Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Can't believe that Smaug has been sold that much. After all, its only a (centre) piece for a painter or collector.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Can't believe that Smaug has been sold that much. After all, its only a (centre) piece for a painter or collector.

In the same way that the Mumak was only a centre piece for painters and collectors? This is one hell of a sweeping statement.

People can and do play with big massive centre piece models, even in tournaments. All-monster and all-hero lists are actually quite popular at SBG tournaments (quick to assemble and paint, monsters and heroes are fun to use, can be quite challenging to play with and against). And Smaug is probably the ultimate all-monster list. Anecdotally, I've seen Smaug used at least once in a tournament and by all accounts it was quite fun to play against because the player decided "Feth it, I'll play like Smaug would and SMASH EVERYTHING", and he ignored the objectives.

Even if nobody anywhere has ever used Smaug in a game, there'll be plenty of people buying it simply because its Smaug. Its a giant feth off dragon, beautifully detailed, one of the best big dragon kits on the market. If I could justify burning £300 in cash, I'd get it for my DnD campaign.

The argument that the rules and games drive sales for GW miniatures might apply most of the time, but I'd say Smaug is one of the exceptions.

But it is only a painter's/collector's piece. It's not in scale with the 28mm Hobbit figs and, as far as I know, doesn't have rules attached to it.

I can't recall the number, but GW's web store sales were pretty significant. GW said best selling, and did not qualify that. But regardless, it's still impressive that a lot of Smaugs sold, T least to me.

Looking at the list of top 28 in its entirety, I am becoming increasingly convinced that a really big chunk of GW's income is derived from so-called collectors (much bigger than I thought a month ago), though I do believe a lot of them play the game at least occasionally.

It's also possible that you don't see a lot of these people on places like forums, because, I think, if you don't war game much or at all, a place like this becomes less relevant.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
In business terms, price and quality are different variables. Otherwise the same item would gain quality by being sold at a lower price.

In business terms, both are part of a derived variable - perceived value - so they actually mesh pretty tightly.

The Auld Grump

What I mean is this: There are different ideas of quality. One is objective measurements. Another one is customer acceptability. Perceived value is not quality in itself, though obviously if you can buy the same product at two different prices, people see more value in the cheaper one.

If you buy steel hawser, the breaking strain of a particular quality doesn't change because the price goes up or down.

If you want to buy a GW kit, in other words the acceptable quality of the kit is that it must be GW, no Tamiya kit will ever achieve this customer defined "quality" no matter how cheap it is. This doesn't mean the Tamiya kit has less parts, or is less poseable, it just isn't what the customer wants.

If GW kits are too expensive and should come down in price, that's perceived value.

Or you look at the perceived value, and decide 'no, it doesn't need to be a GW model - I can get better for less'.

So, I have a Leviathan, I do not have a knight.

I have Kings of War, I do not have Age of Sigmar.

If GW's sales are dropping, and it looks like they have been doing so fairly consistently, then GW has a disconnect between price and quality - and thus in perceived value.

I actually like GW's current models less than I did the models from a few years ago - I consider them overly ornate and impractical.

I dislike the shortcuts thyat they are taking with their CAD - they are overly fond of copy and paste.

Just because you can use CAD to model a skull popping out of something's knee does not make it a good model.

The Auld Grump - I can point to far too many people that have left GW because of the lack of percieved value - one of them wears my shoes, while another occasionally steals my tee shirts....

*EDIT Fixed a mess o'typos.... Grumps are not meant to attempt thumb typing....

 Guildsman wrote:
But it is only a painter's/collector's piece. It's not in scale with the 28mm Hobbit figs and, as far as I know, doesn't have rules attached to it.

As far as you know? So I take it you don't play the SBG then?

There most certainly are rules for Smaug.

The rules for Smaug I believe were first released in White Dwarf (not sure, I don't buy WD anymore).
Then they were released for free online in a pdf supplement, along with rules for the other Battle of Five Armies releases.
Then the pdf was released in a physical format as a small booklet supplement.

I've got them in my hands right now.

Like I said, I saw Smaug used in a tournament last September. That would be a tricky without rules, no?


And what on earth does scale have to do with it? If anything, it was scaled down to make it useable on the tabletop. If it was purely a painter and collector's item, then it would have been much bigger.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Guildsman wrote:
But it is only a painter's/collector's piece. It's not in scale with the 28mm Hobbit figs and, as far as I know, doesn't have rules attached to it.

As far as you know? So I take it you don't play the SBG then?

There most certainly are rules for Smaug.

