Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Manchu wrote:
The analysis absolutely does not hinge on the good in question being required for survival or the consumer being somehow "deserving" or otherwise entitled. You can keep beating that horse but it was never even alive, my friend.

The retail market is about bringing goods and customers together. What scalpers do is step in between goods and customers in order to charge the customers for that very interference.

My analysis about want vs need is entirely accurate. Your own observations are absolutely incorrect. Ford Motor Company does not make cars. They make money. They do that, by making cars and selling them. They sell them to people, who sell them to other people, who sell them to someone else. But there are only so many links in the chain. You can't keep upticking forever. You can't scalp a scalped ticket for a reasonable risk vs reward.

You can scalp an original price ticket for a greater value... sometimes. If the value of the ticket is less than the market will bear. Scalper inflated prices EXACTLY indicate that the MSRP is below market value. If it wasn't, the scalper couldn't inflate the price! People wouldn't pay it! You're making my argument by baselessly claiming the opposite. I can prove to you what the value is of a given commodity by determining what it will be purchased for. Limited release prices are lower than people are willing to pay, so scalpers can raise it and make money. The proof is right there. Claims to the contrary can be proven false by direct observation of reality.

Scientifically? The process of observing repeatable phenomenon, and drawing conclusions based on reason? Not making baseless claims without backup? Wherein a person can not declare their opinion without basis, and must then prove their point?

My argument can be proven, that the market will bear an intermediary [scalper] that inflates the cost of a specific commodity, therefore that commodity's value on the open market was less than it could be. Observable. Provable. Fairness is irrelevant. Entitlement is the only cause of a sense of unfairness in this situation. The fact that 99% of a given population wouldn't even be aware of this event is further proof that it is not a wide-spread issue, but one held exclusively by a small margin of people that want some item that they don't need.

Please step up with an actual argument to prove your position, or kindly acknowledge there isn't one.

 greatbigtree wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
The analysis absolutely does not hinge on the good in question being required for survival or the consumer being somehow "deserving" or otherwise entitled. You can keep beating that horse but it was never even alive, my friend.

The retail market is about bringing goods and customers together. What scalpers do is step in between goods and customers in order to charge the customers for that very interference.

My analysis about want vs need is entirely accurate. Your own observations are absolutely incorrect. Ford Motor Company does not make cars. They make money. They do that, by making cars and selling them. They sell them to people, who sell them to other people, who sell them to someone else. But there are only so many links in the chain. You can't keep upticking forever. You can't scalp a scalped ticket for a reasonable risk vs reward.

You can scalp an original price ticket for a greater value... sometimes. If the value of the ticket is less than the market will bear. Scalper inflated prices EXACTLY indicate that the MSRP is below market value. If it wasn't, the scalper couldn't inflate the price! People wouldn't pay it! You're making my argument by baselessly claiming the opposite. I can prove to you what the value is of a given commodity by determining what it will be purchased for. Limited release prices are lower than people are willing to pay, so scalpers can raise it and make money. The proof is right there. Claims to the contrary can be proven false by direct observation of reality.

Scientifically? The process of observing repeatable phenomenon, and drawing conclusions based on reason? Not making baseless claims without backup? Wherein a person can not declare their opinion without basis, and must then prove their point?

My argument can be proven, that the market will bear an intermediary [scalper] that inflates the cost of a specific commodity, therefore that commodity's value on the open market was less than it could be. Observable. Provable. Fairness is irrelevant. Entitlement is the only cause of a sense of unfairness in this situation. The fact that 99% of a given population wouldn't even be aware of this event is further proof that it is not a wide-spread issue, but one held exclusively by a small margin of people that want some item that they don't need.

Please step up with an actual argument to prove your position, or kindly acknowledge there isn't one.

then answer this if the item in question is available still for $20 can the Scalper still get $40 for it? the thing that helps many scalpers out is ignorance of the buyer, if the buyer is not aware of what is available they will jump on anything, like with the dice set, originally sold for $20 the scalper had them at $40 and yet the same set could be found for $25 shipped on eBay, and because of the sites rules potential buyers from the scalper could not have been informed of that or where.

In the "biz", that's called information advantage, and all resellers possess it. Anywhere you buy something, that company knows where to buy it cheaper, and then they resell it to you. Scalping is just bald-faced reselling.

