ScatheZombie
Member
Restricting GMG from selling keys was a shrewd business move. But GMG didn't choose to just not sell the game, and so here we are.
Strictly based on the information we know -- It's ridiculous to excuse either CDPR's business decision to not sell keys to GMG, or GMG's decision to resort to another seller. There are two separate, if connected, issues to be analyzed: The negotiation with GMG and their subsequent move. One doesn't excuse the other, and we need more information to actually analyze either without making quite a few assumptions like I did above.
Why is it ridiculous to excuse CDPR's business decision to not sell keys to GMG? Supplier/Retailer contracts fail all the time, from both ends. Choosing to not sell your product through specific retailers is not something new or even malicious, shady, or unethical. It literally happens all the time.
What doesn't happen all the time ... is a retailer intentionally going around the supplier after failing to secure a distribution contract to acquire the goods in what is arguably a questionable manner. That is straight up retailer suicide.
 
	 
				 
 
		 
 
		 The point regarding GOG's margin and the elasticity being higher in particular conditional on going outside Steam didn't come out as clearly as I hoped, though. A ton of people are saying that the fact that GOG's price is the same as Steam means that statements regarding competition should be immediately dismissed. That is categorically wrong.
 The point regarding GOG's margin and the elasticity being higher in particular conditional on going outside Steam didn't come out as clearly as I hoped, though. A ton of people are saying that the fact that GOG's price is the same as Steam means that statements regarding competition should be immediately dismissed. That is categorically wrong. 
 
		