Talk:GameStop

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Famicom style controller This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
High This article is on a subject of high priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
VG To-do:
This article is part of WikiProject Texas, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Texas.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] MovieStop Edit

Hi, I'm going to edit the MovieStop section. It says it has 36 stores "nationwide" and lists American locations. This seems biased so I'm just going to change it to "across the United States". 194.69.198.242 (talk) 11:48, 29 January 2008 (UTC)Illuvater01

Why do you hate America? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.202.225 (talk) 17:35, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reservations and New Games

Exactly why does that section exist? I don't know any major company that doesn't have a policy almost identical to this. Even if it was special in some manner, why is it relevant to anyone who's looking at this Wikipedia article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.253.102.133 (talk) 04:41, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] History

Whoah. That's quite an update. My guess is that this is from someone who was either a really old SM at the time, or someone in corporate who is now part of corporate GameStop. I personally don't know if any of this is true, but it does appeal to logic. The company has only recently done so well, but before that, it was a very rocky road for the company. It would be hard to verify such information as being true or not, since such a small company wouldn't be the focus of any news outlets, nor would the company likely care to record such information. For the time being, we should probably just leave it up.

Thoughts? Xabrophazon 18:11, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't realize I wasn't logged in with my account yesterday (I guess the Cookie Expired). Anyway I was a store Manager for Babbage's from March of 1993 to

December of 1997. I lived through the nightmare of the Babbage's/Software ETC merger. When I saw the state that the article was in relating to that time period I couldn't resist expanding it and clarifing what really happened. Perhaps its not an entirely journalistic account, but it is the facts. I'd be willing to work to clean it up maybe make it less personal if thats the right thing to do. Haplopeart 13:48, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

It's probably as accurate as we'll see, and it is a very interesting account of what happened way back then. I don't see how your contribution is against Wiki rules, so I would vote to keep it, being that it's the most info we'll ever get on what happened. Thanks for the contribution! Xabrophazon 19:10, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Then I guess I will leave it alone unless anyone else has any objections? Haplopeart 16:04, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Clarification? Current Status?

What is the current status of the company in terms of EB and GAME. The three articles seem to have somewhat conflicting information. Also, what is that large chunk of text at the bottom of the article about? The stuff that mentions "Palmer, Reifler & Associates", I think it traces back to this old edit. I don't really know what it is about, it looks like some attack, added to by the fact it is after the external links! Clarification? --SnakeSeries 15:28, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that last paragraph is nonsensical. It was added by some random IP person with only five edits to their name, the last one being that one on March 16. I'm just going to remove it and if someone wants to add it back with some explanation as to how it is relevant that's fine. Otherwise I don't see any reason for it being here. The Bob Talbot 04:41, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

The Electronics_Boutique page should be retitled as EB Games in my opinion. However, it remains to be seen whether the company will go with EB Games or Gamestop for the name of the retail chain in the future. --Aresgodofwar30 16:56, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

In the Gamestop Article it states that Playstation and N64 games were dropped July 1, 2006. It was in fact June 1, 2006 I work at a gamestop and June 1st is my birthday so I specifically remember the date, not that it's a large matter but I thought I would let you know.

Actually, to note, those systems are not dropped... my store still sells them. However, they are being phased out, in that they don't take in trade-ins anymore.

Yep, both of you are right. Some stores (such as mine) have gotten rid of them entirely, but there are still plenty of stores that still carry what remains of the companie's stock.

Also, as long as other GameStop employees are adding and editing this, we need to be careful what we say, being that if corporate doesn't like anything that we're doing, they could probably try and get us in trouble. Xabrophazon 03:01, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Hrm? I thought Gamestop employees that were editing this article were all corporate loyalists? At least, any employee who lasts more than a week tends to be a total jerkass who meshes with the corporate "the customer is an asshole who deserves to be ripped off" business model. Maybe if Gamesop wanted respect they'd give 50% trade-in values instead of 5%. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.162.204.6 (talk) 06:30, 10 March 2007 (UTC).
Up until recently, Gamestop gave 30 dollars for Zelda: TP on Wii. 33 if you have the discount card or are putting it towards a reservation. 36 if you're putting it towards a reservation and have the discount card. It sells for 45. 40.50 If you have the discount card. A whopping 4.50 profit! Oh boy!
Listen, it's clear you never took Econ101, but I'll make it simple- it's not a matter of "50% value for everything." It depends on many more things. For example, what if you have a few billion of a product? My store has over 100 Madden NFL 2006 for Xbox. Do you think I'll be selling those anytime soon? I'm pretty sure it sells new for 10 (when we have it) so we should give people 5 bucks for a copy of a game that won't go anywhere for the next few years, and will probably just be dumped into a bin for 1 dollar in two or three years? If you believe this to be a smart business strategy, then never start a business, you will fail. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.92.89.202 (talk) 06:37, 4 April 2007 (UTC).