If I know where to buy an item, and I purchase that item, and then go somewhere else and sell it... that's what they call a grocery store. Everyone knows they could go to a farm and buy a cob of corn. But they don't. They go to a grocery store. I'm exaggerating to make a point, but that's what reselling is. Know where to buy an item cheaper than the open market, purchase it, and then resell it for more.

Good night folks, I've had my say. Wish you well. Be aware that no matter what you purchase, someone else has made money off of it for doing basically nothing.

 greatbigtree wrote:
In the "biz", that's called information advantage, and all resellers possess it. Anywhere you buy something, that company knows where to buy it cheaper, and then they resell it to you. Scalping is just bald-faced reselling.

If I know where to buy an item, and I purchase that item, and then go somewhere else and sell it... that's what they call a grocery store. Everyone knows they could go to a farm and buy a cob of corn. But they don't. They go to a grocery store. I'm exaggerating to make a point, but that's what reselling is. Know where to buy an item cheaper than the open market, purchase it, and then resell it for more.

and yet I'm still confused why anyone would pay $20 for a set of dice let alone $40.

At my shop(which also sells comics, which this is more common with) we call them prospectors. Generally we refuse sales beyond a certain volume, even more so on variant or limited edition items.

A current item is the Star Wars Destiny card/dice game. Because the available stock is so low right now, we limit the packs to 6 per customer, and we always tell people calling that we don't have them(because our local loyal customers just come in to see if we do).

We do not tolerate prospecting, and we actively try to make sure that our products are available for our local customers first and foremost, as their repeat business is what keeps us going.

Lately, I've been getting at least 10 calls a day asking about these packs, none of them from people we know to be regulars, and most from area codes an hour or more away.

If all we cared about was the short term sale, we wouldn't have even sold them in store, and just ebay'd them ourselves.

There are always going to be some consumers able to pay more than MSRP. The question is, how do you make them willing to do it? The answer is not just taking advantage of scarcity but also amplifying it.

Once again: The market is the meeting of consumers and goods. Scalpers step between consumers and goods. The whole point of interfering with the market in this way is to distort pricing, which amounts to creating a dependent submarket.

GW is not charging below market value; their market is just substantially larger and more diverse than the scalper's submarket. The scalper depends on GW not overcharging, otherwise there will be insufficient scarcity to entice those able to overpay. And scarcity per se is not enough; there must also be demand, which is created on the market and not the submarket.

Some alleged entitlement to non-essential products is not why people don't like scalping. Keep in mind there is a difference bewteen paying a scalper's price and liking it. Scalpers actively shut out some consumers not for the sake of making goods available to others but rather for the sake of charging more to consumers who also already have access otherwise but could and would pay more.

BTW this is the difference between scalping and distribution or even reselling.

 Manchu wrote:
GW is not charging below market value; their market is just substantially larger and more diverse than the scalper's submarket.

That doesn't make any sense. GW could set their prices at the exact same point as the scalper and sell to the exact same customers. If someone can buy up all copies of a GW product and immediately sell them at an inflated price then GW must be charging below market value. If GW sold the entire production run on ebay, starting at $0.01 per copy, allowing the market to set the price for each sale, the final result would be above current MSRP. Therefore GW is charging below market value.

Anyway, the real issue here is GW creating artificial scarcity with small production runs that are inadequate to meet demand at MSRP. If GW significantly increased the size of their production runs they'd earn more sales at the same price, giving them more revenue and more profit. GW's failure to do this is inexcusable stupidity.

 Peregrine wrote:
If someone can buy up all copies of a GW product and immediately sell them at an inflated price then GW must be charging below market value.

If someone could sell all or substantially all of a GW dice sets at 200% over MSRP then GW would have just charged that much to begin with. As I explained, scalping generates and exploits a submarket dependent on the existing market. Scalping does not create scarcity or demand; it just amplifies scarcity to exploit the demand of the subset of consumers willing to pay more. Scalping really is just shutting out some customers in order to gouge others.

Peregrine wrote:Anyway, the real issue here is GW creating artificial scarcity with small production runs that are inadequate to meet demand at MSRP. If GW significantly increased the size of their production runs they'd earn more sales at the same price, giving them more revenue and more profit.

Maybe so. It stands to reason that GW does things this way to ensure they sell everything they produce, even if it means missing out on some sales. Ork, Ultramarine, and Sylvaneth dice are all still in stock, after all. The thing that bugs me is GW creating conditions that encourage scalping, like the mixed signals about whether something is really gone for good. Although take a look at the 1k Sons dice prices on ebay compared to the Skavenblight dice. I seriously wonder if speculation rather than real demand ate through that stock.

 Manchu wrote:
If someone could sell all or substantially all of a GW dice sets at 200% over MSRP then GW would have just charged that much to begin with.

This is an interesting assumption here, that the company which proudly declares that it does not do market research will always have the optimal prices for its products.

It stands to reason that GW does things this way to ensure they sell everything they produce, even if it means missing out on some sales.

If only there was a way to judge the likely sales volume for a new product. Perhaps we could call it "customer studying" or something...

Stepping back one.

I liked the Gork and Mork dice idea. For £5 - maybe £6, I'd have bought them as a bit of fun. At £12.50, forget it.

They sold out, so patently others were prepared to spend £12.50.

Today, on ebay, there are 4 UK sets available - prices from £18.50 to £34.56. Presumably the sellers think people will pay that price.

Genestealer dice are £35 - £45. If they sell - the demand was there.

That's market economy, and as others said - if price was the only factor, we'd buy elsewhere....

 Manchu wrote:
Scalping does not create scarcity or demand; it just amplifies scarcity to exploit the demand of the subset of consumers willing to pay more. Scalping really is just shutting out some customers in order to gouge others.

Exactly. It's not natural market forces that allow scalpers to charge more, it's PARTLY natural market forces and partly the fact scalpers are making scarcity worse.

If the scalpers didn't exist, the stuff wouldn't sell out from the primary channel as quickly and regular customers would have more chance to get it.

GW obviously make matter worse by not adequately communicating things like how they're going to handle production runs. For genuine limited items I'd be more than happy if GW just capped it at 1 per customer (or maybe 2 or 3 in the case of dice).

But in the end, I still see scalpers as leeches and dislike them. In a hypothetical world where burglary wasn't illegal and lock makers constructed poor locks, I might lay some blame at lawmakers and lockmakers, but I'd still hate the bloody burglars. Just because someone might be able to scalp and GW don't help things isn't going to stop me disliking the leeches who take advantage of it.

Scalping isn't natural market forces, it's a parasite who doesn't offer a service injecting themselves as a middle man. Even if model makers matched the price of scalpers I'd be happier to pay it because at least they're contributing (certainly not saying GW should inflate their prices any more).

 Manchu wrote:
I think it is actually a lot simpler than you are making it out to be. People respond to a basic sense of fairness. Scalping violates that very reasonable sensibility. It's even worse when a company can be seen as taking no action or even implicitly endorsing the practice.

GW could help curb scalping by curbing its own marketing patter around false scarcity. It's understandable that they want to give the impression of urgency but selling through stock fast has to be balanced against creating anger and disappointment in your customers.

Unfairness is a judgment a human poses on a situation he generally dislikes.
Because for some reason, he needs a justification for that profound dislike.

Meanwhile, in the real world, there are problems you face, solutions you come up with, and whether it's fair or not makes no difference, so why slow yourself with these considerations ?

Dice scalping sounds dumb, I personally dislike Eldar Bone Singer scalping (50 bucks for a miniature you don't even want ... sure) and most of all buildable land scalping which is a reality here and will cost me more than any crazy amount of miniatures, painted, based and diorama-ted.


But in the end, I'm left with two options: pay the price, don't pay the price.


So why even wallow in this fethed up echo chamber with the other guys who aren't that happy that the price is so high ?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Aerethan wrote:
At my shop(which also sells comics, which this is more common with) we call them prospectors. Generally we refuse sales beyond a certain volume, even more so on variant or limited edition items.

A current item is the Star Wars Destiny card/dice game. Because the available stock is so low right now, we limit the packs to 6 per customer, and we always tell people calling that we don't have them(because our local loyal customers just come in to see if we do).

We do not tolerate prospecting, and we actively try to make sure that our products are available for our local customers first and foremost, as their repeat business is what keeps us going.

Lately, I've been getting at least 10 calls a day asking about these packs, none of them from people we know to be regulars, and most from area codes an hour or more away.

If all we cared about was the short term sale, we wouldn't have even sold them in store, and just ebay'd them ourselves.

So you're losing money and you're loving it ?
Awesome !

