Get Some
General => General Chat => Topic started by: Xsannz on November 20, 2015, 08:38:14 am
-
GST hits Steam and other digital stores next Oct
Games purchased on Steam will be subject to GST from next October, Revenue Minister Todd McClay says.
As reported by Stuff, from October 1, a GST charge of 15 per cent will be added to Netflix subscriptions, iTunes downloads, Amazon e-books, and other digital products and services purchased offshore.
Any foreign company that sells more than NZS$60,000 of digital services to New Zealanders each year will be required to register with Inland Revenue and collect the GST on its behalf.
Those avoiding GST by using a VPN to make it appear they lived outside the country would be liable for a fine of up to $25,000, said McClay. It will be up to the IRD to implement the rules.
However, those circumventing geo-blocking to access content would probably not be liable for fines, said Deloitte tax partner Allan Bullot.
The tax is designed to close a loophole under which digital products and services can be bought from overseas firms tax free. It is expected to raise about NZ$40 million a year for the government.
The Government first announced its plans to impose the so-called "Netflix tax" in August.
Several countries, including South Africa, Norway and Japan, have introduced similar regimes to that proposed by the new legislation, with Australia set to follow in July 2017.
-
I don't mind.
For most games it will only be an extra couple of bucks, still get good deals on steam stales.
Considering the value I get from Netflix, I would happily pay twice what I'm paying now.
Taxes gonna tax.
-
VPN ho...
-
Back to buying CD keys to activate on steam I go.
-
VPN ho...
I wouldn't use a VPN to avoid GST. Not worth the bother, plus I have no issues with paying taxes, gotta pay for roads and schools.
I may use it to avoid regional pricing.
-
Back to buying CD keys to activate on steam I go.
GMG or CDKEYS sites yep i'm with you there, on cdkeys i got mortal combat x deluxe edition for 4usd....
still better deals.. than steam sale..
-
VPN ho...
I wouldn't use a VPN to avoid GST. Not worth the bother, plus I have no issues with paying taxes, gotta pay for roads and schools.
I may use it to avoid regional pricing.
i pay my rates and my taxes, but paying for DLC is bad enough without be taxed on it ontop off, i use digital companies so i dont have to pay the premium have having to pay some twat at EB's markup and markup for import and gst.
-
If this applies to the XBOX store it's going to mean paying nearly $150 for triple A's. I get fucked and peters of Kensington still gets to sell kitchen appliances for less than my cost.
Thanks National.
-
you fuckers
-
Actually, I reckon it’ll bring in a wave of overseas based credit card accounts,
Actually if you look at the way the law and legislation is written the end user is dictated by the billing address for the end user.
HELLLO VISA application for the USA, or USA visa prezzy cards.
Create foreign steam account and pay with foreign visa or prezzy card and then ‘gifting’ purchases to themselves (real steam account).
-
If this applies to the XBOX store it's going to mean paying nearly $150 for triple A's. I get fucked and peters of Kensington still gets to sell kitchen appliances for less than my cost.
Thanks National.
FUCK PETERS OF KENSINGTON. THESE FUCKERS GOT MY EMAIL ADDRESS OFF SOME SPAM LIST AND HAVE BEEN REAMING MY GMAIL'S PROLAPSED ASSHOLE EVER SINCE.
Pro-tip, don't buy digital unless it's Steam's massive annual sales. AAA titles are always cheaper at JB Hifi than what Steam releases them as.
-
I signed up on purpose to keep an eye on things. Regret.
Actually, I reckon it’ll bring in a wave of overseas based credit card accounts,
Actually if you look at the way the law and legislation is written the end user is dictated by the billing address for the end user.
HELLLO VISA application for the USA, or USA visa prezzy cards.
Create foreign steam account and pay with foreign visa or prezzy card and then ‘gifting’ purchases to themselves (real steam account).
Yeah, that sounds way too complicated for a dummy like me.
-
Gosh peoples, just pay your taxes
Or move to Northland, the land where no one pays taxes.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/northern-advocate/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503450&objectid=11548461 (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/northern-advocate/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503450&objectid=11548461)
-
I smoke cigarettes. I pay enough tax thanks mate.