All the EBs in my area are now officially Gamestop. When I asked an employee he said, quote,"Dude there ain't no more EB. We own 'em now."75.121.36.237 (talk) 03:06, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Arbiter099

[edit] Funcoland

I don't think Funcoland should direct here. Although it is now owned by GameStop, some of the stores names have not changed... Funcoland also is know to differ from GameStop for carrying a larger selection of older games, and less newer ones. --HarroSIN 03:48, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I completely agree. It should have it's own page. I would make one, but I don't know enough about it. :( Ihatecrayons 06:12, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I must disagree on this one, the corporation itself is now owned by Gamestop, as well as all internet related searches prove to direct to gamestop. I believe that the current status should be left alone. sc7

I disagree with that point. Although the company is now part of Gamestop, the company still has it's own history on it's own right. It would be equivilant to removing the Enix article when it was aquired by SquareSoft, or eliminating references to Marshall Fields because it was aquired by Macy's. User:Anonymous User

But Enix and Marshall Fields both have a really rich history. Funcoland provides little to speak of... not enough to warrant a full article. However, having a Funcoland section within the Gamestop article would be appropriate.-- 72.92.89.202 16:04, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

The first FuncoLand store was opened in Roseville Minnesota in the Early 90s. The owner started the buisness by selling used games out of his garage and or basement. I believe they were the first company to start selling the magazine Game Informer (also Minnesota based) which was a very small publication back then, and of course is now a major video game magazine. There is much more to the history but that is what I remember from working at the Roseville store back in 95-96. Back then, before they were bought out, the were much more gamer friendly. It was a company created for gamers, by gamers. The store credit values weren't as big a rip off as they are now. And you could also demo used, and most new games before purchasing them. Sadly very little game stores allow this these days.

[edit] Removed text

Gamestop has also now come under fire for the fact that customers may only use store credit to preorder a Sony PlayStation 3 or a Nintendo Wii.[1]

I followed the link, and the information added to the page 1) did not reflect the actual text of the source and 2) the source did not appear to be valid. Maybe I'm just too cynical, but I don't trust everything I read on the internet. z4ns4tsu\talk 19:47, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

This is no longer true, it was a test done by Gamestop in Hawaii that lasted less than a week. Drinel

'Currently, GameStop Corp. currently has around five thousand stores.' - From the Department of Redundancy Department. =) I changed that to make more sense. Xabrophazon 19:18, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Criticisms

I've removed this section. Without any sources, it becomes a section of pure original research. Wikipedia is not a place to dump your personal gripes with Gamestop. Find sources for this sort of thing. Phil Sandifer 21:28, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Regardless of your reasons, they're still a shitty store chain that treats customers like crap, offers piss-poor ripoff trade values and tends to hire real jackasses to work the counters. And with their buyout of Rhino, that chain will now drop all the classic stuff solely to become more GameSteal locations. Gamestop employees can basically go fuck themselves for all I care.206.162.192.39 03:24, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Your point being, Mr. .39? This is not a discussion forum. The S 18:06, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
My point? Gamestop is corrupt and deserve to be called out on it. Sadly, many of their employees keep editing this article to make Gamestop look pure. I'd even put up an article at Encyclopedia Dramatica about them, but one of their admins is a Gamestop employee and pulled the article. Are you an employee? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.162.204.6 (talk) 06:26, 10 March 2007 (UTC).
Your personal experiences and opinions have no place in any sort of encyclopedia. This is a place for cold, hard facts. Your claim is that they, for the most part, treat customers poorly. Therefore, please provide a source showing that 51% of their stores recieve negative customer feedback. Or, provide a source showing that 51% of their stores hire "jackasses." Or, provide a source that shows that a great number of other middlemen provide better trade values (you'll find most pawn shops give MUCH less for video games). And, as for losing the classic stuff: 1) You can't continue to exist selling JUST classic video games, and 2) Stores have X amount of space for product, and that doesn't magically increase, or increase for free. You need to get some business sense, or take an economics class and look up things like "middle man," and "profit," and "sales." Cause, if you actually understood anything about business, you'd know why there's NOTHING wrong going on... you percieve it as unfair, but that's the way to make the business profitable (the opposite of which would be to have a business which makes no money... cute idea, but it would fail miserably). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.92.89.202 (talk) 17:38, 16 March 2007 (UTC).

