That would make you a petty idiot that likes to destroy stuff out of spite and waste money. You'd be an asshole, but not for the reasons of being a scalper.
In the bigger picture, I definitely benefitted from scalping (as the consumer), buying cheap sports games tickets, cheap concert tickets, etc.
Based on this thread, as far as people that GAF doesn't usually care for, scalpers are pretty low on the list presumably because many of the posters on here fall into that category.
I'm not a fan of them. I get why they do what they do, but I'm not a fan of anyone who drives up initial demand just so they can profit off selling it at a higher cost. If the only people buying the items were people actually wanting to use them, the demand often times wouldn't be so high.
And yes, "they're not essential items like food and Medicine," and "Don't hate the player, hate the game," and all that bullshit. You're entitled to game the system and I'm entitled to dislike you because of it.
I'd like to see how they determine the 'market' value since it can vary on an individual basis. For me, any given rare Amiibo is worth zero, since I have no desire to own such rubbish.
That would make you a petty idiot that likes to destroy stuff out of spite and waste money. You'd be an asshole, but not for the reasons of being a scalper.
In the bigger picture, I definitely benefitted from scalping (as the consumer), buying cheap sports games tickets, cheap concert tickets, etc.
Agreed, I'm not saying it can or should be stopped. I just think the people that do it are asses
I've literally had store owners tell me that they have items in the back that they have no intention of putting on shelves because they know that they can sell them on the grey market for a 7-10x markup. If someone thinks that's okay I think it says a lot about their morals.
Buying a product from one market and then selling it on another market for a higher price is not "gaming the system". It happens all the time and at all levels of commerce.
If you dislike arbitrage at the level being discussed here then you should have a problem with the publisher, retailer, seller, buyer, and marketplace. To put the onus just on the seller is irrational.
Should NeoGAF moderate against flipping items in the B/S/T thread? If it is as bad as some say then they probably should. In the scenario where flipping items is a bad thing then NeoGAF would be just as complicit as the seller for providing the seller a viable platform.
Also, "scalping" happens all the time on Amazon. If you buy a lot of products through Amazon Prime there is a good chance that you have taken part in "scalping". Lots of products from third-party sellers are bought on sale or clearance at a brick-and-mortar store and then sent to Amazon warehouses to be sold, for a profit, through Prime. Some products are priced higher on Amazon when using Prime because there is the convenience and security of ordering through Amazon and also guaranteed 2-day shipping.
Paying 10% more on Amazon Prime for the convenience factors is the same as someone paying 20% more on eBay for a limited edition game they didn't reserve or didn't know they wanted until it released.
edit: Framing the buyer in a "scalping" transaction as lacking knowledge is assuming a lot. You're projecting your entire value system onto them. It is entirely possible someone knowingly and willingly pays more for an item and does not care. This doesn't always make them ignorant, they may just place different levels of value on time and money as you.
Agreed, I'm not saying it can or should be stopped. I just think the people that do it are asses
I've literally had store owners tell me that they have items in the back that they have no intention of putting on shelves because they know that they can sell them on the grey market for a 7-10x markup. If someone thinks that's okay I think it says a lot about their morals.
I really wanted the Back to the Future Pepsi Perfect and the 2015 Nikes, just not 3-4 times MSRP.
The only thing I can do and have done is find a contact email at the respective branding company and manufacturing company and give an argument convincing them to re-release.
Dont know if that actually works, but its better than nothing.
I'd agree that video game scalping isn't a huge issue. Games haven't been hard to buy since optical media, even less so now with digital. I guess there is the LE stuff but I'm not too interested in such things.
An area where I always run into issues with beer. A small brewery will do a release of 1,000 bottles of something and sell them at 3 per person for $20 each. People mule it up and bottles start showing up for sale in the $350 range. Stuff like this is also a major problem in the Bourbon market.
I actually didn't know the beer thing was even a thing.
Food stuffs and medication is an odd area for me on this topic. Food and drink safety and all, plus some guy could drink or eat the item and refill and reseal with something of a lower quality and the poor sod buying might not even know.
Scalpers are driven by the same greed corporations are when they take advantage of a situation/manipulate it for excessive gains and take advantage of the desperate by leaving them with little or no choice (even if that desperation is materialistic). Scalpers exist because they can take advantage of certain people who enable them. That alone makes it distasteful and shouldn't be defended.
Wow. This is not Martin Shkreli raising the price of Daraprim 500%. Hell, this isn't even McDonald's dropping the dollar menu. Scalpers have the same access that anyone else does to these products. Sony manufactures 12,000 20th Anniversary PS4 units. Despite how irrational it would be to get legitimately upset about not having one, if you have to be unreasonably mad with someone, it's Sony you should hate for manipulating the market. Also, be mad at your favorite band for only reuniting once a decade. Be mad at Pepsi for only making a few Back to the Future II bottles. Be mad at Nintendo for chip shortages.
