Skip to Content
 

Who pays for the shipping? (when selling to stores)

11 replies [Last post]
Mon, 10/04/2004 - 02:20
Anonymous

Hi,

Let say I find a online store that wants to sell my game. If my game is retailing for $25.00 and I give him is 40% discount (sell him the game for $15), then who ends up paying the shipping bill to the store? (the store or me)

If I find a distributor (which so far looks like there is no one for my target audience), then I hear he is suppose to get an additional 20% cut (60% total for my game so I am selling it to the distributor for $10). Who ends up pay for the shipping in this situation? (me, the distributor, or the store)

Thanks in advance,

Ali

Top
Sat, 10/09/2004 - 20:53
#1
Anonymous
Who pays for the shipping? (when selling to stores)

With distributors, you usually pay shipping.

With retailers, it can go either way. If you are only giving them 40% off retail, adding shipping would be a bit harsh. If they're getting it at 50% off you may be able to tack shipping on.

I don't do that many sales to retailers (I encourage them to go through distribution if I can because it's less hassle for me to sell through distribution and I'm not trying to compete with them) but when I do, I charge a shipping fee that usually covers about half the shipping cost. The rest comes out of the margin.

For retailers that buy a LOT of games (i.e. cases of games) I often throw in the shipping.

Top
Tue, 10/19/2004 - 11:43
#2
Chad_Ellis
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Who pays for the shipping? (when selling to stores)

Most retailers want a 50% discount to MSRP, so if you're going for 40% I doubt many (any?) will also pay shipping.

With distributors it often comes down to volume. You usually have to pay shipping, but you can set a minimum below which they must pay shipping. Of course, they have lots of games to pick from, so if your terms are unfavorable they won't push your games.

Regards,
Chad

Top
Sun, 11/07/2004 - 03:32
#3
Anonymous
Who pays for the shipping? (when selling to stores)

It would really depend on who you're selling to. If you are the manufacturer then you would set a base price which would be FOB your dock or a major shipping port. This is the price you quote and then you work your quantity discounts from there. There are a lot of other factors. For example in some countries any wording must be in two languages and there are UPC codes tracking systems, insurance, over and under quantity allowances and duties which will all need to be added to your price and will need to be negotiated with the buyers. In some countries there is even a thing called "arbitrary fee's " so when you ship large quantities keep shipping out of the price quotes or you could damage your business. Some of the larger retail buyers have their own shippers and forwarders which pack the containers before loading.

If selling to individual stores, you still must have your basic price and work from there. If you set a price which includes shipping before knowing where the customer is, you could end up paying more for shipping than you allowed and once a contract is signed you could end up like Martha Stewart if you don't dance to the agree melody.

Distributors will be the same. They want the FOB price and from there you work it out if any quantity discounts or special packaging are needed to make the sale.

To make this perfectly clear, offer your price FOB your shipping dock. A sales contract is a complicated document and the terms are binding.

Top
Sun, 11/07/2004 - 08:24
#4
jwarrend
Offline
Joined: 08/03/2008
Who pays for the shipping? (when selling to stores)

Quote:
It would really depend on who you're selling to. If you are the manufacturer then you would set a base price which would be FOB your dock or a major shipping port.

Might I make a suggestion here? Folks with "industry knowledge", could you try not to use jargon or acronyms that aren't widely used in the "outside" world? In this case, I have no idea what "FOB" means, but just as a general rule, the expertise of knowledgable respondents is greatly appreciated, but is much more help to those of us who are clueless if you keep in mind that we're clueless when you post. Thanks!

-Jeff

Top
Sun, 11/07/2004 - 10:00
#5
VeritasGames
VeritasGames's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/01/2008
Re: Jargon

In a live discussion it's annoying 'cause you fall behind when you don't understand something.

However, a 10 second Google search gave me this:

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/fob.asp

and

"Free On Board
FOB. A shipping term which indicates that the supplier pays the shipping costs (and usually also the insurance costs) from the point of manufacture to a specified destination, at which point the buyer takes responsibility. "

Look, as long as the jargon can be deciphered quickly then it's not a big deal. You have to be a little more forgiving and a little more persistent if you want to get to know a field of study.

That said, I think the preceding statements probably were a bit less than clear, even with an understanding of the acronym.

Top
Sun, 11/07/2004 - 20:27
#6
jwarrend
Offline
Joined: 08/03/2008
Re: Jargon

VeritasGames wrote:
In a live discussion it's annoying 'cause you fall behind when you don't understand something.

However, a 10 second Google search gave me this:

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/fob.asp

Good for you. Any post that I need to do Google searches to understand is a non-starter for me.

Quote:

Look, as long as the jargon can be deciphered quickly then it's not a big deal. You have to be a little more forgiving and a little more persistent if you want to get to know a field of study.

I was using "FOB" as an example to make a broader point, and I should point out that I'm writing primarily as an Admin of the site rather than someone who's actually interested in the specific topic at hand. I agree with you that if I wanted to self-publish a game, I'd expect to have to do some of my own homework and learn some of these things on my own.

As a site Admin, however, I'm trying to ensure that the site is useful for all of our members, many of whom are at very different levels in the process. I'm asking that the people on the board who are "in the know" on such matters try to be considerate of those less well-informed and explain things in simple terms, without unreferenced jargon or acronyms. I'm very much including you in that request, Lee. Having a great knowledge base is a tremendous asset to our community, and we're appreciative of the time that people take to help educate members of our community on these and other matters. But when asked to be more clear, the proper response isn't to accuse the questioner of laziness; rather, it's to try to be more clear in the future. Communication is a two-way street, and talking over people's heads, with the understanding that "if they really care about understanding this, they'll look it up on Google" wastes the time that one spends offering his/her insights in the first place.

-Jeff

Top
Sun, 11/07/2004 - 21:47
#7
VeritasGames
VeritasGames's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/01/2008
Re: Jargon

jwarrend wrote:
But when asked to be more clear, the proper response isn't to accuse the questioner of laziness; rather, it's to try to be more clear in the future. Communication is a two-way street, and talking over people's heads, with the understanding that "if they really care about understanding this, they'll look it up on Google" wastes the time that one spends offering his/her insights in the first place.
-Jeff

Note first that I thought that even with knowledge of the acronym I felt the discussion was a little difficult to follow.

Note, secondly that I posted one or two different sources defining the term. So, I hardly accused you of laziness and then tried to keep the issue you raised obfuscated.

Note lastly, that I largely disagree with you. I think that it's better to have a site glossary with publishing acronyms, etc. and then let people use the real industry jargon than it is to translate it 100% into laymen's terms only to leave the neophyte members to sink in the real world when they face the unsimplified stuff.

An industry glossary (and particularly a printing/publishing FAQ) seems like it would be hugely useful. In contrast I find that telling people not to use acronyms, etc. doesn't fully serve the community.

I am certainly guilty of using some jargon on my posts, but I often heavily comment my posts as well, including links, etc., as I have even in this thread. Fundamentally, if I include a more complicated post with lots of outside references listed and people refuse to look at the citations I list, then I feel it is sort of their problem. Generally I pick explanatory links which are simple or very much to the point so that people can pick up the introductory level of knowledge if they need it to understand my post.

I feel that giving overly simplistic answers is just as useless as giving too complicated an answer. Ideally we should write answers targeted specifically at the level of understanding of those who ask the questions, but that often requires an individual knowledge of those asking the question which I frequently lack.

Your mileage can and probably does vary. Since you are an administrator I take your admonishment under consideration. But I ask you to take into account that I actually posted the sought after definition in two forms (one a link to one page and one a definition from another).

I'd agree that it's a non-starter if you have to look for stuff that's hard to find. But I think if a Google search trivially finds the answer you want, then I find that no more outrageous than having to look up an unknown word in a dictionary. Still, I think a FAQ/glossary is the best way to go as opposed to potentially oversimplifying or "dumbing down" responses from industry insiders.

I'm personally very much in the know on some things. In other areas of design and publishing I'm a relative neophyte. As a neophyte re: this particular issue (since one of my business partners handles issues like this), I'd rather have an answer that was a little above my head rather than one which was too simple. What I didn't like was having some parts of the explanation cloudy even after I looked up the definition you claimed was missing. I think that's a little worse of a sin than the use of the acronym itself.

Top
Mon, 11/08/2004 - 01:14
#8
jwarrend
Offline
Joined: 08/03/2008
Re: Jargon

VeritasGames wrote:
I think that it's better to have a site glossary with publishing acronyms, etc. and then let people use the real industry jargon than it is to translate it 100% into laymen's terms only to leave the neophyte members to sink in the real world when they face the unsimplified stuff.

An industry glossary (and particularly a printing/publishing FAQ) seems like it would be hugely useful.

I agree that this would be a fantastically useful resource. The trick, as with all great ideas for useful resources on the site, is getting someone to write it. Perhaps there's an already extant resource out there on the web somewhere that we could provide a link to? I doubt it would be specific to the game industry, but if it had some of the "printing industry" jargon (e.g. CMYK, etc), that would already be pretty helpful and then I'd agree that less hand-holding would be necessary in posts like these.

Anyone know of such a glossary on the web somewhere?

Thanks,

Jeff

Top
Mon, 11/08/2004 - 02:03
#9
sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Re: Jargon

VeritasGames wrote:
...tried to keep the issue you raised obfuscated.

... what's "obfuscated" mean?

(That was a joke btw. Oh, and that meant "by the way".)

Top
Mon, 11/08/2004 - 08:08
#10
phpbbadmin
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2013
Re: Jargon

jwarrend wrote:
VeritasGames wrote:
I think that it's better to have a site glossary with publishing acronyms, etc. and then let people use the real industry jargon than it is to translate it 100% into laymen's terms only to leave the neophyte members to sink in the real world when they face the unsimplified stuff.

An industry glossary (and particularly a printing/publishing FAQ) seems like it would be hugely useful.

I agree that this would be a fantastically useful resource. The trick, as with all great ideas for useful resources on the site, is getting someone to write it. Perhaps there's an already extant resource out there on the web somewhere that we could provide a link to? I doubt it would be specific to the game industry, but if it had some of the "printing industry" jargon (e.g. CMYK, etc), that would already be pretty helpful and then I'd agree that less hand-holding would be necessary in posts like these.

Anyone know of such a glossary on the web somewhere?

Thanks,

Jeff

Note from me: This (publishing terms/jargon) is one of the things I do plan to have in the wiki, if we can ever get that puppy off the ground.. *Sigh*

-Darke

Top
Mon, 11/08/2004 - 09:47
#11
VeritasGames
VeritasGames's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/01/2008
Who pays for the shipping? (when selling to stores)

Sorry to threadjack --

Printing acronyms:

http://www.gain.net/business_solutions/acronyms.html?print=1&

http://www.ipg.uk.com/production.html

Computer acronyms:

http://www.billssite.com/puterize.htm

Some business acronyms:

http://www.crwmag.com/CRW/BusRes/Acronyms.html

Top
Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut