5 ms·

Used Video Games Are Good For The Industry (It's Just GameStop That's Bad)

34 points by fallentimes 18y ago

sachinag 18y ago
Well, this is targeted at GDC attendees (we're flyering out there: http://twitter.com/Christopurr/status/1395013503 http://twitter.com/Christopurr/status/1395013503), but would love the thoughts of the HN crew now that it's front paged.
- fallentimes 18y ago
  Other than Gamestop and you guys, what competition is there?
  - sachinag 18y ago
    eBay, Amazon Marketplace, and Half. [Fee comparison: http://www.dawdle.com/selling/index.php/fees/ http://www.dawdle.com/selling/index.php/fees/ The Google Spreadsheet isn't locked, so please don't abuse it. :) ] What's interesting is that we're trying to get all the small independent stores to sell on Dawdle. They're a different beast - many of them don't even sell new games. They're typically in a strip mall next to a Wal-Mart that does. So people go into the indie store, sell their games, and walk to the Wal-Mart to buy new games. Only the people who can't afford new games anyway or are looking for older stuff that Wal-Mart doesn't stock end up buying at the used game store, so the publishers/developers/retailers actually don't "lose sales", which is their main concern.
    - goldsmith 18y ago
      If people are going to go to the Walmart to buy new games anyway, why wouldn't the indie store them as well? Even if the prices are a little higher, wouldn't the convenience of not having to go somewhere else make up for it?
      - sachinag 18y ago
        They've told us it doesn't make up for it. The stores just walk down to the Wal-Mart themselves to pick up a couple copies of Halo 3 or whatever rather than actually working with a games distributor like Jack of All Games or whoever. They just can't compete on new games; that's why they do used, retro, and host tournaments and so forth.
voidpointer 18y ago
I fail to see how dwadle is radically different from the GameStop model. They only make 12% on a used game sale, so what? They are just cheaper than GameStop. They have the same incentive advertising the purchase of used games over new games as GameStop does. I don't think they are in a position to point fingers at their competitors as is done in the article. It is nice that you get real cash instead of store credit. On the other hand, as a seller you are competing with other sellers so you don't get instant credit like at GameStop. It's a choice everyone interested should be able to make for themselves. The remarks towards GameStop are uncalled for though. They should compete on a service/product level and not pull out some twisted ethical argument how they are better for the gaming industry.
- jcromartie 18y ago
  Dawdle is a good thing for gaming culture because it stocks classic games that are valuable to people who seek to broaden their horizons with a wider variety of titles. GameStop merely pushes the "hot" games. GameStop doesn't even sell games that don't get preordered at their stores. GameStop is utterly devoid of any real cultural value to gamers.
  - Radix 18y ago
    Which is sad because it didn't always feel this way. GameStop still employs gamers, so it is easy to miss this. The racks they keep for the previous generation consoles isn't as prominant anymore. Funcoland had a great feel to it. They always had several TV's with games on them. I think I played Super Mario RPG first there. It was weird compared to what I expected, but that was a great game.
- sachinag 18y ago
  No, if a new game sells on Dawdle for $60, we make $7.20. If a used game sells on Dawdle for $55, we make $6.60. Technically, we'd favor new games because our commission dollars are higher. But our margins are not. We're like the real estate broker; we make money by finding market-clearing prices. Higher prices are naturally better, but we can't control that. Our goal is to reduce friction. As to your second point, you can get instant sales when there are Sell It Now buttons for items that have StandingOffers. (Example: http://www.dawdle.com/product.php/wavebird-wireless-controller-platinum-045496950538-dc58e http://www.dawdle.com/product.php/wavebird-wireless-controll...) Lastly, there absolutely is an ethical argument here. The publishers send traffic to GameStop, then GameStop sales reps push used games. That's what gets Dave Perry and all the other publishers who are willing to speak out so angry.
Tichy 18y ago
Sorry, but this is ridiculous. Somebody bought a used game for 40$ on Dawdle (or Dawlde bought it for 40$ and resold it for > 40$), and that is not showing up in the second chart. If that was included in the second chart, it would look exactly like the first chart. Edit: to clarify, the second chart only shows purchases of new games, whereas in reality some used games must have been purchased to provide the new 40$ in purchasing power.