What I can't stand are self righteous fans who believe they're entitled to that scalper's property at a cheaper price than what they're willing to give it up for, because hey - fans would never do anything just for the money. That plastic hunk of preordered shit deserves to sit in a closet for 30 years, but only if acquired at MSRP. Not be pimped to make evil money with.
It's kind of a tricky subject. Although it might seem "scummy" to buy something you have no intention of enjoying solely because it is a limited quantity and you'll be able to sell it later for extra cash, none of that happens without the scalper finding a buyer. The blame can't be all on the scalper because it's the buyers who make up the other side of the arrangement. If no one ever bought above retail price than the practice would stop because no money would be made, but obviously that's not going to happen.
Sure as soon as soon as people stop calling George Lucas a scum for the prequels. Believe it or not, people are allowed to complain about stuff that's not a life or death situation. You should see how some people in this place feel about *gasp* advertisements.
I don't cosign that either. Though there's a difference between criticizing a filmmaker's film and people who bought stuff first. In the latter case, both parties wanted it. How do you determine which party's motives are more worthy?
Okay I'm gonna try to switch the tone of the conversation a litttle bit.
So yeah, dumb plastic toys are dumb. It's irrational for somebody to be absolutely devestated because they couldn't get one, that sounds mental.
But what I want to hear is the rationality of why its okay for people to profit off of others people's bad luck. Because, that's what it is at the end of the day. Because it's legal and that's how capitalism works? I guess that's an answer but its not a very good one that answers how its morally okay. Because lolol dumbasses will pay for it? Okay, thank you for admitting that you are a dick. I want to hear some other explanations.
Okay I'm gonna try to switch the tone of the conversation a litttle bit.
So yeah, dumb plastic toys are dumb. It's irrational for somebody to be absolutely devestated because they couldn't get one, that sounds mental.
But what I want to hear is the rationality of why its okay for people to profit off of others people's bad luck. Because, that's what it is at the end of the day. Because it's legal and that's how capitalism works? I guess that's an answer but its not a very good one that answers how its morally okay. Because lolol dumbasses will pay for it? Okay, thank you for admitting that you are a dick. I want to hear some other explanations.
Okay I'm gonna try to switch the tone of the conversation a litttle bit.
So yeah, dumb plastic toys are dumb. It's irrational for somebody to be absolutely devestated because they couldn't get one, that sounds mental.
But what I want to hear is the rationality of why its okay for people to profit off of others people's bad luck. Because, that's what it is at the end of the day. Because it's legal and that's how capitalism works? I guess that's an answer but its not a very good one that answers how its morally okay. Because lolol dumbasses will pay for it? Okay, thank you for admitting that you are a dick. I want to hear some other explanations.
Okay I'm gonna try to switch the tone of the conversation a litttle bit.
So yeah, dumb plastic toys are dumb. It's irrational for somebody to be absolutely devestated because they couldn't get one, that sounds mental.
But what I want to hear is the rationality of why its okay for people to profit off of others people's bad luck. Because, that's what it is at the end of the day. Because it's legal and that's how capitalism works? I guess that's an answer but its not a very good one that answers how its morally okay. Because lolol dumbasses will pay for it? Okay, thank you for admitting that you are a dick. I want to hear some other explanations.
You're asking why capitalism isn't more morally responsible?
Shit man, that's a huge philosophical question.
Your morals end where mine begin. No one in the world shares the exact same morals. Even members of various religions do not share in equally respected morality. People don't work that way.
Business is about exploiting resources to turn a profit. In of itself, exploitation is immoral, wouldn't you agree?
Agreed, I'm not saying it can or should be stopped. I just think the people that do it are asses
I've literally had store owners tell me that they have items in the back that they have no intention of putting on shelves because they know that they can sell them on the grey market for a 7-10x markup. If someone thinks that's okay I think it says a lot about their morals.
So they should sell you something for less than what they can get for it elsewhere because...reasons? As long as these things are not neccecities like medicine I don't see anything morally wrong with someone refusing to sell you an amiibo or some other plastic story for $15 when they know they can get $50 from someone else. That's simple business.
I did feel bad about it... for a very short time. But the guy was super happy to get it, and he was quite happy with the price he paid (he stated it a couple times when we met up.)
So really, it was a win-win situation for both of us. ¯\_(ツ_/¯
It sucks that people buy many units just to sell at a profit, essentially screwing over other customers, but the bigger problem lies with the people who are willing to pay these premium prices that promote this endless cycle.