-
I pay an astro fucking nomical amount of PAYE already, money which goes to paying for all sorts of shit the government has no business providing (like giving a cent to anyone who is not an NZ citizen).
-
If the Govt is going to charge GST - I wonder if one could make legal challenge that international purchases should be covered by the CGA (if the NZ Govt is going to charge me Tax on it, then they better be covering me as well)
-
If the Govt is going to charge GST - I wonder if one could make legal challenge that international purchases should be covered by the CGA (if the NZ Govt is going to charge me Tax on it, then they better be covering me as well)
Consumer guarantees act for electronic purchases?
Hahahhahahahahahahaha
No.
Still waiting for news or any information about what the TPPA contains about copyright infringement. I'm pretty sure that if you pirate then the rules state that you'll get a free trip to guantanamo bay.
I take it you are one of those anti-TPPA loonies?
Electronic Commerce? Thats covered by the TPPA.
Who is the loony now?
p.s Neither of us
-
If you don't like paying tax, leave NZ.
-
If you don't like people having the ability to complain about tax move to N Korea
-
If you don't like paying tax, leave NZ.
It's a bit hard to justify telling people that their copy of Call of Duty: Black Ops 16 from an online store is funding roads in Auckland, when in reality it is funding John Key's bathroom robe malfunctions in Manila.
-
HELLLO VISA application for the USA, or USA visa prezzy cards.
Create foreign steam account and pay with foreign visa or prezzy card and then ‘gifting’ purchases to themselves (real steam account).
Apparently when Valve figures this out you get banned, refunded, etc
-
When it comes to games, blame the publishers for the excessive price, not the tax.
-
If you don't like people having the ability to complain about tax move to N Korea
It doesn't make sense to complain about tax. It's the governments source of income. Same as every other country.
Complaining about how that money is spent is a different matter.
-
My main complaint is that currently anything I buy that has GST, also has consumer protection (enforced by the Govt) Buying overseas did mean no GST, but also no Protection for the consumer - that was a trade off I was happy with.
Now I see the Govt having their cake and eating it too.
-
Wait, does this affect the Humble Bundles as well?
The more money you pay, the more the Government gets?
-
Wait, does this affect the Humble Bundles as well?
The more money you pay, the more the Government gets?
affects anything deemed to be a service or goods that sells more than a stupidly low threshold, netflix, steam, amazon books, itunes, etc etc
-
If you don't like people having the ability to complain about tax move to N Korea
It doesn't make sense to complain about tax. It's the governments source of income. Same as every other country.
Complaining about how that money is spent is a different matter.
Of course it makes sense. I'm not complaining about paying tax, I'm complaining about paying MORE tax in a country that is in the top ten "most taxed" countries.
Things are semi-ok at the moment but it's been a rough 5 - 10 years and people don't have a lot of money. Increasing the cost of entertainment by 15% is a dick move. Government service indeed.
-
Also on the related subject of physical imports, if NZ retailers only charged 15% less than online I'd buy from them, but they don't..
If I can buy things overseas, and even with shipping to NZ they can be 1/2 the price of the same item in NZ, something is very rotten.
-
Regional pricing and buying power. Retail prices are more controlled by distributors than you'd think. I have to buy product x from the importer/distributor, even when product x is for sale online to the end user at less than my cost.
When the boomers are dead and gone, so too will bricks and mortar go. Scary prospect for me really. I'm trying to get our online store up to scratch with little funds and less understanding from boomer management.
Also trying to get a younger market, but until I can drop ship from overseas it's never going to happen.
-
My theory for digital goods, is that NZ law should be changed so that any digital good (game, tv show, whatever), should be made available by the supplier/copyright owner at the cheapest price anywhere in the world, or it becomes legal to copy it because they are illegally price gouging. Would also apply if they decline to make it available in NZ. It would kill regional pricing dead.
To take an example from SteamPrices, currently Silent Hill Homecoming is USD$39.99 (NZD$61.11), GBP£17.99 (NZD$41.81), or EUR€19.99 (NZD$32.54). It's also not currently available on steam in NZ. Under my proposal, it would be legal to pirate it because it's not offered here, but even if it was offered here they would have to price it at the lowest global price(NZD$32.54) or again it would be legal to copy it.
