cost is close to that incurred in manufacturing/distributing, etc the product, and it never is.
Click to expand...
I said prices the market would bear, yes - there are always those that want the world on a shoestring but they aren't the majority of consumers... things are done this way because it works... end of story..

You can't blame the system then extol the virtues of it in the same breath. The point is, GAME (and everyone else) charges what they believe people will pay, what they deem the game to be worth (by anticipated demand), etc. I suspect what GAME charges is actually considerably more than they get the game in for in the first place, especially as they would buy in huge bulk quantities. That doesn't make them "teh evil" though, it just makes them a regular profit-making business.
Click to expand...
and unlike the likes of HMV and Virgin who run game departments as an added attraction for their main customers who buy music/video they rely solely on game sales - they're a business not a charity and as mentioned previously console sales and other hardware equate to jack shit...

An interesting viewpoint, if a little blinded by corporate allegiance. Consumer power works on the premise that if something is priced uncompetitively, you buy it elsewhere where it is cheaper. Doing this en massé sends a clear message to the powers-that-be that the prices they're charging are uncompetitive. If you believe actually buying it at this inflated price would somehow lead to a price reduction, you're living in cloud cookoo land. Perhaps you also believe that UK motorists enraged by petrol prices should in fact buy more of it in the vain hope that the petrol companies will sit up and say "Guys, we've made a fortune off these saps, lets stick the price down because we're such caring people.". Wake up and smell the coffee please :)
Click to expand...
I didn't say that it WOULD happen, I said it's the only way it could...


with console and game sales meeting a decline at the moment it's ludicrous to consider that the likes of GAME would lower their prices if pressured for PC titles - if you hadn't noticed the PC games already play second fiddle in the majority of their stores and if it was going to be unprofitable for them to stock games at prices the public demanded you'd more likely see that shelf space decrease further as the stuff that does make money takes over....

and it's me that needs to wake up? please!

It sells to people that either don't have a frame of reference about pricing, or don't care to look elsewhere.
Click to expand...
Or for a plethora of other reasons including impulse purchases, their returns scheme or sheer convenience

Neither of which are indicative of anything, except maybe that the clued-up Internet-going cognoscenti make up a minute percentage of the market. But then we already knew that. Look at piracy? Seems like everyone on IRC pirates games and therefore it's hard to see how games companies make any money... looking at it holistically, all the IRC pirates make up a tiny percentage of game buyers (or rather, non-buyers).

At the end of the day, you can't condemn people for paying for goods legitimately from retailers that are prepared to sell it for less than GAME, especially in the lofty position of having free hardware donated to you. People in glass houses, etc..
Click to expand...



Reading that last paragraph I think you must have missed the point of my initial replies entirely...

the fact of the matter is that GAME don't intend to make 50% of their annual profits from one game, by policy for the first couple of months they put games on shelves for the RRP and subsequently the price lowers by £5 or £10 depending on volume of sale etc...

the first post complained that the game was selling for £40 in GAME - which is just the way they work and the price their disctribution channel/publishers decided... they don't champion low prices but likewise have never put anything out to my knowledge above the RRP - after all that's what it's there for...

The initial post was misguided - it's not GAME to blame - take your grievances to infogrames - I'm sure they'll care ;) take that out and whats left consists of the usual bitching and moaning you hear from any consumer stood at the till demanding a price match...

Now unless you buy 5+ games a month (which would make me wonder if you're ever going to explore games like NwN fully) I can't see the problem in a slightly higher RRP, FFS it's only £40!! It costs me more in petrol to drive to work once in a week!

Tbh I think we should leave things here - i cba to argue this one, working in the industry now as I do I'm seeing things from both sides and such rants over a tenner - which ultimately is about 20 minutes in sega world or a couple of pints was hardly worth this much discussion... things cost what they do because that's what they cost - end of story.... we're a tiny miniority as this online community and our opinions will never sway such companies as GAME so I suggest we all just get back to it before someone starts telling us about having to pay 36p for a pack of polos from a newsie in central london when they cost 22p from some local shop in the middle of nowhere...
 
G

granny

Guest
All this stuff about printers is a bit irrelavant if you ask me.

When it comes to games then anyone who buys them regularly will know that prices vary and will therefore usually check out a few places and buy from the cheapest, simple.

If any given retailer consistently charges higher prices than others then they'll end up selling less, simple supply & demand surely?

I now know never to even bother looking in GAME in Nottingham cos I know for a fact it charges as much as £10 more than places like Virgin & HMV - the only people GAME are hurting by overcharging are themselves...
 
