I think the game should ignore those of us who can't afford to spend that much on a deck. Pokemon is a luxury good. Pricing for a luxury good should not be made at the point where everyone it is affordable for everyone.
Why? No, seriously, why not? If it is because the company producing would have to take a loss, that goes without saying. If a product derives much of its perceived value (and thus profits from sales) by marketing itself as a status symbol, that also would justify not striving for greater market penetration.
Otherwise the standard business practice is to price your product only as high as the market can bear while achieving maximum market penetration. That is how you maximize profit. Of course,
neither of these apply to the secondary market prices.
For that, the company must weigh how many
potential customers decide not to purchase the product because the secondary prices either can't or won't be paid by those customers. In this case, I am making my case that I find the secondary market prices prohibitive.
If the business people at Pokemon priced their product such that everyone can afford to buy it, they would be fired instantly for their incompetence.
Only if that entails selling at a loss, something that would be considered pretty obviously not an option. There are a few industries where such things are possible, but they require the ability to cost shift. [DEL] Suggesting that I was expressing such a thing is useful; it is good to know you have no real argument beyond "I did it this way and you should have to as well!"
[/DEL]
Edit: Upon re-reading that last sentence crossed the line into a personal attack, but deleting it just makes more problems. Of course if psychup2034 or a Mod requests it, it's gone completely. Trying to state that point in a
polite way, no I wasn't suggesting that companies take a loss to sell Pokémon, and while this isn't the first time that claim has been made against a statement I have made, I still don't know why.
This is especially revealing since the issue for players wanting a reprint of
Pokémon Catcher is the secondary market prices and the low availability in one set of dubious quality (as an Uncommon) or as a Secret Rare in a different set.
Vince is concerned with the larger aspects of selling the Pokémon TCG, my disagreement with him (besides feeling insulted by his earlier posts, which honestly is negligible) was that I think he hasn't stepped back far enough; he is worried about moving a one-year-old set verus making the game more accessible so that he might see more sales overall... and in either case, it
still comes down to issues of set design and card balance.