

Used Video Games Are Good For The Industry (It's Just GameStop That's Bad) - fallentimes
http://www.dawdle.com/used-games-are-good/

======
voidpointer
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
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
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.

------
Tichy
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.

~~~
bena
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.

~~~
Tichy
Why wouldn't you be able to sell your Gamestop Game somewhere else? I suspect
what is happening is that Gamestop guarantees to buy your game for a certain
price, which would be great (as in being a real plus compared to ebay). For
another beneficial thing about used games is this: maybe 60$ is too much for
me for a game, but I know I can sell it for 20$, so it really costs me only
40$. Therefore used games are good for the industry - without used games I
might not buy any games at all. With the guaranteed buyback price of GameStop,
I know in advance how much a game costs me. Some people might prefer that to
putting in the work to sell on ebay/Dawdle for an uncertain price.

As for the original case, it makes no difference who buys the used game, what
people seem to care about is the amount of money spent for buying new games.
And that is the same for GameStop and for Dawdle.

~~~
sachinag
Right - you're making our point. When GS buys a used game for $20, they re-
sell it for $40 (49% margins). That means the value of the used product is
$40. If you can sell it for $40 on Dawdle, a new game only really costs you
$20.

That means your $100 in purchasing power gets you five _new_ games: the
publishers, developers, and retailers only benefit when you buy _new_ product.
We're trying to show them how used games can work in their favor if you cut
out the GameStop middleman.

Edit: as for the uncertain price, we're working on it. With our
StandingOffers, we might be able to find people willing to guarantee you $30
or $35 up front.

As an example of how that works, right now, I'll pay $25 for a platinum
Wavebird ([http://www.dawdle.com/product.php/wavebird-wireless-
controll...](http://www.dawdle.com/product.php/wavebird-wireless-controller-
platinum-045496950538-dc58e)).

~~~
Tichy
You should think about the magic net gain. You can not just buy games for 40$,
there must be buyers of used games. These don't show up in your equations.
There is only so much money people will spend for games, you can not create
more.

I am not saying that Dawdle might not be a better deal for the end consumer.
Certainly lower margins means cheaper games means more games sold. But I don't
think GameStop are crooks, they simply have an alternative business model.
They might be more expensive, but in exchange they offer a different service
(guaranteed prices, no hassle with online selling of your game). I don't know
GameStop or Dawdle, btw.

------
Radix
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
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
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
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
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]

------
pxlpshr
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.

------
mrcharles
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?

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

~~~
fallentimes
Other than Gamestop and you guys, what competition is there?

~~~
sachinag
eBay, Amazon Marketplace, and Half. [Fee comparison:
<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
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
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.

------
jedediah
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
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?