- Dilpil 18y ago
  Yes. The chart struck me as highly suspect, that is why.
- ajuc 18y ago
  Exactly, Dawdle cant forever buy used games for $40 and do nothing with them, they'd bankrupt. This is not real money multiplier (like in bank), because "new" money is not created "from air" but taken from other place. So, for each used game bought by Dawdle either: a) Dawdle lose $40 b) Dawdle sells this game to someone (in which case this is exactly the same situation like in case of GameStop) For Dawdle to survive amount of cash lost by unsold used games must be smaller than amount of cash earned by selling new and used games (only count margins there, not full prices).
- bena 18y ago
  But not necessarily by the person doing the purchasing. That's part of his point that isn't being made clearly. In Gamestop's model, they issue you a store credit so you have to go back to Gamestop. Once there, they pressure you into "saving $5" by purchasing a used copy of another game (through low buyback amounts, Edge cards, etc.). In Dawdle's model, you get a higher buyback amount and aren't forced to shop at Dawdle. This user can then go buy the next latest title and repeat the cycle. Dawdle is trying to show how their model is better for both consumers and producers.
  - ajuc 18y ago
    Still - either Dawdle bankrupt, or somebody is going to buy that used game from them (at least high percent of that used games). PS. I wish them all the best, but these charts and description using words like money multiplier is just Wrong (tm) :)
pxlpshr 18y ago
I love Dawdle and wish you guys the best of luck! I came out of a failed video game startup last year, I know how difficult it can be being a new guy on the streets of a massive industry. It's definitely one heck of a challenge but I'm confident you guys will succeed. I wish I was going to GDC this year, went in '08 and it was a blast.
Radix 18y ago
It looks like you all are partnered with Best Buy. Other than that a good article. Have you considered selling new games directly? I know from another post you plan on expanding to other markets so I can see a future where you advertise more expensive products to be drop shipped from the manufacturer's warehouse straight to the consumer. ...wait, maybe I should build a business on that idea.
- sachinag 18y ago
  If you want to build a business on that idea, we'll be happy to help you out. We know a couple of the distribution companies that drop ship and we'll give you a fee discount to get more new games on the site. :) [BTW, we're not partnered with Best Buy at all. It's just that blue is a default color in PowerPoint. :) ]
  - Radix 18y ago
    Actually it was the choice of Best Buy, the choice of blue, and the use of Best Buy (and Amazon) as alternative places to purchase games when I was checking out your site. Regarding you post, I would like to look into this. Would you email me the names of those distribution companies and how can I contact you? (I glanced at your site, but didn't see your email.) benjamin . serrato (at g mail com) Sometimes I wonder how good I should expect the webcrawlers are.
    - ja2ke 18y ago
      Using "Best Buy" as shorthand for "big retail chain which sells games, but, no no, I'm not talking about GameStop here, no, ugh, I'm talking about everyone EXCEPT gamestop in this bit -- you know, the stores like Best Buy and that sort of thing," works just fine.
      - Radix 18y ago
        Yes, I just like the local Fry's more than Best Buy. Bias, that's really all it is. [edited with new magic editing powers]
mrcharles 18y ago
I think the biggest difference between Dawdle and Gamestop is that people do more buying at Gamestop. I can't really see a functional difference. Even the quick math doesn't add up given the two charts. 1:1 New:Used, vs 3:2 New:Used. Maybe I'm missing something important. Whether or not the company selling used games makes money off of it or pushes it is very small I would think. If someone wants a used game, they'll get a used game. In fact, at Dawdle, since the example shows games as selling for cheaper, I can see that maybe it would allow people to save a little more money for new games... or it would allow people to just buy more games. What am I missing that makes this different?
jedediah 18y ago
So in the original image, a gamer would buy a used game from GameStop instead of a new game from Best Buy. If a used game will suffice, why would the same gamer not just buy a $40 game from Dawdle instead of the $60 game from Best Buy?
jay_kyburz 18y ago
I'm sorry, as far as I'm aware, developers see no money from the sale of a second hand game. If you are not going to reward a developer for their hard work, or contribute to their next game, why would you pay anything at all?

