90% of the Gemstore cosmetic items are not available for purchasing, RCA

[Derdzvero.7051]

So at any given time, 90% of items, one can see around in game, are unavailable for purchasing in gemstore. We're not talking about discounts or offers or rare goods - this concept basically makes almost ALL cosmetics being unavailable for purchasing at any time.

Obviously this doesn't apply for account upgrades, so why do we have this practice for mount (and pretty much all other) skins ? Can someone from Anet check with marketing department if that really is the intended model?

It's one thing to have "offer of the day/week/month/event", but another to have 3k posts thread about interest in spending money, which is not possible since store doesn't want to take those money ;)Of course some exclusives have to be limited, no question in that. But really considering all mount skins or some outfits, related to story content (just an example) being exclusive is quite an overstatement and false understanding , imho..

Analogy with real life is to enter a big store and see empty shelves with 2-3 items rotating in one corner of those. It's not like we have limited space in the showroom :)

Doesn't really encourages Gem purchasing - if I'm entering 3 times such a store and not finding what I want, chances are I will ignore it later, when the object of interest appears there. For how long will I remember that object, I saw next to me during an event, and will write it down for future?? Or will I open TP, check it's not there and forget it?I don't think that is good for the artists and customers. And business income too.

Imagine Riot blocking 95% of skins behind a timegate in store and being still a successful business.. or local store doing it for bicycles or cars or furniture.... Hope you understand my point and confusion

[Yargesh.4965]

Change your title, as you said in the body of your text all items rotate so they cannot be permanently unavailable by your own definition. It is a proven marketing strategy, if you can think of anything that would make them more money without even more inconveniencing players go for it.

[Derdzvero.7051]

How does it make more money, when they are not selling stuff?Price is not higher when those objects appear, neither will go low if they stay permanently available. So limiting exposure is directly a hit on sales.

[Yargesh.4965]

perceived rarity. impulse buying. look it up.

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

@"Derdzvero.7051" said:How does it make more money, when they are not selling stuff?

Artificial scarcity serves several purposes:

• It gets people to pay more attention to the gem shop generally, which generates more sales.
• It counteracts "familiarity breeds contempt," i.e. people tend to discount the value of things that can be obtained at any time.
• It adds incentive to "impulse buy," because you can't be sure when the item will return.

It also has downsides, including annoying some players enough that they simply don't check at all. However, in the last few hundred years since the practice got under way in an organized fashion, retailers have gotten pretty good at it, so for every dollar lost because a user became jaded, they usually get several more dollars from the rest of us who keep a watchful eye.

tl;dr Why do they do it? Because it works to make more money than leaving things available 24/7 and 365 days.

Further reading

• https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/68112/gem-store-items-availability
• https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/79995/question-why-do-we-have-rotation-items-in-the-gem-store
• https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/41418/locked-gem-shop-items
• https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/13925/whats-the-actual-reason-for-limited-time-gem-store-items

(Just a sampling of threads in these forums. There are many in the old forums and on r/Guildwars2 as well.)

[Adrianna.3092]

@Derdzvero.7051 said:How does it make more money, when they are not selling stuff?Price is not higher when those objects appear, neither will go low if they stay permanently available. So limiting exposure is directly a hit on sales.

simple.... making it not available all the time increases desirability... you always want what you cant have more so when something rolls around again sales increase... it also means nothing stays popular for too long and as time moves on certain things become less common.

[Derdzvero.7051]

Hmm, ok..for me it's just not working - Apple tried with iPhone same concept and was ditching it after initial hype-phase..I wouldn't buy Picasso even though it's rare. I would get a Rembrandt, provided I had the opportunity. So I don't understand the increased desirability argument.. might be me only though.To have some business profit with current implementation, Anet should really have all overpriced when available (which is not the case, quite frequently the opposite in fact) or make more money from alternative purchases. I doubt people will buy ugly (for them) skin or 10th account upgrade, if they have 9 already sitting idle, while waiting for a specific skin...I would never get a skin for gathering tools if I'm looking for a mount skin..Then again I'm probably a border case, but for me it's simply a losing money model. It makes zero sense with current pricing and story content release plan.Who would buy sand or branded-themed skins when a water expansion comes out? Or how many would buy HoT-themed skins nowadays? I don't see a logic..

