When we got our first batch of decks, we offered them at MSRP. They more or less sold out, and we were unable to get any more for awhile. Then one of our distributors restocked them, but- get this- at a higher price.
We decided after some thought to mark up only the two that are in the higest demand, and leave the others at MSRP in order to account for our higher cost. Although in our case it's not a huge markup, it would have to be if our cost was significantly greater.
It's easy to dismiss retailers as "greedy" when they go above MSRP (it's easy because, frankly, many of them are). It's not always the full story, though. We went for awhile without Commander decks available for order, and had to turn many customers away. If a distributor came to me and wanted to sell them at double the cost, for example, would I be "greedy" for raising the price I sell them at in the store above MSRP?
My store has put them out for MSRP. The only 'checks' we have on buying is a limit of one of each deck per customer, unless you're one of our regulars. I'd prefer that someone didn't 'fish us out' of a particular deck to give our regular folks a chance to get it, but am leaving the door open for one of our legacy players who might need a couple copies of something.
Just for today, though- after that, folks can get what they like.
I strongly believe that in many of these cases the LGS' actions are fueled by the growing sub-culture of players (actually, I suspect most don't even play the game) who feel that it is their entitlement to take advantage of anyone and everyone in the supply chain to eke out the most "value" that they can from Magic.
FTVs, for example, are a prime case of this behavior. The aforementioned "players" grab up as many copies of FTV that they can from LGS who charge MSRP so that they can turn them around to giant online retailers like SCG or T&T for instant profit. This in turn forces many retailers to simply up their sale prices to match the internet giants so that they aren't taken advantage of by the sharks. It is simply an escalation of conflict that does nothing but hurt the game overall and disenfranchise the real players who are not interested in making small profits at the sake of others.
While we are all aware that Commander 2013 is not a limited product, don't be surprised when the same sharks descend on every local Target and WalMart and cherry pick the one expensive deck from the lot so they can break them up and sell the singles for a profit.
I may be over-generalizing a bit here, but I'm growing really sick and tired of all the sharking going on in the game. You always spot this crew at GPs and other big events trying to take advantage of others in trades. Trading has long since moved away from "I need this card you have, and you need this card I have" to "You are a sucker and don't know that this card just exploded in Modern and jumped 138% in value overnight so I will take advantage of your ignorance."
Bringing all this wordiness back around to the LGS--the shop owners who are aware of this behavior and refuse to be taken advantage of by the sharks are raising their prices and being labelled as greedy and gouging, while those who allow themselves to be taken advantage of will slowly come around to the other camp when they realize what is going on. In all, prices will continue to rise far above MSRP and the true players and collectors of the game simply lose.
I take your point, though savvier retailers will find a way to work around this 'arms race' as well. It's certainly possible.
What we did at my LGS with the FTV: 20 was to strike a sort of balance between profit and availability. On the one hand, vending them en masse to an online retailer was right out- without our community of players, we have no store.
On the other hand, letting them go at MSRP was also somewhat unpalatable, preciasely because of what you mention- people snatching up as many as they can for a quick buck on eBay.
So I did three things.
First, we raffled off two of them at $1 a ticket. This let "lady luck" play a part, and indeed one of the winners was a casual player who just "threw in a buck for fun."
Second, I pulled some back to use as prizes in tournaments. In some, you could win the right to buy it at MSRP. In another torunament we ran, we cracked open an FTV 20 and let winner get first pick, and so on down the top 20.
Finally- and this was the fun one- we took four of them and put them out for sale at $250, which was the market rate on eBay at the time. We had the prices for all four on a huge whiteboard. In addition to the prices, the whiteboard also declared that the prices would decrease by $5 a day until they sold. This gave players a chance to "play the market" and try and ride their luck. In the end, once the first one went (at $150, I think), the other three were gone within 24 hours, an interesting exercise in human psychology.
In the end, both we and our players had a lot of fun with this. Everyone felt like they at least had a chance at getting them in a way that didn't gouge our customers or put greed ahead of fun.
I believe that there's an opportunity in these situations for LGS's to really set themselves apart in how they handle these, and it doesn't have to be a zero-sum game for players and stores.
5 intro decks for each set is alittle much, every set leaves both of my lgs with too many spares so they wind up giving them as prize support or stripping them to fill their basic land and common boxes.
Not really having this problem at my store... could your LGS simply be over-ordering on product?
Quick question for everyone. What would you consider to be a fair entry fee for a Standard tournament whose sole payout was a pick from an opened FTV: 20? In other words, winner gets a Jace (obv), then runner-up gets second pick, etc?
A $15 entry for a win-a-box Standard seems fairly, well... standard... and Jace alone has a higher value than a generic box of M14 by present market price. We're mulling over more ways to get these into the hands of our players in addition to the ones I mentioned some pages ago.
Are you the same guy that runs the Magic website Ertai's Lament? the one that does a VS article for each of the premade decks? Cool!
One and the same! The site's on temporary haitus right now, just bought our LGS on 01 July and have been engrossed in getting it up to speed, but EL will be back and soon. Glad you enjoy!
So here's what I decided to do at my store. We try hard to be a 'white hat' store, so I wanted to give players several options to get hteir hands on it that don't involve massive payola.
First, we're raffling two of them away. $1 a ticket, two different jars. One lucky entrant from each jar walks away with one.
Second, the opportunity to win one outright or win the ability to buy one at MSRP will be available through select tournaments throughout the month, including (but not limited to) FNM's.
Finally, the "market option" is a fun one that's gotten a lot of attention. We stuck a giant whiteboard on the wall, divided into four. In each quarter is a price, which started at $250. A note on the whiteboard explains that these preorder prices will drop by $5 each day until they are sold. This "games the gamer," playing in the tension between locking it in and paying less for it. It will be interesting to see at what price they go.:)
Even if it's true (which I doubt), there's no way for them to enforce it.
Our store has had no communication from WotC on how to distribute this product, so my guess is that the "Wizards told me not to take preorders" claim from the LGS is false. Whether its "confusion false" or "fabrication false" is up to the OP to decide.
Got it in my cart, but lost fateful seconds when I realised it had logged me out and I needed to relog and re-enter my credit card security code. Bummer. Maybe I can just swap one for an FTV20...
One thing I'm doing at my new LGS is "beat the owner, win a pack." If, as it seems, I'm able to play the Hydra deck on game day to let our players take a run at me, then I'm going to resemble one of Diablo's Treasure Goblins on the day and love every minute of it.
I might be wrong but as a store owner wouldnt it serve you most to increase your player base over the long term? I know very many people scared away from this game by steep prices and situations like this. I know another chunk that almkst exclusively proxies their decks.
By making the game more accessible, allowing someone to get the Jace they want for that cool deck idea they have (at a reasonable price).... doesnt that create long term sustainability? Increased foot traffic, more frequent purchases and tournament buy ins to formats that would otherwise not be worth it?
Id think one years worth of that would be worth more than value from the ebay value of 15 FTV 20. I realize its not EXACTLY the choice between one or the other, but if you look at FTV 20 as kind of a symbol for the barrier-to-entry issues with this game i think its worth looking at that dynamic.
I see the point you're making and don't disagree. But let's say I'm a struggling LGS. I could just as easily make a case that building the player base might be better served by dumping these to one of the major retailers for a huge paycheck, then using the revenue from that to carry more/better product, supplies, and other things that make the store a more appealing place.
I might also consider that letting some of these go at MSRP makes a few people happy, but I could probably do just a fine a job at attracting business to the store by holding a few back from the cashout and just giving them away as prizes/awards.
I'm not saying I'm doing any of these things personally (well, I'll be doing the giveaway/prize thing for sure), but I think a lot of this debate tends to go black or white. There are other reasons besides simply hoarding greed that would compel a retailer to dump these things at inflated prices, and to be honest a great many players wouldn't care less.
Most of the players I've spoken to didn't seem all that interested at this, though when we talked about the price point most all said they'd buy it if it was MSRP so they could flip it on eBay. In fairness, that might be because they're so used to being gouged on this that they simply don't get their hopes up for getting it on terms any more favourable than "twelve months same as cash."