It's the logical extension of our pro consumer laws into the global digital marketplace, they can provide the goods at a reasonable price, without price gouging, or they can have their content pirated.
I don't really see why we shouldn't extend the pricing requirements to physical goods, I they sell it anywhere in the world at Cost X, the price in NZ should only ever be Cost X + shipping to NZ.
-
^ communist.
-
My theory for digital goods, is that NZ law should be changed so that any digital good (game, tv show, whatever), should be made available by the supplier/copyright owner at the cheapest price anywhere in the world, or it becomes legal to copy it because they are illegally price gouging. Would also apply if they decline to make it available in NZ. It would kill regional pricing dead.
To take an example from SteamPrices, currently Silent Hill Homecoming is USD$39.99 (NZD$61.11), GBP£17.99 (NZD$41.81), or EUR€19.99 (NZD$32.54). It's also not currently available on steam in NZ. Under my proposal, it would be legal to pirate it because it's not offered here, but even if it was offered here they would have to price it at the lowest global price(NZD$32.54) or again it would be legal to copy it.
It's the logical extension of our pro consumer laws into the global digital marketplace, they can provide the goods at a reasonable price, without price gouging, or they can have their content pirated.
I don't really see why we shouldn't extend the pricing requirements to physical goods, I they sell it anywhere in the world at Cost X, the price in NZ should only ever be Cost X + shipping to NZ.
HEAR HEAR, GIVE THIS MAN A JOB AS AN MP
-
That's anti-competitive to the extreme. Anyone who couldn't compete on the price would go out of business (because they are "illegally price gouging", leaving one vendor holding a monopoly, who could then charge what ever they want.
Most stupid idea ever.
-
It's the logical extension of our pro consumer laws into the global digital marketplace, they can provide the goods at a reasonable price, without price gouging, or they can have their content pirated.
Despite the obvious flaws in your proposal. I'd like to see other markets in NZ be held responsible for blatant price gouging long before videos games/software were looked at.
-
It's the logical extension of our pro consumer laws into the global digital marketplace, they can provide the goods at a reasonable price, without price gouging, or they can have their content pirated.
Despite the obvious flaws in your proposal. I'd like to see other markets in NZ be held responsible for blatant price gouging long before videos games/software were looked at.
LESBI'ONEST HERE Lias was actually only ever talking about the "Games " Digitial Goods" aka Hookers were price gouging, i mean if you can root in a bar for the cost of two or three spirits drinks, then $50 for blowie is just price gouging.. and $180 per hour for GF experience is just gouging as well.
especially since Lias pays for everything with reach arounds.
-
I don't even know what you're saying right now.
Stop smoking meth before breakfast.
-
I don't even know what you're saying right now.
Stop smoking meth before breakfast.
Pah all i did was sniff your protein powder...
-
That's anti-competitive to the extreme. Anyone who couldn't compete on the price would go out of business (because they are "illegally price gouging", leaving one vendor holding a monopoly, who could then charge what ever they want.
Most stupid idea ever.
It's not meant to stop a monopoly, it's meant to ensure that kiwis never pay a cent more than anyone else in the world for a product. If the entire planet is begin squeezed by a monopoly, then so be it, but I doubt that situation would ever happen, someone would innovate around it.
-
It's not meant to stop a monopoly, it's meant to ensure that kiwis never pay a cent more than anyone else in the world for a product. If the entire planet is begin squeezed by a monopoly, then so be it, but I doubt that situation would ever happen, someone would innovate around it.
Let's not stop on a country level.
Regionally people in Otago shouldn't be paying more for butter than the people in Waikato.
Hell, throw out regionally, lets do it on postcodes, no streets!
Stupid idea is stupid.
Price varies "inexplicably", just deal with it. If you don't like it move to the place which offers things at the price you want, and complain about other things you don't agree with.
-
^You're in my cool book.
If you don't understand the way goods are priced here you need to look up both "economies of scale" and "distance to market". Both of which pose difficulties to New Zealand businesses.
If you try to price gouge anything, anything the next guy in line will take your market share. People are too savvy now, and they're price checking globally, just like us when we buy games.
-
^You're in my cool book.