I agree that Game Stop employees treat customers poorly. I saw a bunch of employees bragging about how they had sucked a granny into buying 7 games on reserve months before Christmas. I also often see employees employing high-pressure market tactics trying to convince parents to buy new systems, and kids to pre-order commonly stocked items, such as controllers. These people are really corrupt. Whoever wrote that article on critisims, please post it someplace else online and place a link so I can enjoy reading it. --71.105.21.125 22:49, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

So, you're saying your singular experience represents 100% of Gamestop employees? After all, you didn't say some, or even most, just "Gamestop employees." And even then, it should be noted- preordering is how items are ordered. There's a reason one store, with 100 reserves, gets 150 copies, where the store with 10 reserves gets 15 copies. Wal-Mart and Best Buy can order as much as they want... video games have terrible profit margins, they don't really make money on them, they're more a thing to get people in... they make money of 3000 dollar HDTVs, 40 dollar kids toys, etc. Gamestop... sells games. And, by the way, if you think the systems make up for it, they're even worse (given percent of profit). So, they don't have the option to order a whole bunch of copies of stuff that may not sell. This is why many Gamestops have 50 or so copies of Lego Star Wars II for GC and PS2... they presumed wrong just how much it would sell (given that the first one was a surprise hit). And you know what? They aren't getting money back for what they don't sell (unless they become greatest hits, in which case, they will get credit from the manufacturer for the price change), and they aren't becoming more valuable... 72.92.89.202 03:27, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
PS- You must REALLY hate any and all mom and pop video game stores. After all, they couldn't even exist without preorders... or used sales... they'd die out instantly. 72.92.89.202 03:27, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Gamestop employees NEVER push NEW systems, and you cannot pre-order controllers, how is pre ordering corrupt, you change your mind u get your money back, you are guaranteed the copy of that game, and you never loose your money

THe criticism section deserves to be right back up where it should be. Tons of other top class Wikipedia pages have them, and this should be no different. I suspect that whoever took down the criticism page has an excessively pro-Gamestop agenda, as possibly someone that supports or even works there shooting down a criticism section for personal reasons when it's valid and has much to do with the store, itself. UltimateZeroX 16:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Criticism of a massive chain of stores of any type is a valid point which should be addressed in any encyclopedia. Is it wrong for an entry on Walmart to contain controversy surrounding near-slave labor? Of course not, it's an aspect of the company. GameStop employees are treated poorly and there's no need for this to be ignored. As a former employee, I especially feel it's important for ALL the facts to be seen by as many people as possible. Yes, they are facts. Low wages and long hours, forced reservations and forced subscriptions, these are all aspects of being an employee of GameStop, no matter the location. This article addresses the good, such as employee discounts within the company and at Barnes and Noble, so why not address the bad as well? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.162.150.65 (talk) 14:03, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Low wages and long hours, in addition to salesmanship, are all aspects of being a retail employee, ESPECIALLY in a speciality store (in fact, more or less unquestionable in a speciality store). It's not some facet unique to Gamestop, it's just the way things are. Speciality stores are typically low profit venues (Yes, Gamestop is on the fortune 500 list... but only after it bought out it's only real competitor, thus doubling it's size, and even then it's way at the bottom) which therefore have an extra focus on sales add ons. The less specialized you get, the less this is necessary. Wal-Mart employees, for example, need barely address a customer past "Welcome to Wal-Mart." So, perhaps after you spend a few more years in retail (better yet, in speciality retail) you'll learn this. 71.185.207.72 07:11, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
As a specialty retail employee myself, I can say that low wages and long hours do not necessarily come with working retail. Nor are we heavily pushed to sell add-ons. If someone can provide a reliable source to GameStop working conditions, I see no reason not to include it. CorrTerek (talk) 17:04, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Not up to date

I live in Florida, and Volusia Mall in Daytona Beach, Florida has a GameStop, but the sign outside still says "electronics boutique", which means that not all the stores have up-to-date logos? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.205.129.139 (talk) 08:33, 11 December 2006 (UTC).