This is probably a bad example of a product touted to increase a player base. A much better example will be the Commander 2013 decks in November, which I absolutely intend to sell at MSRP.
Not actually considering doing this, of course, but it makes for an interesting mental exercise.
"We're going to sell these for $150, first come, first served. Every day we'll be taking $5 off the asking price until we hit $40 or sell out, whichever comes first."
I've been doing a lot of thinking about this, since I bought my LGS at the start of this month. That new position has certainly given me a lot to think about with regards to this.
On the one hand, I strongly feel like I want to be one of the good-guy LGS's that doesn't gouge on prices. I wouldn't be anything without my players who make the store what it is, and it seems wrong to generate feel-bads by grinding dollars on something like this.
On the other hand, "just let the market decide" doesn't seem appealing either. If I stuck my allotment on a shelf for $40, they'd be snapped up in multiples by a small number of folks who know they could just flip them on eBay- probably on the very first day of sale.
If every player who bought it bought it because they wanted it, that would be one thing. But we know that's far from the case, and the argument "I expect my LGS to sell it to me at $40 so I can eBay it at $200" is cringeworthy.
Considering how closely many gaming stores ride the profitability edge, it's hard to just dismiss their need for revenue out of hand. For some, this is a desperately-needed infusion of capital to help keep the lights on. It's easy to cast show owners as "greedy," and undoubtedly there's an element of that there, but I think the picture is a bit more nuanced.
So maybe I mix both approaches, offering it at MSRP to a select group of store regulars who do the most for the store (FNM attendance, etc), and at a markup otherwise. Of course, even that approach has its downfalls and opportunities for resentment, from folks who don't make the 'select list' for MSRP but think they should have.
Lots to think about.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
When we got our first batch of decks, we offered them at MSRP. They more or less sold out, and we were unable to get any more for awhile. Then one of our distributors restocked them, but- get this- at a higher price.
We decided after some thought to mark up only the two that are in the higest demand, and leave the others at MSRP in order to account for our higher cost. Although in our case it's not a huge markup, it would have to be if our cost was significantly greater.
It's easy to dismiss retailers as "greedy" when they go above MSRP (it's easy because, frankly, many of them are). It's not always the full story, though. We went for awhile without Commander decks available for order, and had to turn many customers away. If a distributor came to me and wanted to sell them at double the cost, for example, would I be "greedy" for raising the price I sell them at in the store above MSRP?
Just for today, though- after that, folks can get what they like.
I take your point, though savvier retailers will find a way to work around this 'arms race' as well. It's certainly possible.
What we did at my LGS with the FTV: 20 was to strike a sort of balance between profit and availability. On the one hand, vending them en masse to an online retailer was right out- without our community of players, we have no store.
On the other hand, letting them go at MSRP was also somewhat unpalatable, preciasely because of what you mention- people snatching up as many as they can for a quick buck on eBay.
So I did three things.
First, we raffled off two of them at $1 a ticket. This let "lady luck" play a part, and indeed one of the winners was a casual player who just "threw in a buck for fun."
Second, I pulled some back to use as prizes in tournaments. In some, you could win the right to buy it at MSRP. In another torunament we ran, we cracked open an FTV 20 and let winner get first pick, and so on down the top 20.
Finally- and this was the fun one- we took four of them and put them out for sale at $250, which was the market rate on eBay at the time. We had the prices for all four on a huge whiteboard. In addition to the prices, the whiteboard also declared that the prices would decrease by $5 a day until they sold. This gave players a chance to "play the market" and try and ride their luck. In the end, once the first one went (at $150, I think), the other three were gone within 24 hours, an interesting exercise in human psychology.
In the end, both we and our players had a lot of fun with this. Everyone felt like they at least had a chance at getting them in a way that didn't gouge our customers or put greed ahead of fun.
I believe that there's an opportunity in these situations for LGS's to really set themselves apart in how they handle these, and it doesn't have to be a zero-sum game for players and stores.
Not really having this problem at my store... could your LGS simply be over-ordering on product?
A $15 entry for a win-a-box Standard seems fairly, well... standard... and Jace alone has a higher value than a generic box of M14 by present market price. We're mulling over more ways to get these into the hands of our players in addition to the ones I mentioned some pages ago.
