What effect will eBay have on the PS3 launch?

I'm really curious as to how eBay will affect the launch of the PS3. People have known about using eBay for profits for a long time now, and there were some rare cases of high prices for the PS2 back in 2000. However, it wasn't until the 360's launch that we saw insanity on a much larger scale. People didn't anticipate the limited supply and the high demand for the 360, and yet 10% of 360s purchased were done on eBay.

Now enter the PS3.  Demand will be higher.  Supply will be similar, and considering the base price is even higher, you can see the dancing dollar signs in people's eyes.  Most discussions I read or hear about the PS3 involve selling it on eBay.

People are anticipating some crazy prices, but I'm not so sure.  I think that so many people are going to put up PS3 auctions that margins will be destroyed.  But if over 50% of launch PS3s are ended up offered on eBay, are there enough people willing to use eBay?  Or will they say forget it, and wait for the PS3 to show up in stores?  How will this affect game sales?

**** you

That seems a little uncalled for.

Clever girl

I for one buy my games from the stores. Buying a PS3 on EBay may be the only option for Sony fans for a while though. I read on www.ign.com that PS3's can be preordered from gamestop, but the stores have a very limited supply, forcing people to sleep in tents on the sidewalk hoping to be the lucky 10 or so to actually get a PS3 launch day.

For the Gamestop/EB thing, I'd guess that pretty much all pre-orders are now taken.  Every store was able to take 8 or 16 PS3 preorders, with employees being able to secure 2 of them at most.  Some places had lineups starting the night before stores opened, whereas other stores maybe not so much.  If you really want a PS3 then I suggest calling your local EB/Gamestop, if you live in a small town you might get lucky.  Still, even for people that preordered, you're not guaranteed a system at launch.  We still don't know what Sony's production yields are going to be like, so you've really just secured a place in line which may or may not be fulfilled on launch day.

Now, I do want to talk about this eBay thing some more.  I've read a lot of arguments on both sides of the debate. Scalpers are bad.  Scalpers are just performing a service.  etc etc.  And personally I wasn't sure where I stood.  Maybe it's the people willing to pay the crazy prices that are the problem?  Well, I think I've come up with a clearer understanding of the problem.  Warning: it's pretty boring to read!

For people saying "I bought it, it's mine and I can do what I want with it!" well, that's not really true. In a technical sense it is, but from a community/social aspect it's not. To illustrate this point I'll use the hilarious show Malcolm in the Middle. In one episode Rees gets a job and has a lot of money. In one scene Rees surprises Dewey with a new model airplane. Dewey is shocked to see that Rees is giving him such a nice present, but right before it's in Dewey's hands, Rees smashes it on the ground, which of course upsets Dewey. Now, you can argue that smashing the plane on the ground right in front of Dewey's face is totally within Rees' rights, since he paid for the plane and it's a free country and all that crap, but NOBODY can argue that it's not a jerk move to pull.

Why is that a jerk move to pull? Because Dewey is a proper user of the plane. Consumer products have an intended use. Sony makes the PS3, and people will buy it for the reason of entertainment. Sony isn't making the PS3 to be used as a form of currency, they'd be making dollar bills instead, the intended and proper use of the PS3 is for entertainment purposes, so people using it for that reason are the proper users.

So there are a certain number of proper users in the world, and this creates the demand for the PS3. Now, due to limited supplies that can't satisfy all of this demand, the cost increases, naturally in the form of having to wait in line. So right away the cost of the PS3 is $600 + X, where X is some number that's the amount of time necessary to wait * the value of your time. Now it's totally fair and reasonable for someone to substitute themselves in line with someone else.

Let's illustrate this further.

Bob is a CEO of a big company, so his time is worth $500/hour
Jim is currently unemployed and watches a lot of TV, so his time is worth $10/hour

It's in both parties best interest to have Jim wait in line for Bob, for a price of $100/hour. Bob is paying Jim a service to save him time and money. No problems here.

The problem, and moral divide occurs when you don't have a one-to-one substitution.
Let's introduce a 3rd person, Rick. Rick doesn't know any CEOs personally, but he knows they're out there, and they're willing to pay for a Jim-like service. So without prior arrangement Rick takes it upon himself to incur the cost of waiting in the hope that a Bob-like person will make it worth their while.

The problem occurs when the number of Ricks grows very large. What happens when you have a lot of Ricks is that the X-factor, the extra cost of procuring the item, INCREASES. And this is entirely out of greed. If there was only PROPER users, or their 1-to-1 substitutes, let's say to secure yourself a console the lineup time is 12 hours. When you start introducing a lot of Ricks, who have no intention of proper use, the lineup time now doubles to 24 hours. So now the Ricks have effectively doubled the X increase in price entirely out of greed.

So if I'm Bob or Betsy (not a CEO, so she's gonna have to wait in line), I'm obviously going to be pissed off at the Rick's of the world.

So this is where the disagreement comes from: Ricks all see themselves as being just like Jim, where there is no problem. Whereas Bob and Betsy see Ricks as greedy a bastard that's just making their lives more difficult.

Hm, maybe we should cap all of Omar's post to be 100 words or less.

You don't limit Pavarotti to sing for only 10 minutes.  You don't limit Christospher Noland to make 100 second movies.

Genious needs its space.