(I know it's more like donating money to a cause, but still, ... you have to admit that's quite generous of you).

morgoth wrote:
So why even wallow in this fethed up echo chamber with the other guys who aren't that happy that the price is so high ?

Because if I can make leeches feel bad about leeching then I'm all for it, maybe they'll get themselves a proper respectable job if they think enough of the world dislikes them

 Manchu wrote:
The thing that bugs me is GW creating conditions that encourage scalping, like the mixed signals about whether something is really gone for good. Although take a look at the 1k Sons dice prices on ebay compared to the Skavenblight dice. I seriously wonder if speculation rather than real demand ate through that stock.

That's how they get their product out the door: 1) regular people jump on it, 2) scalpers jump on it, 3) stock empty, success.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

morgoth wrote:
So why even wallow in this fethed up echo chamber with the other guys who aren't that happy that the price is so high ?

Because if I can make leeches feel bad about leeching then I'm all for it, maybe they'll get themselves a proper respectable job if they think enough of the world dislikes them

They are most likely, at present time, laughing all the way to the bank.

morgoth wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

morgoth wrote:
So why even wallow in this fethed up echo chamber with the other guys who aren't that happy that the price is so high ?

Because if I can make leeches feel bad about leeching then I'm all for it, maybe they'll get themselves a proper respectable job if they think enough of the world dislikes them

They are most likely, at present time, laughing all the way to the bank.

Perhaps if they're psychopaths, even most sociopaths have a germ of feeling related to whether other people find them reprehensible.

 Manchu wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
it could be argued

But do you really want to make and defend that argument?

Actually, there was someone on the receiving end in a Facebook group a few months back making that argument. He is not able to get GW where he lives, and so relies on the secondary market making it available for him. So while rare, it's more legitimate than you think.

I think its annoying but at the same time, the item being sold for a higher price increases its value and rarity making it more "Limitied." Who cares about having a limited dice set thats only worth $10?

Stores that sell these limited products also needs to control the sales... as in.. not selling their whole stock to one person. Who can then drive the price up on ebay or w/e.

Companies selling Limited Editions actively encourage scalping. It's their fault.

I get it, it's a trick to get people to impulse buy, but it's making you the one responsible for it unless you actively discourage that by e.g. limiting sales to one item per shipping adress or similar countermeasures.

Just make it a Premium Edition that you restock once your stock goes low. If you managed to print 250 LE German books and they're sold within an hour or so, you should be able to order/make another 250 of them at the same pricepoint (saving money since you don't have to layout/write it again!) and put them up for sale again.

Jacksmiles wrote:
He is not able to get GW where he lives, and so relies on the secondary market making it available for him.

Scalping is not synonymous with the secondary market. In the situation you describe, someone is making goods available where they otherwise would not be. By contrast, the scalper's customers already had access to the same supplier as the scalper.

morgoth wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
The thing that bugs me is GW creating conditions that encourage scalping, like the mixed signals about whether something is really gone for good.

That's how they get their product out the door:

Sure, I have explained ITT that I understand the tactic of creating urgency around a small stock to sell out.

But that is not the only way to move stock. You could also make better things. So we can compare the Skavenblight dice with the Lake-Town terrain kits. The former are marked Sold Out while the latter are marked Temporarily Out of Stock. When I purchased the latter, it was not because I mistakenly believed it was a limited product - it was because it was obviously a great product. When it comes back in stock, it will continue to sell very well.

The other issue is, GW did not actually rely on "limited edition" market patter to sell through their dice. GW did not say (and have not said) they won't reprint the dice. So, in other words, by listing some items as Sold Out versus Temporarily Out of Stock, without announcing which is which before the fact, GW is not really helping itself but it is most definitely helping the scalpers.

 Manchu wrote:

Jacksmiles wrote:
He is not able to get GW where he lives, and so relies on the secondary market making it available for him.

Scalping is not synonymous with the secondary market. In the situation you describe, someone is making goods available where they otherwise would not be. By contrast, the scalper's customers already had access to the same supplier as the scalper.

Yet for limited edition items, the secondary market will adjust for market value regardless of scalping, and he recognized that this will cause him to pay more to get these items on the secondary market. The conversation is in regards to limited-run items, and that's what this gentleman was talking about as well. He doesn't have access to the same supplier as the scalper.