[XenesisII.1540]

It's to drive up demand for items in a digital market where you can have unlimited supply but one time purchases for accounts.Skins is their big market, they could have 50 glider skins up for sale, but are you going to buy all of them at once? no, so they spread out availability and sales, and knowing that some may not be back for some time can be tempting enough for someone to buy it, just so they have it now and don't have to wait when they actually want to use it, like the white and black feathered wings back piece/glider.

This also gives them the chance to keep listings to a certain amount like 100 items a week instead of seeing 1000 items up all the time, and keep people interested in checking back every week for new sales.

[Derdzvero.7051]

Yeah, but will you be buying more glider skins with the current store concept, compared if these were listed as available(albeit at higher price than current discount)? I don't think so- you'd probably make a list of desired items and get as many as you'd afford or like to have. Now- you'd get 1 and that provided you have nothing else planned, else you'd chose between options. Outcome: less money for Anet.Only shopacholics would probably be spending more since they have to buy something now, just for the sake of the purchase... Then again, those would be buying tons more if there's an opportunity so..

Also rareness raises prices, but they offen return items to store on 40% discount..so that also doesn't fits the idea of limited availability making objects more expensive.

Your example with gliders is good: see those you mention can be considered rare or limited- After all we have like 5-10 glider skins always available for purchase, right? So no problems to have some rare.But mount skins are terribly limited (I'm just looking now for one hence the example) and that means no options and no purchase. And I'm sure I won't be getting on the hook get one of those ugly skins/recolors available (my taste here!) so 1200 gems less for Anet. Neither will they get more from me, nor I will be happily now or after waiting for 3m for that skin (provided I remember what i wanted)..

I understand your explanation and feel it's indeed what Anet believe.. still don't see it working in the currently implemented store model of theirs.

[Yargesh.4965]

It has been working to ANETS satisfaction for about 5 years now (up to the first expansion there was very little in the store to begin with). I think they are probably happy with it or they would have changed it.

[Tommo Chocolate.5870]

@Derdzvero.7051 said:I wouldn't buy Picasso even though it's rare. I would get a Rembrandt, provided I had the opportunity. So I don't understand the increased desirability argument.. might be me only though.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here (that you value certain common things more than certain rare things?), but your example seems poorly chosen. Picasso and Rembrandt were both incredibly prolific painters, but Picasso was much moreso: he painted about three times as many paintings as Rembrandt did (over 1800 in total, plus many other artworks).

[Derdzvero.7051]

@Tommo Chocolate.5870 said:

@Derdzvero.7051 said:I wouldn't buy Picasso even though it's rare. I would get a Rembrandt, provided I had the opportunity. So I don't understand the increased desirability argument.. might be me only though.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here (that you value certain common things more than certain rare things?), but your example seems poorly chosen. Picasso and Rembrandt were both incredibly prolific painters, but Picasso was much moreso: he painted about three times as many paintings as Rembrandt did (over 1800 in total, plus many other artworks).

The point is: if only sand-themed skin is available for purchase, I won't buy it if I'm looking for fire-themed skin. Regardless if sand-skin is top quality. E.g. offering only 1 thing at a time in the store won't make me buy more, if that 1 thing is not what I want to have. I won't use a skin, which doesn't fit my character, just because someone calls it rare/unique/etc... It will make all ugly.

@"Yargesh.4965" said:It has been working to ANETS satisfaction for about 5 years now (up to the first expansion there was very little in the store to begin with). I think they are probably happy with it or they would have changed it.

