Just noticed this thread, as of the same moment i was cracking my mind after i made a sheet of what i need to buy to play a 1000 point WFB game.
It will cost me around 300 euro total, and thats without the paint, army book and so on.

So basicly, it makes me nocious to think ill be buying "a game" for 300 euro (which is by far a complete game). Secondly i cannot convince friends to start playing, yeah they love the mini's on the gw website, but then again the first thing they say to me; dude.... thats really expensive. And the biggest thing i then have; i cannot actually tell them why it cost so much money.

With some plastic miniatures, made with a simple mould machine, which should propably cost just a bit more then some several euros to create a whole regiment. But asking 40+ euro for it........
I really..... really cannot understand how people can join this game at this level of prices they ask.

Therefor i really stumbled upon myself; asking myself; is it worth it.

The problem is that you can't look at a price per model comparison, you have to look at everything overall, and GW is still more expensive when you look at the amount needed to buy. They could charge like historicals and be decent prices given that's a fair comparison for game size. But when they charge a ton just because, there's an issue.

 Rachnaros wrote:

I really..... really cannot understand how people can join this game at this level of prices they ask.

ebay helps.

 Rachnaros wrote:
Just noticed this thread, as of the same moment i was cracking my mind after i made a sheet of what i need to buy to play a 1000 point WFB game.
It will cost me around 300 euro total, and thats without the paint, army book and so on.

So basicly, it makes me nocious to think ill be buying "a game" for 300 euro (which is by far a complete game). Secondly i cannot convince friends to start playing, yeah they love the mini's on the gw website, but then again the first thing they say to me; dude.... thats really expensive. And the biggest thing i then have; i cannot actually tell them why it cost so much money.

With some plastic miniatures, made with a simple mould machine, which should propably cost just a bit more then some several euros to create a whole regiment. But asking 40+ euro for it........
I really..... really cannot understand how people can join this game at this level of prices they ask.

Therefor i really stumbled upon myself; asking myself; is it worth it.

The question is really not, is it worth it. The question is "Is there VALUE in it for YOU?" I was thinking of trying Fantasy. I started with battle of Skull Pass, got it at a discount. So I saw some value there. Then reading the rules a bit, seeing how it can be another mess like 40K (rules wise, tired of debates). Nice minis. Beautiful minis. But too expensive. I see there is no support for the game and with prices increasing, to me the Value is not there to start Fantasy for me.

For 40K, the value is not there for me either now. Was going to start Orks for the wife. Price increase again. So less and less worth. So the value is not worth me paying the prices GW is asking for.

 Rachnaros wrote:
Just noticed this thread, as of the same moment i was cracking my mind after i made a sheet of what i need to buy to play a 1000 point WFB game.
It will cost me around 300 euro total, and thats without the paint, army book and so on.

So basicly, it makes me nocious to think ill be buying "a game" for 300 euro (which is by far a complete game). Secondly i cannot convince friends to start playing, yeah they love the mini's on the gw website, but then again the first thing they say to me; dude.... thats really expensive. And the biggest thing i then have; i cannot actually tell them why it cost so much money.

With some plastic miniatures, made with a simple mould machine, which should propably cost just a bit more then some several euros to create a whole regiment. But asking 40+ euro for it........
I really..... really cannot understand how people can join this game at this level of prices they ask.

Therefor i really stumbled upon myself; asking myself; is it worth it.

A lot of people prefer Kings of War for WHFB alternative but faster gameplay. You can use GW models if you have them, but you ccan instead use Mantics own models which are far cheaper. You could also consider using Mantics KoW models for WHFB if you prefer. As you say, you really have to go "is this really worth it"... a lot more people are just saying "nah, it really isn't" now. Thankfully there are some strong alternatives!

I think they should adopt more tiered pricing (which would require more lines, unfortunately.)

Forge World is already established as the "luxury" brand, with high prices and very high quality models. Someone who has money to burn -- especially for that special model -- can.

Right now GW is pricing itself like a luxury, and it should make itself more affordable, so that most of its models are "midrange".

GW should introduce an inexpensive "starter range" that lacks all the gubbins, articulation, and other neat stuff, and simpler, easier to assemble sculpts (maybe even snap fit models). Probably only cover certain basic things that you expect people to need to buy in bulk -- but it would get people to buy who wouldn't spend any money otherwise.

@ Davon,

Yes its the value, and as of now im still not certain about what to do. I really love to paint the minis, but like i said before, its kinda de-motivating knowing i still need to spend alot of money before i can even play a game. Ofcourse, i should not buy a complete army at once, and paiting mini after mini i will have a lot time to spend. But it still not the way it should be i think. It now will take alot of time before i can even play the game. (as in buyed the army, not painted).

Further more i think GW doesnt get it. If you buy a "starter kit" like Island of Blood you may assume as a new player that you have bought something that is "working" out of the box, but it doesnt, point wise the skaven are really outnumbered, secondly before you can play you need to go seek the store again for the army books. And this is complety wrong in my opinion. Same as the battalions, they should make boxes with 700 points, 1000, 1400 and so on. So you can immediatly start playing. (and ofcoure: make these boxes cheaper!)

 Rachnaros wrote:
@ Davon,

It's Davor, with an R

Further more i think GW doesnt get it. If you buy a "starter kit" like Island of Blood you may assume as a new player that you have bought something that is "working" out of the box, but it doesnt, point wise the skaven are really outnumbered, secondly before you can play you need to go seek the store again for the army books. And this is complety wrong in my opinion. Same as the battalions, they should make boxes with 700 points, 1000, 1400 and so on. So you can immediatly start playing. (and ofcoure: make these boxes cheaper!)

I guess that is the big reason why I couldn't get into Fantasy. It was another, "I need to buy more in order to play a legal game?" I guess I am tired of being felt like a "sucker". Yeah I was a "sucker" to buy it in the first place, but at least it was on sale. Thing is, who is the "sucker"? Me for thinking it wasn't the case or GW for loosing out on so much sales? Well for me, I don't feel like a "sucker" because I got what I wanted. Some minis, the rules (even if I never did play) and was happy with my purchase. GW loses out because they think we will just keep buying and buying no matter what.

It might have worked before, but not anymore in todays age.

That point about the boxed sets is also a good point. I find that in most cases that's where you really start to feel like you're being fleeced: Even the boxed armies on the GW site (the ones with actual discounts) aren't that great a discount when you actually see that you're getting like only 750 points.

For instance, I recently looked at the Cadian boxed army on the GW site. It was like $160 and came with:

* 1x Command Squad (5 models)
* 2x Infantry Squads (20 models)
* 1x Heavy Weapons Team
* 1x Chimera
* 1x Leman Russ tank

I compared this to Bolt Action's US Army starter army for $128:

* 1x Command Squad (2 models)
* 5x Infantry Squads (50 models)
* 2x Heavy Weapons Teams
* 1x Armored Car
* 1x Sherman tank

The Bolt Action army is 1,000 points which is a normal-sized Bolt Action game. Not having the AM codex I'm not sure of the points cost of the Cadian force but I'd wager 500-750 in a world where 1,500 is the average size game. So you are paying $160 and getting roughly half of what you need to play average games for 40k compared to $128 for everything you need to play average Bolt Action games.

ComTrav wrote:
GW should introduce an inexpensive "starter range" that lacks all the gubbins, articulation, and other neat stuff, and simpler, easier to assemble sculpts (maybe even snap fit models). Probably only cover certain basic things that you expect people to need to buy in bulk -- but it would get people to buy who wouldn't spend any money otherwise.

They used to do that. That is what plastics were, but then Kirby had his brilliant "Why should there be a price gap between plastic and metal?" idea. Personally I think their system is flawed, even luxury brands make the bulk of their money from selling the low end stuff to ordinary people (for example Gucci and sunglasses, Ferrari and Hats).

I honestly couldn't really see GW focusing on snapfit plastic and the like because of their encouragement of conversions. On the flipside I'm actually curious why Privateer didn't go with that for Warmachine/Hordes, since while you can do conversions they are very limited.