34 points by fallentimes 18y ago

Well, this is targeted at GDC attendees (we're flyering out there: http://twitter.com/Christopurr/status/1395013503 http://twitter.com/Christopurr/status/1395013503), but would love the thoughts of the HN crew now that it's front paged.

fallentimes 18y ago
Other than Gamestop and you guys, what competition is there?
- sachinag 18y ago
  eBay, Amazon Marketplace, and Half. [Fee comparison: http://www.dawdle.com/selling/index.php/fees/ http://www.dawdle.com/selling/index.php/fees/ The Google Spreadsheet isn't locked, so please don't abuse it. :) ] What's interesting is that we're trying to get all the small independent stores to sell on Dawdle. They're a different beast - many of them don't even sell new games. They're typically in a strip mall next to a Wal-Mart that does. So people go into the indie store, sell their games, and walk to the Wal-Mart to buy new games. Only the people who can't afford new games anyway or are looking for older stuff that Wal-Mart doesn't stock end up buying at the used game store, so the publishers/developers/retailers actually don't "lose sales", which is their main concern.
  - goldsmith 18y ago
    If people are going to go to the Walmart to buy new games anyway, why wouldn't the indie store them as well? Even if the prices are a little higher, wouldn't the convenience of not having to go somewhere else make up for it?
    - sachinag 18y ago
      They've told us it doesn't make up for it. The stores just walk down to the Wal-Mart themselves to pick up a couple copies of Halo 3 or whatever rather than actually working with a games distributor like Jack of All Games or whoever. They just can't compete on new games; that's why they do used, retro, and host tournaments and so forth.

voidpointer 18y ago

I fail to see how dwadle is radically different from the GameStop model. They only make 12% on a used game sale, so what? They are just cheaper than GameStop. They have the same incentive advertising the purchase of used games over new games as GameStop does. I don't think they are in a position to point fingers at their competitors as is done in the article. It is nice that you get real cash instead of store credit. On the other hand, as a seller you are competing with other sellers so you don't get instant credit like at GameStop. It's a choice everyone interested should be able to make for themselves. The remarks towards GameStop are uncalled for though. They should compete on a service/product level and not pull out some twisted ethical argument how they are better for the gaming industry.

jcromartie 18y ago
Dawdle is a good thing for gaming culture because it stocks classic games that are valuable to people who seek to broaden their horizons with a wider variety of titles. GameStop merely pushes the "hot" games. GameStop doesn't even sell games that don't get preordered at their stores. GameStop is utterly devoid of any real cultural value to gamers.
- Radix 18y ago
  Which is sad because it didn't always feel this way. GameStop still employs gamers, so it is easy to miss this. The racks they keep for the previous generation consoles isn't as prominant anymore. Funcoland had a great feel to it. They always had several TV's with games on them. I think I played Super Mario RPG first there. It was weird compared to what I expected, but that was a great game.
sachinag 18y ago
No, if a new game sells on Dawdle for $60, we make $7.20. If a used game sells on Dawdle for $55, we make $6.60. Technically, we'd favor new games because our commission dollars are higher. But our margins are not. We're like the real estate broker; we make money by finding market-clearing prices. Higher prices are naturally better, but we can't control that. Our goal is to reduce friction. As to your second point, you can get instant sales when there are Sell It Now buttons for items that have StandingOffers. (Example: http://www.dawdle.com/product.php/wavebird-wireless-controller-platinum-045496950538-dc58e http://www.dawdle.com/product.php/wavebird-wireless-controll...) Lastly, there absolutely is an ethical argument here. The publishers send traffic to GameStop, then GameStop sales reps push used games. That's what gets Dave Perry and all the other publishers who are willing to speak out so angry.

Tichy 18y ago

Sorry, but this is ridiculous. Somebody bought a used game for 40$ on Dawdle (or Dawlde bought it for 40$ and resold it for > 40$), and that is not showing up in the second chart. If that was included in the second chart, it would look exactly like the first chart. Edit: to clarify, the second chart only shows purchases of new games, whereas in reality some used games must have been purchased to provide the new 40$ in purchasing power.