I guess you are right.. I'm also happy that I can ignore the TP and real money spending (especially after Skyscale flop), but was just wondering how not selling stuff could be better than selling stuff.. Guess "it's always been like that" explains it. Thanks guys, GL to Anet financial dept ;) I'm going to check Gog/Steam/Epic sales currently, because..you know, they are actually selling stuff :)Apologies for duplicated post, should have seen there are other recent threads on same topic.

[Yargesh.4965]

They are not doing it because that is how they have always done it. They have not always done it and they are doing it because it works. Look at all of the MMORPGs that have been released in the past 7 years and tell me how many are profitable, how many have sunk and vanished without a trace and then look closely at your game of choice and tell me they don't do exactly what you complain about to a greater or lesser extent.

[Derdzvero.7051]

Yes, many studios simply follow the lemming train, I agree with you. I hope it works for Anet. And for you. But that doesn't mean we should be focusing too much or overlooking some stuff..

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

There's limited space in the Gem Store, so even if they wanted to display everything, they would not.

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

@Derdzvero.7051 said:Hmm, ok..for me it's just not workingIt's not intended to work on you. The point is that it works on the community as a whole.

Rest assured: if it didn't work, retailers and mobile games wouldn't make use of it so thoroughly.

[zealex.9410]

@Yargesh.4965 said:Change your title, as you said in the body of your text all items rotate so they cannot be permanently unavailable by your own definition. It is a proven marketing strategy, if you can think of anything that would make them more money without even more inconveniencing players go for it.

Have everything available and run sales whenever a update drops? Thats what poe does and it works fine.

[zealex.9410]

@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:

@Derdzvero.7051 said:Hmm, ok..for me it's just not workingIt's not intended to work on

you

. The point is that it works on the community as a whole.

Rest assured: if it didn't work, retailers and mobile games wouldn't make use of it so thoroughly.

i thought when monetising the goal was to reach the biggest number of buyers possible.

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

@"zealex.9410" said:i thought when monetising the goal was to reach the biggest number of buyers possible.The goal of business is always to make the most money possible. Among many strategies:

• Reach the biggest number of possible buyers (example: state-sponsored lotteries)
• Reach the biggest number of likely buyers (example: voter guides are sent to members of a particular party in particular cities)
• Reach the biggest number of those who can afford a minimum asking price (e.g. Ferrari dealers aren't looking for "most people")

Other strategies include increasing the pressure to buy, offering incentives (real or imagined), and, in this case, artificial scarcity.

[Derdzvero.7051]

@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:The goal of business is always to make the most money possible.

And that is exactly what Anet is NOT doing! Having price constant or frequently on discount and at the same time limiting the good's offering period to days/weeks is absolute nonsense. Thousands of posts in multiple threads mean large part of community is not being targeted at all(gw2 is a small community). Good luck to such business.

[Mewcifer.5198]

@Derdzvero.7051 said:

@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:The goal of business is always to make the most money possible.

And that is exactly what Anet is NOT doing! Having price constant or frequently on discount and at the same time limiting the good's offering period to days/weeks is absolute nonsense. Thousands of posts in multiple threads mean large part of community is not being targeted at all(gw2 is a small community). Good luck to such business.

Do you have access to Anet's income analytics?

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

@Derdzvero.7051 said:

@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:The goal of business is always to make the most money possible.

And that is exactly what Anet is NOT doing!Do you really think that all of this discussion has

never

occurred to them in the 10 years they've been selling GW1-2?

Having price constant or frequently on discount and at the same time limiting the good's offering period to days/weeks is absolute nonsense.I'm sorry that you're having trouble seeing the logic. It works, ergo it doesn't matter if it sounds like it's nonsense.

Thousands of posts in multiple threadsIt's a handful of posters, many of whom are pointing out that artificial scarcity is a successful practice that has been used for ages.

mean large part of community is not being targeted at allAs I noted above, the goal is to increase the amount of total purchases. The fact that

some

people purchase less is mitigated by the amount of people who purchase more.

(gw2 is a small community).The size of the community isn't directly relevant. It's the proportion of the community that spends and how much they do so.