If you don't understand the way goods are priced here you need to look up both "economies of scale" and "distance to market". Both of which pose difficulties to New Zealand businesses.
If you try to price gouge anything, anything the next guy in line will take your market share. People are too savvy now, and they're price checking globally, just like us when we buy games.
I think you are missing Lias' point - he is referring to digital media where there is almost zero cost in terms of Distance to Market (econmies of Scale really only applies to digital media if the servers can't handle the load - a la the slashdot effect)
pricing differences based on ease of delivery to various regions I have no problem with - but again, that doesn't apply to Digital Media.
-
I'm totally with him on the digital side. It blows my mind that physical media is cheaper than digital in NZ, but unless I'm mistaken he's brought physical consumer goods into his argument and it's simply not the same thing.
Example lazy quote:
"I don't really see why we shouldn't extend the pricing requirements to physical goods, I they sell it anywhere in the world at Cost X, the price in NZ should only ever be Cost X + shipping to NZ."
-
I'm totally with him on the digital side. It blows my mind that physical media is cheaper than digital in NZ, but unless I'm mistaken he's brought physical consumer goods into his argument and it's simply not the same thing.
Example lazy quote:
"I don't really see why we shouldn't extend the pricing requirements to physical goods, I they sell it anywhere in the world at Cost X, the price in NZ should only ever be Cost X + shipping to NZ."
Well the + Shipping to NZ should account for the cost to market that you are raising.
-
But not economies of scale. More units garner lower prices. Biggest guy wins, boom monopoly.
-
The point of regional pricing is because in some regions, people are willing and able to pay more then people in other regions, due to things like average wealth. i.e in NZ, we are generally more wealthy then people in Kyrgyzstan. So you can't charge people in Kyrgyzstan the same price that you would charge people in NZ for a game (i.e $80), because no one in Kyrgyzstan would be able to buy it.
Vice versa, if you changed people in NZ for games at the price you charge a Kyrgyz (let say $20), then you no going to make as much money.
There will be a sweet spot for every region where a distributor will get the best return for a particular price. It's fully within their right to set that price, they are a business, not a charity. They're there to make a profit.
You are not entitled to their product for a certain price, digital media is not a life necessity, it's entertainment. You don't need it, you just want it.
It might not be fair, deal with it. There are ways to work around it.
Haveing legalisation like Lias suggested which sets the price on digital media is extremely anti-competitive, and a restriction of freedom on how business are allowed to operate. It would also be terrible for our economy.
-
The point of regional pricing is because in some regions, people are willing and able to pay more then people in other regions, due to things like average wealth. i.e in NZ, we are generally more wealthy then people in Kyrgyzstan. So you can't charge people in Kyrgyzstan the same price that you would charge people in NZ for a game (i.e $80), because no one in Kyrgyzstan would be able to buy it.
Vice versa, if you changed people in NZ for games at the price you charge a Kyrgyz (let say $20), then you no going to make as much money.
There will be a sweet spot for every region where a distributor will get the best return for a particular price. It's fully within their right to set that price, they are a business, not a charity. They're there to make a profit.
You are not entitled to their product for a certain price, digital media is not a life necessity, it's entertainment. You don't need it, you just want it.
It might not be fair, deal with it. There are ways to work around it.
Haveing legalisation like Lias suggested which sets the price on digital media is extremely anti-competitive, and a restriction of freedom on how business are allowed to operate. It would also be terrible for our economy.
Respectfully - Bullshit.
If the people of poverty-stan can't afford to buy it at $80, then they can't afford to buy it. Period.
If the game developers make enough profit off a $20 sale in Poverty-stan for it to be viable to sell at $20 (for a given number of units), then they can make the same profit by selling it in NZ at $20.
This is a legacy of the physical media age where there was a significant barrier to people going to poverty-stan and getting the discount price, now with the internet, that barrier has been removed, yet businesses are still clinging onto distribution models that artificially inflate the price solely to increase their profit.
-
^ What TDL said :-P
If they can sell it in whogivesafuckistan at $20 and make a profit, and shipping to NZ is $20, it should be $40 in NZ, not $80.
-
So your logic is, I want it for $40 so it should be $40?
Who cares about businesses actuality making money.