Yes, I understand that he doesn't have access to the same supplier as the scalper - that's why it's not really an example of scalping. Bringing a good to otherwise inaccessible customers adds value. Of course, when you factor in ebay, scalpers could incidentally be doing that. But its not actually their strategy, just an incidental benefit of infrastructure.

 Manchu wrote:
Yes, I understand that he doesn't have access to the same supplier as the scalper - that's why it's not really an example of scalping. Bringing a good to otherwise inaccessible customers adds value. Of course, when you factor in ebay, scalpers could incidentally be doing that. But its not actually their strategy, just an incidental benefit of infrastructure.

But "scalping" is what made it possible for him to get it at all. Incidental benefit is still a benefit.

Don't shoot the messenger here, I was just responding to your assertion of "but do you really want to argue that" by showing you that it's an actual thing that at least one person appreciates because even if he pays more for a limited item, he otherwise would not be able to get that item. Your post had the tone of "it's nonsense that anyone would see it as a benefit" and I was just pointing out "hey, this guy does." Then you say it's not an example of scalping, except it only comes about due to scalping, so the incidental benefit still benefits the guy.

The item not being available to him otherwise only became "not an example of scalping" after I told you he can't get it otherwise, why did you not bring that up as soon as the notion of "people might not be able to get these items otherwise" was mentioned? If I don't know how you define the terms of the argument, I can't argue :/

Jacksmiles wrote:

 Manchu wrote:

Jacksmiles wrote:
He is not able to get GW where he lives, and so relies on the secondary market making it available for him.

Scalping is not synonymous with the secondary market. In the situation you describe, someone is making goods available where they otherwise would not be. By contrast, the scalper's customers already had access to the same supplier as the scalper.

Yet for limited edition items, the secondary market will adjust for market value regardless of scalping, and he recognized that this will cause him to pay more to get these items on the secondary market. The conversation is in regards to limited-run items, and that's what this gentleman was talking about as well. He doesn't have access to the same supplier as the scalper.

actually he does have access to the same supplier as the scalper, scalpers do not have some mystical place where they can buy their items, they buy them from the same place we do, ticket booths, stores what have you, they just buy a lot of them in hopes of reselling, now some places are putting limits on amounts that can be bought to slow down scalpers, but not all places, like GW, you want to see how ugly scalping is, go to a Target on stocking day when they open their doors, that is just straight up ugly when it comes to HotWheel Scalpers and collectors and such. same thing with that new hatchimals toy or whatever it is called.

Problem is the US is made of consumerists, its why our inflation has gotten away from us to the point no matter what the minimum wage is it will never be enough, we have to have that brand new shiny gadget (not me ) and companies know that. and more importantly Scalpers know that.

Asterios wrote:

Jacksmiles wrote:

 Manchu wrote:

Jacksmiles wrote:
He is not able to get GW where he lives, and so relies on the secondary market making it available for him.

Scalping is not synonymous with the secondary market. In the situation you describe, someone is making goods available where they otherwise would not be. By contrast, the scalper's customers already had access to the same supplier as the scalper.

Yet for limited edition items, the secondary market will adjust for market value regardless of scalping, and he recognized that this will cause him to pay more to get these items on the secondary market. The conversation is in regards to limited-run items, and that's what this gentleman was talking about as well. He doesn't have access to the same supplier as the scalper.

actually he does have access to the same supplier as the scalper, scalpers do not have some mystical place where they can buy their items, they buy them from the same place we do, ticket booths, stores what have you, they just buy a lot of them in hopes of reselling, now some places are putting limits on amounts that can be bought to slow down scalpers, but not all places, like GW, you want to see how ugly scalping is, go to a Target on stocking day when they open their doors, that is just straight up ugly when it comes to HotWheel Scalpers and collectors and such. same thing with that new hatchimals toy or whatever it is called.

Problem is the US is made of consumerists, its why our inflation has gotten away from us to the point no matter what the minimum wage is it will never be enough, we have to have that brand new shiny gadget (not me ) and companies know that. and more importantly Scalpers know that.

I feel like you didn't even read the original portion of this. He does not have access to the same supplier due to not being able to get anything GW except on the secondary market.

Jacksmiles wrote:

Asterios wrote:

Jacksmiles wrote:

 Manchu wrote:

Jacksmiles wrote:
He is not able to get GW where he lives, and so relies on the secondary market making it available for him.