Davor wrote:

 Rachnaros wrote:
Just noticed this thread, as of the same moment i was cracking my mind after i made a sheet of what i need to buy to play a 1000 point WFB game.
It will cost me around 300 euro total, and thats without the paint, army book and so on.

So basicly, it makes me nocious to think ill be buying "a game" for 300 euro (which is by far a complete game). Secondly i cannot convince friends to start playing, yeah they love the mini's on the gw website, but then again the first thing they say to me; dude.... thats really expensive. And the biggest thing i then have; i cannot actually tell them why it cost so much money.

With some plastic miniatures, made with a simple mould machine, which should propably cost just a bit more then some several euros to create a whole regiment. But asking 40+ euro for it........
I really..... really cannot understand how people can join this game at this level of prices they ask.

Therefor i really stumbled upon myself; asking myself; is it worth it.

The question is really not, is it worth it. The question is "Is there VALUE in it for YOU?" I was thinking of trying Fantasy. I started with battle of Skull Pass, got it at a discount. So I saw some value there. Then reading the rules a bit, seeing how it can be another mess like 40K (rules wise, tired of debates). Nice minis. Beautiful minis. But too expensive. I see there is no support for the game and with prices increasing, to me the Value is not there to start Fantasy for me.

For 40K, the value is not there for me either now. Was going to start Orks for the wife. Price increase again. So less and less worth. So the value is not worth me paying the prices GW is asking for.

A friend of mine considers Skull Pass to be totally worth it... as the bulk of his Orc army for Kings of War.

Isle of Blood serves much the same purpose for an Elf army.

The Auld Grump

WayneTheGame wrote:
That point about the boxed sets is also a good point. I find that in most cases that's where you really start to feel like you're being fleeced: Even the boxed armies on the GW site (the ones with actual discounts) aren't that great a discount when you actually see that you're getting like only 750 points.

For instance, I recently looked at the Cadian boxed army on the GW site. It was like $160 and came with:

* 1x Command Squad (5 models)
* 2x Infantry Squads (20 models)
* 1x Heavy Weapons Team
* 1x Chimera
* 1x Leman Russ tank

I compared this to Bolt Action's US Army starter army for $128:

* 1x Command Squad (2 models)
* 5x Infantry Squads (50 models)
* 2x Heavy Weapons Teams
* 1x Armored Car
* 1x Sherman tank

The Bolt Action army is 1,000 points which is a normal-sized Bolt Action game. Not having the AM codex I'm not sure of the points cost of the Cadian force but I'd wager 500-750 in a world where 1,500 is the average size game. So you are paying $160 and getting roughly half of what you need to play average games for 40k compared to $128 for everything you need to play average Bolt Action games.

Yup. I'm a total Wargames Factory fanboy myself. They sell infantry packs of 31 guys for $22, in high quality plastic. Compare that to GW's 10 guardsmen for $35. At Wargames' prices, I'm buying models I won't even use, just for fun, because they're quality and well-priced. If third-party manufacturers can make good models for 1/4th the price, I'm pretty sure that GW could easily cut their prices by 20%, or more to the point they could offer 20% more in each infantry box and not incur any additional shipping costs. I'm absolutely not buying any GW models right now (still buying the books though), I've got a halfway Dark Eldar (from 3rd Edition) and Space Marine army (from eBay) and there's no freaking way I'm paying $40 for three reavers nor $41 for a razorback.

I got my valkyrie (hind helicopter model) for $16 on Amazon, got my vendetta (harrier jet model) for $25. I haven't met a player yet who objected to my counts-as rough riders or conscripts. I would gladly give my money to GW, just as soon as they start offering their products at reasonable prices. Until then, I'll go gangbusters on Amazon and Wargames Factory.

Same deal with paints. My Blick/Utrecht paint store will gladly sell me 1 oz of acrylic ink for $5 when GW tries to sell 0.4 oz of nuln oil for $5. Quality acrylic paints, I can find a similar deal. Everyone else seems to be competing on price...

 TheSilo wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:
That point about the boxed sets is also a good point. I find that in most cases that's where you really start to feel like you're being fleeced: Even the boxed armies on the GW site (the ones with actual discounts) aren't that great a discount when you actually see that you're getting like only 750 points.

For instance, I recently looked at the Cadian boxed army on the GW site. It was like $160 and came with:

* 1x Command Squad (5 models)
* 2x Infantry Squads (20 models)
* 1x Heavy Weapons Team
* 1x Chimera
* 1x Leman Russ tank

I compared this to Bolt Action's US Army starter army for $128:

* 1x Command Squad (2 models)
* 5x Infantry Squads (50 models)
* 2x Heavy Weapons Teams
* 1x Armored Car
* 1x Sherman tank

The Bolt Action army is 1,000 points which is a normal-sized Bolt Action game. Not having the AM codex I'm not sure of the points cost of the Cadian force but I'd wager 500-750 in a world where 1,500 is the average size game. So you are paying $160 and getting roughly half of what you need to play average games for 40k compared to $128 for everything you need to play average Bolt Action games.

Yup. I'm a total Wargames Factory fanboy myself. They sell infantry packs of 31 guys for $22, in high quality plastic. Compare that to GW's 10 guardsmen for $35. At Wargames' prices, I'm buying models I won't even use, just for fun, because they're quality and well-priced. If third-party manufacturers can make good models for 1/4th the price, I'm pretty sure that GW could easily cut their prices by 20%, or more to the point they could offer 20% more in each infantry box and not incur any additional shipping costs. I'm absolutely not buying any GW models right now (still buying the books though), I've got a halfway Dark Eldar (from 3rd Edition) and Space Marine army (from eBay) and there's no freaking way I'm paying $40 for three reavers nor $41 for a razorback.

I got my valkyrie (hind helicopter model) for $16 on Amazon, got my vendetta (harrier jet model) for $25. I haven't met a player yet who objected to my counts-as rough riders or conscripts. I would gladly give my money to GW, just as soon as they start offering their products at reasonable prices. Until then, I'll go gangbusters on Amazon and Wargames Factory.

Same deal with paints. My Blick/Utrecht paint store will gladly sell me 1 oz of acrylic ink for $5 when GW tries to sell 0.4 oz of nuln oil for $5. Quality acrylic paints, I can find a similar deal. Everyone else seems to be competing on price...

You really like the rules that much, or is it you have a good play group to play with? I can't see anyone buying other minis/toys to play with 40K rules. Not trying to condensed, just understand where you are coming from.

Easy ruleset to find a game.

 TheSilo wrote:
Easy ruleset to find a game.

Ah, I get it. I understand.

Davor wrote:

 TheSilo wrote:
Easy ruleset to find a game.

Ah, I get it. I understand.

Believe me, I've got plenty of house rules that I'd love to implement. But I'd rather use a mediocre ruleset and actually get a game in than run around trying to find the one other guy in the state that plays my chosen wargame.

By far the #1 reason people leave the game is because of the price tag. GW could sell the rules and models for literally half the price and still make a 100% or better profit off of them based on individual sales. This is even after taking into account development, transportation, all other overhead and production.
On top of this, they would actually increase their numbers of items sold by over 100% for a huge overall profit margin increase.

 EVIL INC wrote:
By far the #1 reason people leave the game is because of the price tag. GW could sell the rules and models for literally half the price and still make a 100% or better profit off of them based on individual sales. This is even after taking into account development, transportation, all other overhead and production.
On top of this, they would actually increase their numbers of items sold by over 100% for a huge overall profit margin increase.

That's the kicker. Most other businesses would have a business model where they release rules for free to get people into the models, where they make the money.

 TheSilo wrote:

 EVIL INC wrote:
By far the #1 reason people leave the game is because of the price tag. GW could sell the rules and models for literally half the price and still make a 100% or better profit off of them based on individual sales. This is even after taking into account development, transportation, all other overhead and production.
On top of this, they would actually increase their numbers of items sold by over 100% for a huge overall profit margin increase.

That's the kicker. Most other businesses would have a business model where they release rules for free to get people into the models, where they make the money.

Sure as hell seems to be working for Corvus Belli.