The rules for Smaug I believe were first released in White Dwarf (not sure, I don't buy WD anymore).
Then they were released for free online in a pdf supplement, along with rules for the other Battle of Five Armies releases.
Then the pdf was released in a physical format as a small booklet supplement.

I've got them in my hands right now.

Like I said, I saw Smaug used in a tournament last September. That would be a tricky without rules, no?


And what on earth does scale have to do with it? If anything, it was scaled down to make it useable on the tabletop. If it was purely a painter and collector's item, then it would have been much bigger.

You mean this Smaug? The one with the tiny Bilbo on the base, which is scaled more for 15mm than 28mm? The one that GW describes thusly:

Every scale, horn and battle-scar has been expertly reproduced to create a beatifically authentic collectors piece.

Sure, they released rules for him. But that doesn't mean that the model was originally intended, or even suited, for use in-game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Back to the original topic, the half-year report isn't really surprising. The studio threw everything they had at consumers, and it shored up sales for another year. Sooner or later, though, they're going to run out of big, exciting releases.

And ending up with a loss is still significant, even if it's down to currency fluctuations. A loss is a loss, regardless of the reason.

 Guildsman wrote:

Back to the original topic, the half-year report isn't really surprising. The studio threw everything they had at consumers, and it shored up sales for another year. Sooner or later, though, they're going to run out of big, exciting releases.

The Knight model and codex where a "new" release both in 2014 and yet rehashed in 2015... and the former was one of the most popular kits according to GW. Don't underestimate the lows to which the fan base will sink to get their officialTM brandedR plasticrack fix. If GW feels the need for another cash infusion, they'll rerelease BaC (assuming that it goes OOP) or some other Retribution on Prospero with more plastic HH stuff to make some bonkers quick cash. While another HH box actually would IMO be a good idea, they'd also probably have no qualms about rehashing yet another marine codex or 40k edition as well (1-2 year product life cycle) which wouldn't be a good idea.

 Guildsman wrote:
Back to the original topic, the half-year report isn't really surprising. The studio threw everything they had at consumers, and it shored up sales for another year. Sooner or later, though, they're going to run out of big, exciting releases.

And ending up with a loss is still significant, even if it's down to currency fluctuations. A loss is a loss, regardless of the reason.

What's wrong with selling as many big, splashy releases as the market will bear? It's not really GW's problem I the spending on their gaming-unfriendly models sucks lots of money out of people who might otherwise spend it on more gaming-friendly products (or not). If it stops being of interest to the market, I'm sure they'll stop making them. But when storm surge makes top 28 with only a couple of months on the shelf (release window) you can bet more will come.

I'm not so sure they lost money. Wasn't it that they made less money than last year, though it would be slight growth under constant currency? Could be wrong, just going from memory.

To be honest, I'm rather surprised the last half year wasn't absolutely horrible, with Sigmar taking 3 solid months, and then a few weeks spread out, out of 6. I mean, did anyone expect 3 months of sigmar to be in par with last year's releases?

 Talys wrote:
I mean, did anyone expect 3 months of sigmar to be in par with last year's releases?

GW probably.

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Talys wrote:
I mean, did anyone expect 3 months of sigmar to be in par with last year's releases?

GW probably.

Hahahaha! +1

And omg, what terrible English. On par, I mean, of course!

 Guildsman wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Guildsman wrote:
But it is only a painter's/collector's piece. It's not in scale with the 28mm Hobbit figs and, as far as I know, doesn't have rules attached to it.

As far as you know? So I take it you don't play the SBG then?

There most certainly are rules for Smaug.

The rules for Smaug I believe were first released in White Dwarf (not sure, I don't buy WD anymore).
Then they were released for free online in a pdf supplement, along with rules for the other Battle of Five Armies releases.
Then the pdf was released in a physical format as a small booklet supplement.

I've got them in my hands right now.

Like I said, I saw Smaug used in a tournament last September. That would be a tricky without rules, no?


And what on earth does scale have to do with it? If anything, it was scaled down to make it useable on the tabletop. If it was purely a painter and collector's item, then it would have been much bigger.

You mean this Smaug? The one with the tiny Bilbo on the base, which is scaled more for 15mm than 28mm? The one that GW describes thusly:

Every scale, horn and battle-scar has been expertly reproduced to create a beatifically authentic collectors piece.

Sure, they released rules for him. But that doesn't mean that the model was originally intended, or even suited, for use in-game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Back to the original topic, the half-year report isn't really surprising. The studio threw everything they had at consumers, and it shored up sales for another year. Sooner or later, though, they're going to run out of big, exciting releases.

And ending up with a loss is still significant, even if it's down to currency fluctuations. A loss is a loss, regardless of the reason.

There's only one smaug.

You're moving the goalposts. You claimed that Smaug is a co!lectors only item, and didnt even have rules which is cleaRly not true. Why would they make rules and scenarios for him if he's only for collectors? And what exactly is your criteria for "was not originally intended to be used in games"? That its simply to big and inconvenient? What about the balrog? Mumakil? Warhound and Reaver Titans? Forge world Fliers?


If were talking about games workshops "original intentions, " then every model they make is originally intended for painters and co!lectors. Gaming is only an afterthought. Thats their ethos right? That's the prevailing argument on dakka dakka, they are (or rather, think they're) a model company, not a gaming company?

Even if BaC can be rightfully called a success, I wonder how many Tactical Squad, Terminator Squad and Dreadnought kits were not sold after the contents of the game box were announced.

I say this because I actually know someone who was thinking about starting a new Space Marines army and went for BaC instead of getting the separate kits.

Irony can be quite a bitch sometimes, specially considering how Specialist Games were canned in the past due to not selling enough and "cannibalizing" sales from the main products.

Actually from the latest Priestly interview, they were cut because the "other languages" editions almost bankrupted the company...

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
Actually from the latest Priestly interview, they were cut because the "other languages" editions almost bankrupted the company...

Yeah, read that one, and still midway in a state of disbelief. Translating a game, specially a game like GW's specialist games, shouldn't bankrupt anyone. It's not like translators are as well paid as the companies' higher ups.

It was not the translation, its how many they printed and didn't sell.

Just how many Necromunda or Gorkamorka rulebooks one has to print in order to get nearly bankrupted?

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
It was not the translation, its how many they printed and didn't sell.

Well then they should have gone the same route that they did with Japanese books and had them online for free...

 Korinov wrote:
Just how many Necromunda or Gorkamorka rulebooks one has to print in order to get nearly bankrupted?

Too many.

Plus, depending on distribution terms, they may have had to have the boxed translated games destroyed, rather than returned. Which means the boxes and models as well as the rulebooks.

(Fairly typical in the toy industry, I'm afraid - most unsold toys are not returned to the manufacturer, but are crushed on site.)

For what it is worth, similar things happened to the other industry giant, TSR. Reading the account of WotC buying out TSR is heartbreaking.

The Auld Grump

Plus, depending on distribution terms, they may have had to have the boxed translated games destroyed, rather than returned. Which means the boxes and models as well as the rulebooks.

(Fairly typical in the toy industry, I'm afraid - most unsold toys are not returned to the manufacturer, but are crushed on site.)

Why???


Automatically Appended Next Post:
From that TSR article.

In all my research into TSR's business, across all the ledgers, notebooks, computer files, and other sources of data, there was one thing I never found - one gaping hole in the mass of data we had available.

No customer profiling information. No feedback. No surveys. No "voice of the customer". TSR, it seems, knew nothing about the people who kept it alive. The management of the company made decisions based on instinct and gut feelings; not data. They didn't know how to listen - as an institution, listening to customers was considered something that other companies had to do - TSR lead, everyone else followed.

I know its been pointed out countless times, but...wow.

"Market research is otiose in a niche market".

 agnosto wrote:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
It was not the translation, its how many they printed and didn't sell.

Well then they should have gone the same route that they did with Japanese books and had them online for free...

It's easy to forget how downright terrible internet speeds were pre-2000, not to mention online distribution.

 Korinov wrote:
Even if BaC can be rightfully called a success, I wonder how many Tactical Squad, Terminator Squad and Dreadnought kits were not sold after the contents of the game box were announced.

I say this because I actually know someone who was thinking about starting a new Space Marines army and went for BaC instead of getting the separate kits.

Irony can be quite a bitch sometimes, specially considering how Specialist Games were canned in the past due to not selling enough and "cannibalizing" sales from the main products.

Indeed, GW is shooting itself in its foot. The BaC set is such a good deal that customers collect Tacticals, Termies, and Dreads from there.

 wuestenfux wrote:

 Korinov wrote:
Even if BaC can be rightfully called a success, I wonder how many Tactical Squad, Terminator Squad and Dreadnought kits were not sold after the contents of the game box were announced.

I say this because I actually know someone who was thinking about starting a new Space Marines army and went for BaC instead of getting the separate kits.

Irony can be quite a bitch sometimes, specially considering how Specialist Games were canned in the past due to not selling enough and "cannibalizing" sales from the main products.

Indeed, GW is shooting itself in its foot. The BaC set is such a good deal that customers collect Tacticals, Termies, and Dreads from there.

