Online store prices are outrageously high!

[Melichoir]

Ignoring the fact, you have no idea what the specific financial aspects of every SE division and website are, your comment doesn't relate to what I said and isn't even true.

You initially said that if a market supports prices, that means the items aren't over-priced. That was disproved with the Starbucks example which shows companies can have a reputation for selling over-priced goods while staying in business and making profit. When I gave you that example, instead of acknowledging that, you just tried to change the subject to ‘the market supporting the company’.

No, they are more or less right with some exceptions. The market will ultimately dictate the pricepoint of a product, but that will depend on many factors - one being perception of it's worth. The example of starbucks doesnt quite work because the issue is two fold. The first one is that while the market may understand the pricepoint is high for what it is, they perceive the quality or reputation of Starbucks (more subjective and intangible factors) to be the factor that helps justify the price point. The other factor is market competition. Starbucks may be overpriced for a cup of coffee, but that depends on what teh competitors also provide. A gourmet coffee shop is gonna sell possibly the same drink at higher pricepoint or same pricepoint but less quantity, giving hte perception that Starbucks pricing is still 'relatively' cheap compared to the competition. The only thing that gets 'cheaper' would be businesses not known for selling coffee.

So for example I could go to Mickey D's for a cup of coffee, but they are not known for their coffee. Theyre a burger joint, and one that is typically seen as the bargain barrel one. So public perception is that yeah, coffee there is gonna be cheaper than starbucks because it is cheaper quality from a place that isnt known for it. Comparatively, if I go to a small hole in the wall coffee shop that sells exquisite coffee, I may pay 6 or so dollars for a 12 oz coffee where at starbucks I may only pay 3 or 4. I understand the quality is better at the hole in the wall, and if I really want to have that quality Ill pay, but if I want something that is just 'good', the starbucks option is plenty fine.

This doesnt work when there are two factors - Drastically overpriced without a reputation to back it, or the lack of market competition (aka a monopoly). If McDonald's sold coffee for $15 a pop, people would say "get out of here", because it's just 'McDonald's Coffee and isnt worth that much." Could be the finest coffee ever, but McDonald's does not have that reputation so the price point wont float (not unless they want to weather months for word of mouth to overtake skepticism). Conversely, if Starbucks is the only place you can get coffee at all, they can charge exorbitant pricing simply because theyre the only game in town. Limited supply for a high demand essentially.

Do you acknowledge now that companies can stay in business yet still have a reputation for selling over-priced goods? Or are you still claiming that if a company is in business, that means its products can’t be over-priced as the market is happy with them?

Youre oversimplifying the situation. A company can, for a period of time, survive on overpricing. In fact I would argue that companies try to do this as much as possible to maximize profits. It is not, however, sustainable long term. If a company is in business and generating profit, that means that they found a sweet spot in the market that the pricepoint is high enough but not to high that you shut out customers completely.

As a point, if mogstation sold a mount for $500, you might get a few buyers, but it wouldnt be a long term business strat. Itll end up shutting down the company cause its to pricey for most people. So much so that the whales wont even really go in on it.

And speaking of whales, youll notice that SE targets a pretty broad audience and tailors their price points to fit a target. Keep standard items relatively cheap (dyes, holiday glamours, etc) and keep some pricier stuff that whales would probably go for (mounts, custom glamours). It's a something for everyone mentality. The shop isnt designed to appeal to only whales as that would generate them less money overall. It is sometimes straight up better to maximize customer numbers instead of just going for whales, because of the whale market is hyper limited (and even whales have upper limits on pricing) then you will not generate as much money as putting out a cheaper more affordable item with a smaller profit per product but with a vastly higher consumer base. It is better to make a dollar off 1000 people than it is to make 100 dollars off 2 people.

And even your new 'point' isn't valid. Many people in the market wait for a sale, many don't buy at all, many will buy less than they would otherwise and so on.

Except even with sale prices, they still have to generate a profit on it. It is just a smaller margin than normal. All that sales do is alter the 'tiers' of items. Items that would likely get picked up by whales are now more readily available to the standard user as it 'feels' like the right price now. Then there is also the mental trick behind it - Lower the pricepoint so it seems like a steal, inclining people to buy more. The thing a lot of people dont get is that a large swath of people are actually more likely to spend more money overall when theres a sale then when there isnt. This occurs simply because people tend to 'stock up' and buy big because they perceive an opportunity to get things cheaper. This is where the balancing act for a company comes in. If I can drop 30% off a product but get you to spend more overall that offsets the mark down, I come out better.

Plus many companies subsidise one part of their business with another. For example, in this day and age, many parts of companies run at a loss for one reason or another. The market has nothing to do with anything there.

Just because a company hasn't gone bust, doesn't mean their business model is good or right or couldn't be improved and just because a website has certain prices, doesn’t mean the market has determined that or everyone agrees with it.

Yes and no. Yes companies may subsidize divisions or projects with revenue from other sectors, but they do that either for publicity reasons, where it is understood that keeping it open would generate the company overall better profits, even if that one sector isnt performing well, or that they think the investment is worthwhile. Successful companies will cut the fat after a certain point if there is no benefit from it. In this case, SE isnt going to keep something open for years and years if the cost of it is drastically more expensive than the return.

Another example would be that some companies deliberately keep prices high to make items exclusive. There are many reasons why a company sells at specific prices – the market often has nothing to do with it.

Making something exclusive alters market perception of it and it's worth. So it very much does involve the market input about it. If SE sold a standard chocobo at $300, no ones gonna buy it cause you get it for free in game. It's not exclusive in any way. Now if they make a custom mount with a limited amount of availability....thats a different story.

Regarding SE, the indication here is that they don’t really care what the market thinks – otherwise they would have dropped a load of prices.

This is conjecture. You dont know what the sales are for SE regarding Mogstation products. It is a lot more reasonable to assume that prices dont go down overtime because they generate a decent profit than it is to say SE keeps a shop open that is a net drain on the companies finances, and keeps stocking it with things are a net loss to the company as a whole. There doesnt seem to be anything If to be gained from keeping it up in that case. If we take YoshiP at his word and the new NA datacenters were funded by Mogstation sales, it seems to point more towards the store generating profit and therefore the pricepoints are working well enough.

You aren't providing perspective. You’re just copying and pasting the same flawed arguments that were dealt with pages ago. Once again, if Starbucks rips you off for $6 for a drink, that doesn’t make paying $30 for a DLC video game graphic acceptable. They are both bad.

This is an oversimplification. Ill pay $30 for DLC if I think it's worth it. If I dont, I dont buy. If enough people have my perspective, theyve overshot their market and are losing out. But if pricing remains stable, it means there's a large enough market that suggest the price is a fair exchange.

You wouldn't behave like this with a cereal company or a lawnmower company selling over-priced products. You have to ask yourself why you're doing it over a video game.

This all boils down to what we as individuals find worthwhile. If a box of cereal, or a lawnmower exceeds my expectation of what it is for hte cost, Ill get it. I would buy a box of $30 cereal, but that cereal better be the best damn thing since grilled cheese sandwiches. It better be made with the finest ingredients and taste like perfection.

If you dont think it's worth the price, that's fine. I or others might. That is up for us to decide. And just because we dont agree with your position doesnt mean we just giving things a pass.