I've always found it equal parts funny ironic and depressing ironic that GW goes on and on about being a model company, not a rules company, yet throws so many ludicrously overpriced rulebooks at you.

Quite simply for everyone that doesn't agree with the charges (like myself) for official GW stuff but you really want to own the gear you would look to following.

A. Discount stores like darksphere, element games etc up tp 30% off to me is erasable! you would basically get 30% more there for your budget.

B. hunt for bargains. This is a pain buster because things like eBay usually have friends boosting bids to the maximum so very hard to get a good deal on there but very possible to win a bargain sometimes. The other is buy from people who want to offload their old stuff.

 jonolikespie wrote:

 TheSilo wrote:

 EVIL INC wrote:
By far the #1 reason people leave the game is because of the price tag. GW could sell the rules and models for literally half the price and still make a 100% or better profit off of them based on individual sales. This is even after taking into account development, transportation, all other overhead and production.
On top of this, they would actually increase their numbers of items sold by over 100% for a huge overall profit margin increase.

That's the kicker. Most other businesses would have a business model where they release rules for free to get people into the models, where they make the money.

Sure as hell seems to be working for Corvus Belli.

I've always found it equal parts funny ironic and depressing ironic that GW goes on and on about being a model company, not a rules company, yet throws so many ludicrously overpriced rulebooks at you.

How can you be a miniature company when you make crappy rules for them? How many people have bought Pyrovores? Maybe one just to have it for a collection, but shouldn't those be being sold in 2's and 3's? So yeah, GW is not even a mini company anymore.

GW doesn't even know what it wants to be.

 kerikhaos wrote:
Quite simply for everyone that doesn't agree with the charges (like myself) for official GW stuff but you really want to own the gear you would look to following.

A. Discount stores like darksphere, element games etc up tp 30% off to me is erasable! you would basically get 30% more there for your budget.

B. hunt for bargains. This is a pain buster because things like eBay usually have friends boosting bids to the maximum so very hard to get a good deal on there but very possible to win a bargain sometimes. The other is buy from people who want to offload their old stuff.

To be fair, that's not a huge help given that (for me at least) even with the 25% Dark Sphere offers, the prices are still at the eyewatering level.

You wouldn't expect things to go lower than 30% because that would unreasonable even from us who want lower prices. If for every 100 I was spending I got 30 back then that's quite a lot off considering. It's an expensive hobby and we know the charges but finding them for this much cheaper does lighten the blow and keeps more of us in the game.

The point is GW won't drop ever I beleive so the hunt would continue to be finding the cheaper reseller. Or buy from bored / ex collectors who sell for bargains.

There is simply no way I would feel guilty about turning up with minis I bought elsewhere.

When I lived in Denver, there actually was a GW store in town (in the metropolitan area) and I actually did attend their 40k night with some regularity. I also went to a lot of the other fine hobby shops in the area (Denver had quite a few nice ones).

I never felt bad about bringing minis that I bought at one store to play at another- and I think I shopped the least at the GW store.

It isn't as though I hadn't paid for my minis (I wasn't casting copies in my garage or anything).

Local Game Stores find different ways to get people to buy things at their store. I know one place that offers everything at a decent discount. Most places simply keep up a stock on the shelf and know that their regulars just can't resist the mini that's right in front of them.

I'd be cool with more value, without the price mattering. For instance, why are Sternguard/Vanguard 5 models for like $50? They should be 10. $50 for 10 is expensive, but it doesn't feel like you're being cheated. $50 for 5 when you likely want 10 just feels like you're getting ripped off because the company KNOWS you want 10 so is purposely charging you twice.

WayneTheGame wrote:
I'd be cool with more value, without the price mattering. For instance, why are Sternguard/Vanguard 5 models for like $50? They should be 10. $50 for 10 is expensive, but it doesn't feel like you're being cheated. $50 for 5 when you likely want 10 just feels like you're getting ripped off because the company KNOWS you want 10 so is purposely charging you twice.

A lot of businesses do this. Problem is, we see GW doing this to the extremes without ever giving great value else where. I could live with GW doing this, but then when selling out codices, do so at half the price they are selling now. Sell the rules cheaper as well. This way, yes I pay more for minis but we are getting books/rules at a fair value. The way I see it, is, GW is doing the 5 for $50, plus gouging with books and rules.

I use to collect Lord of the Rings. Now, GW increases the prices of the books. Now instead of paying $40 for 20 minis, now it's $30 for 10 minis. Half the miniature count but only 1/3 the price count, so intact that turns into a price increase. Could I have lived with this? Maybe. But I draw the line when I have to pay $150 for the starter set with rules, and then that rule book doesn't have the point costs and the rest of the miniature stats, that I would have to dish out another $100 for a rulebook just for Stats and point costs. Didn't have to do that with Mines of Moria, which was a great deal. Or should I say an awesome value. Now I see no value in The Hobbit and quit.

Sadly I am starting to see no value in 40K either. I see no value in Fantasy so will not even start it. While the prices maybe high, I am willing to save for high prices. Problem is, I see no value at those prices. Even GW cut the prices in half now, there is no value in their products? Why? Ever 2 years an edition change. (yeah I know it was only 18 months from 6th to 7th) codices invalidating previous builds, or just changing rules for because. How come a gun in one edition, does not have the same rules in the next edition.

Why are the rules not proof read? Why are their mistakes? Why are there written mistakes? If I am going to be paying for a "Premium Product" then that product should have premium workmanship.)How come there is too much imbalance in the game? If I am going to be spending 5 for $50 or $5 a plastic mini, I need to see that the game will be supported through Errata/FAQ when problems arise. (I can understand not every for seeable circumstance can be seen, so a good Errata/FAQ should be made then.)

I just don't see no value anymore in GW products as a gaming system anymore.

I want to see value in 40k, I really do. Hell I want to play it again. But not at the price they're asking, with poor rules that don't allow me to field what I want (well unless I'm happy to spend hundreds and lose every game).

GW basically pretends its products are luxury, but like you said a luxury premium product should have quality control. Otherwise what are you paying for? They need to learn that a hardcover book and glossy pages doesn't mean your product is high quality. GW is a Toyota Corolla engine and faux leather seats in an body that looks like a Ferrari but is a cheap knockoff, that's being passed off as being a Ferrari. If there was actually some kind of law/regulation about claiming a product to be a luxury product, I'm pretty sure GW would be violating it.

It's one of them mind f*ck situations where we're cleverly being rooted. we all agree that GW are expensive and we hate them for it but when we actually stretch to the occasion of buying their stuff we actually justify our purchases as being in accordance with value.

It's like we're driving and deliberately turn into a dead end road knowing it's a dead end and still driving down it just because we believe that this time round they may of made an opening linking to the main road on the other side.......hmmm. Maybe that example is a bit warped but my point is we argue about the obvious but still take no logical advice and do any different....we still waaaant moooooore

What do you mean 'we', paleface?

 Vermis wrote:
What do you mean 'we', paleface?

I guess I mean those who drive lol

-

Character- $10
Troops Choice- $20
Elites Choice- $25
Light Vehicle/Bikes- $25
Tank/Transport/Monstrous Creature- $35
Flyer/FMC- $40
Superheavy- $70

Verviedi wrote:
Character- $10
Troops Choice- $20
Elites Choice- $25
Light Vehicle/Bikes- $25
Tank/Transport/Monstrous Creature- $35
Flyer/FMC- $40
Superheavy- $70

This would be ideal, but you could bump those all up by $5 and i'd still be happy to pay it. On the superheavy front I wont mind paying a much higher price. Knights are only 20 ish bucks too expensive IMO, and all the other forgeworld stuff is priced fine by me.

Yeah, I'd actually be fine with those prices: provided rules that go with them are acceptable.

I don't know what the price should be as I don't know their costs but for me to buy models from them more than once a year (haven't bought a model from them since dark vengeance was released actually) they would have to be about 50% cheaper. They would have to scrap or heavily reduce codex prices or include army lists in the main rule book.

I am not a fan of the hobbit releases but at a more reasonable price I would own a decent amount of lotr stuff. But their prices are just too high and if I do pick up any lotr stuff in the future it will be from ebay.