Not really. Nobody buys basic terminators anymore, dreadnoughts are lousy 40k units (and contemptors are the wrong loadout), and the tactical are missing grav weapons that you have to get elsewhere. You solve all your bolter tacticals, and you get 3 melta, plasma, flamer and combs, which are useful. Plus, you get a chaplain (very usable), but the terminator captain is pretty useless.

If all you want are 40k units, you're better off buying the Demi-company box, or just 3 boxes of ttactical and one box of a elite unit like sternguard. If you want a dread, get the mew start building box. But really, how many gw vets need more bolter tacs, never mind 30 more, or 60, for the people who bought 2 boxes?

But none of this gets to the core of GW's so-called 'collector' or big spender modelling audience. This is the first time tactical in mk4 are in plastic, the first time cataphractii are in plastic, and the first time you can get a 30k chaplain and cataphractii terminator in plastic. And contemptor! These customers want the Tigrus pattern bolsters and the retro missile launchers because an mk4 marine is not the same as an mk3 or mk7, and will no doubt model both. If you have ever built a FW tactical, you'll know how infinite better these are.

Of course, others will think these fans are crazy. But that's part of the recipe to GW's success -- an audience that is captivated by different marks of armor, different models of the same guns, $30 decal sheets with campaign markings, and all that heraldry that goes with the imperium.

Also, on the flip side, this will almost certainly boost 30k sales. The most annoying thing about 30k, IMO, are substandard space marin parts, when compared to modern GW kits like blood angels, space wolves, or sternguard. This cuts through that with a great foundation, and lets players/collectors focus on the expensive vehicles, primarchs, characters, titans and all that.

@Talys.
If players want cheaper game counters, then they will buy and use the cheaper game counters in BaC.
Rather than using coke cans as 'proxies' using the 'right models' with different weapons options is much better!

IF the ONLY people buying into 40k are well off collectors like yourself, then your argument s are valid.

BUT I suspect lots of customers are trying to play a game of 40k on a more restricted budget.

On a side note, every one expects the starter set to be better value for money than the standard minature range.
But in the case of GW this yawning chasm between starter prices and standard range prices ,causes a massive sticker shock in many potential players.And they just walk away.

 Korinov wrote:
Even if BaC can be rightfully called a success, I wonder how many Tactical Squad, Terminator Squad and Dreadnought kits were not sold after the contents of the game box were announced.

I say this because I actually know someone who was thinking about starting a new Space Marines army and went for BaC instead of getting the separate kits.

Irony can be quite a bitch sometimes, specially considering how Specialist Games were canned in the past due to not selling enough and "cannibalizing" sales from the main products.

Only because this specialist game is essentially their core line; 28mm Space Marines. Putting it another way; how many people bought BaC for the game and not the marines? You can get the game contents (without the marines) on eBay for $10 shipped.

The same doesn't apply to any other specialist game, because it's either a different scale, game size, or sub-world. Except gorkamorka, that was a great source of cheap trukks and boys.

Substandard? they (the FW resin) are the only space marine parts that allow one to have space marines that are not a moving shrine!

GW should not care if veterans buy Bac they are a company with constant decline in units sold, they should really care what potential new players could buy and how they can lure them in.

And if dreadnoughts and terminators are not worth it with the current meta its GWs fault of not keeping a balanced game, not the players.

Apparently models need rules to be sold.

Lanrak wrote:
@Talys.
If players want cheaper game counters, then they will buy and use the cheaper game counters in BaC.
Rather than using coke cans as 'proxies' using the 'right models' with different weapons options is much better!

IF the ONLY people buying into 40k are well off collectors like yourself, then your argument s are valid.

BUT I suspect lots of customers are trying to play a game of 40k on a more restricted budget.

On a side note, every one expects the starter set to be better value for money than the standard minature range.
But in the case of GW this yawning chasm between starter prices and standard range prices ,causes a massive sticker shock in many potential players.And they just walk away.

But my point is that Calth is not an efficient way to buy legal to play WYSIWYG space marine game counters for 40k at $150, if you want a quasi-competitive or good-for-pickup starter force.

Going straight models, you can buy 3 tactical squads for $120, leaving you with $30 to contribute to a hero, which will give you much better game value (or at least, relevant counters), since the terminators, terminator captain, and dreadnought are not very desirable, and the tactical squad doesn't have ideal weapons.

Or you can buy an $85 start collecting, plus 2 more tactical squads, for just $15 more, and get all 40k models and weapons, and a dreadnought and captain that has the right configuration for 40k. Or you can buy the $220 demi company, which includes, "a Space Marine Commander, three Space Marine Tactical Squads, a Space Marine Assault Squad, a Space Marine Devastator Squad and a Space Marine Dreadnought" -- far more relevant to 40k. Yeah it's $70 more, but, you're getting way better stuff for 40k.

