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.

Just something I've been wondering about recently,
Where does Wayland Games (and other sites, Wayland Games just seems to be the main one) buy the miniatures they sell from? They sell cheaper than GW, so can't get it from there, and I'm pretty sure they sell the EXACT products that GW sell (as in, not with the same name and looking similar, the same resin cast and box), so where do they buy from?

Please leave an answer and thx in advance.

To put it simply, the price you pay to GW and the price a non GW store pay them are very very different.

It's something called wholesale.

A retail business is the sort that you, as a customer buy your stuff from. This can be Tesco, GW, Wayland, whoever.

These businesses buy their product from the company that makes them (or sometimes a middle man, called a distributor usually.)

Here's the clever bit: the company that makes the stuff sells it (wholesaler) for more than it costs to make it, but for less than the retailers sell it to you.

This is why GW work so hard to encourage you to buy things from them directly, by selling Limted Editions etc that other places can't sell to you (because GW won't sell it to them) because them they make a LOT more money.

As of their last set of figures, GW spend about 1/4 of the money they take in on making stuff, so when they sell it to you, they're making 4x what it cost them. They sell it to other retailers for a little under twice what it costs them to make it.

Other retailers then choose to make less than they would if they sold it at full RRP in the hope that you'll choose to buy it from them instead of somebody else by offering discounts and special offers.

Yeah, gw is primarily a factory, that happens to have a retail chain attached. They are run at minimal profit to try and recruit new hobbyists. Trade accounts (like Wayland) have access to core lines, new releases and best sellers (three modules they can choose from), and can sell between 80-120% rrp.

Well, no. Technically they can sell it for whatever they like, as otherwise that would be illegal.

Of course, enforcing that is near impossible and continued supply is contingent on good behaviour, so...

No, it's part of the terms and conditions of the trade agreement that third party retailers have to agree to in order to carry the product.

Makes no odds. If a stipulation in a contract is illegal, it's unenforceable, but if a store needs GW to keep the lights on, they're never going to challenge it.

I'd say that there's no doubt something precisely worded in the t+cs to circumvent anti price fixing legislation, but given GW's track record in the legal sphere, I wouldn't be surprised if someone took a stand they'd get somewhere, but who'd take the risk?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

https://www.gov.uk/cartels-price-fixing/types-of-anticompetitive-activity wrote:

Other anti-competitive activities
You must avoid other activities that break competition law, eg:...
...restricting how much other businesses can sell your product for

Automatically Appended Next Post:
And refusing to supply someone for breaking your unenforceable and illegal contract terms may then fall under "abusing a dominant position" and also be illegal.

But, as I said, who's going to rock the boat just for the right to make less money or price themselves out of the market?

Hi, Grey Knight. Welcome. This is Dakka.

...where some people think GW is ok.

And the rest of us are right!

 Azreal13 wrote:
Makes no odds. If a stipulation in a contract is illegal, it's unenforceable, but if a store needs GW to keep the lights on, they're never going to challenge it.

I'd say that there's no doubt something precisely worded in the t+cs to circumvent anti price fixing legislation, but given GW's track record in the legal sphere, I wouldn't be surprised if someone took a stand they'd get somewhere, but who'd take the risk?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

https://www.gov.uk/cartels-price-fixing/types-of-anticompetitive-activity wrote:

Other anti-competitive activities
You must avoid other activities that break competition law, eg:...
...restricting how much other businesses can sell your product for

Automatically Appended Next Post:
And refusing to supply someone for breaking your unenforceable and illegal contract terms may then fall under "abusing a dominant position" and also be illegal.

But, as I said, who's going to rock the boat just for the right to make less money or price themselves out of the market?

Do you have a precedence for that clause being enforced in a situation similar to gw? I.e. a not a cartel and suggesting a selling point below their own to encourage sales? Given the purpose and intent is to prevent price fixing from different companies or forcing retailers to sell at above market prices, I doubt it.

As to who, Asda and Tesco. Both really want (or wanted) trade contracts, but with a much greater discount range for the volume they'd have purchased. Gw have refused to agree to this. Both Asda and Tesco have immense legal teams, if there had been a clause as easy to exploit as that, they'd have signed the paperwork and done what they wanted anyway.


