[aislephive]

[ QUOTE ]
OK, Gamestop is a merchandising store. They make money by selling products for more than they cost to acquire. When they buy new games from suppliers, they pay less than the $60 they can get for them. When they buy used games from used-game suppliers (e.g., you), they pay less than the $40 they can get for them. The surplus in both cases goes to paying rent and salespeople.

If they took returns of a formerly new game for full price and had to resell it as used, they would be paying a higher price (=their supply cost on new games) for used inventory. Profits go down, and the CEO is sad.

Now you seem to be confused because some merchandisers DO accept returns at full price, even though they have to resell at a lower price. This is because they can charge a premium for the return feature that is greater than the losses they expect to take from reselling returned goods. Now if goods are likely to be returned at a very high rate, like music and video games, the reselling losses are greater, perhaps even greater than the premium they can charge for returnability. In these cases, stores won't allow returns of new products.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your post makes perfect sense, and I'm not disputing any of what you said nor would I have at any point. I however did address this somewhat earlier, but it's a pretty massive thread now so I can understand if you didn't take the time to read it all. Basically, my suggestion for a return policy regarding new games was this:

'For new games, you must return them within seven days of the purchase with the original reciept in hand. You must pay a fee equal to 10% of the value of the game when you bought it new, and refunds are for store credit only, no cash refunds allowed.'

Now both the alloted time to return the game and the fee could both be adjusted as they see fit to make it less exploitable. I think this would be a very reasonable policy, and I think that it or something similar should be considered. Of course nothing will happen, but it would be nice.