Dilpil 18y ago
Yes. The chart struck me as highly suspect, that is why.
ajuc 18y ago
Exactly, Dawdle cant forever buy used games for $40 and do nothing with them, they'd bankrupt. This is not real money multiplier (like in bank), because "new" money is not created "from air" but taken from other place. So, for each used game bought by Dawdle either: a) Dawdle lose $40 b) Dawdle sells this game to someone (in which case this is exactly the same situation like in case of GameStop) For Dawdle to survive amount of cash lost by unsold used games must be smaller than amount of cash earned by selling new and used games (only count margins there, not full prices).
bena 18y ago
But not necessarily by the person doing the purchasing. That's part of his point that isn't being made clearly. In Gamestop's model, they issue you a store credit so you have to go back to Gamestop. Once there, they pressure you into "saving $5" by purchasing a used copy of another game (through low buyback amounts, Edge cards, etc.). In Dawdle's model, you get a higher buyback amount and aren't forced to shop at Dawdle. This user can then go buy the next latest title and repeat the cycle. Dawdle is trying to show how their model is better for both consumers and producers.
- ajuc 18y ago
  Still - either Dawdle bankrupt, or somebody is going to buy that used game from them (at least high percent of that used games). PS. I wish them all the best, but these charts and description using words like money multiplier is just Wrong (tm) :)

pxlpshr 18y ago

I love Dawdle and wish you guys the best of luck! I came out of a failed video game startup last year, I know how difficult it can be being a new guy on the streets of a massive industry. It's definitely one heck of a challenge but I'm confident you guys will succeed. I wish I was going to GDC this year, went in '08 and it was a blast.

Radix 18y ago

It looks like you all are partnered with Best Buy. Other than that a good article. Have you considered selling new games directly? I know from another post you plan on expanding to other markets so I can see a future where you advertise more expensive products to be drop shipped from the manufacturer's warehouse straight to the consumer. ...wait, maybe I should build a business on that idea.

sachinag 18y ago
If you want to build a business on that idea, we'll be happy to help you out. We know a couple of the distribution companies that drop ship and we'll give you a fee discount to get more new games on the site. :) [BTW, we're not partnered with Best Buy at all. It's just that blue is a default color in PowerPoint. :) ]
- Radix 18y ago
  Actually it was the choice of Best Buy, the choice of blue, and the use of Best Buy (and Amazon) as alternative places to purchase games when I was checking out your site. Regarding you post, I would like to look into this. Would you email me the names of those distribution companies and how can I contact you? (I glanced at your site, but didn't see your email.) benjamin . serrato (at g mail com) Sometimes I wonder how good I should expect the webcrawlers are.
  - ja2ke 18y ago
    Using "Best Buy" as shorthand for "big retail chain which sells games, but, no no, I'm not talking about GameStop here, no, ugh, I'm talking about everyone EXCEPT gamestop in this bit -- you know, the stores like Best Buy and that sort of thing," works just fine.
    - Radix 18y ago
      Yes, I just like the local Fry's more than Best Buy. Bias, that's really all it is. [edited with new magic editing powers]

mrcharles 18y ago

I think the biggest difference between Dawdle and Gamestop is that people do more buying at Gamestop. I can't really see a functional difference. Even the quick math doesn't add up given the two charts. 1:1 New:Used, vs 3:2 New:Used. Maybe I'm missing something important. Whether or not the company selling used games makes money off of it or pushes it is very small I would think. If someone wants a used game, they'll get a used game. In fact, at Dawdle, since the example shows games as selling for cheaper, I can see that maybe it would allow people to save a little more money for new games... or it would allow people to just buy more games. What am I missing that makes this different?

jedediah 18y ago

So in the original image, a gamer would buy a used game from GameStop instead of a new game from Best Buy. If a used game will suffice, why would the same gamer not just buy a $40 game from Dawdle instead of the $60 game from Best Buy?

jay_kyburz 18y ago

I'm sorry, as far as I'm aware, developers see no money from the sale of a second hand game. If you are not going to reward a developer for their hard work, or contribute to their next game, why would you pay anything at all?