Thanks in advance!
One and the same! The site's on temporary haitus right now, just bought our LGS on 01 July and have been engrossed in getting it up to speed, but EL will be back and soon. Glad you enjoy!
First, we're raffling two of them away. $1 a ticket, two different jars. One lucky entrant from each jar walks away with one.
Second, the opportunity to win one outright or win the ability to buy one at MSRP will be available through select tournaments throughout the month, including (but not limited to) FNM's.
Finally, the "market option" is a fun one that's gotten a lot of attention. We stuck a giant whiteboard on the wall, divided into four. In each quarter is a price, which started at $250. A note on the whiteboard explains that these preorder prices will drop by $5 each day until they are sold. This "games the gamer," playing in the tension between locking it in and paying less for it. It will be interesting to see at what price they go.:)
Our store has had no communication from WotC on how to distribute this product, so my guess is that the "Wizards told me not to take preorders" claim from the LGS is false. Whether its "confusion false" or "fabrication false" is up to the OP to decide.
One thing I'm doing at my new LGS is "beat the owner, win a pack." If, as it seems, I'm able to play the Hydra deck on game day to let our players take a run at me, then I'm going to resemble one of Diablo's Treasure Goblins on the day and love every minute of it.
What else would you call it?
The store orders it. It arrives. The store pays for it. They own it. Isn't that how commerce is supposed to work?
If you want the benefits of store ownership, I humbly invite you to take upon yourself all of the risks associated with it, too.
I see the point you're making and don't disagree. But let's say I'm a struggling LGS. I could just as easily make a case that building the player base might be better served by dumping these to one of the major retailers for a huge paycheck, then using the revenue from that to carry more/better product, supplies, and other things that make the store a more appealing place.
I might also consider that letting some of these go at MSRP makes a few people happy, but I could probably do just a fine a job at attracting business to the store by holding a few back from the cashout and just giving them away as prizes/awards.
I'm not saying I'm doing any of these things personally (well, I'll be doing the giveaway/prize thing for sure), but I think a lot of this debate tends to go black or white. There are other reasons besides simply hoarding greed that would compel a retailer to dump these things at inflated prices, and to be honest a great many players wouldn't care less.
Most of the players I've spoken to didn't seem all that interested at this, though when we talked about the price point most all said they'd buy it if it was MSRP so they could flip it on eBay. In fairness, that might be because they're so used to being gouged on this that they simply don't get their hopes up for getting it on terms any more favourable than "twelve months same as cash."
This is probably a bad example of a product touted to increase a player base. A much better example will be the Commander 2013 decks in November, which I absolutely intend to sell at MSRP.
Okay, start at $350 then reduce by $10 a day. More a general concept than a hard-and-fast number.
"We're going to sell these for $150, first come, first served. Every day we'll be taking $5 off the asking price until we hit $40 or sell out, whichever comes first."
On the one hand, I strongly feel like I want to be one of the good-guy LGS's that doesn't gouge on prices. I wouldn't be anything without my players who make the store what it is, and it seems wrong to generate feel-bads by grinding dollars on something like this.
On the other hand, "just let the market decide" doesn't seem appealing either. If I stuck my allotment on a shelf for $40, they'd be snapped up in multiples by a small number of folks who know they could just flip them on eBay- probably on the very first day of sale.
If every player who bought it bought it because they wanted it, that would be one thing. But we know that's far from the case, and the argument "I expect my LGS to sell it to me at $40 so I can eBay it at $200" is cringeworthy.
Considering how closely many gaming stores ride the profitability edge, it's hard to just dismiss their need for revenue out of hand. For some, this is a desperately-needed infusion of capital to help keep the lights on. It's easy to cast show owners as "greedy," and undoubtedly there's an element of that there, but I think the picture is a bit more nuanced.
So maybe I mix both approaches, offering it at MSRP to a select group of store regulars who do the most for the store (FNM attendance, etc), and at a markup otherwise. Of course, even that approach has its downfalls and opportunities for resentment, from folks who don't make the 'select list' for MSRP but think they should have.
Lots to think about.