As it stands if I need paint and I am passing a GW I will pick up some paint, but beyond that I don't shop with them.

I think a big part of it is feeling you see being price gouged too. I mean infinity models are really expensive at about 5-10 quid a model (pretty much all of them are character models.) but despite that I don't feel like I am being shafted when I buy from corvus belle.

 carlos13th wrote:
I think a big part of it is feeling you see being price gouged too. I mean infinity models are really expensive at about 5-10 quid a model (pretty much all of them are character models.) but despite that I don't feel like I am being shafted when I buy from corvus belle.

A big reason for that IMHO is because 40k and WHFB have grown exponentially larger to encourage buying more. Infinity requires a few models, so while they're individually pricy you feel like you're getting your money's worth not having to buy a couple boxes of the same guys. Same with Warmachine for me, I feel like I get more value buying a $50 infantry unit from Privateer than I do a $40 box from GW, because that Warmachine box is a good chunk of my force not just a small piece.

I think the 20% off prices that most independent retailers sell GW products for is about the right price and I'm happy paying those. I consider Forge World luxury purchases and again am happy paying those prices.

I was speaking to someone who has an inside knowledge on the true cost involved of producing kits.

I'll give you an example. The Hobbit Goblin Captain which sells here in Australia at $33.00

The total cost of the entire model cost GW which is Citadel Finecast 5 Australian cents, the packaging, 1 Australian cent, shipping so small it not worth mentioning.

Add all other costs it total cost is 25 Australian cents. GW when they sell that figure they make a whopping $32.75 profit on the figure.

What is worse is that for that figure 70% of the entire contents is wastage as the Goblin Captain figure only makes up for 30% of total sprue. And they charge $33.00 for a figure the size of a Gretchin.

WayneTheGame wrote:

 carlos13th wrote:
I think a big part of it is feeling you see being price gouged too. I mean infinity models are really expensive at about 5-10 quid a model (pretty much all of them are character models.) but despite that I don't feel like I am being shafted when I buy from corvus belle.

A big reason for that IMHO is because 40k and WHFB have grown exponentially larger to encourage buying more. Infinity requires a few models, so while they're individually pricy you feel like you're getting your money's worth not having to buy a couple boxes of the same guys. Same with Warmachine for me, I feel like I get more value buying a $50 infantry unit from Privateer than I do a $40 box from GW, because that Warmachine box is a good chunk of my force not just a small piece.

Yeah while 40k is cheaper on a per model basis than other skirmish games a playable force is cheaper with other games. Compared to other games that require large numbers of troops 40k is very expensive. I am currently making a samurai army out of metal historicals and it's still cheaper than doing a whfb army of a similar size.

If I made them from plastics they would be even cheaper.

 Achaylus72 wrote:
I was speaking to someone who has an inside knowledge on the true cost involved of producing kits.

I'll give you an example. The Hobbit Goblin Captain which sells here in Australia at $33.00

The total cost of the entire model cost GW which is Citadel Finecast 5 Australian cents, the packaging, 1 Australian cent, shipping so small it not worth mentioning.

Add all other costs it total cost is 25 Australian cents. GW when they sell that figure they make a whopping $32.75 profit on the figure.

What is worse is that for that figure 70% of the entire contents is wastage as the Goblin Captain figure only makes up for 30% of total sprue. And they charge $33.00 for a figure the size of a Gretchin.

I don't think you're friend know what their talking about. Even IF that was their costs it only represents a small percentage of costs. When you look at GW's investor relations website you can see how much revenue and profit they actually make, with the cost to operate being the difference. They only have a 10% return on investment, they have to spend $10 to make $1. Even if GW were some how doing this without a profit margin, that would only amount to a 10% decrease in their wholesale prices.

GW's problem is they try to grow profits by growing margin and shrinking costs instead of trying to grow its customer base. Their pricing scheme has caused a 9% shrink in sales volume this last year, 7% the year before... Its starting to look like a bell curve where each percent of price increase is met with a growing disproportionate loss of customers. A company in their position's main advantage is the volume they can produce by charging as much as they do they struggle to pay off the capital investments made to create their products.

From a purely economic stand point if we turned back the clock to 2011 that was the last year where price rises saw no significant impact on sales volume. That is the price point where price-demand elasticity is breakeven and thus optimized. After adjusting for inflation, if GW set its prices to 2011 levels, it'd see a balanced sales volume relative to overall profitability. Now I don't have a recollection of prices that year, but that would be statistically the "best price" for consumers and GW

Its nice to come up with a pricing scheme of what we'd like to pay, but it doesn't take into consideration the health of a company. If GW charged the prices of some of the recommendations here they'd likely stagnate from a lack of capital to reinvest into the next new product or go under.

Their prices 5-7 years ago would've ben fine for me. Not now.

 aka_mythos wrote:

 Achaylus72 wrote:
I was speaking to someone who has an inside knowledge on the true cost involved of producing kits.

I'll give you an example. The Hobbit Goblin Captain which sells here in Australia at $33.00

The total cost of the entire model cost GW which is Citadel Finecast 5 Australian cents, the packaging, 1 Australian cent, shipping so small it not worth mentioning.

Add all other costs it total cost is 25 Australian cents. GW when they sell that figure they make a whopping $32.75 profit on the figure.

What is worse is that for that figure 70% of the entire contents is wastage as the Goblin Captain figure only makes up for 30% of total sprue. And they charge $33.00 for a figure the size of a Gretchin.

I don't think you're friend know what their talking about. Even IF that was their costs it only represents a small percentage of costs. When you look at GW's investor relations website you can see how much revenue and profit they actually make, with the cost to operate being the difference. They only have a 10% return on investment, they have to spend $10 to make $1. Even if GW were some how doing this without a profit margin, that would only amount to a 10% decrease in their wholesale prices.

GW's problem is they try to grow profits by growing margin and shrinking costs instead of trying to grow its customer base. Their pricing scheme has caused a 9% shrink in sales volume this last year, 7% the year before... Its starting to look like a bell curve where each percent of price increase is met with a growing disproportionate loss of customers. A company in their position's main advantage is the volume they can produce by charging as much as they do they struggle to pay off the capital investments made to create their products.

From a purely economic stand point if we turned back the clock to 2011 that was the last year where price rises saw no significant impact on sales volume. That is the price point where price-demand elasticity is breakeven and thus optimized. After adjusting for inflation, if GW set its prices to 2011 levels, it'd see a balanced sales volume relative to overall profitability. Now I don't have a recollection of prices that year, but that would be statistically the "best price" for consumers and GW

Its nice to come up with a pricing scheme of what we'd like to pay, but it doesn't take into consideration the health of a company. If GW charged the prices of some of the recommendations here they'd likely stagnate from a lack of capital to reinvest into the next new product or go under.

You are absolutely correct, my previous price points are biased because i feel like i have been gouged so I am overshooting what I would consider to be worthwhile. With that said, their prices for individual "character" models are absurd as are some of the other things. There has to be a balance where they charge significantly less than current prices which creates enough new customers to outweigh the per model loss of profit.

@Achaylus72.
The figures from my friend who works at GW (In the manufacturing facility.)

The cost of manufacturing a plastic kit is appx 4% of the retail price.
The cost of all the other overheads , wages, facility depreciation, design and development etc, APART from logistics and retail.
Bumps this up another 22% appx.(26% appx.)

This leaves a gross profit of 74%on average.

However, logistics, (shipping the product to retail and distributors,) cost just under 10% of the retail price on average.(This means 35% appx of the retail price in total before you get to the retail costs.)

The retail chain costs GW plc in excess of 50% of their gross profit!

So if you play regular games in your local GW store, then you MAY be getting the extra value for money everyone who buys off GW HAS to pay for!

There are still GW stores you can play in?

Well if you can not play in the stores, what are you paying GW all that extra money for?

I was under the impression it was some sort of Australian Tax.

 carlos13th wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:

 carlos13th wrote:
I think a big part of it is feeling you see being price gouged too. I mean infinity models are really expensive at about 5-10 quid a model (pretty much all of them are character models.) but despite that I don't feel like I am being shafted when I buy from corvus belle.

