Find a lot of rainbows in the sewers, do you?

My point was made. A visual aid wasn't necessary. Thank you, anyway, though.

I'd say it's about 80% yes, 20% no, overall.

Just after.

Could have been a talk show bit. Obama seems to have a sense of humor.

I'm not saying it's impossible; it's certainly within Gamestop's right to do so. I just think that's the less likely of the two scenarios based on my experience with the company.

It may be that the third party was doing just that, but was more keen on making a bulk deal for a lump-sum with Gamestop, rather than pulling the money in one sale at a time online. Maybe they needed the cash quick, or maybe they were trying to free up inventory space by getting rid of a game that wasn't moving as…

No, but like a lot of gamers I did work for them at one time. And regardless, it's not like Gamestop is the only retailer that engages in this practice. My points still stand, regardless of my former relationship with the company.

Fair enough. Whatever the numbers, my point stands.

the policy of gutting a game allows them to bypass having to explain why a new copy of a game is being sold for $90. it's a lazy, deceptive practice.

I used to work in Gamestop's main distribution warehouse. I know that's how they operate. I don't have any specific information about this title, since I haven't worked there in years, but I understand this practice. It's not uncommon at all. So yes, it does seem more likely that they would continue to perform a…

It doesn't even have to be a reprint. Gamestop may have simply come across a third party that had a bunch of these games on hand for whatever reason. In either case, Gamestop finds a source of inventory that is not bound by the MSRP and takes advantage of the good deal.

The individual price depends on the deal that the publisher makes with the retailers, and the supply that's provided. Was FF7 reprinted by a third party, or by the original publisher? If it was the original publisher, then they likely reprinted enough copies to drive supply high enough to drive down costs. It could…

If they got reprints, why did they crack open all the games? Nobody's explaining this. Why do that?

That's something we'd have to be privy to Gamestop and Nintendo's agreement to know for sure. This is all speculation at this point, I just think it's a lot more likely that Gamestop is engaging in standard business practices than being openly underhanded. It doesn't make sense to break the rules when you can make…

Not at all. Publishers often sell games in bulk to third party vendors, who then make their own distribution deals with retailers. If Gamestop found an overseas vendor with a few thousand extra copies lying around, and if their deal with Nintendo only extended to the stock they bought from Nintendo (very likely)…

No, publishers often give third party companies the rights to reprint titles. They also make bulk deals with third party vendors, who then make their own distribution deals with retailers. If Gamestop found an overseas third party with a few thousand copies lying around (not hard to believe) and their agreement with…

From Ben Kuchera over at the PA Report:

The only reason they went for $90 on Ebay is because Gamestop withheld their stock

You can't use Ebay as an example of the market setting values, those values are often set by greedy people that appraise merchandise at the price they want.