This kinda pissed me off

[otnemem]

OP,

The reason the policy exists for used games is because they're ALREADY [censored] OPEN! You're not really this [censored] dumb, are you?

[aislephive]

[ QUOTE ]
OP,

The reason the policy exists for used games is because they're ALREADY [censored] OPEN! You're not really this [censored] dumb, are you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Seriously, what the hell is your point? You love to throw around these one liners like they mean anything at all. I think you're the biggest douche I've come across in OOT, congrats. OBVIOUSLY IM AWARE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A NEW AND USED GAME YOU [censored] IDIOT.

You missed the entire point anyways, yet again. You clowns just told me how this policy would be abused and run GameStop out of business blah blah when they already have the [censored] policy implemented for used games. But gee whiz, Gamestop would never allow a policy for new games to be returned within a week paying a $5-10 fee in exchange for a refund of store credit. So many people would spend $60 on a brand new game (zomg new!) and then $5-10 each week so they could return it in exchange for another brand new game, instead of just buying the used version of said game and returning it for another game a week later without any fees or questions asked, or just going to Blockbuster and abusing their return policy.

You should stick to those pretentious one liners that totally miss the entire point, btw. If you actually try to use your head I'm afraid you might hurt yourself. So browse some OOT threads, find some really good conceited remarks/insults from fellow pompous d-bags, and come back with another tounge in cheek response. Be sure to have very little relevance and not make any sense. Who am I kidding, you've got that one down pretty good!

[aislephive]

You OOT tards have officially put me on forum tilt. afgd'd3tf4gegfjrrjk8ea
tgkotd4tuq;f's2'sfhng

Show me specifically where I'm wrong, or stfu and gfto thx.

[wtfsvi]

[ QUOTE ]
You OOT tards have officially put me on forum tilt. afgd'd3tf4gegfjrrjk8ea
tgkotd4tuq;f's2'sfhng

Show me specifically where I'm wrong, or stfu and gfto thx.

[/ QUOTE ] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

I'd challenge you to HU for rolls. That seems like your kind of proof. But I'm too mature. (Or maybe I'm busto [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img])

[otnemem]

One liners? So [censored] retarded.

Gamestop doesn't care if people abuse the used game policy, because the games are already open. They don't lose anything, because they're putting it right back on the shelf the same way it went out. When you open your new game and return it, they lose money no matter what. If it's not because of the fact that they have to lower the price on it now, it will be down the road when nobody's buying the game anymore and they have to lower the price on the used copy you put back on their shelf. Seriously, this would be the greatest level ever if it is one.

[aislephive]

[ QUOTE ]
One liners? So [censored] retarded.

Gamestop doesn't care if people abuse the used game policy, because the games are already open. They don't lose anything, because they're putting it right back on the shelf the same way it went out. When you open your new game and return it, they lose money no matter what. If it's not because of the fact that they have to lower the price on it now, it will be down the road when nobody's buying the game anymore and they have to lower the price on the used copy you put back on their shelf. Seriously, this would be the greatest level ever if it is one.

[/ QUOTE ]

To suggest that people abusing the used game policy doesn't affect sales of their new games is hilarious. Can you be any more of a clueless moron? OH WAIT R U LEVELING ME? THAT WOULD SERIOUSLY BE THE AWESOMEST LEVEL OF ALL TIME AMIRITE?!

[stormstarter28]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
One liners? So [censored] retarded.

Gamestop doesn't care if people abuse the used game policy, because the games are already open. They don't lose anything, because they're putting it right back on the shelf the same way it went out. When you open your new game and return it, they lose money no matter what. If it's not because of the fact that they have to lower the price on it now, it will be down the road when nobody's buying the game anymore and they have to lower the price on the used copy you put back on their shelf. Seriously, this would be the greatest level ever if it is one.

[/ QUOTE ]

To suggest that people abusing the used game policy doesn't affect sales of their new games is hilarious. Can you be any more of a clueless moron? OH WAIT R U LEVELING ME? THAT WOULD SERIOUSLY BE THE AWESOMEST LEVEL OF ALL TIME AMIRITE?!

[/ QUOTE ]

I hate it when Mom and Dad fight. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[bobman0330]

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.

[NotFadeAway]

[ QUOTE ]
You OOT tards have officially put me on forum tilt. afgd'd3tf4gegfjrrjk8ea
tgkotd4tuq;f's2'sfhng

Show me specifically where I'm wrong, or stfu and gfto thx.

[/ QUOTE ]
How can you not understand this? You went to a store and bought a product. After completing this transaction you decided you wanted to negate the transaction by returning the product. The store agreed to negate your transaction, but only was willing to pay you a portion of the price that you paid. You thought that you should be able to completely negate the transaction after it was agreed to (and finalized, as you gave them money in exchange for your product) and the store disagreed with you. As you had fully completed the transaction it was up to the store as to whether or not they felt that it was in their best interests to negate your transaction, and they felt that it was not. The end.

[aislephive]

Did you read the thread, or even the last 10 posts? If you did, you wouldn't have posted that.