Edit. Actually, looking around the legislation on the topic, I'm increasingly starting to question why this hasn't happened...

 JamesY wrote:
Edit. Actually, looking around the legislation on the topic, I'm increasingly starting to question why this hasn't happened...

Probably because Tesco and Asda consider GW to be so irrelevant that there'd be no point in it.

Basically, the cost of doing the suing would be more money than they'd make.

Because GW (or any other supplier) does not have to sell to Asda, Tesco or Bob's Gaming Emporium

so even if your 1 year (or whatever) trade contract has terms on discounting that might not be enforceable all that proving it would do is to make GW carry on supplying you for the rest of the year (or whatever)

after that they can cut you of totally

I can assure you GW trade terms and conditions do not have any clause in themregarding the price you can or can't sell items for. Doing so would be illegal here in the UK.

Their sales reps will Recommend you sell at rrp all the time, but they can't make you.


There are a number of distributors in the UK that specialise in Wargames. Typically most things can be brought trade for 40%-50% off rrp.

I guess from the source

 Tamereth wrote:
I can assure you GW trade terms and conditions do not have any clause in themregarding the price you can or can't sell items for. Doing so would be illegal here in the UK.
Their sales reps will Recommend you sell at rrp all the time, but they can't make you.
There are a number of distributors in the UK that specialise in Wargames. Typically most things can be brought trade for 40%-50% off rrp.

There was a whole thing about Battlefront and Maelstrom back when Maelstrom used to sell BF products at a discount greater than 10%. At one point, BF stoipped supplying to Maelstrom. I'm sure it's all easily googleable still.

For the OP:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wholesale

Have a read through that, it should explain a lot.

Stepping away from GW for a moment, there is a big distributor in the UK that holds most of the wargaming ranges. I forget the name unfortunately.

 Azazelx wrote:

 Tamereth wrote:
I can assure you GW trade terms and conditions do not have any clause in themregarding the price you can or can't sell items for. Doing so would be illegal here in the UK.
Their sales reps will Recommend you sell at rrp all the time, but they can't make you.
There are a number of distributors in the UK that specialise in Wargames. Typically most things can be brought trade for 40%-50% off rrp.

There was a whole thing about Battlefront and Maelstrom back when Maelstrom used to sell BF products at a discount greater than 10%. At one point, BF stoipped supplying to Maelstrom. I'm sure it's all easily googleable still.

For the OP:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wholesale

Have a read through that, it should explain a lot.

Yes right, think BF used to stipulate a max 10% discount, they also used to only sell to shops that had a physical presence (i.e. no internet traders). Not sure if this has changed now however.

 JamesY wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Makes no odds. If a stipulation in a contract is illegal, it's unenforceable, but if a store needs GW to keep the lights on, they're never going to challenge it.

I'd say that there's no doubt something precisely worded in the t+cs to circumvent anti price fixing legislation, but given GW's track record in the legal sphere, I wouldn't be surprised if someone took a stand they'd get somewhere, but who'd take the risk?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

https://www.gov.uk/cartels-price-fixing/types-of-anticompetitive-activity wrote:

Other anti-competitive activities
You must avoid other activities that break competition law, eg:...
...restricting how much other businesses can sell your product for

Automatically Appended Next Post:
And refusing to supply someone for breaking your unenforceable and illegal contract terms may then fall under "abusing a dominant position" and also be illegal.

But, as I said, who's going to rock the boat just for the right to make less money or price themselves out of the market?

Do you have a precedence for that clause being enforced in a situation similar to gw? I.e. a not a cartel and suggesting a selling point below their own to encourage sales? Given the purpose and intent is to prevent price fixing from different companies or forcing retailers to sell at above market prices, I doubt it.

As to who, Asda and Tesco. Both really want (or wanted) trade contracts, but with a much greater discount range for the volume they'd have purchased. Gw have refused to agree to this. Both Asda and Tesco have immense legal teams, if there had been a clause as easy to exploit as that, they'd have signed the paperwork and done what they wanted anyway.


Edit. Actually, looking around the legislation on the topic, I'm increasingly starting to question why this hasn't happened...

GW do not want to trade with Supermarkets or multiples for the very reasons you state - The request for deep discounts of promotional pricing.

Asda tescos and even Toys R Us may have made approaches but GW will have either rebuffed them or put restrictive policies in front of them.
Charging suppliers for the privilege of displaying stock in store is one of the many reasons GW wouldn't touch grocery multiples with a bargepole.

There were also reports of GW and Wal-Mart not being able to come to an agreement years ago, as GW wanted various things that WM refused to comply with (and presumably vice versa).

There are laws in Greece too dissallowing any limits in final sale price, it's against the free market I guess.
You are also not allowed to refuse sale (it's illegal). What you can do however is limit supply, i.e. state to have a Policy to maintain at all times "x" quantity of product in stock, the production capacity is "y", so you can only supply "w" quantity of product monthly to you (the retailer).
We had researched that when forming our own ToT (Terms of Trade) document. Tricky bussiness if done wrong...

Also, on the matter of having retailers selling your product and selling it yourself, it's a two-side cut; When you sell it direct the percentage of profit augments. When you sell it indirect the volume of sales augment. It's a delicate bussiness to see what's most profitable.
After a first few years in this miniatures/games bussiness (but also having prior experience in the sales bussiness) I think it's best to keep "direct only" items that would not be competetive or generate enough profit to justify the investment. The rest best make available to everyone. I personally find it's like choosing between your left and your right arm; one arm is always stronger but the other allows for more. My personal conclusion is best you keep both ;-)

One last thing. We too have refused the sale of our products to a number of retailers and/or distributors because they didn't agree with our ToT. We find them more than reasonable and a number of retailers are already working with them. Regardless, others wanted to renegotiate and thus were refused. To each his own I guess... :-)

Angelos.

 Azazelx wrote:
There were also reports of GW and Wal-Mart not being able to come to an agreement years ago, as GW wanted various things that WM refused to comply with (and presumably vice versa).

In the grand scheme of things think this is a real shame. At it's core I think wargaming, painting, modelling as part of a hobby (and I mean that in a general sense) is beneficial to the development of kids and a really worthwhile pursuit for adults. I know I don't have to explain that to people posting in this forum. So, having more of it out there, more people doing it, is.. well, a good thing!

A lot of companies would gladly sacrifice their next of kin to get space in somewhere like Walmart and it's equivalents, least of all in such a niche industry as wargaming.
Even if it meant losing a bit of profit margin on sales, the fact that GW didn't grab that offer with both hands (and sell their souls or whatever) shows once again how the company is run by a bunch of fething incompetents.

 Pacific wrote:

 Azazelx wrote:
There were also reports of GW and Wal-Mart not being able to come to an agreement years ago, as GW wanted various things that WM refused to comply with (and presumably vice versa).

In the grand scheme of things think this is a real shame. At it's core I think wargaming, painting, modelling as part of a hobby (and I mean that in a general sense) is beneficial to the development of kids and a really worthwhile pursuit for adults. I know I don't have to explain that to people posting in this forum. So, having more of it out there, more people doing it, is.. well, a good thing!

A lot of companies would gladly sacrifice their next of kin to get space in somewhere like Walmart and it's equivalents, least of all in such a niche industry as wargaming.
Even if it meant losing a bit of profit margin on sales, the fact that GW didn't grab that offer with both hands (and sell their souls or whatever) shows once again how the company is run by a bunch of fething incompetents.

I agree that a wider presence would be great but GW are hardly monsters for not caving to Supermarkets. Even though they have arguably trodden a surprising path in recent times.

They way I've heard it told, and I've no idea if it's hearsay or reality, but it certainly sounds like the sort of thing GW would do, is that they went to Walmart with a bunch of demands and limitations, trying to call the shots. Walmart, unsurprisingly, laughed through their noses and told the to get the feth out.

@JamesY & Azreal13 - I don't dispute that there's a contractual agreement to sell the product at 80%-120%, but whether that's binding in certain jurisdictions has got to be irrelevant as it must not be enforced at all.

