Is the age of discounts over?


log in or register to remove this ad

Yes, I blogged about this myself before it hit the more public news spaces yesterday (it was initially buried at the bottom of a news article about several other Supreme Court decisions).

Personally, I think it's an exceedingly sad day when an almost 100-year old Supreme Court decision against monopoly power is overturned by the current court members.
 
Last edited:


Sidetrack:

I checked out your blog and I like your articles (now in my RSS)! Do you have another blog, the one in your profile was last updated in April.

Back to the subject: I imagine this will hurt the smaller companies and newer games, as if each person has less cash to spread around, they may stick with their favorite one or two games.
 

Key quote from Mr. Dancey (his emphasis):

And the publishers already know that the full-service retail model is the best way to grow their businesses. Given the chance to “save the retailers”, the manufacturers are almost compelled by the logic of the situation to do so.

EDIT: Hey, thanks Brentos :). I do have an entirely non-D&D blog on (god forbid) MySpace. For all things non-D&D (bad words, politics, religion included): http://blog.myspace.com/superdan2
 
Last edited:

Well, I think it remains to be seen how this will affect things. On the one hand, it limits competition among retailers by limiting the retailer's flexibility to set prices. That's not so good for the consumer. On the other hand, it encourages marketplace diversity by making it more difficult for a very large retailer (say, Wal-mart, Borders, Amazon, etc.) to squeeze out smaller retailers by selling product at a loss. That's good for small retailers (FLGS).
 

Maybe...

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
Why would publishers care about the retail price? They get paid the same amount by the retailer, and make the same profits.

Good question. Maybe a company like WOTC, who can't discount their own goods can now do direct distribution to customers and level the playing field by forcing retail prices that equal what they will sell it for themselves. I thought (and I could be waaaay wrong here) that the publisher/manufacturer selling directly to customers had a legal reason why they couldn't discount...or maybe it was a nicety to the distributors/retailers. This could level the playing field for them, I imagine?

Thoughts?
 

Schmoe said:
On the other hand, it encourages marketplace diversity by making it more difficult for a very large retailer (say, Wal-mart, Borders, Amazon, etc.) to squeeze out smaller retailers by selling product at a loss. That's good for small retailers (FLGS).

The scenario I've considered is a retailer so powerful (like Wal-Mart) that they can demand that the manufacturer give cut prices for themselves, and enforce higher prices for competitors. That could in theory be illegal, but then you have to be able to fund the legal challenge against Wal-Mart's lawyers, urgh (whereas formerly it was just patently prohibited).

Probably not something that would happen in RPG's, though.
 

That still makes no sense, Brentos. Take Paizo, for example. If they sell Pathfinder and the Gamemastery novels to other retailers, and get X amount from them (a set cost charged to all retailers), they make the profit they budgeted for. If they then sell Pathfinder or Gamemastery novels on their own site, at full price (X + Y), any they sell there, they get all the money.

Now, maybe there are companies who never want to be happy with X, but that's more of an argument with the retail model as it exists in the country, and can be solved, in the Age of the Internet, by just selling directly from their own site only, but limiting their exposure in others' stores.

After this decision, if they want to force everyone to sell at X + Y, and not at a discount (X + Y - Z), all they're really accomplishing is that a lot of retailers (who use the discounts as a way to get people in the virtual door) like RPGShop or Amazon will just say "nah, call us when you come to your senses" and they'll be back to just selling their products on their own site with the same visibility problems.

This is the farmers killing the goose that laid the golden eggs because they wanted ALL the gold all at once, instead of having the foresight to see that a steady stream of a smaller amount would net them more in the long run.

In other words, any producer stupid enough to do this is almost too stupid to deal with anyway, and has probably got a history of thunderous stupidity.
 

I agree!

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
In other words, any producer stupid enough to do this is almost too stupid to deal with anyway, and has probably got a history of thunderous stupidity.

Heh. I agree with you completely, but I've seen companies do dumber things for the short term dollar chasing. I'm just-a speculatin' :)
 

Remove ads

Top