Pachter: So Far, GameStop Not Impacted By Online Pass

August 20, 2010 -

Michael Pachter, gaming research analyst for Wedbush Morgan Securities, says that schemes to recoup cash from used game buyers doesn't seem to be having an impact on sales at GameStop. In a post-financials report on the retailer, Pachter said that the country's largest games retailer remained unscathed in its latest quarter and that aggressive code-based schemes for used games weren't hurting the retailer’s bottom line. This could be because most of these schemes from EA and THQ (in a small measure) are targeting multiplayer, which GameStop says only 25 percent of used game buyers are interested in.

"The company has not seen a negative impact on used software sales from first-use codes or new competitors in the space," Pachter said. "The company estimates that only 25 per cent of used game buyers play online.”

Naturally EA and THQ have just barely rolled out such schemes on a couple of titles. We'll see how it affects used games sales of titles like the latest Madden game in the next quarter. Pachter also shared his pessimism on GameStop’s plan to create a digital market space to sell DLC.

"We remain skeptical about how GameStop will participate in digital distribution," he said. "After a successful trial run in 35 test markets in the spring and summer, the company will complete a full DLC kiosk rollout in Q3."

"While we agree that the DLC opportunity is large and growing, we are skeptical that it will be a sales growth driver. Rather, we think that DLC will at best forestall the inevitable cannibalization of physical disc sales and allow GameStop to capture a small percentage of this cannibalization, with relatively insignificant margin contribution."

Source: MCV UK


Comments

Re: Pachter: So Far, GameStop Not Impacted By Online Pass

Without having seen Gamestop's plan to sell DLC, I'd have to question how they think they can legally do that.

Also, I think we're at least another quarter or two away from really seeing the negative effects of used game sales. Lets see how well Gamestop is feeling in Q3 2011.

-- Dan Rosenthal

-- Dan Rosenthal

Re: Pachter: So Far, GameStop Not Impacted By Online Pass

How do they think they'll get away with this?! I'm sure they'll do something illegal in all 4000+ stores and the international corporation will be sunk by a lawsuit! ...!!! 

Ohwait, no... they're more likely allowed to sell DLC because of a business partnership between themselves and the publishers.  Talking to gamers in person, enough of them don't even know how to get their Xboxes online that it's going to be a very, very long time before publishers can give the finger to retailers like GameStop entirely by doing away with physical media.

This initiative means little more than letting gamers buy an $8 DLC pack rather than spending $20 on points they won't use... and encouraging GameStop's umpteenthousand register monkeys to suggest DLC alongside game purchases.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Is King right? Should all games adopt the free-to-play model?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MaskedPixelanteNumber 3: Night Dive was brought to the attention of the public by a massive game recovery, and yet most of their released catalogue consists of games that other people did the hard work of getting re-released.04/17/2014 - 8:46pm
MaskedPixelanteNumber 2: If Humongous Entertainment wanted their stuff on Steam, why didn't they talk to their parent company, which does have a number of games published on Steam?04/17/2014 - 8:45pm
MaskedPixelanteNumber 1: When Night Dive spent the better part of a year teasing the return of true classics, having their big content dump be edutainment is kind of a kick in the stomach.04/17/2014 - 8:44pm
Matthew Wilsonhttp://www.giantbomb.com/articles/jeff-gerstmann-heads-to-new-york-takes-questions/1100-4900/ He talks about the future games press and the games industry. It is worth your time even though it is a bit long, and stay for the QA. There are some good QA04/17/2014 - 5:28pm
IanCErm so they shouldn't sell edutainment at all? Why?04/17/2014 - 4:42pm
MaskedPixelanteNot that linkable, go onto Steam and there's stuff like Pajama Sam on the front-page, courtesy of Night Dive.04/17/2014 - 4:13pm
Andrew EisenOkay, again, please, please, PLEASE get in a habit of linking to whatever you're talking about.04/17/2014 - 4:05pm
MaskedPixelanteAnother round of Night Dive teasing and promising turns out to be stupid edutainment games. Thanks for wasting all our time, guys. See you never.04/17/2014 - 3:44pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the consequences were not only foreseeable, but very likely. anyone who understood supply demand curvs knew that was going to happen. SF has been a econ/trade hub for the last hundred years.04/17/2014 - 2:45pm
Andrew EisenMixedPixelante - Would you like to expand on that?04/17/2014 - 2:43pm
MaskedPixelanteWell, I am officially done with Night Dive Studios. Unless they can bring something worthwhile back, I'm never buying another game from them.04/17/2014 - 2:29pm
PHX Corphttp://www.msnbc.com/ronan-farrow/watch/video-games-continue-to-break-the-mold-229561923638 Ronan Farrow Daily on Video games breaking the mold04/17/2014 - 2:13pm
NeenekoAh yes, because by building something nice they were just asking for people to come push them out. Consequences are protested all the time when other people are implementing them.04/17/2014 - 2:06pm
Matthew Wilsonok than they should not protest when the consequences of that choice occur.04/17/2014 - 1:06pm
NeenekoIf people want tall buildings, plenty of other cities with them. Part of freedom and markets is communities deciding what they do and do not want built in their collective space.04/17/2014 - 12:55pm
Sora-ChanI realize that they have ways getting around it, but one reason might be due to earthquakes.04/17/2014 - 4:42am
Matthew WilsonSF is a tech/ economic/ trade center it should be mostly tail building. this whole problem is because of the lack of tail buildings. How would having tail apartment buildings destroy SF? having tail buildings has not runed other cities around the US/world04/16/2014 - 10:51pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the issue is you can not build upwards anywhere in SF at the moment, and no you would not. You would bring prices to where they should have been before the market distortion. those prices are not economic or socially healthy.04/16/2014 - 10:46pm
ZippyDSMleeYou still wind up pushing people out of the non high rise aeras but tis least damage you can do all things considered.04/16/2014 - 10:26pm
ZippyDSMleeANd by mindlessly building upward you make it like every place else hurting property prices,ect,ect. You'll have to slowly segment the region into aeras where you will never build upward then alow some aeras to build upward.04/16/2014 - 10:25pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician