Is the age of discounts over?

[tenkar]

No, SOME FLGS provide a place for gamers to meet and play. There are quite a few game stores here in NYC that I know of that don't. Even Neutral Ground, which HEAVILY promotes Card and miniatures gamers while giving RPGr's a hard time about taking up tables that can be otherwise used for card gaming...

NYC seems to be the Black Hole of FLGSs. The Complete Strategist is far from friendly and I can't remember one in Queens since Hobbies and Such closed its doors YEARS ago.

I do 95% of my RPG shopping online. I'd lower that percentage quite a bit if I actually had a FLGS to give me business to.

 

[Delta]

I'll be surprised if this ruling stands up in the long run.

Ugh, you realize the last time this was decided it was in place for 96 years? And this one was decided 5-4 on the strength of the newest (youngest) members of our ultimate Supreme Court?

I'd like to share your optimism, but frankly I can't.

 

[Banshee16]

Well, this has been very interesting reading. Without getting into how tragic the FLGS tragedy of the commons is, Ryan Dancey makes a few statements about economics that don't strike me as quite right.

First off, he says that gaming demand is inelastic, meaning that people won't buy a similar (but not identical) product at a lower price. So if people want M:tG, they won't buy a cheaper knock-off. But he seems to ignore the fact that people will buy less of M:tG at a higher price (until WotC comes out with newer, cooler cards). Of course, this isn't really the issue with this court decision; WotC can set the price where it wants based on their understanding of the supply/demand curve and either (a) tell retailers exactly the price or (b) suggest a retail price. The point is, WotC can adjust the price either way so consumers get it at the correct point on the supply/demand curve. In this, it seems like R.D. might be right that fixing a price across the board might help the LGS (or at least not hurt it). But how important that is has been the debate here.

The other thing that he implies is that removing antitrust barriers from the market is capitalism (true enough, in a strict laissez faire sense) and therefore great for consumers. W/o straying into politics, let's just say that pure capitalism tends to end up in the form of monopolies (Ma Bell, MS, etc), which isn't always great for consumers. There is a reason antitrust laws were instituted, after all.

In the end, though, I'm glad this decision seems unable to affect the Canadian market. Since I moved here a year ago, I've been appalled at the ridiculous "exchange rate" for USD/CAD with respect to book retail pricing. The only way to get fair value for my dollar is through deep discounting.

Preaching to the choir. Several articles have commented on how Canadian retailers are shooting themselves in the foot by not transferring the cost savings of our higher dollar to us. Local stores have lost a sale, for example, because I found that even *after* I pay taxes and duties, it's still about $500 cheaper to buy tires for my car in the U.S. than it is here.

That's not right...but hey, guess they don't want my money.

Unfortunately, the U.S. tends to get what it wants, economically.....so I expect that this will affect us somehow. Guess we'll see.

Banshee

 

[Banshee16]

Aren't the book chains one of the things that White Wolf and other large companies have brought to the table so to speak when doing imprints? That they can be sold in larger retailers and online? Take away the discount and the incentive to buy such from Amazon.com or Buy.com goes away and the sales decline overall. It's not mom and pop shops selling the majority of gaming products these days.

I disagree. Many of us don't have access to shops on a consistent basis. I have three shops I can use, and *do* use for many of my purchases. But there's usually only about one day a week that I can visit them, and it means that in that day, I have to forego other things that need to get done. When I *do* get there, it's a gamble as to whether they'll have what I want to purchase. Sure, I can do special orders, but often it takes weeks for them to get the book(s) I want. Or, I can venture online, and purchase from Amazon or something, and get it within days. At the lower price I'd expect, given they don't have the overhead that a store does.

To try and prevent Amazon or other online retailers from setting their pricing is colossal interference with their business models. In the end, I think if WotC etc. tries to force a change, through use of this ruling, it could easily backfire in their faces.

Banshee

 

[jodyjohnson]

To try and prevent Amazon or other online retailers from setting their pricing is colossal interference with their business models. In the end, I think if WotC etc. tries to force a change, through use of this ruling, it could easily backfire in their faces.

Banshee

Amazon is capable of selling a number of items with no discount at all. Just the free shipping and 'avoidable' sales tax are a draw (I would say no sales tax but that's not true).

How many console games are not sold at a discount?

And the majority of non-book items are not sold at the huge discount of 34% (although Harry Potter is at 49% discount).


Walmart and Borders grade discounts are not as at risk here as Amazon and Gameoutfitter sized discounts.

 

[Banshee16]

Amazon is capable of selling a number of items with no discount at all. Just the free shipping and 'avoidable' sales tax are a draw (I would say no sales tax but that's not true).

How many console games are not sold at a discount?

