This kinda pissed me off

[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.

[aislephive]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah A5 I can see why you'd be annoyed but it's pretty inevitable for these smaller gamer companies for reasons people have touched on a bit already

McDonalds: They can afford a generous full refund policy because they can still retain a very strong "Revenue to Returns ratio" probably at least 500:1. No way small gaming stores could accomplish this, their ratio would be much much smaller. If everyone started abusing McD's policy, they would discontinue it.


[ QUOTE ]
Now I can see them not giving me a complete refund or exchange, perhaps making me pay 5 or 10 bucks since it was opened and they can't sell it new.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is what they do, but they just charge a $40 fee for a $60 full refund [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure that EBGames/Gamestop (same company btw, Gamestop bought EBgames in 05) now has a monolopy on video game stores, and I see them all over the place. I think they're a pretty big company even though they definitely do have major competition in the form of Best Buys and WalMarts, etc.

The reason why I was pissed to begin with is because the offer for the game was a joke. The trade in value of THPG was listed as $20 on their website, but it makes no sense to label a game's value based solely on the fact that it is technically used. The condition of the game and the contents inside the cover determine how much they sell each used game for. A scratched up yet working version of THPG with a stained and ripped instruction manual they will probably sell for $30-35. Mine is practically brand new with no scratches or anything that would suggest that it was a used game whatsoever, and they're going to sell that one for $50-55. Yet me and the guy who gave them the same which is in poor but working condition are going to get the same amount back. That just seems completely ridiculous to me that the condition of the game is not a factor at all in what I should get for it, especially considering I'd only had it for a few days so it's not like I can fool them into thinking it's a new game because I kept it in mint condition.

Like I said before, I didn't expect them to give me a full refund. I did expect that I could work something out with them that we both would consider fair. An amount that wouldn't cause them to lose money on the exchange, whether I pay an extra $5-10 or even $15. Is it worth getting worked up about? Probably not. I'm just a nit, what can I say.

[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.

[yi style]

[ QUOTE ]
The reason why I was pissed to begin with is because the offer for the game was a joke. The trade in value of THPG was listed as $20 on their website, but it makes no sense to label a game's value based solely on the fact that it is technically used. The condition of the game and the contents inside the cover determine how much they sell each used game for. A scratched up yet working version of THPG with a stained and ripped instruction manual they will probably sell for $30-35. Mine is practically brand new with no scratches or anything that would suggest that it was a used game whatsoever, and they're going to sell that one for $50-55. Yet me and the guy who gave them the same which is in poor but working condition are going to get the same amount back. That just seems completely ridiculous to me that the condition of the game is not a factor at all in what I should get for it, especially considering I'd only had it for a few days so it's not like I can fool them into thinking it's a new game because I kept it in mint condition.

[/ QUOTE ]

i agree with you here, and if they thought that customers would still buy used games in great condition for close to full price, they might change their return policy.

[kiddynamite]

If it looks brand new and you saved all the packaging, why don't you just go exchange it at any walmart and say you don't have the receipt...?

[rubbrband]

grunch:
sell your game on ebay and buy skate on ebay.

PS quit cryin like a bitch.

[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.

[edfurlong]

You seem pretty smart.

[Assani Fisher]

aislephive,

You disagreed with the corporate rules of Gamestop. You started this thread I would suppose because you wanted OOT's opinion on it. OOT has OVERWHELMINGLY voiced its opinion that you are wrong. OOT understands all of the details and has made up its mind. I have yet to see EVEN ONE PERSON that agrees with you anywhere in this thread. End of thread. 101,984 and counting.