Like I said, digital media is not a necessity, you are not entitled to it. Companies have a freedom to change what ever they want. Just like you have the freedom to decide to buy it or not.
-
If the game developers make enough profit off a $20 sale in Poverty-stan for it to be viable to sell at $20 (for a given number of units), then they can make the same profit by selling it in NZ at $20.
It's not viable to only sell at $20 in Poverty-stan, that market is not enough to pay for the development of the game.
That is why they also have to sell in in NZ for $80.
Digital media is not a physical good, you don't get profit per sale, because, unlike physical good, there is no cost per sale.
The cost is the development of the game, the revenue is to total of all sales worldwide, and the profit makes the difference.
It's ironic that you reference the legacy of the physical media age as a factor, where in fact, you are the one treating a digital product as a physical one.
-
Maybe they aren't selling it at a profit.
Maybe by taking a negative profit (aka. "a loss" to the people in the know) they are able to get their game to reach more of an audience. And just maybe that might add more intangible value to their product.
These "facts" you are basing your argument on are crap.
It's like you've written a book, or many books, on how you think things should be done with "testaments"; and are now knocking on peoples doors looking for people to join your crusade. Sound familiar?
Don't come in here and pretend to know what you're talking about when you don't have all the information.
Do I agree with GST on digital goods? I don't know. It feels weird, but I'm certainly not pretending that I know more about the markets than the companies selling the goods.
Idiocy in thread is at an all time high.
-
The fatal flaw in that plan is the internet.
They could get away with that when there was limited global communications, but now we know they are selling at at $20 in Fuckistan, so we value the game at $20. If EvilCorp attempts to sell the game for $80 in NZ, we feel ripped off, and either pirate it (they make $0) or obtain it from a grey market CD key vendor (say $30, of which they still only get $20).
-
The fatal flaw in that plan is the internet.
They could get away with that when there was limited global communications, but now we know they are selling at at $20 in Fuckistan, so we value the game at $20. If EvilCorp attempts to sell the game for $80 in NZ, we feel ripped off, and either pirate it (they make $0) or obtain it from a grey market CD key vendor (say $30, of which they still only get $20).
Exactly, there are ways to work around it. So there is no need for legalization.
And they are "getting away with it", if their business model wasn't working, then they wouldn't be making any money.
Selling a game for $80 does not make a company evil.
Selling AIDs medication for $750 a pill does however.
-
Maybe EvilCorp intended to sell the game at $40. Then two people arbitrarily decided $40 was too expensive and pirated it. Leaving them to recoup $40, which is the extra they charge the next man through the door.
Just because you feel hard done by is not a reason to pirate goods.
In my opinion, the only valid reason for piracy is if a digital media is deliberately made unavailable by the manufacturer without a "just reason". And this doesn't include things being "delayed to market", because international compliance and law is complex, and time consuming.
-
Selling a game for $80 does not make a company evil.
Selling AIDs medication for $750 a pill does however.
Selling a $80 game for $80 isn't evil, Selling a $20 game for $80.. getting there.
But yes selling a $10 pill for $750 is monstrous.
-
The point (I think) SM is making.
You aren't going to die if you don't play game xyz.
-
Selling a $80 game for $80 isn't evil, Selling a $20 game for $80.. getting there.
How do you put a value on a game? Surly it's worth whatever someone is prepared to pay for it?
The point (I think) SM is making.
You aren't going to die if you don't play game xyz.
Pretty much, it's not the end of the world if someone can't buy a game, so it's a bit extreme to have a law which sets the price.
Things like basic food, electricity, water, even broadband, I agree need regulation. Overcharging on necessities is price gouging.
But for things like movies, games, and music, it should be left up to the market.
-
Meh I see your point, I just don't agree.
Mind you I'm turning into a raging anti capitalist as I age.
-
clearly :P
-
It's funny because I still dislike most of the left wing social policies, but economically I'm rapidly moving left :-)
-
Communism isn't left wing.
I don't think it's even a wing.
(I kid of course, only because communism isn't a thing)
-
If the game developers make enough profit off a $20 sale in Poverty-stan for it to be viable to sell at $20 (for a given number of units), then they can make the same profit by selling it in NZ at $20.
