Game Wholesalers

NeoKubrick

Gamesnash.ie (Pat) wrote: »

:DI can only hope if not assume that the vast majority of people reading your posts can see through the smoke and mirrors.

I'm not in the business of selling games as a middle-man to the readership here; you are. I post here to discuss, not sell. I'm not constructing horribly skewed self-serving summaries for people to lazy to read. I have no reason to throw up smoke and mirrors; whereas you do have a reason. So, please don't embarrass yourself by bringing up the possibility of bias or interest in this discussion, again.

Read:

It hasn't become personal for me: it never does (just another mark). You stated several idiotic statements, and I corrected you; if you take that personally, you should reevaluate the fact that you're not the smartest guy in the world and then accept and get over it. You always had the opportunity to drop the debate because you're the one challenging irrefutable logic, not me. Now, you're dropping it but without retracting (something you ironically ask of me later on, wrongly) your idiotic statements and conceding what's self-evident anyway.

If you're taking this personally, then the only reason you would be is the fact that you took the wrong stance in the argument. Hence, you should reevaluate the fact that you're not the smartest guy in the world and you should get over that; otherwise, you'll continue to take it personally every time someone corrects you. Continue to argue that a small of something doesn't need to be complemented by something big, or concede.


This is comical now. You did claim that there's no "bigger" margin elsewhere in response to my querying how can 7.76% dwarf 3%, here:

Gamenash.ie (Pat) wrote:

Just because something is little does not mean there is a bigger version elsewhere.

Gamenash.ie (Pat) wrote:

Just because I said how little a margin was made on consoles did not imply a huge margin was made elsewhere

The average is irrelevant to that point, and unless you post hard evidence (invoices), it's all conjecture anyway fabricated after the fact (same goes for all your figures by the way). You lied when you said that there's no implied bigger margin than 8%, and you provided the evidence to prove it (11% and now you even suggested that it's above that, although I think that was a slight error on your part). Therefore, the onus is on you to withdraw your statements, but you won't and it makes no difference to me that you mark yourself a hypocrite in the process. Posting some clearly incorrect bullet points won't make a difference either to what is already explicitly posted.


If you didn't want to alienate customers, why did you even participate in the discussion to begin with? In fact, the only reason I've responded was to correct your idiotic statement that a small value can exist without there being a bigger value (effectively erasing the concept of numbers other than zero). I guess you thought you knew something about logic.

Gamesnash.ie: Pat

Why don't we just copy and paste our entire conversation so far back and forth 1000 times - it will end up with the same responses as another 1000 efforts from me to get you to understand our position and vice versa.

I completely take your point about us coming from two seperate areas when it comes to why we are posting here. But your discussion points and claims of margins that we would make our wrong which is why coming from my position as a representative of Gamesnash I have to defend that.

I'm trying to make the distinction between two seperate discussions that have been intertwined and I'm not sure that you see that there are two discussions. That's not a personal dig by the way. There is one discussion about the "how little" implying something a lot larger is out there and there is a seperate issue with our specific margins.

You're taking a quote about one thing and using it to reference another. Example ...

Originally Posted by Gamenash.ie (Pat)
Just because something is little does not mean there is a bigger version elsewhere.

Is about the debate in relation to the relative sizes etc. Which is why I made the points about babies not being dwarfed by other babies etc. ( Of course you've made a counter post to that point etc but again I'm emphasising that I wa talking about the little and large concept there )

Originally Posted by Gamenash.ie (Pat)
Just because I said how little a margin was made on consoles did not imply a huge margin was made elsewhere

This is not saying that there are no higher margins than the low margins on consoles. It is saying that what I said did not imply HUGE margins elsewhere in my business. I'd consider a 200% markup / 67% profit margin to be huge and these were the figures I was responding to based on your post about independent retailers margins. We're making approx one seventh of those figures. And at the worst case scenario of pre owned titles at 11% I still would not consider that huge profit at all.