Good luck to such business.Any business depending on luck is going to be in for hard times. That's why companies make use of such tactics: because it increases gross income without adding much to their costs.

[Derdzvero.7051]

I understand your point and marketing description. All I'm saying is that it does not fit in current price plan. And your logic is "if they are doing it, then it's working". No, I disagree and don't consider GW2 being a very clever and promising business to take all without grain of salt.

Total purchases of skins is higher, if you provide only 2 at a time and thus only shopping-addicted customers are able to buy something? Would be interesting if that's the case. But there are other factors that need to be in place for this to happen ..like bigger dynamics in game for example, skin to come with stats modifiers, etc.. (like WoT for example)..Even then it won't work for regularly priced cosmetics. I don't know an online game that limits the access to cosmetics..see Riot, hirez, etc.. for example

It's pointless to discuss - one skin costs 1200 regular price. At times discounted to 750. That's it, no 3rd price exists. There is NO way that Anet makes bigger income now, offering that skin for 1.5 months a year, compared to if that skin has been kept permanently available for 1200 gems. Never in life , not in other games, not in gw2. Yes, it might cause disparity in various skins' distribution, but income-wise it's a terrible decision. I don't need Anet's financial reports to know that.

Now, if you are saying that people would actually buy more skins, provided those are offered within limited timeframe.. i don't know, don't understand it, could be. As I said I wouldn't buy a Picasso if I wanted a Rembrandt..e.g. I won't buy currently offered skins only because they are the only ones available now..

Now, if people are monumentally... and would buy extra salvage tools from despair, just because their skin of interest is not available for purchase.. and then buy 2 more skins..and the one they wanted at the end... i don't know that, sounds like a serious problem to me ;) None of the people I know in or out of the game is driven by such logic, ymmv

[Tommo Chocolate.5870]

@Derdzvero.7051 said:

@Tommo Chocolate.5870 said:

@Derdzvero.7051 said:I wouldn't buy Picasso even though it's rare. I would get a Rembrandt, provided I had the opportunity. So I don't understand the increased desirability argument.. might be me only though.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here (that you value certain common things more than certain rare things?), but your example seems poorly chosen. Picasso and Rembrandt were both incredibly prolific painters, but Picasso was much moreso: he painted about three times as many paintings as Rembrandt did (over 1800 in total, plus many other artworks).

The point is: if only sand-themed skin is available for purchase, I won't buy it if I'm looking for fire-themed skin. Regardless if sand-skin is top quality. E.g. offering only 1 thing at a time in the store won't make me buy more, if that 1 thing is not what I want to have. I won't use a skin, which doesn't fit my character, just because someone calls it rare/unique/etc... It will make all ugly.

Oh, I see. In that case, I agree with you personally - but I think a lot of people just buy things that they think look cool, and don't care about a theme or character concept. (I'm basing this on the player characters I see in game, the majority of which don't appear to have any theme or aesthetic cohesion.) Also there's a difference between rarity and scarcity - gem store items are easy to get when they're available, but the fact that they're only available for a limited time puts extra pressure on potential buyers to make a decision about whether to buy them.

I do think this strategy makes for a worse customer experience - in fact, most of the times I've wanted to buy something from the gem store, I found it wasn't available, and by the time it came around again I'd lost interest. So the strategy hasn't really worked with me personally. But that doesn't matter to ANet - what matters to them is that this strategy makes them the most money overall. They obviously believe that's the case (and arguably with good reason).

[zealex.9410]

@Derdzvero.7051 said:

@"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:The goal of business is always to make the most money possible.

And that is exactly what Anet is NOT doing! Having price constant or frequently on discount and at the same time limiting the good's offering period to days/weeks is absolute nonsense. Thousands of posts in multiple threads mean large part of community is not being targeted at all(gw2 is a small community). Good luck to such business.

Hey dont be mad, cant do much if anet doesnt want to sell stuff to you, just enjoy the free updates and if you are asked why dont you support the game just say "because anet wont let me"