It's not viable to only sell at $20 in Poverty-stan, that market is not enough to pay for the development of the game.
That is why they also have to sell in in NZ for $80.
Digital media is not a physical good, you don't get profit per sale, because, unlike physical good, there is no cost per sale.
The cost is the development of the game, the revenue is to total of all sales worldwide, and the profit makes the difference.
It's ironic that you reference the legacy of the physical media age as a factor, where in fact, you are the one treating a digital product as a physical one.
So, what you are saying in your scenario, is that I am financing the Development of a game so that other people can play it for cheap?
Am I going to be rewarded in game for bankrolling it (ie additional content and/or features)?
Because if not, then no thank you - Either Poverty-stan can pay the full price or go without (as you keep reminding us, its not a necessity)
-
So, what you are saying in your scenario, is that I am financing the Development of a game so that other people can play it for cheap?
Exactly.
I'm not saying it's fair, I don't like regional pricing either.
But it's why we have regional pricing, and it's reasonable that a company will want to maximize it's return in each region, after all they're there to make money.
-
So, what you are saying in your scenario, is that I am financing the Development of a game so that other people can play it for cheap?
Exactly.
I'm not saying it's fair, I don't like regional pricing either.
But it's why we have regional pricing, and it's reasonable that a company will want to maximize it's return in each region, after all they're there to make money.
And its reasonable that I will want to minimize my expenditure to a level that is acceptable to me - I'm not a charity either and so I object to paying a rip-off price, solely to subsidise others to enjoy the same content.
-
And its reasonable that I will want to minimize my expenditure to a level that is acceptable to me - I'm not a charity either and so I object to paying a rip-off price, solely to subsidise others to enjoy the same content.
Your first sentence holds merit. The rest, not so much. Classic case of FOMO.
Would it make you happy if they didn't publish any prices except for the one you are paying?
You only perceive it to be a rip-off because you see someone else getting it cheaper.
If you don't want to pay the sticker price for a game, then don't. Simple as that. minimize my expenditure to a level that is acceptable to me. Do exactly that, by not purchasing the game.
Next thing you'll be running to Mitre 10, and demanding trade prices because "that other guy got trade prices". It's not how shit works.
-
You only perceive it to be a rip-off because you see someone else getting it cheaper.
Your wandering into one of my other theories here, that people should only ever pay what they feel is appropriate for digital content.
Imagine if every game, movie, tv show, mp3, etc was sold like a humble bundle style of pay what you want. Perfection.
-
Your wandering into one of my other theories here, that people should only ever pay what they feel is appropriate for digital content.
Imagine if every game, movie, tv show, mp3, etc was sold like a humble bundle style of pay what you want. Perfection.
*Perfection for the consumer.
That's fine and dandy after you've recouped your costs, and most likely some profit. (most) People don't work for free.
You neglect the fact most games have already had an official release, with a sticker price. In which the developer has most likely made their investment, and some.
I like HumbleBundle, and I am fairly generous when I use their service.
-
And its reasonable that I will want to minimize my expenditure to a level that is acceptable to me - I'm not a charity either and so I object to paying a rip-off price, solely to subsidise others to enjoy the same content.
Your first sentence holds merit. The rest, not so much. Classic case of FOMO.
Would it make you happy if they didn't publish any prices except for the one you are paying?
You only perceive it to be a rip-off because you see someone else getting it cheaper.
If you don't want to pay the sticker price for a game, then don't. Simple as that. minimize my expenditure to a level that is acceptable to me. Do exactly that, by not purchasing the game.
Next thing you'll be running to Mitre 10, and demanding trade prices because "that other guy got trade prices". It's not how shit works.
Sure I'd be happy - because only one price would be published, which is the one price everyone would be paying.
Damn straight I perceive it as a rip-off if someone else is getting it cheaper - I'm happy to pay for a Companies profit - you develop a game, your per-unit cost should cover the costs to develop that game, costs for future developments and a good percentage markup for Profit. I'm okay with that. If you tell me that when you factor in the number of units you expect to sell and to meet all of those requirements, its going to be $80 - I'll open my Wallet and cough up my $80.