I don't understand the hate for scalpers. There is X number of things. Anyone can buy it. Everyone has equal access. If their intent from the beginning was to resell it - who are you to deem their reasons for buying something as invalid?
They are a byproduct of the demand, whether artificial or real, created by the company that sells the product in the first place. If Nintendo created a billion of each amiibo, or if 2K created 5 million pip boys, there would be nothing to scalp.
They are a byproduct of the demand, whether artificial or real, created by the company that sells the product in the first place. If Nintendo created a billion of each amiibo, or if 2K created 5 million pip boys, there would be nothing to scalp.
They're producing as many as they believe they can effectively market and sell. It would be foolish to produce an amount much in excess of the amount you believe you can sell.
Meanwhile, scalpers are taking advantage of the small space between Supply and Demand to essentially enable profit for themselves and access to luxury goods for the wealthy, leaving those outside squeezed out and generally feeling cheated.
So they should sell you something for less than what they can get for it elsewhere because...reasons? As long as these things are not neccecities like medicine I don't see anything morally wrong with someone refusing to sell you an amiibo or some other plastic story for $15 when they know they can get $50 from someone else. That's simple business.
They should because doing otherwise would make them asses. Asses that customers will no longer support by buying the non limited items that keep them in business.
I don't understand why there would be a "scalping community". Seems like the sort of enterprise where people would seek to misdirect and screw over others to hoard all the potential profit for themselves.
They should because doing otherwise would make them asses. Asses that customers will no longer support by buying the non limited items that keep them in business.
How would the product company know that they under produced something in high demand?
Let's take the 20 year anniversary grey PS4 as an example.
Sony knew it was producing an ultra limited run and let journalists and bloggers know that it was to be a limited item to purchase. They explicitly said so.
Why would they produce more than the minimum if they have no clue how many people would be willing to pay slightly more for a PS4 with a paint job? Why take that risk?
I could buy a used PS4, find a vinyl company online, and pay them to reproduce as close as possible a grey PS4, fancy logo and all.
There are always workarounds when it comes to these collector's edition products.
How would the product company know that they under produced something in high demand?
Let's take the 20 year anniversary grey PS4 as an example.
Sony knew it was producing an ultra limited run and let journalists and bloggers know that it was to be a limited item to purchase. They explicitly said so.
Why would they produce more than the minimum if they have no clue how many people would be willing to pay slightly more for a PS4 with a paint job? Why take that risk?
I could buy a used PS4, find a vinyl company online, and pay them to reproduce as close as possible a grey PS4, fancy logo and all.
There are always workarounds when it comes to these collector's edition products.
I'll be the first to admit that I dont understand the mentality of people that need to have the latest limited faceplate, console, controller, etc.
If you consider something else like say... bourbon. A product that takes upwards of 10 years to produce, so the supply is based on estimations from an entirely different market (and even if they knew demand they likely wouldn't have the capacity to meet it). There is also no workaround. People buy them up for $80 for the sole purpose of reselling them for $500.
I'll be the first to admit that I dont understand the mentality of people that need to have the latest limited faceplate, console, controller, etc.
If you consider something else like say... bourbon. A product that takes upwards of 10 years to produce, so the supply is based on estimations from an entirely different market (and even if they knew demand they likely wouldn't have the capacity to meet it). There is also no workaround. People buy them up for $80 for the sole purpose of reselling them for $500.
They should because doing otherwise would make them asses. Asses that customers will no longer support by buying the non limited items that keep them in business.
No it makes them a business, and not a charity. You expecting them to sell you products for less than what they are worth makes you an unreasonable customer, and probably one they don't mind losing.
No it makes them a business, and not a charity. You expecting them to sell you products for less than what they are worth makes you an unreasonable customer, and probably one they don't mind losing.
That's kind of part of the weird, bipolar, fucked up fantasy land that proponents of pure profit adhere to. There are greys between Pure Profit and Pure Charity that businesses can inhabit (and usually do inhabit). If it were all about maximizing profit 100% of the time, such businesses would likely be the target of political and social ire.
That's kind of part of the weird, bipolar, fucked up fantasy land that proponents of pure profit adhere to. There are greys between Pure Profit and Pure Charity that businesses can inhabit (and usually do inhabit). If it were all about maximizing profit 100% of the time, such businesses would likely be the target of political and social ire.
Scalpers are the fucking scum of the earth (and by earth I mean our hyperbolic nerd enthusiast culture) ALL I WANTED WAS A LITTLE MAC FOR A NORMAL PRICE!
If that were the case then we wouldn't see consoles selling for MSRP at launch. Target would be selling them at prices in line with the secondary market.