I think there has been another misunderstanding in what you perceived I was actually debating with you in regards to the first issue.

your idiotic statement that a small value can exist without there being a bigger value

This was never my position. I took it from your post ....

Heh

You classify a 3.5% margin on consoles, "little", but the "[big]" comparison to this figure to dwarf its profit is a margin of 7.76%?

that your position was that there had to be something a lot bigger to use the term "how little" in the context that I did. My understanding was that you were saying that in order for me to use the term "how little" that there had to be something dwarfing this like your 200% markup etc.


So to make it as clear as I can

Of course there has to be something bigger in order for something to be little. Anyone saying that is guilty of an idiotic statement. That wasn't my position in the first place but if you want to hear me say it - there it is. I genuinely think we went off on the wrong tangent based on that misunderstanding.

I haven't lied about any of our margins or the figures I quoted. I think were you're coming from saying I implied otherwise etc is based on the assumption that there was only one debate. I would totally agree with you if there was one issue being debated that the comments above could be interpeted as being implications etc but I was debating two seperate issues - and I think to be fair that should have been clear when I made the distinction between the personal debate which I wished to withdraw from and the one about Gamesnash's exact figures etc.

I've no interest in sparring back and forth with you about what is clearly a whole catalogue of misunderstandings and am willing and more accurately wishing to drop it, virtually shake hands on the subject and call it a day. The only outstanding issue for me is the acceptance / making clear that the margins we operate are nowhere near what you think.

I can't produce and publically post invoices here ( even if I did I could have photoshopped or faked them ) and I think in all fairness you know and understand that but if you want to come and meet me at our offices next week when prototype comes in to verify the price I quoted you're more than welcome.

CutzEr

...

Absolam

I'm reminded of the old saw so often found on boards... 'Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their own level then beat you with experience'

cliffon3

i agree with pat

i also work in an independant retailer of games, dvds and electronics etc. in kilkenny

the margins on games and consols are miniscule

2nd hand stuff slightly more, but not much, what we do is we offer better prices on 2nd hand stuff than gamestop, xtravision etc and we sell them cheaper. approximately we make about 2 spuds per 2nd hand dvd and then it varies between 2-5 spuds for the games.

ive seen alot of planks get onto pat about his margins and accusing him of the "proverbial dwarving margins". lets face it its none of your business, but trust me we're not making a whole ton on anything.

if you want to point the finger at the organisation with the MASSIVE MARGINS look at gamestop. about 2 months ago i conducted a little experiment. i got one of my old xbox360 games, traded it in i got 3 store crd. or 2 spuds, 4 days later that game was onsale for 34.99. so think again before you accuse independant retailers of hiking up the price

cliff kk

coughlan08

which game hmmm

noodler

@NeoKubrick

NeoKubrick

noodler wrote: »

@NeoKubrick

I wonder is it worth conducting a study to find if there is any relation between the qualities of a dunce and the posting of overused "LOLZ" pictures instead of substantiated posts.

noodler

There were two options. Go with the wall of text, which you were using to deflect the fact you were incorrect in many of the things you have said, or I could go for the minimalist approach and see if a picture really does tell a thousand words.

NeoKubrick

noodler wrote: »

There were two options. Go with the wall of text, which you were using to deflect the fact you were incorrect in many of the things you have said, or I could go for the minimalist approach and see if a picture really does tell a thousand words.

I could see why you went with the minimalist approach. You could avoid being specific: you didn't have to substantiate your mutterings, and I couldn't very well respond to a non-existent argument.

noodler

Exactly. Plus nobody has to put up with another 3 pages of waffle from yourself this way too.

Hagakure_irl

NeoKubrick wrote: »

I could see why you went with the minimalist approach. You could avoid being specific: you didn't have to substantiate your mutterings, and I couldn't very well respond to a non-existent argument.

Settle down there kitten, it's only the internet.

cliffon3

coughlan08 wrote: »

which game hmmm

need for speed prostreet, mint condition mind you