They're unavailable to you. If they buy them and sell them online, they are available. They are, literally by its purest definition, made available by the scalpers.
Hardware Wii U Gamecube adapters sold out :(
- Thread starter Sheldon392
- Start date
- Views 18,687
- Replies 172
They're unavailable to you. If they buy them and sell them online, they are available. They are, literally by its purest definition, made available by the scalpers.
First off, I never said that I cannot afford them at the scalpers' prices. Hell, I don't even own a Wii U at this time, so I'm not even a potential customer. I have no personal stake in this.
And no, the units are not "made available by the scalpers" just because the scalpers have units available, because they did not create the availability; they simply moved the availability from retail locations to themselves. If the scalpers were never there, those very same units would have been available for customers to purchase.
If there are 5 free apples on a table and I take all of them and sell them at $4 a piece, did I make the apples available? No, because before I arrived on the scene, there were 5 available apples at the table, and after I arrived, there were 5 available apples in my possession. My grabbing of the apples did not increase the number of apples available to the public.
If there are 5 apples and someone buys them, but then someone is selling Apples online for 3x the MSRP, it is available to you at a higher price. They've made the apple available to you. This is literally the definition of availability, being able to have something. If you cannot have it because of literally any reason, but someone sells it, it is available. Regardless of the reasoning or the morality behind it, it's now available.
Oh, man.
It is the way the market works.
Let's go to the apples example.
A farmer produces five apples this season and sells them to many merchants.
Seeing the demand for apples is going to increase beyond the a availability of apples this season, the merchants rise the price, because they can* and it is their job (they gambled buying them in the first place in order to potentially sell them later).
Sure next season the farmer will produce more and perhaps the apple fad will not be so strong, meaning the price will be reduced again, but the future is NOT today.
* If they sell it for a lower price, the product will be sold out when there is still people willing to buy it, if they rise the price less people will be willing to buy it, and if they keep rising the price there will be just enough people willing to buy it and the whole stock of product can be sold. If they sold it to cheap, many people that want it will not be able to have it (and they will be stupid and losing money), if they sold it to expensive it will just accumulate dust in some warehouse. The optimal free-market equilibrium dictates high prices for high demand and low supply, it is basic economics.
It is the way the market works.
Let's go to the apples example.
A farmer produces five apples this season and sells them to many merchants.
Seeing the demand for apples is going to increase beyond the a availability of apples this season, the merchants rise the price, because they can* and it is their job (they gambled buying them in the first place in order to potentially sell them later).
Sure next season the farmer will produce more and perhaps the apple fad will not be so strong, meaning the price will be reduced again, but the future is NOT today.
* If they sell it for a lower price, the product will be sold out when there is still people willing to buy it, if they rise the price less people will be willing to buy it, and if they keep rising the price there will be just enough people willing to buy it and the whole stock of product can be sold. If they sold it to cheap, many people that want it will not be able to have it (and they will be stupid and losing money), if they sold it to expensive it will just accumulate dust in some warehouse. The optimal free-market equilibrium dictates high prices for high demand and low supply, it is basic economics.
Yes, they drive the market. That is their value. I know this comes off harsh but I got to say it. grossaffe the_randomizer maybe you would have more money if you understood how fee markets work. Stop making it personal, it's simply business. gypsynimrod understands... Complaining and name calling is not going to make this resource any less scarce.
Only dumbasses will pay for that and if they will, then they deserve to be ripped off for doing so.
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2011
- Messages
- 31,284
- Trophies
- 2
- Age
- 38
- Location
- Dr. Wahwee's castle
- XP
- 18,969
- Country
Relys I already have a Gamecube adapter coming to my parent's house next week, so, those eBay people can do whatever the hell they want. Just because they can do it, doesn't mean I have to agree or accept what they do. As far as I'm concerned, they can keep it up, but I refuse to support them. Too effing bad. I managed to snag one before they ran out and no, I'm not telling anyone where I got it 
In your example, the farmer is the producer and the merchants are retail stores such as Walmart and Gamestop etc., and there are no scalpers, but rather the retailers are setting the price themselves. However, in the video game industry, companies like Nintendo have an agreement with their retailers on the price they want the product to be sold at. Then the scalpers step in as a second middle man buying the games at selling them for more than Nintendo wants customers to have to pay for it.
Consider the case of a farmer and retailer who are trying to get affordable produce into the hands of low-income people in the inner city who do not otherwise have access to fresh produce, so they come to an agreement on a reasonably low price to sell the goods at in these neighborhoods. ...And then some people come strolling along and see produce selling here for less than average, so they buy all of the inventory up and sell them to more affluent areas at a higher price.