A big reason for that IMHO is because 40k and WHFB have grown exponentially larger to encourage buying more. Infinity requires a few models, so while they're individually pricy you feel like you're getting your money's worth not having to buy a couple boxes of the same guys. Same with Warmachine for me, I feel like I get more value buying a $50 infantry unit from Privateer than I do a $40 box from GW, because that Warmachine box is a good chunk of my force not just a small piece.

Yeah while 40k is cheaper on a per model basis than other skirmish games a playable force is cheaper with other games. Compared to other games that require large numbers of troops 40k is very expensive. I am currently making a samurai army out of metal historicals and it's still cheaper than doing a whfb army of a similar size.

If I made them from plastics they would be even cheaper.

And that's the other thing. Large-scale games tend to have cheaper figures to balance it out (you pay less but buy more), smaller games tend to do the opposite (more expensive figures but you need to buy less). GW takes the worst of both: Pay a lot and buy a lot, because they're delusional and can get away with it.

It just feels like you're being cheated.

The fact the rules are overall garbage doesn't help.

 aka_mythos wrote:

 Achaylus72 wrote:
I was speaking to someone who has an inside knowledge on the true cost involved of producing kits.

I'll give you an example. The Hobbit Goblin Captain which sells here in Australia at $33.00

The total cost of the entire model cost GW which is Citadel Finecast 5 Australian cents, the packaging, 1 Australian cent, shipping so small it not worth mentioning.

Add all other costs it total cost is 25 Australian cents. GW when they sell that figure they make a whopping $32.75 profit on the figure.

What is worse is that for that figure 70% of the entire contents is wastage as the Goblin Captain figure only makes up for 30% of total sprue. And they charge $33.00 for a figure the size of a Gretchin.

I don't think you're friend know what their talking about. Even IF that was their costs it only represents a small percentage of costs. When you look at GW's investor relations website you can see how much revenue and profit they actually make, with the cost to operate being the difference. They only have a 10% return on investment, they have to spend $10 to make $1. Even if GW were some how doing this without a profit margin, that would only amount to a 10% decrease in their wholesale prices.

GW's problem is they try to grow profits by growing margin and shrinking costs instead of trying to grow its customer base. Their pricing scheme has caused a 9% shrink in sales volume this last year, 7% the year before... Its starting to look like a bell curve where each percent of price increase is met with a growing disproportionate loss of customers. A company in their position's main advantage is the volume they can produce by charging as much as they do they struggle to pay off the capital investments made to create their products.

From a purely economic stand point if we turned back the clock to 2011 that was the last year where price rises saw no significant impact on sales volume. That is the price point where price-demand elasticity is breakeven and thus optimized. After adjusting for inflation, if GW set its prices to 2011 levels, it'd see a balanced sales volume relative to overall profitability. Now I don't have a recollection of prices that year, but that would be statistically the "best price" for consumers and GW

Its nice to come up with a pricing scheme of what we'd like to pay, but it doesn't take into consideration the health of a company. If GW charged the prices of some of the recommendations here they'd likely stagnate from a lack of capital to reinvest into the next new product or go under.

So let me see, you are saying that that Goblin Captain costs GW $30.00 Australian to make $3.00 Australian profit.

I Don't know of any other manufacturer in the history of manufacturing that operates on a 10% margin, enlighten me on others that do.

Well, I can vouch that the Australian market has retracted on average of just under 11% per annum over the last 10 years, last year alone Australia retracted with sales down by 9.4% That relates to a sale loss of 2.31 Million Pounds. While GW operated at a profit in Australia to the tune of 557,000 Pounds which means that GW stripped 2.867 Million Pounds out of its operations to post such profits, explain that?

10% net is perfectly acceptable, even healthy. Do not confuse gross and net.

Besides, even if your "source" is correct on the intrinsic costs of the materials involved, something which I have no trouble believing are very low, if perhaps not quite as low as stated, you have to factor in non-material and logistic costs before you arrive at the true figure.

Aside from all that, we know how much GW spends on making their stuff, because their accounts tell us and those figures almost exactly mirror what Lanrak has already mentioned.

People are unhappy with GW´s pricing even while their models actually cost less than a few other popular games models. Sure, you need a bit more of them.

People are unhappy when GW fires people. Which would happen more if they reduced prices as their main source of income would be reduced.

Go figure.

Finally, I don´t understand how people in the US and UK are so unhappy about it, as they pay much less than I do for example and I´m fine. You can get an army for 400 dollars online anyways. Is 400 dollars for something that lasts you years really that much? Especially seeing you can sell them for 50-70% of their original price depending on their condition, therefore paying even less in the end, when you´re done with them?

My friend plays american football, he pays that much for the insurance alone, let alone the other payments and the gear, every season. There´s not many popular hobbies that run cheaper over the years. I go to the gym and that also costs more than being a miniature hobbyist. In the end miniatures are quite a cheap hobby unless you have some uncontrolled urge to buy new stuff every 2 weeks. For that you can only blame yourself.

 Achaylus72 wrote:


So let me see, you are saying that that Goblin Captain costs GW $30.00 Australian to make $3.00 Australian profit.

I Don't know of any other manufacturer in the history of manufacturing that operates on a 10% margin, enlighten me on others that do.

That's what GW reports to its investors. The actual margin may well vary region to region but that 10% profit is what it averages out to be. Other aspects to consider is that the majority of it sales are to retailers and thus at a lower price and margin. With just over 50% of its revenue from retailers and around 35% of revenue from direct to customer sales GW itself doesn't benefit that much from it high retail prices.

The majority of oil companies, pharmaceutical companies, and even Airbus operate with an annual profit margin of around 10%, they just work in billions not millions.

 Achaylus72 wrote:

Well, I can vouch that the Australian market has retracted on average of just under 11% per annum over the last 10 years, last year alone Australia retracted with sales down by 9.4% That relates to a sale loss of 2.31 Million Pounds. While GW operated at a profit in Australia to the tune of 557,000 Pounds which means that GW stripped 2.867 Million Pounds out of its operations to post such profits, explain that?

GW's business model emphasizes maintaining that 10% margin over other considerations. That's why they've sacrificed their sales outlets, their employees, and all the opportunities for sales those things afford them. It is normally something a company only does as a short term solution to temporally prop it self up. GW just keeps doing the same thing every year because they don't really understand the consequences and are chasing "what it knows" instead of trying to provide a service and proactively run a business. GW each year has increased its per item margin, but it sells a lower volume so the revenue from that sale now has to cover a greater fraction of the overhead and tool costs for the product.

GW's strategy is effectively they'd rather sell 1 miniature for a million dollars, than a million miniatures for 2 million dollars, even though the overall effort is effectively the same. It ignores their advantage is mass production. It ignores that it takes disproportionate amounts of effort to make fewer higher priced sales. GW has been able to maintain their profits because of the relatively inelastic demand for their products, but what we've seen these last two years is that GW's hit the price point where demand is again elastic and they're shedding customers because of it. They've maintained their flat profitability by raising their prices by whatever it would take to keep their profits flat after all other factors. Its now catching up with GW and thats why their CEO stepped down.

 RunicFIN wrote:

You're just a walking cliché mate, every time I see you post it is everything that people taking your viewpoint have tried arguing many times before, with no new information to prevent it being just as irrelevant.

People are unhappy with GW´s pricing even while their models actually cost less than a few other popular games models. Sure, you need a bit more of them.

Disingenuous, in most cases to play what is considered "typical" game sizes, you need a LOT more for a game of 40K and even more for Fantasy, in fact the only games I'm even dimly aware of that have a similar model count to 40K are Historicals, which are, by and large, much cheaper.

People are unhappy when GW fires people. Which would happen more if they reduced prices as their main source of income would be reduced.

Go figure.

Are they? I think you just made that up you little tinker! You know that cutting prices doesn't necessarily mean a fall in profits or revenue right? If an increase in units sold is sufficient it can offset or even outstrip the drop. Equally, where has the idea that people "get unhappy when GW fires people come from?"