This is because the Electronics Boutique logo is not out of date. Currently, the logos GameStop, EB Games, Electronics Boutique, Babbage's, Funcoland, Software Etc., EBX, and Planet X are all logos used in by GameStop Corp. I would guess that eventually they will all be changed to GameStop, although there are some instances where this is not allowed. Most malls will not allow a store with one name to have another branch within a certain milage of the mall, weather or not they are the same company. It's probably just to keep people from not going to the mall store. Point is though, there are quite a few names that GameStop operates under, not unlike most rappers these days. Xabrophazon 05:56, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I might be able to shed some light, this is based on my more than likely out of date knowledge, but perhaps the policy has remainded the same. Typically signage is only changed when a store remodel takes place. Store remodels only happen for a few reasons.
1. Its contractual, the store may have a clause in the rental contract that after so many years of occupancy the store must be remodeled, this keeps the stores in the malls looking modern.

2. It moves to a new location in the mall, not really a remodel per-see, but same logical store unit in the company just going to a new place and therefore will get the most up to date company format.

3. It needs to be remodeled, time has taken its toll!

4. Its a model store, the company wants to try something new and this is the first place it will be tried out. This is often in combination with the above reasons.

5. Large scale company mission shift, its possible in the case of a merger like what just happened that the store might start converting from one format to another.


I rather suspect that we might start seeing some sort of co-branding to represent the combined mission. Both companies before the merger where headed in a pure entertainment direction, even before I left Babbages in 1997 the "Gamestop" direction was being talked about. I suspect that we might start seeing stores called "EBGamestop"


There are reasons why it might NOT happen as well. For instance if a mall has both a Gamestop and EBGames and they are both excellent performers they might choose to keep both open, to close one would hurt the company. By closing one it will not increase the sales of the other by 100%. KBtoys and Cirus World did this for a long time. In one mall I can remember the two stores where directly above each other. They both performed very well it didn't make sense to close one and kill the sales. There might also be contractual reasons, if both stores have a long term contact with the mall, breaking the lease might be more expensive than just keeping the store open and making sales.Haplopeart 16:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Location

There aren't any gamestop, Software Etc., FuncoLand or ebgames stores in Mexico, where did you get that? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 189.141.96.92 (talk) 19:03, 14 December 2006 (UTC).


[edit] MovieStop

I didn't realize that MovieStops were going to be a completely separate store. The new GameStop that was built in my area is also part-MovieStop. I could be mistaken though. Alabasterchinchilla 05:13, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] store income?

what about the stores monthly income from sales? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.236.92.108 (talk) 05:00, 24 January 2007 (UTC).

What about it? These figures are vastly differant per store, and the amount they make is irrelevant - all the money goes to corporate, as all stores are corporate owned. It would be a violation of terms of employment to talk about any amount of store income anyways. Xabrophazon 18:15, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Competition Section

Is there a reason the brief competition section was removed on January 24? The change seems to have survived several real edits. Dinobobicus 06:20, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

It would be in violation of anyone that works for these combined companies to state any monetary disclosures. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Usakristy (talk • contribs).

Come now! Are you a Gamespot CEO or something? --71.105.21.125 22:51, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Some of this article DOES read like an advertisement. Oh, Gamestopoly... 216.37.86.10 17:15, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Recent major deletion

I support the outright removal of the "employees" section as it really has very little bearing on the business, and couldn't be adequately sourced without violating an NDA. I find the outright deletion of the "History" section to be a bit much, there was a lot of good information there. I found that it made the article a lot more interesting and informative, and I feel that a short company history would absolutely belong in a comprehensive encyclopedia article.

Perhaps if it was condensed and properly sourced it could be reincluded?

meisterchef 04:51, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Restored History section, acknowledging that it could be trimmed a bit. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 14:13, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Class Action Lawsuit section

An anonymous user added this, but does it really need to be included in the article? I reverted it for the time being, since it doesn't seem very encyclopedic (especially some of the links). --clpo13 00:09, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Best of all, the user provided only half the truth. The selling used games as new lawsuit was a matter of the old return policy. It used to be that, if you didn't like a game, even a new one, you could return it within a week and get something else. Any gamer would certainly say "Boy, that's nice of them," (we've all encountered crap games we thought were gonna be great... Lost Planet, anyone... didn't mean to offend, though). However, some people didn't like the fact that they were resold as new... I guess perhaps they felt they should be sold used and let Gamestop take an automatic loss of profit (new video games have sickeningly low profit margins, 2-7 dollars at best). As such, a lawsuit was launched, and won. Now, Gamestop simply doesn't do returns on new games which have been opened... just easier that way.