Believe it or not, running a business isn't about extracting everything you can out of them on a single purchase. These stores wouldn't exist without repeat customers
Sure. The original SFIV TE and standard arcade sticks didn't sell well retail, however there were plenty of individuals who were willing to purchase them on eBay due to lack of an online store. In between jobs, I purchased a bunch of these, at a financial risk to myself. I sold them for profit and was able to live for a bit longer.
At this time I was selling off my game collection to GAF especially. Some who overvalued or under depending on the item. I would have made double selling some of the stuff now.
I had a big response type up and lost it due to a browser issue
My tl;dr version is that I don't personally consider this the same as what the OP is talking about. It sounds like you were taking unwanted stock (that no one in your area seemed to be interested), and were selling it to a group elsewhere that, for whatever reason, could not obtain it. If you were scooping up special editions and arcade sticks and throwing them up on craigslist because they were a hot commodity around you then I think that would be more like OPs situation. Your Wii example is perfect.
How would the product company know that they under produced something in high demand?
Let's take the 20 year anniversary grey PS4 as an example.
Sony knew it was producing an ultra limited run and let journalists and bloggers know that it was to be a limited item to purchase. They explicitly said so.
Why would they produce more than the minimum if they have no clue how many people would be willing to pay slightly more for a PS4 with a paint job? Why take that risk?
I could buy a used PS4, find a vinyl company online, and pay them to reproduce as close as possible a grey PS4, fancy logo and all.
There are always workarounds when it comes to these collector's edition products.
This may be a terrible idea because I don't really know much about the production side of things, but could Sony have done something along the lines of...
Announce this edition months in advance. Open a pre-order window for said console, stating that if they receive at least "x" order then they will produce a console for every pre-order, along with a very, very limited quantity of extra consoles. Announce a release date based on final pre-order/production numbers.
That seems like a situation where everyone that wants one gets a fair shot at getting one. BUT, if the goal of the company is to create a truly limited piece, then they really don't care if everyone that wants one gets one.
For general console releases, like the Wii, something like the above isn't really going to work, but for stuff like this I don't see why not? I think it just depends on the company's goals.
I had a big response type up and lost it due to a browser issue
My tl;dr version is that I don't personally consider this the same as what the OP is talking about. It sounds like you were taking unwanted stock (that no one in your area seemed to be interested), and were selling it to a group elsewhere that, for whatever reason, could not obtain it. If you were scooping up special editions and arcade sticks and throwing them up on craigslist because they were a hot commodity around you then I think that would be more like OPs situation. Your Wii example is perfect.
Like you mentioned, there was the convenience factor. People more or less pay companies to scalp now. One example would be you can place a food/goods order with an app, pay a higher rate for each particular item over retail cost, and then additional fees for services rendered.
Retail also does specific bundles which falls under the same umbrella. There are a lot of different variations. This forum however, the ire seems to be geared towards limited edition incentives.
This didn't happen to be but to someone I met. I was in line for the Wii launch and a guy was telling me about how he had lined up for 12 hrs to get a PS3.
There were 5 people in line, he was #2 and the store (walmart) had 5 PS3s. All 5 people waited 12 hours.
Finally hits midnight and the first guy goes up and says "I'll buy all 5 PS3s." And this piece of shit walmart employee said sure no problem and sold him all 5. He then turns around and tells the other 4 people he'll sell them their PS3's for double the cost.
I wish this was a joke.
I don't know who is worse in this story - the guy who did it or the walmart employee that had no problem screwing over the other 4 people when they had the power to not sell this guy the other 4 units.
This didn't happen to be but to someone I met. I was in line for the Wii launch and a guy was telling me about how he had lined up for 12 hrs to get a PS3.
There were 5 people in line, he was #2 and the store (walmart) had 5 PS3s. All 5 people waited 12 hours.
Finally hits midnight and the first guy goes up and says "I'll buy all 5 PS3s." And this piece of shit walmart employee said sure no problem and sold him all 5. He then turns around and tells the other 4 people he'll sell them their PS3's for double the cost.
I wish this was a joke.
I don't know who is worse in this story - the guy who did it or the walmart employee that had no problem screwing over the other 4 people when they had the power to not sell this guy the other 4 units.
i mean it's one thing to try and take advantage of a situation to make some money, and an entirely other thing when you've been in line with a group of 4 other people for 12 hours, never telling them what your plan is, knowing the whole time that you plan to try and take advantage of them.
it's one thing if you walk in a store and there are 3 consoles there and no one else around and you snatch em up.
what this guy did is on another level. it's downright aggressive action against the other 4 people. disgusting.
_/¯ 