Now, my acceptance of that $80 is based on the above premise, that this is the amount based on the number of Units you expect to sell. If you then turn around and in another country put the cost at $20 (to cover the above) - then that means you are attempting to extort $60 out of me - without giving me anything to justify the increased cost.
Trade pricing is different - that is done on the basis of Economies of Scale - I'll probably spend maybe $200 a year at Mitre 10, I'm happy paying full price for that. If I was in trade and spending $1-2K a week at Mitre 10, I'd be expecting some form of discount, based on the volume of sales that I represent.
-
"I don't really see why we shouldn't extend the pricing requirements to physical goods, I they sell it anywhere in the world at Cost X, the price in NZ should only ever be Cost X + shipping to NZ."
I understand that NZ is an out of the way market and it costs a lot more to physically bring products to our shores, however a lot of it is also bullshit. Companies will often see NZ as an opportunity to mop up lost profits in markets where they have to competitively price their product, they're able to get away with a multitude of compounded excuses "shipping costs, exchange rates, small market".
Companies are also able to get away with stocking older models, probably due to the fact that consumers aren't always as 'savvy' as we like to think. "Mum & pop" shoppers put too much faith in their Noel Leemings and Harvey Norman salesman when they throw up a "THIS WEEKEND ONLY SALE". Old stock sells for an inflated price.
Like most people here, I know how to research a product and where to get it from to ensure I'm getting my money's worth so what I've outlined doesn't really effect me. Just an observation after working in several small tech shops that have to purchase from local distributors.
-
Sure I'd be happy - because only one price would be published, which is the one price everyone would be paying.
I didn't say that everyone would be paying the same price. I said you would only know of one price. Big difference.
Damn straight I perceive it as a rip-off if someone else is getting it cheaper - I'm happy to pay for a Companies profit - you develop a game, your per-unit cost should cover the costs to develop that game, costs for future developments and a good percentage markup for Profit. I'm okay with that. If you tell me that when you factor in the number of units you expect to sell and to meet all of those requirements, its going to be $80 - I'll open my Wallet and cough up my $80.
Now, my acceptance of that $80 is based on the above premise, that this is the amount based on the number of Units you expect to sell. If you then turn around and in another country put the cost at $20 (to cover the above) - then that means you are attempting to extort $60 out of me - without giving me anything to justify the increased cost.
Trade pricing is different - that is done on the basis of Economies of Scale - I'll probably spend maybe $200 a year at Mitre 10, I'm happy paying full price for that. If I was in trade and spending $1-2K a week at Mitre 10, I'd be expecting some form of discount, based on the volume of sales that I represent.
Wait you understand how Economies of Scale affects trade prices, but you can't see that there may be other factors driving the price difference?
Trade pricing is the same exact same scenario. We don't know why the price is different in games, so we have to exclude that from the trade price scenario (Economies of Scale). When we do that we have someone getting the same item cheaper than someone else.
-
Sure I'd be happy - because only one price would be published, which is the one price everyone would be paying.
I didn't say that everyone would be paying the same price. I said you would only know of one price. Big difference.
Damn straight I perceive it as a rip-off if someone else is getting it cheaper - I'm happy to pay for a Companies profit - you develop a game, your per-unit cost should cover the costs to develop that game, costs for future developments and a good percentage markup for Profit. I'm okay with that. If you tell me that when you factor in the number of units you expect to sell and to meet all of those requirements, its going to be $80 - I'll open my Wallet and cough up my $80.
Now, my acceptance of that $80 is based on the above premise, that this is the amount based on the number of Units you expect to sell. If you then turn around and in another country put the cost at $20 (to cover the above) - then that means you are attempting to extort $60 out of me - without giving me anything to justify the increased cost.
Trade pricing is different - that is done on the basis of Economies of Scale - I'll probably spend maybe $200 a year at Mitre 10, I'm happy paying full price for that. If I was in trade and spending $1-2K a week at Mitre 10, I'd be expecting some form of discount, based on the volume of sales that I represent.
Wait you understand how Economies of Scale affects trade prices, but you can't see that there may be other factors driving the price difference?
Trade pricing is the same exact same scenario. We don't know why the price is different in games, so we have to exclude that from the trade price scenario (Economies of Scale). When we do that we have someone getting the same item cheaper than someone else.