  • That policy is still active for used items.Tabor 23:13, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Sounds to me like there are too many people with a pro-Gamestop agenda making an effort to censor the article from criticism, to me. UltimateZeroX 16:07, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Moviestop

Does anybody know if there's any site of Moviestop?--FG90 21:28, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This is absolutely ridiculous. NO criticism section? You guys have one week to add it, or that's it, I will

This is absolutely ridiculous. NO criticism section? You guys have one week to add it, or that's it, I will.

Honestly, just google "gamestop sucks" annd you'll get pages of info. Their employees are widely accepted as absolute ****. Some idiot earlier said "it needs to represent 100% of their employees. lmao no it doesn't. Is that your only rebuttal? One week kids, one week.... Shutup999 21:16, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

If you want it in so bad, just go ahead and put it in. It's not that hard of a concept. Tabor 21:21, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
If it not sourced by a reliable source it will be removed seconds after you add it. SpigotMap 03:02, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Here is some info: http://www.fortworth.bbb.org/commonreport.html?compid=A1021655 68.228.222.95 20:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Neutrality

This article reads like it was written by Gamestop Corporate. The chain obviously has a lot of problems just from anecdotal customer complaints, scanned memos of corporate policy, etc. What is really needed is a Criticism section that is properly researched and cited. --Ihmhi 15:26, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

So put one in. Tabor 03:50, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree, this is unlike any other wikipedia article I've come across of a company with contraversial policies.

As far as "just putting it in," I'm sure there's at least on Game Stop employee hell bent on preventing NPOV watching this article like a hawk, and I'm not inclined in starting an editing war with a GS employee that has guzzled down the kool-aid. 67.134.71.242 18:09, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

If you add a properly sources section then it will most likely not be removed. The main reason criticism sections are removed from articles are because they almost never contain sources and are original research. SpigotMap 23:38, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
I agree with SpigotMap. As long as everything is sourced properly, I see no reason for anyone to remove it. If it is sourced, and people do remove it, it can be considered vandalized and that can be taken care of. Tabor 01:43, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
I wouldn't even care if it was properly sourced. People have problems with GameStop, that's understandable, but chances are that if a criticism section was added it would be full of the same kind of illiterate garbage that some of the random vandals are posting. Criticism is fine, a jumbled mess of incompetence is another thing. I just wish I had the employee handbook so that I could double-check what it says on employees "checking out" new games, which I know pisses people off. I personally don't care, but I know that when people buy a new game they want it to be new. Delition (talk) 01:34, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
The policy is you can only have one game checked out at one time. And also it cannot be the only copy of said game in the entire store. This covers new, or used. It also covers movies. Tabor (talk) 23:44, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
I think the neutrality of this article should be disputed. The text in the article seems VERY VERY VERY much so like it's trying to advertise the company in question. (i.e. "Contact your local GameStop, etc.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jahudgins1983 (talk • contribs) 17:21, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I noticed that, and it has been removed. Thanks! Tabor (talk) 22:09, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Practices/How it's run

This article, aside from it's other flaws, doesn't really highlight the way GameStop runs, namely trading in games and etc., and that is really the only reason why this chain or corp. or whatever it is is noteworthy in the first place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Magicallydajesus (talk • contribs) 10:04, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Recent News on Potential Support of Adults-Only Games

I found an interview with GameStop Senior Merchandising VP Bob McKenzie wherein he is questioned on GameStop's stance on the sale of AO games. I've seen it on gamasutra.com and gamepolitics.com. His response indicates that GameStop would at least be willing to consider stocking some AO games on a case-by-case basis. As no other retail chain that sells video games currently does this (to my knowledge) I feel it's worthy of a mention in the article. However, I'm unsure whether the sites I've found it on constitute a reliable source. Should I keep looking? CorrTerek (talk) 17:09, 6 March 2008 (UTC)