For reference, here’s some summary of the economic debate over a similar situation with the X-box 360
The basic problem that confounds economists
Some more of the proposed answers
And, who decides when the launch date is? Sony. When Sony saw this problem coming, they could have delayed the date. But I think they want the publicity- nothing better than lots of articles in the paper and news snippets about dudes who want their product so damn bad they’ll wait in line for days for it! :dubious:
Note the last answer in the second article, which is pretty interesting. It’s basically: not many people really ARE reselling their game systems on e-bay comparatively to the actual store run of the product. Most are keeping them. That’s precisely why the prices are so high on ebay: because they represent the VERY scarce amount of resellable game systems!
I’m with Ivylass.
IANA economist. I am a sometime antiques and collectibles dealer. Due to short supply, there will be a short term artificial market for PS3s. Some other dealers are counting on that market and profitting by it. I don’t see the difference between this and the constant searching of yard sales, and neighborhood trash days performed by dealers. I am curious what posters think of buying an antique widget for a dollar and reselling it for one hundred dollars.
But, the comparison fails on a critical point. There are a limited number of antique widgets and there shall never be more. There will be more PS3s next year. It’s not as if other people will be forever deprived. They just have to wait a few months.
First, you forgot the ‘quality’ quotient in the formula. Second, the game itself might have been ‘only’ $19.99, but you’re also paying, what $15 a month to keep playing? Sorry, but those two factors are major hits to the ((quality * gamelength) / expense) ratio. I personally refuse to play a game that purposely never ends just so the company can screw more money out of you.
Back on topic: In this specific case, Sony is kind of caught between a rock and a hard place. The lack of supply is due to blue laser diode production problems, not specifically to production problems at Sony. Further, as has been noted, Sony can’t afford to let the Wii or Xbox 360 get (another) holiday season in before it got the PS3 out. As it is, some analysts are predicting that Microsoft’s Xbox 360 will be the major winner in the US, with Xbox and PS3 fighting a close battle in Europe, with the PS3 being a clear winner only in Japan, followed closely by the Wii.
Even with the $600 price tag, Sony still loses close to $300 on every console they ship. In other words - Sony couldn’t care less how much they lose on the console; they expect to make much, much more on the software and peripherals.
I would counter that Sony wants to put as many units in homes during the holiday season as it can. Sony lost one holiday season to Microsoft, and to the majority, PS3 and Xbox360 are an either/or choice.
Well yes, there’s a tradeoff between getting it out before Christmas and having lots of stock, so you’re really never going to get a launch of such a complex product that doesn’t have at least some initial supply issues. Mainly because to fully supply such a long-awaited launch, Sony would have to stockpile PS3s for absolutely ages, which would be an insane cost in itself. But this launch is far scarcer than planned. Seriously, the production problems they’ve been having are well documented in the press (example), and are apparently largely due to teething issues with the Blu-Ray drives they’ve put in the thing.
Sony don’t really have anything to gain from this; they’re missing out on prime holiday season due to low supply, and they don’t see a penny from resales, nor do they profit from having people sit in the street. Granted, a little bit of scarcity is probably good for pre-launch mystique (just enough to prompt pre-orders, say), but if Sony had had the capacity to get another 2m consoles out by Christmas (they’re aiming at 2m, and seem unlikely to hit that), I can absolutely guarantee you they would. It’s going to be more or less impossible to get your hands on a PS3 until well into the New Year; how can they possibly be happy with that?
That’s a good point–I honestly forgot about the $15.00/month, which does add into the equation. As far as playing a game that never ends–I’m enjoying it so much that I consider the $15 to be a trivial expense and money well spent. But you still have a point.
Okay, no more hijacks from me–back to the regularly scheduled discussion. 
Tramplings & a Shooting Occurs over Ps3 in Boston
Tards Nearly Riot in Rochester, NY - Quelled by Police
Almost Cabbage Patch Doll-like furor. The carpal-tunnel crowd haven’t been this pissed since Jar-Jar Binks made his debut.
Isn’t this one about criminals who robbed people standing in line? I don’t think it had much to do with the PS3…they could have easily waited until November 24 and done the same thing.
Although I found this quote by the Boston mayor :rolleyes: -inducing
Um, who is being taken advantage of here? I didn’t see people forced to wait in line or face beheading.
Scalping is exactly what they’re doing. Why does that deserve an eyeroll?
Well, I think the idea that the mayor seems to think that Sony and the retailers are somehow to blame deserves an eyeroll.
Ok, well I agree it’s not Sony’s or the retailers’ fault.
This is not an economic argument, it’s an emotional one. I mean, MY argument is not based on economics.
I don’t have a problem, so much, with people re-selling the units. It’s that such a high percentage of the people buying them are only buying them to make a quick profit. If these were sold with a lottery system, like they use for sports tickets, I wouldn’t have a problem with the odd person re-selling.
And what is wrong with that? They bought it, it’s their property. What they choose to do with it is their business. It just so happens some people are using the scarcity of PS3s to their monetary advantage. Why does it bother you?
They’re greedy little maggots. I don’t have to like them if I don’t want to.
No one says that you have to like them, you hypersensitive twat, I don’t like them much either. Where we disagree is that you somehow think that buying something and then selling your property for a profit should be illegal when that item is a toy.
Really? Got a cite with a %? I know exactly one dude who is doing this (or rather he and his wife are taking turns) they want it for their teen-aged son who was promised one for Xmas for high grades- and produced said high grades, so I admit they are stuck. Fair is fair. Now, in my very limited sample size of one that’s 100% who aren’t going to re-sell.
In swampbear’s link, we have exactly two dudes who have said what they planned on doing; one re-selling it, and another giving it to grandson (but I admit gramps is wavering). In JohnBckWLD second link we have one person admiting to re-selling. I don’t doubt that many will re-sell, but so far, nothing has convinced me it’s anywhere near almost all. So, of 4, we have 50% in each group. 
However, I have no problem at all with those who will wait in line then re-sell. or wait in line and keep or give. How else can a store decide who’ll get the few they will sell? Based upon how many “really’s” a fan sez he really wants one for himself? :dubious:
Or that somehow *he’s * entitled to one, but they are not. That’s what I don’t get. 
When did I say I was entitled to one?