Finally, I don´t understand how people in the US and UK are so unhappy about it, as they pay much less than I do for example and I´m fine. You can get an army for 400 dollars online anyways. Is 400 dollars for something that lasts you years really that much?

The "I'm alright Jack" defence does not apply. Ever. Just because you're fine with something does not preclude other people having an issue with it, neither does it make either party right or wrong.

My friend plays american football, he pays that much for the insurance alone, let alone the other payments and the gear, every season. There´s not popular hobbies that run cheaper over the years. I go to the gym and that also costs more than being a miniature hobbyist. In the end miniatures are quite a cheap hobby unless you have some uncontrolled urge to buy new stuff every 2 weeks. For that you can only blame yourself.

In other news, things that cost more than GW include building rockets to fly to the moon and setting fire to Ferraris, what's your point? Just because something costs more money, it doesn't make GW prices frequently poor value which is the issue. Something can cost pennies but still represent poor value, or millions and represent a bargain.

 RunicFIN wrote:
People are unhappy with GW´s pricing even while their models actually cost less than a few other popular games models. Sure, you need a bit more of them.

People are unhappy when GW fires people. Which would happen more if they reduced prices as their main source of income would be reduced.

I think its more complicated than that. I think people are unhappy with GW because they see its practices are ruining the game and eroding the fan base. The pricing and employees are just the most visible causes of that dissatisfaction. The problem with prices is that the customer base is generally knowledgeable and have a reasonable estimation of GW's manufacturing cost; its also that the prices climb relatively needlessly while quality has suffered or failed to improve. Using other companies' prices to justify GW's prices is backwards, since those other companies set those prices based on data from what people were willing to pay for GW's products. GW has the advantage of mass production but fails to capitalize on it. Its poor decisions have made it more reliant on a fewer number of sales and that only forces it to further sacrifice their product's integrity.

Honestly, these days you'd have to pay me before I would even think of touching one of GW's products again.

 Azreal13 wrote:
You're just a walking cliché mate, every time I see you post it is everything that people taking your viewpoint have tried arguing many times before, with no new information to prevent it being just as irrelevant.

You should read about the actual meaning of the word cliché since you are obviously misusing it. But hey, that makes two of us. Everytime I see you post it´s everything people with your viewpoint tried arguing many times before, with no new information to prevent it being just as irrelevant. You just do the polar opposite in the pro/anti GW axis. Kettle and pot. And why should I post anything new, it´s not like it´s a requirement and many anti-GW posters don´t do it either. Can´t even count how many "too high prices/plain codices/unbalanced rules" posts I´ve seen this week alone.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Equally, where has the idea that people "get unhappy when GW fires people come from?"

There are countless threads inwhich people are unhappy about the GW "one-man store" move, one of the major reasons being people being fired. It´s true that a price drop doesn´t directly mean the need to cut staff, but if GW already has to do that with the current prices I would see it more likely that people would be let go on a global scale as the company income could ( probably would ) drop. It´s not certain but likely afaic.

In other news, things that cost more than GW include building rockets to fly to the moon and setting fire to Ferraris, what's your point? Just because something costs more money, it doesn't make GW prices frequently poor value which is the issue. Something can cost pennies but still represent poor value, or millions and represent a bargain.

GW makes the some ( if not most ) of the highest quality miniatures in existence ( except for failcast, can´t argue with that ) and yet their miniatures aren´t the most expensive ones.

 aka_mythos wrote:
I think people are unhappy with GW because they see its practices are ruining the game and eroding the fan base.

Possible, but this is where the internet community/wargaming community scale comes into play, which has been discussed before. Active forum users ( who are the ones who voice their opinions which we see mostly ) are a tiny fraction of the entire wargaming community, and it´s just as possible that 95% of the GW fanbase are happy and fine, and 5% are not.

Browsing certain forums can certainly make it seem worse, but in actuality we are indeed but a tiny drop of the total wargaming community.

This will just be yet another GW hate-train so I´ll just leave it to run it´s course. ( Not directed at you aka_mythos or anyone in particular. It´s just like I´m seeing into the future. )

 RunicFIN wrote:
GW makes the some ( if not most ) of the highest quality miniatures in existence ( except for failcast, can´t argue with that ) and yet their miniatures aren´t the most expensive ones.

Wait what. By any chance what miniatures from other companies have you bought?

 heartserenade wrote:

 RunicFIN wrote:
GW makes the some ( if not most ) of the highest quality miniatures in existence ( except for failcast, can´t argue with that ) and yet their miniatures aren´t the most expensive ones.

Wait what. By any chance what miniatures from other companies have you bought?

Privateer Press, Reaper, Malifaux, Flames of War and Scibor off the top off my head. You don´t agree that the plastic kits of GW have some of the sharpest detail and dynamic poses ( admittedly sometimes too dynamic ) ?

I guess it´s a subjective thing in the end, but aside from Failcast I can´t see how the plastic kits could get much better detail, quality and posing -wise.

 RunicFIN wrote:

 heartserenade wrote:

 RunicFIN wrote:
GW makes the some ( if not most ) of the highest quality miniatures in existence ( except for failcast, can´t argue with that ) and yet their miniatures aren´t the most expensive ones.

Wait what. By any chance what miniatures from other companies have you bought?

Privateer Press, Reaper, Malifaux, Flames of War and Scibor off the top off my head. You don´t agree that the plastic kits of GW have some of the sharpest detail and dynamic poses ( admittedly sometimes too dynamic ) ?

I guess it´s a subjective thing in the end, but aside from Failcast I can´t see how the plastic kits could get much better detail, quality and posing -wise.

I'd agree that GW plastics have some of the sharpest detail of PLASTICS on the market. Dynamic poses? Ha.
Sterngaurd have crisp detail but 5 sets of practically the same, utterly static legs.
Witch Elves are laughably over dynamic, with the jumping off rocks and hair.

Then of course the detail is utterly lacking when you compare them to say Infinity metals or resin models.

Bandai has been doing movable plastic kits with different colors for years, and they're detailed as hell.

Perry Miniatures just have as much detail quality-wise, and a whole dang lot cheaper. It's the same Perry brothers who used to worked for GW (until this year, I think).

With resin/metal, Infinity is hands down better at both being detailed and dynamic. Dark Sword miniatures have intricate sculpts as well. And they're all cheaper than GW. A metal figure from Darksword is $10, while a PLASTIC librarian is $30.

RunicFC wrote:
Browsing certain forums can certainly make it seem worse, but in actuality we are indeed but a tiny drop of the total wargaming community.

I would say perhaps at least a glass of water..

But, I think forums/blogs and the like are probably something of a litmus test for the rest of the wargaming public to some extent. Except that you get much more of a hardcore fanbase on these sites (someone who cares enough about a hobby to sign up to a forum and spend time writing about it), so if those people are complaining about a price then you could argue that the more 'casual' gaming fan, for which the games have less relative value, the pricing disparity is that much worse.

And remember, we aren't talking about price per miniature here - it's entry level price, the size of army required to play a game. I think that you get so much less complaints about pricing with other game systems must make you think that there is some kind of incongruence there with GW's current pricing policy.

 Bottle wrote:
I've recently returned to the hobby and I'm starting afresh with WHFB. The prices don't seem to bad to me. Everyone seems to want to jump right in the deep end with massive battles, of course it's going to seem expensive, but you only need 10 models a side to have hours of fun with skirmish rules. You should build slowly towards having an army, it is a collection after all, not purchase it right away.

At least that's my approach.

You can't play WFB with 10 miniatures (although by having hours of fun, I assume you mean building/painting etc?) Lots of games you can play at skirmish level though using fantasy miniatures; Mordheim, Song of Blades and Heroes, SAGA conversions etc.

Yeah Warhammers both do require more miniatures than your average skirmish game, and hence end up costing more in total.

But well, I´m fine with that as they provide me countless hours of fun and in the end being a miniature hobbyist isn´t that expensive on the grand scale of hobbies in a year to year basis. Sure it stings to start a new army.. Ofcourse a price reduction would be nice, but here´s hoping...