We know that Frontline sells stuff at 25% regularly (all preorders), as they advertise it right here on Dakka. There was a giant pile of Betrayal at Calth at 33% discount at Pastime Games in Langley, and regularly have products at anywhere up to 50% discount -- and they were featured in GW's list of places you could preview BaC. I think Darksphere is 25% always? In my area, every month, Imperial Hobbies has a Customer Appreciation "Day" (it's the first weekend of every month), where you can get up to 25% discount - it's a sliding scale, and you hit 25%, I think, at $200.

I'm sure there are a litany of other examples of regular discounting beyond 20% of GW product.

 Pacific wrote:


A lot of companies would gladly sacrifice their next of kin to get space in somewhere like Walmart and it's equivalents, least of all in such a niche industry as wargaming.
Even if it meant losing a bit of profit margin on sales, the fact that GW didn't grab that offer with both hands (and sell their souls or whatever) shows once again how the company is run by a bunch of fething incompetents.

And a lot of companies will not go near supermarkets. They are not nice people to deal with and will happily grind your business in to a paste, chew you up and dump you without a thought. Its not incompetent, it's a very good idea if you don't have to work with them. They demand more and more discount, with longer and longer payment terms, and will force you to mess about with your production and distribution chain until it suits them only for them then dump you without a thought. Many companies have gone bust at the hands of supermarkets and their methods.

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Pacific wrote:


A lot of companies would gladly sacrifice their next of kin to get space in somewhere like Walmart and it's equivalents, least of all in such a niche industry as wargaming.
Even if it meant losing a bit of profit margin on sales, the fact that GW didn't grab that offer with both hands (and sell their souls or whatever) shows once again how the company is run by a bunch of fething incompetents.

And a lot of companies will not go near supermarkets. They are not nice people to deal with and will happily grind your business in to a paste, chew you up and dump you without a thought. Its not incompetent, it's a very good idea if you don't have to work with them. They demand more and more discount, with longer and longer payment terms, and will force you to mess about with your production and distribution chain until it suits them only for them then dump you without a thought. Many companies have gone bust at the hands of supermarkets and their methods.

This. If GW went the supermarket route they'd probably be ground into dust within a few years simply because they are no where near big enough to survive the supermarket chains methods of undercutting suppliers whilst maximising profits and keeping prices down, even with the increased visibility and reach it would give them the hobby is too niche for it to remotely be worth it to GW.

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Pacific wrote:


A lot of companies would gladly sacrifice their next of kin to get space in somewhere like Walmart and it's equivalents, least of all in such a niche industry as wargaming.
Even if it meant losing a bit of profit margin on sales, the fact that GW didn't grab that offer with both hands (and sell their souls or whatever) shows once again how the company is run by a bunch of fething incompetents.

And a lot of companies will not go near supermarkets. They are not nice people to deal with and will happily grind your business in to a paste, chew you up and dump you without a thought. Its not incompetent, it's a very good idea if you don't have to work with them. They demand more and more discount, with longer and longer payment terms, and will force you to mess about with your production and distribution chain until it suits them only for them then dump you without a thought. Many companies have gone bust at the hands of supermarkets and their methods.

I've actually worked with Walgreens before from the vendor end of things. It's the most miserable experience ever and a good way to grind any joy out of doing whatever it is you do Those places with great discounts treat their vendors like a consignment operation and except for core branded products that they MUST have, like Coke, Pepsi, or Tylenol, you're screwed as a manufacturer. Miserably long time to pay you, you must participate in often ineffective advertising, and you must agree to take back stuff under the most ridiculous of conditions. Like, if something doesn't sell, take it back. If something doesn't get sold but customers bash it all to crap and it's unsalable, take it back. Basically, if the item didn't make the chain a bunch of money... you have the privilege of taking it back.

It's fine if your margins are *extremely* high and have a low return rate -- like video games or bottled water -- but horrible if your margins are more earthly and your product is more subject to customer satisfaction.

Of course, not ALL big box chains are like this, but the ones that customers get all excited about because they have great prices? Well, those great prices didn't come free

This is a recent (late last year) case involving the conduct of one of Australia's "big two" Supermarket chains. I doubt that they're especially unique in their conduct.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/companies/coles-fined-10m-for-serious-misconduct-against-suppliers/story-fn91v9q3-1227164168471?sv=89234b1959b488e79bb5b4117d1e4c44