And the majority of non-book items are not sold at the huge discount of 34% (although Harry Potter is at 49% discount).


Walmart and Borders grade discounts are not as at risk here as Amazon and Gameoutfitter sized discounts.

What are their sales of those items like, though? Books seem to be somewhat different. I very rarely buy non-gaming books through Amazon, because I live a 5 minute walk away from an Indigo that has just about everything I could want. However, gaming books are much harder to find....so those I buy more frequently.

But things like console games, DVDs, and cameras and such? I've never really purchased them through websites....in most cases, the goods are available at multiple local stores, and given they're not discounted online, that kind of purchase can become a pain if the product is defective or needs repairs. Books don't normally need repairs.

Maybe I'm a cheap bugger, but I rarely purchase things like console games etc. at full price anyways. I don't find them really worth $80. An interesting thing will be seeing whether companies try to leverage this into preventing products from ending up in bargain bins, etc.

Thanks for reminding me of Harry Potter...I've been remiss in not preordering it for my wife

Overall, I find the added value of gaming shops to be overrated. I like using them, and I support them whenever I can. But frankly, I've never met a player in one, who I've invited into my game (successfully). The ads for new players that are posted on the boards in my local shop have almost always found me players that did significant damage to my group. My group of several years imploded after adding two players from a local FLGS into my group earlier this year. And I've been in non-playing status ever since.

The only good sources of players I've found was through "a friend of a friend", and through the old player posting boards that WotC/TSR used to have. I found players through those boards who joined my group for 6+ years, and became good enough friends that they were at my wedding. FLGS's? Never again.

Banshee

 

[Dark Psion]

Keep in mind that some of us have no Local Gameshop, Friendly or otherwise. Amazon.com is our primary source for our books. Yes, there are books stores like Borders, but I have more gaming books on my shelves that those I know of have combined (and they have the same core books each). And not all books stores are friendly to gamers, I remember one that "hid" its D&D books in an out of the way corner (Search DC 30), and others that would look at you funny when your bought them.

One question I have about this ruling, who decides the Suggested Retail Price?

Technically an item is worth what someone else is willing to pay for it. But to be honest, I probably would not have bought some of my books if I had to pay that "Suggested" price. Some have said that the Suggested Retail Price is purposely inflated to account for discounters, but I doubt it will be reduced any time soon. It is hard to really determine what a book is worth because it is part the physical book (page count, color, binding and paper) but is also who wrote it, who did the art and how well they did the job. Some books are very disapointing (Expedition to Undermountain, I'm looking at you) and some are so good I am still reading them (Ptolus, the Neverending story).


The main effect of this descision is to give the publishers an additional option. It is their choice on if or how they use that option.

 

[Glyfair]

One question I have about this ruling, who decides the Suggested Retail Price?

The publisher.

Note that you can still sell your products for whatever price you choose. The way its enforced is that the publisher gives a "Minimum Retail Price" (which isn't necessarily the "Suggested Retail Price"). Any retailer found to be selling below that doesn't get to buy any more product from the company.

In fact, even those this has been the rules, it's been in practice by a few companies. Also, I know in the video industry a "minimum advertised price" was in effect for a while. Video stores often get advertising incentives when they purchase ad space. If they advertise below that level they don't get any of the advertising money and have to pay it all themselves.

 

[Steel_Wind]

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.

It was most unwise and reflective of the current court's sharp ideological divide.

Americans have little apprecation of the mischief minimum floor pricing causes. Canadians pay two to two and a half times the prices on many consumer electronics items because of minimum floor price fixing. It is highly anti-consumer. Check out Onkyo USA's prices in Canada - where MSRP min floor price is legal - and the USA, where until this past weeke it was not, for example. Many internet resellrs are prevented from shipping to Canada to preserve the floor price in Canada. Newegg can't ship to Canadians to preserve the artifical price market in Canada. You have no idea what mischief these bozos on the Supreme Court have just done to you all.

However,when this percolates into the price stream - as it will - Congress will be inundated with complaints. It can be undone in Washington rather quickly by statute. In any event - another administration will bring another appointment or two to the Court should the legislation not be amended directly.

I do not think this decision will last long. But until then, America will have an opportunity to see what an extremely BAD idea relaxation of legislation meant to promote competitive pricing really is.

The suggestion that this decision is "pure capitalism" as if that equated with a good thing for the market mentioned by Ryan Dancey was one of the most ignorant comments I have read anywhere this year in print - in any medium.

 

[Mistwell]

I doubt this will impact this particular part of this industry much at all. The sales figures for RPG materials are not really in the realm where the allowed minimums will even be bothered with. This ruling has a lot more to do with the mass production of mostly-fungible consumer goods to a broad spectrum of retailers.