You're not teaching me anything I didn't already know about supply and demand or economics. I've held steadfast that yes, this is related to supply and demand, but that doesn't make these people not greedy as they add nothing of value to the market; they're just skimming money off the top.
You are telling me not to make it personal immediately after implying I can't handle my finances and that I don't understand the market? Brilliant.
In the 70s, and to a certain degree today, the Argentinian government tried to implement a price control system, limiting price of basic products. This lead to undersupply at the government accorded prices in the big market chains, and to the creation of an illegal parallel black market where the product was available at high prices.
It is a similar situation.
I won't say I condemn the behavior of said scalpers (I do not) but I understand the mechanics behind the process and I think it is something that cannot be avoided.
If they don't use tracking/signed to dispatch it then the scalpers can be scammed by the buyers.
Don't get me wrong, I am not at all in favor of the government making regulations of the sort. I am very much a free-market capitalist (free-market being key, though most people seem to confuse that term with Laissez-Faire). In the case of government setting the price, they are neither the consumer nor the producer, and if the producer decides the product is not worth producing to sell at that price, they will not produce it. In this case, however, it is the producer setting a low price that they are comfortable with, so it is not detrimental to the market. It could even lead to more profits as this item works in conjunction with four Gamecube controllers, which they are selling at $30 a piece, so by making them cheap, they get them into the hands of more who can then spend money on the controllers.
As for it being something that's unavoidable, I do not disagree. It is legal and it should be legal, but that doesn't make the people who do it not greedy. I also find many of the big-name game publishers to be greedy with their annual releases of watered down games. They're selling, so obviously the market supports it, but that doesn't make me like EA, Activision, or Ubisoft an more.
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2011
- Messages
- 31,284
- Trophies
- 2
- Age
- 38
- Location
- Dr. Wahwee's castle
- XP
- 18,969
- Country
Whoa.. Amazon UK customers have gone apeshit: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Super-GameCube-Controller-Adapter-Nintendo/dp/B00O9QW4HS
I'm one of the few who gave it a 5/5 as that's the score it deserves not 1/5.
Nintendo didn't expect the GameCube adapter to be sold out and turn out this way but come on posting false reviews about it is just immoral.
Edit: LOL my review has "6 of 22 people found the following review helpful" I don't even...
I'm one of the few who gave it a 5/5 as that's the score it deserves not 1/5.
Nintendo didn't expect the GameCube adapter to be sold out and turn out this way but come on posting false reviews about it is just immoral.
Edit: LOL my review has "6 of 22 people found the following review helpful" I don't even...
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2011
- Messages
- 31,284
- Trophies
- 2
- Age
- 38
- Location
- Dr. Wahwee's castle
- XP
- 18,969
- Country
Proving that those butthurt reviewers are asshats. I would report their review for abusing the review system
Wankers XDThe availability was removed, and then availability was reinstated. Keep in mind the scalpers don't have to sell the product, they could buy them up and just sit on them if they wanted. Like it or not, they've made the product available again after removing the availability in the first place. It is true though, that they aren't doing anyone any favors by charging more.
But look at it this way. I live in Wisconsin, the product is completely sold out here, and hypothetically no one in my region has made them available online or in store, as no one is a scalper. Meanwhile down in Florida, someone bought in bulk from a store in person and lists them online for purchase. Their decision to list the product online and willinginess to ship up to me in Wisconsin, has made the product available to me where it otherwise wouldn't have been.
It literally was. By, again, the purest definition, it was made available. When the availability is taken away, by them buying it or any circumstance, it is no longer available. They could have stolen it, ripped it from a turnt over truck, it does not matter. The availability was no longer there. When they sell it, it is again available. That is the purest definition of market availability. There is no simpler way to define that. No loopholes, no anything.
They did not create the availability. The net availability due to their presence is zero. They add nothing to the market that was not there before them. I don't understand how this is a debate. They process of buying and then reselling the units did not magically create more availability than before they got involved. Yes, putting them on the market increased availability from that fraction of a moment in time that they had purchased them taking them out of the market, but their net effect on availability starts at the time that they started purchasing the units up, not at the time they started putting them back on the market.
They literally made it available. They did indeed create the availability because it was not available before, but now, as they selling it, it has once again become available. This isn't a debate at all – I'm teaching you the basics to economics and trying to label the definition of you in its simplest terms, but it somehow is not clicking for you. The definition of available fits, bar none, with what they are doing by buying it and then selling it. It's not "magical" either. When something hits 0 and goes back to 1, it's not magic, it's simple math. I cannot explain this in any simpler words outside of playing an episode of Blue's Clues.
Similar threads