Scalping is not synonymous with the secondary market. In the situation you describe, someone is making goods available where they otherwise would not be. By contrast, the scalper's customers already had access to the same supplier as the scalper.

Yet for limited edition items, the secondary market will adjust for market value regardless of scalping, and he recognized that this will cause him to pay more to get these items on the secondary market. The conversation is in regards to limited-run items, and that's what this gentleman was talking about as well. He doesn't have access to the same supplier as the scalper.

actually he does have access to the same supplier as the scalper, scalpers do not have some mystical place where they can buy their items, they buy them from the same place we do, ticket booths, stores what have you, they just buy a lot of them in hopes of reselling, now some places are putting limits on amounts that can be bought to slow down scalpers, but not all places, like GW, you want to see how ugly scalping is, go to a Target on stocking day when they open their doors, that is just straight up ugly when it comes to HotWheel Scalpers and collectors and such. same thing with that new hatchimals toy or whatever it is called.

Problem is the US is made of consumerists, its why our inflation has gotten away from us to the point no matter what the minimum wage is it will never be enough, we have to have that brand new shiny gadget (not me ) and companies know that. and more importantly Scalpers know that.

I feel like you didn't even read the original portion of this. He does not have access to the same supplier due to not being able to get anything GW except on the secondary market.

this is not about secondary market this is about something that is still visible on the GW website, so a consumer never had a chance to get an item from the GW website? where is a buyer not able to purchase from GW? considering the scalper was selling the items on a North American BST facebook page? where in North America is someone not able to order from GW ?, which is the same place the scalper got his items from? problem is the scalper ordered like 5-6 of an item thereby depriving 4-5 other people of getting that item at SRP, just so the scalper can turn around and sell the items for twice the price.

maybe you should know the facts before spouting off incorrectly.

by the way said scalper of said dice would not sell on eBay since at his prices they would not sell, so instead he would rather give the shaft to a community group instead.

also in your referance, where is this person who cannot buy from GW? tell me where is this mystical place at ?

Asterios - We just have to accept the premise of the hypothetical: the guy apparently cannot buy from GW or any retailers but he can get the items through resellers and/or scalpers. It doesn't matter if it's believable; it's just for the sake of argument.

Jacksmiles - You are still conflating scalping with reselling. As explained in considerable detail, scalping is when someone shuts out some consumers in order to gouge others. The scalper's strategy is not to take advantage of price difference across markets but rather to distort the market he is already in to inflate prices.

Whether this is still a benefit to the guy in the example - sure, I guess, same as how anyone willing to pay a scalper's price "benefits" by receiving what they wanted when they could not get it otherwise. But again, keep in mind that the scalper's own actions are contributing to the "otherwise could not get it" part. This is why I noted, paying a scalper is not the same thing as liking scalpers. Nobody wants to be a scalper's best customer (i.e., a chump). And this is basically why scalping is not a viable business strategy, beyond one shots.

 Manchu wrote:
Asterios - We just have to accept the premise of the hypothetical: the guy apparently cannot buy from GW or any retailers but he can get the items through resellers and/or scalpers. It doesn't matter if it's believable; it's just for the sake of argument.

well if we are going with such imaginary hypothesis lets look at how someone could have never bought from GW or a retailer but can buy from a scalper on a very small group? ummm still trying to figure out how a hypothetical situation like that can occur? this is not like the old days or even like "Convention" exclusives, but an item that had a very wide margin of release to the point it could be bought from GW (which has some of the widest know distribution releases available) or any number of retail situations.

and I still come up empty on how such a hypothetical situation could occur, not too mention the poster indicated this was fact, not hypothetical. wonders if people can fly on their own or have super powers in this "Hypothetical" world?

Asterios wrote:
where is a buyer not able to purchase from GW?

Anywhere that doesn't have a local GW store, if they don't have a credit card?

Or in any of the countries without a local GW, and so subject to GW's insane international shipping charges?

 insaniak wrote:

Asterios wrote:
where is a buyer not able to purchase from GW?

Anywhere that doesn't have a local GW store, if they don't have a credit card?

Or in any of the countries without a local GW, and so subject to GW's insane international shipping charges?

and yet they still can order from them ?

The whole premise is ridiculous.

Everybody in the world has access to credit cards or the equivalent (bank account + paypal or any number of alternatives), at least everybody who can afford GW stuff.

And every last one of these can order stuff online.

So where's your hypothetical customer now ?