I know the difference, but the only way that I would know of only one price was if there was only one price (or you execute your customers after they purchase, but that isn't a sustainable Business model ;))
With a universal digital distribution - all the other factors that would drive price (excluding company greed) are mitigated. There is no Economies of Scale, No increased cost due to the haulage costs.
-
I know the difference, but the only way that I would know of only one price was if there was only one price (or you execute your customers after they purchase, but that isn't a sustainable Business model ;))
Or you hand out special glasses that replace the price for only you. Hypothetical scenario to illustrate my point. But yes I think you understood what I was getting at. Not against executing customers, after all you already have their money. They are no longer of use to you now :P
With a universal digital distribution - all the other factors that would drive price (excluding company greed) are mitigated. There is no Economies of Scale, No increased cost due to the haulage costs.
Got some non-anecdotal evidence for that? Otherwise it's just your opinion based on what you believe is the case.
Things are rarely as simple as they appear, and to think they are isn't particularly insightful.
Asking why is a great way to learn. Even if it doesn't give you an answer, it might give you more questions. Jumping to a conclusion that we should all pay the same for goods with very little (or no) evidence is not the way to spark intelligent conversation.
-
I know the difference, but the only way that I would know of only one price was if there was only one price (or you execute your customers after they purchase, but that isn't a sustainable Business model ;))
Or you hand out special glasses that replace the price for only you. Hypothetical scenario to illustrate my point. But yes I think you understood what I was getting at. Not against executing customers, after all you already have their money. They are no longer of use to you now :P
Okay - I'll admit - that made me chuckle - but if you kill them, how are you going to sell them DLC?
With a universal digital distribution - all the other factors that would drive price (excluding company greed) are mitigated. There is no Economies of Scale, No increased cost due to the haulage costs.
Got some non-anecdotal evidence for that? Otherwise it's just your opinion based on what you believe is the case.
Things are rarely as simple as they appear, and to think they are isn't particularly insightful.
Asking why is a great way to learn. Even if it doesn't give you an answer, it might give you more questions. Jumping to a conclusion that we should all pay the same for goods with very little (or no) evidence is not the way to spark intelligent conversation.
Sure - I host websites at work, some even have downloads on them - there is no appreciable increase or decrease in cost to the company if someone from NZ access the site or someone outside of NZ. If there was a significant increase in the international bandwidth costs (so we became wildly popular overseas) then the cost associated with increasing our international Data limit would be distributed equally.
The only possible reason for charging more could be if you implemented some form of local (regional) caching for faster downloads - in which case the increase cost would be a premium service which one should be able to opt in or out of.
-
LOSS MOTHER FUCKING LEADER
[/thread]
-
Okay - I'll admit - that made me chuckle - but if you kill them, how are you going to sell them DLC?
Good point! Hmmm, and micro transactions. Then again, maybe EvilCorp doesn't value human life at more than $20.
Sure - I host websites at work, some even have downloads on them - there is no appreciable increase or decrease in cost to the company if someone from NZ access the site or someone outside of NZ. If there was a significant increase in the international bandwidth costs (so we became wildly popular overseas) then the cost associated with increasing our international Data limit would be distributed equally.
The only possible reason for charging more could be if you implemented some form of local (regional) caching for faster downloads - in which case the increase cost would be a premium service which one should be able to opt in or out of.
1) Non-anecdotal
2) Software distribution is not the same as hosting websites
In science, definitions of anecdotal evidence include:
"casual observations or indications rather than rigorous or scientific analysis"
"information passed along by word-of-mouth but not documented scientifically"
Not that^ I.e something that directly relates to the scenario at hand, with specific real world examples backed by actual facts.
I have no idea why the price differences can be so drastic, but without an actual example I'm unlikely to believe someone on an internet forum claiming its price gouging.
-
(http://i.imgur.com/aOidi8E.jpg)
-
so how long will it be before we start seeing more of:
"This content is not available in your country"
with the reasoning being
"You're too small for us to make huge amounts of profit so we simply cannot be bothered complying with your stupid GST laws"
-
That's when we return to saying "fuck you, I can steal ALL of it".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d458sm5ToWk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d458sm5ToWk)