 RunicFIN wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
You're just a walking cliché mate, every time I see you post it is everything that people taking your viewpoint have tried arguing many times before, with no new information to prevent it being just as irrelevant.

You should read about the actual meaning of the word cliché since you are obviously misusing it. But hey, that makes two of us. Everytime I see you post it´s everything people with your viewpoint tried arguing many times before, with no new information to prevent it being just as irrelevant. You just do the polar opposite in the pro/anti GW axis. Kettle and pot. And why should I post anything new, it´s not like it´s a requirement and many anti-GW posters don´t do it either. Can´t even count how many "too high prices/plain codices/unbalanced rules" posts I´ve seen this week alone.

No, I'm very comfortable with the use of the word, and just to be clear, I'm using it in the context of "a thought or opinion that betrays a lack of original thought." Which is lifted from a dictionary definition. If you want to see me post some new arguments, post some new points of your own, but at this point why would I a) change my stance in the light of no new information or b) reconstruct perfectly valid rebuttals to arguments and assertions which are wheeled out every single time this topic or ones like it are wheeled out?

 Azreal13 wrote:
Equally, where has the idea that people "get unhappy when GW fires people come from?"

There are countless threads inwhich people are unhappy about the GW "one-man store" move, one of the major reasons being people being fired. It´s true that a price drop doesn´t directly mean the need to cut staff, but if GW already has to do that with the current prices I would see it more likely that people would be let go on a global scale as the company income could ( probably would ) drop. It´s not certain but likely afaic.

I think people dislike one man stores because of the impact it has on their gaming time. Personally I'm not going to get too up in arms about people getting fired for underperforming, I mean, sure, it's pretty irritating for people if a manager they like gets the boot but GW are far from the only, or worst, offenders when it comes to treating it's frontline, bottom tier plebs poorly, nor treating them as disposable. Perhaps someone to be annoyed at them for, but not really something to single them out for specifically. Besides, you're arguing against price drops, whereas most people I see simply want better value - which can be achieved much more economically. That, and essentially the only reason GW's can't afford a price drop is because they made the somewhat dubious decision to alienate the third party retail channel and spend a large portion of their money on running their own chain, which is, you know, not our problem.

In other news, things that cost more than GW include building rockets to fly to the moon and setting fire to Ferraris, what's your point? Just because something costs more money, it doesn't make GW prices frequently poor value which is the issue. Something can cost pennies but still represent poor value, or millions and represent a bargain.

GW makes the some ( if not most ) of the highest quality miniatures in existence ( except for failcast, can´t argue with that ) and yet their miniatures aren´t the most expensive ones.

The company line is not an argument. GW try to tell us they make some of the finest miniatures in the world, and apparently some people like yourself believe that. What GW actually do is produce some very well executed kits from a technical point of view, but I like my models to look pretty and GW don't have a huge success rate at that, what they do have is a very high rate of release which gives that impression. I've argued elsewhere that in terms of aesthetics, Out of every 5 kits they release, perhaps 1 is awesome, 3 are safe (things that were always going to be ok looking or are riffs in existing designs) and 1 terrible one.

All ways up, this isn't relevant to the discussion at hand, because "highest quality" in miniatures terms is a difficult term to precisely define, and largely subjective so I guess if you sincerely believe they make the best, then that's the opinion you're entitled to. I choose to look at some of the other manufacturers bringing out a much higher average finished quality and disagree.

With regard to the "best miniatures in the world" argument, my problem is that their prices are through the roof even for ugly models that haven't been updated.

Apparently, these are worth £7.50 per model:


And these are worth £10 per model:


I'm glad they only charge high prices for really lovely models.

 Azreal13 wrote:


No, I'm very comfortable with the use of the word, and just to be clear, I'm using it in the context of "a thought or opinion that betrays a lack of original thought." Which is lifted from a dictionary definition. If you want to see me post some new arguments, post some new points of your own, but at this point why would I a) change my stance in the light of no new information or b) reconstruct perfectly valid rebuttals to arguments and assertions which are wheeled out every single time this topic or ones like it are wheeled out?

And why would I change my stance? Seeing quite many of those opinions that betray a lack of original thought on both sides. Never asked you to post anything new, just pointed out there´s nothing new coming from you either so you´re being a bit hypocritical pointing that out about others. I find you a walking cliché of an anti-gw oriented poster just the same, and neither is better than the other. Like I said, pot and kettle. So yeah, I don´t even know why talk about this and fail to see any point.

For the record though, I stand on quite neutral ground and have stated many times in vaurious threads my views which include almost asmuch bad as good. I just also understand GW´s side of the coin and don´t blindly blame everything they do on being greedy, malicious and other ridicilous things some of the more extreme anti-gw folk like to fantasize about. Also, having unbalanced rules or high starting cost in a game doesn´t induce kneejerking/quitting reaction for me, I have a good time every single game regardless, both in GW´s games and others ( WM being the only other one at the moment though. ) I just adapt to the unbalanced things in ( all ) games in a way that I will do well, infact I find it fun most of the time. Some people don´t, just the way it is, neither is better than the other in the end. Allround I feel I get more than enough entertainment for the money I spend on miniatures and other supplies. I play almost weekly and paint daily.

 Azreal13 wrote:

The company line is not an argument. GW try to tell us they make some of the finest miniatures in the world, and apparently some people like yourself believe that. What GW actually do is produce some very well executed kits from a technical point of view, but I like my models to look pretty and GW don't have a huge success rate at that, what they do have is a very high rate of release which gives that impression. I've argued elsewhere that in terms of aesthetics, Out of every 5 kits they release, perhaps 1 is awesome, 3 are safe (things that were always going to be ok looking or are riffs in existing designs) and 1 terrible one.

It´s a perfectly fine argument when we´re talking about miniatures and their quality, manufactured by GW. What the hell. It´s -the- argument of said subject. You are saying GW has a bad success rate of producing pretty models. I almost commented on that but noticed you apparently realize it´s subjective. I never said they produce -the- best miniatures, just "some of the best." Sure they have some bad ones but all manufacturers do. Is your opinion that GW just makes average quality miniatures, or even poor ones, then? I dunno, I would find such a statement a bit ridicilous to be honest.

 vipoid wrote:
With regard to the "best miniatures in the world" argument

RunicFIN wrote:GW makes the some ( if not most ) of the highest quality miniatures

But yeah, those aren´t worth the price, the ones you linked.

 vipoid wrote:
With regard to the "best miniatures in the world" argument, my problem is that their prices are through the roof even for ugly models that haven't been updated.

For one moment then I thought.. What in God's name has happened to Darkness Eternal !

 RunicFIN wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:


No, I'm very comfortable with the use of the word, and just to be clear, I'm using it in the context of "a thought or opinion that betrays a lack of original thought." Which is lifted from a dictionary definition. If you want to see me post some new arguments, post some new points of your own, but at this point why would I a) change my stance in the light of no new information or b) reconstruct perfectly valid rebuttals to arguments and assertions which are wheeled out every single time this topic or ones like it are wheeled out?

And why would I change my stance? Seeing quite many of those opinions that betray a lack of original thought on both sides. Never asked you to post anything new, just pointed out there´s nothing new coming from you either so you´re being a bit hypocritical pointing that out about others. I find you a walking cliché of an anti-gw oriented poster just the same, and neither is better than the other. Like I said, pot and kettle. So yeah, I don´t even know why talk about this and fail to see any point.

The thing is. I'm not anti-GW. As I've often said, I take each action and release on it's own merits, if that gives the impression I'm anti-GW? Well, that tells it's own story doesn't it?

There's no lack of original thought here, I can assure you, just the repetition of ideas that I've already formed. You may have heard a phrase occasionally cited by posters with regard to GW release policy "they'll buy what we make, we don't make what they'll buy?" Well, I coined that phrase, not being bigheaded about it, just illustrating that I am generating at least some original content, plus while people continue to post the same old defense of GW, as you did initially, you'll get approximately the same repose from me. You'll notice I was responding to a post of yours in the first instance? So, to reduce it to the most basic, playground terms - you started it. . You, and I'm afraid I'm going to touch on something you're clearly touchy about, have a 5 year old account, yet have only recently appear to have started posting regularly, surely in all the time you were lurking you saw people wheeling out the same arguments as you have done? While you're perfectly entitled to feel that way, what did you expect to add to the conversation by trotting out some very well trodden, slightly tired looking, arguments that have been done to death? Other than picking a fight of course, which is my strong suspicion given your last behaviour and while this will be the last post you'll get from me responding to the subject.

