Limited skins should be available yearly for sale, as well as

As a general rule, listening to customer service when they tell you to post on the forum is a bad idea. Literally no topic that has ever said “CS told me to come and post” has ever been positively received. It’s better to just close that ticket and open a new one or just accept you didn’t get the answer you wanted.

1 Like

In short - I stringly agree with the OP.
What I have to do if I really want some skin. Buying accounts is stupid. In real life you can buy exclusive things - it is only matter of price

No, when I was creating this topic which originally was to address my issue with the Kerrigan Skin, I realized there are skins I’ve also missed and imagined I wasn’t the only one.

I own a chunk of Blizz Act. shares in my portfolio after the stock crashed in Feb and so I think about ways it could improve itself. That said I’m very aware skin sales will not make a big difference, but obviously the more money a company makes the better a stock performs.

Good idea, i will sell OP an acc with the skin for 500$.
He is an investor, he shoud invest. ^^
And he gets some other things too…

Sincerely Hamen
~6th of june 1944~

1 Like

Wait, so you also think I should open a new ticket and talk to somebody again? I didn’t use the web ticket but chat support last time. The phone option wasn’t available.

I mean if I don’t get in trouble for making a new ticket with the same issue if there is hope of them fixing my account/re-adding the kerrigan skin I will. But I just got the impression support knew what they were talking about…

Ok fair.

I don’t have any data on their sales so it is just speculation. Maybe you do have access to some actual data as an investor?

But I still believe that the exclusivity makes more profit than reselling things later to newcomers.

1 Like

If you think a business you own stock in ruining their integrity so you have an item is a good business move, it’s probably a good idea you don’t contribute to decision making.

You won’t get in trouble, but if the next one says you aren’t getting it back, it’s just time to cut your ties with the exclusives that you are missing.


But if stuff wasn’t artificially limited, people wouldn’t throw all their money to blizz and that would be bad to the business.


Has been said over and over. It’s the logical solution. Blizzard will play the gambling-merry-go-round for as long as they can.

i know its limited and im not saying they should bring it back, but demon hunter sombra is one of the best skins in the game imo

Logical solution in what way?

Because if they want to make a lot of money then the gambling-merry-go-round is much more logical.

1 Like

Yeah I’m sad I don’t have that one too.

Although I recall people saying blizzard specifically mentioned that particular skin would be available again sometime this year.

That skins is a mixed bag that will absolutely derail this thread if we let it.

Honestly I’m not sure what BA is doing right now, their stock has bottomed out according to analysts but I haven’t lost much since I bough my shares around the same figure it is today. Its currently considered a stock to buy and theres obvious hopes that the new COD will bump up the stock again.

When it was announced that Blizzard has multiple games in production, that was a comment made more for investors then gamers. Its funny because you mention integrity but one thing I’ve learned about trading is companies use a lot of manipulation to create reassurance for their shareholders.

Game company stock survives on product releases (good stock goes up with positive sale numbers, bad it goes down, pretty simply) or sustained popularity (although this has never happened before until fortnite)

I bought the Blizz stock because i thought why not when it crashed, I only bought 50 shares so thats nothing for serious investors but obviously I’m hoping to see it rise and not fall below $40 mark. For me COD is going to be a big break or make it moment for the stock/aka sell or stay my hand.

Honestly when money becomes involved integrity means only the strength of the companies ability to generate revenue and not cost an investor his…investment.

But again I just do it on the side, a trade costs me $9 and its better then putting my money in savings accounts that only earn me .002% interest. honestly its much like playing a game.

Per the question asked elsewhere share holders basically get the same info that the public can access per sales numbers, ect based on what the company announces during calls. Really depends on what the company decides to release and how they want to frame it.

Game companies esp. EA have a habit of manipulating their investors by simply talking about sale expectations and performance metrics based on ratios. So when they talk numbers they are actually talking about ratios based on profitability ratios, debt ratios or specific to game releases as I like to think of them - efficiency ratios although I’m using the term a slight different. The Sims 4 would be a good example of a product that was managed under an efficiency ratio in my terms and shown to have improved significantly since its release as widely profitable now.

Frankly, absolutely none of that matters at all to the thread at hand. I don’t care how much you spent per stock, but your goal should be to make money. You don’t do that by intentionally trying to break the trust the customers have with a business you have a stake in. :woman_shrugging:

1 Like

really? you have a link

Unfortunately not, it was something I stumbled across on the forums not long ago. But on that thread multiple people stated that there was some text on the bottom of the promotion page or whatever about blizzcon and the Sombra skin that stated something like it was going to be available at some future time in 2019.

The thread was a complaint about it being halfway into 2019 and the skin not being out yet so who knows.

Then you should definitely try it again.

Try using web tickets this time:



Sure, let’s take away the time limit on time-limited skins. We could call them… “skins”.

Removing the limit removes the incentive. That’s why Blizzard do it in the first place.

Don’t be ridiculous. You’re not an investor, you’re a consumer. You have no money tied into the game that you could lose or turn a profit with.

As said above, they’re not “limiting potential avenues of profit”, they use limited skins to increase profit by incentivising people to play the game.

These are the absolute basics of business and no amount of reframing the situation is going to change Blizzard’s standpoint on this.