ELSPA investigators have discovered consoles stashed full of cash in the home of an industrious illegal chipper - not, in this case, someone unlawfully happy.
The bloke in question, a resident of Tower Hamlets, had secreted an impressive £12,210 inside a hollowed-out Xbox 1 and PS2s.
Unsurprisingly the fat-boy Xbox - probably now the only one in existence used for something other than a toe-stubbing doorstop - won the cash-stash hands down, with £5,925 apparently where the hard drive would normally be.
Just as well he didn't stick it in an Xbox 360. It would have probably caught fire.
As well as illegally chipping Xboxs and PS2s, the man was selling PSP games on SD memory card. Naughty.
"I've heard it all now", beamed Michael Rawlinson, managing director of ELSPA. "It never ceases to amaze ELSPA and its investigators the lengths criminals go to make money - and always to the detriment of honest, hard working businesses. I congratulate Tower Hamlets Trading Standards on bringing to an end this illegal business operation."
I suppose who would think of looking in a console?
Well, being that he was arrested for piracy I would have thought that would be one of the first places they would look. Not for money, but to gather evidence, i.e modified consoles etc.
Rather stupid of him, it's a terrible hiding place. Even from a burglar. If you're breaking into a house whats are one of the easiest high value things to steal... you guessed it, consumer electronics!!
why did they not put it in a bank account... would have been better than in a games console.
Because if you store your money electronically it can be traced.
Random Inland Revenue person: "Ooo look. This man's earning £150 a week doing a part time job, but he's putting in £2000. I'm sure there's a legitimate reason and we shouldn't bother putting him under surveillance."
ok, i know this may sound wierd. But i was fed up of my sister/family 'borrowing money off me so i just decided to stash all the notes in the little expansion bay on the ps2 (where the hard drive would have been if it ever got one) exactly as the picture shows. Thats wierded me out slightly.
I've never had a chipped console, nor used the old action replay method with the very old PS1's. But I still stand behind piracy. How else are the consumers supposed to stand up for themselves? Publishers get to dictate the cost of a game. It doesn't go on supply or demand, no it goes on what they think we should pay. Like the Activision case, making people pay more for a downloaded copy of COD4 than you could buy a copy in the shop.
I've never had a chipped console, nor used the old action replay method with the very old PS1's. But I still stand behind piracy. How else are the consumers supposed to stand up for themselves? Publishers get to dictate the cost of a game. It doesn't go on supply or demand, no it goes on what they think we should pay. Like the Activision case, making people pay more for a downloaded copy of COD4 than you could buy a copy in the shop.
Every new release should not be more than £30.
I agree however, no matter how cheap games are people are still going to complain about the price when the option to download games for free is available.
I've never had a chipped console, nor used the old action replay method with the very old PS1's. But I still stand behind piracy. How else are the consumers supposed to stand up for themselves? Publishers get to dictate the cost of a game. It doesn't go on supply or demand, no it goes on what they think we should pay. Like the Activision case, making people pay more for a downloaded copy of COD4 than you could buy a copy in the shop.
Every new release should not be more than £30.
I agree however, no matter how cheap games are people are still going to complain about the price when the option to download games for free is available.
With that kind of logic, you would steal a car because they are too expensive.
I've never had a chipped console, nor used the old action replay method with the very old PS1's. But I still stand behind piracy. How else are the consumers supposed to stand up for themselves? Publishers get to dictate the cost of a game. It doesn't go on supply or demand, no it goes on what they think we should pay. Like the Activision case, making people pay more for a downloaded copy of COD4 than you could buy a copy in the shop.
Every new release should not be more than £30.
I agree however, no matter how cheap games are people are still going to complain about the price when the option to download games for free is available.
With that kind of logic, you would steal a car because they are too expensive.
If people could steal cars and face next to no chance of being arrested / prosecuted for it , then yeah I'm sure that would happen alot....
I've never had a chipped console, nor used the old action replay method with the very old PS1's. But I still stand behind piracy. How else are the consumers supposed to stand up for themselves? Publishers get to dictate the cost of a game. It doesn't go on supply or demand, no it goes on what they think we should pay. Like the Activision case, making people pay more for a downloaded copy of COD4 than you could buy a copy in the shop.
Every new release should not be more than £30.
I agree however, no matter how cheap games are people are still going to complain about the price when the option to download games for free is available.
I also agree with me
But, I see your point.
And I don't care for the stealing cars comparison.
Games cost too much. £50 is too much. I download PC games for free. If I like them, I buy them. If I don't I get rid of them. Not everyone does that, but I appreciate the ability to try these before I splash out a days wage on a game. Last two games I bought after downloading were C&C3 and Crysis.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885
.