D

Durzel

Guest
Originally posted by granny
When it comes to games then anyone who buys them regularly will know that prices vary and will therefore usually check out a few places and buy from the cheapest, simple.

If any given retailer consistently charges higher prices than others then they'll end up selling less, simple supply & demand surely?

I now know never to even bother looking in GAME in Nottingham cos I know for a fact it charges as much as £10 more than places like Virgin & HMV - the only people GAME are hurting by overcharging are themselves...
Click to expand...
This was exactly the point I was trying to get across, albeit I went around the houses whereas granny was right on the money. :)

The point is - if they don't feel pressurised about the public (people like granny) voting with their feet and buying it from other places that are more competitive, they should.
 
S

Skyler

Guest
I got it for 28 quid from game :p

with a free guidebook
 
S

Sar

Guest
Originally posted by Xavier
the game costs £39.99 because that's what they've been told to charge - hence RRP.
Click to expand...

That's bullshit, because why would they have charged a full £10 less on their own website if they've been TOLD to sell it at £40? I look now and see they've put the website price up to £35 now.

Why would play.com sell it at £27 if they've been TOLD to sell it at £40?

Face it, they're getting the arm in.


BTW: The RRP is not £40, it's £34.99, hence I'm right.
 
E

Embattle

Guest
RRP is only a suggestion as to what it might be sold at.
 
T

Trebz

Guest
Play sell so cheaply because if i am correctly informed, they are based in jersey and therefor do not have any issues with tax.
 
S

Sar

Guest
Thought that, which means play are selling it cheaper than the RRP of £34.99 - tax ;)

Thank god I get some money to clear off me credit cards on Wednesday \o/
 
S

Sar

Guest
Dunno, depends on the quality of the player-created modules, and whether Bioware get the multiplayer issues sorted out.

I got bored of RtCW in multiplayer after a few hours, still playing Q3 3 years later though.

So if it's done well then there's no reason I for instance wouldn't be playing it for a couple of years.

But as I said, it depends really.


Gonna create a few modules myself, as I've been playing about with the toolset for the last couple of days :)
 
H

Hashmonster

Guest
heh i was just kidding, ain't brought it yet - not sure, might have a read up on it
 
X

Xavier

Guest
Originally posted by Sar


That's bullshit, because why would they have charged a full £10 less on their own website if they've been TOLD to sell it at £40? I look now and see they've put the website price up to £35 now.

Why would play.com sell it at £27 if they've been TOLD to sell it at £40?

Face it, they're getting the arm in.


BTW: The RRP is not £40, it's £34.99, hence I'm right.
Click to expand...

that's odd... having chatted with infogrames today they confirmed the RRP was £39.99... I'll let em know they're wrong tomorrow ;)
 
X

Xavier

Guest
Originally posted by Sar


That's bullshit, because why would they have charged a full £10 less on their own website if they've been TOLD to sell it at £40? I look now and see they've put the website price up to £35 now.
Click to expand...

aside from game.uk.com running as a seperate business entity all their online prices are less which is why DAoC is 12.99 online and 19.99 in the retail stores... check ur facts fella before you blurt out in the forums ;)
 
S

Sar

Guest
Yeah I know, so if play are selling at £27, then the stock buy price per item must be lower than that still for them to make a profit.
 
S

Sar

Guest
Yeah but not that much lower than say other online retailers, even including the tax thing.
 
B

bodhi

Guest
£40 for NwN is a rip off if you ask me. I nearly picked up Grand Prix 4 today, but decided not to as £35 is too much to pay for a PC game aswell. I dont mind shelling out 45 quid for a PS2 game, as that extra money buys me the priviledge of being able to play the game sitting on a sofa on a 32" Sony Wega :)

Oh, and throughout this thread, it has become clear to me that Xavier doesn't know his arse from his elbow. No change there, then.
 
S

Scooba Da Bass

Guest
Originally posted by bodhi
Oh, and throughout this thread, it has become clear to me that Xavier doesn't know his arse from his elbow. No change there, then.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid I have to agree, altho;

HE WROKS IN THE INDUSTRY YUO KNOW NOTHING CONSUMMER SCUM!
 
S

Summo

Guest
Originally posted by Xavier
that's odd... having chatted with infogrames today they confirmed the RRP was £39.99... I'll let em know they're wrong tomorrow ;)
Click to expand...
handbag.gif
 
B

bodhi

Guest
I take claims like that from Xavier with a pinch of salt. Especially after he claimed to have an ATi R300 2 months before ATi driver writers did.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top Bottom