Used CD Legislation Slows Used Game Sales

by Chris Faylor, May 08, 2007 11:18am PDT
Related Topics – Gearbox

Stricter laws in Florida and Utah aim to hamper the sale of used merchandise such as CDs and video games, with similar legislation underway in Wisconsin and Rhode Island. Typical pawn shop laws require retailers to hold used merchandise for a set amount of days before selling it and to acquire some basic information on the person who sold it back. Such a process is meant to stem the trafficking of stolen goods and facilitate the ease with which authorities track thieves and return stolen items to owners. Florida's new legislation goes well beyond the measures of a traditional pawn shop law. The state now requires all retailers selling second-hand CDs to acquire a permit and invest in a $10,000 security bond through the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Stores must fingerprint individuals trading in CDs, copy their state identification, and pay them only in store credit; traded CDs must be held for 30 days before being resold. With the new legislation already in effect, at least one retailer is reported to have discontinued sales of used items as a result. Pawn shop laws in many other states, which tend to be less restrictive than those in Florida and Utah, often go unenforced. The policy also affects the sale and trade of used video games and DVDs, though to a lesser degree. Video game retailers are not required to acquire a permit, and they only need hold traded games for 15 days before they can be sold. This 15 day buffer could theoretically boost the number of new copies sold. Industry veteran Mike Russell, formerly of Ritual Entertainment, explained to Shacknews that used game sales are more potentially limiting to publishers and developer than used CD and DVD sales, as sales of new games at retail generally comprise the sole revenue stream for games. "It isn't hard to see the attraction that game retailers have for used games," he said. "With a new console game, their margin is usually under 10%, while their margin on a used game can be over 50%. There has been growing developer and publisher discontent with chains that sell used product. After all, the publishers [and most developers] are paying for ad circulars, shelf space, in-store contests and promotions, point-of-purchase advertising, subsidized special editions for certain chains, and more...just to bring a customer into their store who is going to buy a used copy and not help recoup any of that money." Gearbox Software president Randy Pitchford echoed Russell's concerns. "Used game sales are an access point for many gamers and I think the industry should support that path," he noted, "but there is a problem right now in that used game sales are a market that does not provide revenue to the game maker. The entire used game sales market exists only to support and provide profit to the retailers. Healthy retailers are good for our industry, but looking at how GameStop is doing, I think they should be passing more value to the developers and publishers." Across the 2006 fiscal year, GameStop saw a gross profit of $651.9 million as a result of $1.36 billion in used video game and hardware sales, with retail sales of new software and hardware achieving gross profits of $504.3 million on $3.09 billion in sales. While used games comprised 24.8% of total sales revenue during that time period, they were responsible for 48.8% of total profits. Russell added, "While delaying used console game sales for two to four weeks after the initial release would help in a small way as far as the bottom line for game sales (especially since the first thirty days are most crucial for sales of any title), the percentage of sales ceded to used sales during the initial thirty days is severely muted by supply constraints...used games are more likely to significantly impact sales after the first trimester." "Laws like the ones in Utah and Florida won't significantly impact sales of new or used product," he continued. "The most sure-fire way that publishers could 'stem the tide' of used sales would be to eliminate [advertising] support for chains that sell used product, but given the quantity of new product that goes through those outlets as well, that would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater."




Comments

25 Threads | 78 Comments

  • Since the story was given with the gaming slant I'll respond to that versus what a horrible law I think this is in general.

    So game companies are losing new game sales to used game sales. So fucking what. They don't deserve any more protection than any other business that suddenly finds that it's method of making money is being subverted by <insert threat here>. They need to find some other method to make the money they require and if it works (WoW being an example) great, if it doesn't, so be it. Welcome to capitalism.

    Let me tell a story about another industry I've personally been involved in (from 1988 to 1993). I used to race R/C cars competitively at the national level, I also flew R/C planes a little bit too but not competitively. Local race tracks would seldom make much profit from the racing itself. Building rent, employee payroll and prizes would eat up most of the profit from race day. The hobby shop was where they would make their money unless they had a huge number of racers.

    What started happening with tracks and hobby shops in general was people started to mail-order everything and would only buy little things at the local shops, stuff they either couldn't buy online or it wasn't worth the price of shipping . They also would buy replacement parts at the track if it was something they didn't have spares for (broken turnbuckles, worn out tires, stripped gears etc). Well, the tracks and hobby shops couldn't survive selling people $0.75 parts and started closing. The only hobby shops that have survived are few and far between now and have to match online prices to get customers in the door, with the exception of one in the mall that sells at full MSRP to people with money and no clue. Tracks have virtually disappeared in this area and most people now just play in their back yard with their stuff. Flying is a little different, fields are disappearing too but mostly because developers are either buying the property or the new developments next door don't want a flying field nearby.

    While the specifics in the hobby industry are different from game development, the principal is the same. People will buy at the lowest price possible even if it hurts their hobby/interest in the long run. If your sales are being hurt by something, change your business model to compete or go out of business. No one tried to pass a law to protect small computer shops from Dell. Walmart has put all kinds of places out of business but they keep on going.

    Trying to stop people from selling used something they paid for and own just because it hurts your new sales is ridiculous. I myself prefer new games but close friends of mine bought almost every game they have for their console used at Gamestop . I don't shop there due to a number of reasons but I can't blame people who do.


















  • Yea, I can't believe that stealing is a big enough issue for all that. Now let's see, we have games featuring advertisement now, people talking about how games should be shorter, and so forth, yet the price isn't changing much. Now they are coming up with new rules for used games. I both like and hate used games. I like them because you can get some great games for cheap, don't like because a lot/most of times selling your games is a rip off. Then you got some stores that depend on them to survive. Duno, just sounds a bit extreme. Don't know if that all came out the way I wanted it to, lol. Only good thing I see from this, if games are going to be less available, companies hopefully will be forced into selling less crap games.



  • I used to work at Blockbuster in Phoenix about 2 years ago and they already started this policy. In fact, the policy was so hard to enforce that eventually all the Phoenix locations just didn't do used trades anymore. This didn't apply to other cities in the Phoenix area. It never made sense to me that at the time it was on a city by city basis.

    How does making retailers hold merch deter stealing? Most stolen merchandise I've probably purchased came from some guy standing outside a seven eleven. He'd rather have the cash than some stupid EBucks.