In other words, Calth doesn't deprive GW of 40k sales for smart 40k astartes players, because there's better ways of getting to a Gladius, Demi-company, starter force, or whatever. It's really ideal for people like me, who value getting Mk4's, cataphractii, etc. for their uniqueness, rather than gaming value (at least in 40k), because really, most of the non tactical stuff kinda sucks, and the tactical stuff still leaves you having to fill in the holes with more 40k kits.

I've said this a zillion times -- 40k isn't a cheap game. If the budget is tight, 40k is probably going to be a tough game to love.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
Substandard? they (the FW resin) are the only space marine parts that allow one to have space marines that are not a moving shrine!

GW should not care if veterans buy Bac they are a company with constant decline in units sold, they should really care what potential new players could buy and how they can lure them in.

And if dreadnoughts and terminators are not worth it with the current meta its GWs fault of not keeping a balanced game, not the players.

Apparently models need rules to be sold.

Have you put together a FW power armor basic marine and a basic Calth marine? if not, please don't talk about something you're not familiar with. If you really want, I can give you high resolution side by sides. The hand sculpted resin bits cast from rubber molds are miles inferior to the CNC tooled steel molds. The calth pieces are also much more posable. Want more proof? The FW 30k faction squads include the Caleb plastics now.

My point was actually that great rules are NOT important to sell all those calth models. I really don't think people are buying Calth because contemptors and cataphractii and bolter or missile launcher marines are going to win them 40k games. Those calth boxes are moving because the models have some limited use in 40k (good excuse) and because there are people who really want the models (real reason). As I stated in alternatives above, if you want to buy models to play the rules (and win) for 40k, Calth isn't an efficient way to go about it.

If you want to start 30k, that's totally different. But then welcome to your first $150 of $3,000+++. What do they care of you got a nice deal on bolter marines, when your first tank is going to cost as much as your whole calth box, and your first titan is going to cost more than twice that?

Edit - actually, here, I did this ohoto to compare plastic and resin parts for some thread just a few days ago:

While FW as is GW really do not care about the quality of their product and deliver a sub par casting, CAD is no privilege of plastics nor is the medium deprived of the ability to deliver sharp detail, if nothing else resin is better at capturing sharp details.

Why they include bac in their line now, simply ease of manufacture, it takes less to pop up a plastic sprew than to make a resin cast and moulds degrade.

At least the resins can capture detail in areas plastics are unable and do not need cables,purity seals or odd bending foot to make the foots and leg guard castable.

I am sorry but in your comment you said "are substandard space marin parts, when compared to modern GW kits like blood angels, space wolves, or sternguard." and I commented that in contrast to the "modern GW kits" were the kit is a moving shrine of stupid, unnecessary, cluttered, extra junk, the FW kits can deliver a clear model without all this junk.

Moreover if your point was that people buy bac regardless of rules sorry you failed to deliver your point, you yourself sated why certain kits are in decline because of the rules hence why I mentioned that GW uses rules to sell the models and models by themselves do not sell, in my opinion people buy bac because its dead cheaper to get 30k marines in comparison to FW.

 Talys wrote:

My point was actually that great rules are NOT important to sell all those calth models. I really don't think people are buying Calth because contemptors and cataphractii and bolter or missile launcher marines are going to win them 40k games. Those calth boxes are moving because the models have some limited use in 40k (good excuse) and because there are people who really want the models (real reason). As I stated in alternatives above, if you want to buy models to play the rules (and win) for 40k, Calth isn't an efficient way to go about it.

If you want to start 30k, that's totally different. But then welcome to your first $150 of $3,000+++. What do they care of you got a nice deal on bolter marines, when your first tank is going to cost as much as your whole calth box, and your first titan is going to cost more than twice that?

Edit - actually, here, I did this ohoto to compare plastic and resin parts for some thread just a few days ago:

I think you're jumping to conclusions there.
I've heard many people say they're buying it to jump into HH or to flesh out 40k armies. I haven't heard anyone say they're buying it just to look at shelf displays.
Also, if you want "competitive" you're just a WAAC TFG-er anyway, right? (According to new speak GW style)
Like I said earlier, if I was starting a SM army, this is actually exactly where I'd start. Especially for someone that doesn't know what's good or not. (The reason AOS isn't good with newbies. You can eye ball an even battle if you actually know the power levels of both sides.)

 Talys wrote:

Spoiler:

Are you sure the resin is... Genuine?