 Azreal13 wrote:

The company line is not an argument. GW try to tell us they make some of the finest miniatures in the world, and apparently some people like yourself believe that. What GW actually do is produce some very well executed kits from a technical point of view, but I like my models to look pretty and GW don't have a huge success rate at that, what they do have is a very high rate of release which gives that impression. I've argued elsewhere that in terms of aesthetics, Out of every 5 kits they release, perhaps 1 is awesome, 3 are safe (things that were always going to be ok looking or are riffs in existing designs) and 1 terrible one.

It´s a perfectly fine argument when we´re talking about miniatures and their quality, manufactured by GW. What the hell. It´s -the- argument of said subject.

You are saying GW has a bad success rate of producing pretty models. I almost commented on that but noticed you apparently realize it´s subjective.

I never said they produce -the- best miniatures, just "some of the best." Sure they have some bad ones but all manufacturers do. Is your opinion that GW just makes average quality miniatures, or even poor ones, then? I dunno, I would find such a statement a bit ridicilous to be honest.

No the thread isn't "do GW make the best miniatures?" It is "what prices should they sell their product for." The inference being they're charging too much, or the flip side, and the attitude I take, which is often what they're selling isn't of sufficient quality to justify the price. Not that it couldn't be worth what they ask, just that too often for me, and evidently many others, that the product is just too meh when the price tag is taken into account. Aesthetically, yes, I'd say that many of GW's models are essentially average looking, they can't do women, in fact they struggle to do human, a lot of their larger stuff crosses the line between suitably OTT and camp/pantomime (moar skulls!!!) and many of the larger kits are also a bit limited in terms of poseability and options (classic case being Imperial Knight vs Dreamforge Leviathan)

Let me be clear, I'm a long way from turning my back on GW, but I sure as hell avoid giving them cash for any of the dumb gak they do, I don't buy models from them unless I think they're the nicest model to represent the unit I'm building. I'm currently building a small CSM force, but my Obliterators are non-GW entirely, because I think the official ones suck, my basic Marines will ultimately be a hybrid mix of about 5 different GW/FW kits because the CSM Tac Squad looks outdated and silly, but the Heldrake will be just as is because a giant mechanical dragon is just glorious, and even if I don't necessarily think it belongs in a CSM force, I still want to give it table time (and now it's rules have been revised, I won't be accused of cheese.) so that, in essence, encapsulates the GW range for me, three units, one of which has no chance of me ever buying for it's sheer fugliness, one that needs ""fixing" but isn't irredeemable, and one that is fine straight out of the box. What you have to remember is GW release the same number of kits in a month that many manufacturers release in a quarter, consequently the rubbish ones tend to disappear into the background and the great ones stick in the memory.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pacific wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
With regard to the "best miniatures in the world" argument, my problem is that their prices are through the roof even for ugly models that haven't been updated.

For one moment then I thought.. What in God's name has happened to Darkness Eternal !

You too?

I even considered suggesting he change avatar in case of mistaken identity!

Well at least in my experience I buy almost exclusively overseas, give you an example.

I bought the Dark Vengeance limited edition from Britian in 2012 when it was released and after postage it cost me $80 Australian saving me $85.00
I bought two Imperial Baneblades from Britain and after postage it came to $150 Australian saving me $180 Australian
I bought 100 Chaos Cultists with free delivery and it came to $80 Australian saving me $180 Australian.
Just bought two boxes of those Blightkings from Britain with free postage cost me total $90 Australian saving me $104 Australian.
I can get any standard Fantasy/40k Battle force for roughly $88.00 each and with initial $5.00 combined postage saving me roughly $70+ per box.

These are just a few examples, it is a bloody shame I can't justify paying almost 100%+ more from my local Indie or GW retailer.

I have spent $10 grand+ all up and 98% of that from overseas suppliers.

Ironically GW still makes a profit from me after their mark up from production costs to retail costs.

Well one thing we can all agree on is that GW kits are vastly overpriced.

And not just there kits either but things like paint's, codex's and dice/templates/measures are far pricier than they should be.

 Azreal13 wrote:
There's no lack of original thought here, I can assure you, just the repetition of ideas that I've already formed. You may have heard a phrase occasionally cited by posters with regard to GW release policy "they'll buy what we make, we don't make what they'll buy?" Well, I coined that phrase, not being bigheaded about it, just illustrating that I am generating at least some original content, plus while people continue to post the same old defense of GW, as you did initially, you'll get approximately the same repose from me. You'll notice I was responding to a post of yours in the first instance? So, to reduce it to the most basic, playground terms - you started it. . You, and I'm afraid I'm going to touch on something you're clearly touchy about, have a 5 year old account, yet have only recently appear to have started posting regularly, surely in all the time you were lurking you saw people wheeling out the same arguments as you have done? While you're perfectly entitled to feel that way, what did you expect to add to the conversation by trotting out some very well trodden, slightly tired looking, arguments that have been done to death? Other than picking a fight of course, which is my strong suspicion given your last behaviour and while this will be the last post you'll get from me responding to the subject.

I´ll just shrug to this as I still don´t understand why new arguments would be required to discuss things. I do understand it might seem useless to you for example, but it shouldn´t be off your purse in any way if people do that. It happens daily. I don´t believe I´ve seen many people doubt the actuality of Tom Kirbys statements regarding market research on a concretical level, which is what I did and still do, so there´s one rare if not new argument altogether. Anyway, your point about lack of original tought isn´t valid in the end, besides most thoughts aren´t new at all. I´m not touchy regarding ( something related to accounts? ) but before you indirectly demonstrated that you think people with lower post counts are somehow below high post count folk when it comes to credibility and I demonstrated in a sarcastic manner that perhaps people who joined the forum earlier are above people who joined later, just to point out both are pretty dumb ways of judging someones credibility. Only I wasn´t being serious about it. I have been active on the forums but mostly I have posted to the painting and army list sections, as I know what the general discussions can get like.

I have mostly been defending my views ( which is what I find myself doing again ) so I´d say the attacking side is the one picking a fight. Now for example, you opened up with a personal insult ( walking cliche ) and if that isn´t picking a fight then I don´t know what is. While you already stated this is the last bit on the subject I´m afraid I have to make sure it is so, as I´m gonna have to put you on ignore for the sake of having a better time reading these forums next to still not seeing any real point to discussing this... whatever this even is really. You can approach me via PM since asfar as I know ignore doesn´t block those, which is probably the right course of action anyway for an OT discussion like this. I´m not interested in talking about peoples personal qualities but rather the subjects in topics, so I´ve taken the habit of ignoring anyone who seemingly derails things into the forementioned. Now for example I commented on the topic, and it got twisted into this. Sorry for the OT, and bye for now.

 Azreal13 wrote:

Let me be clear, I'm a long way from turning my back on GW, but I sure as hell avoid giving them cash for any of the dumb gak they do, I don't buy models from them unless I think they're the nicest model to represent the unit I'm building. I'm currently building a small CSM force, but my Obliterators are non-GW entirely, because I think the official ones suck, my basic Marines will ultimately be a hybrid mix of about 5 different GW/FW kits because the CSM Tac Squad looks outdated and silly, but the Heldrake will be just as is because a giant mechanical dragon is just glorious, and even if I don't necessarily think it belongs in a CSM force, I still want to give it table time (and now it's rules have been revised, I won't be accused of cheese.) so that, in essence, encapsulates the GW range for me, three units, one of which has no chance of me ever buying for it's sheer fugliness, one that needs ""fixing" but isn't irredeemable, and one that is fine straight out of the box. What you have to remember is GW release the same number of kits in a month that many manufacturers release in a quarter, consequently the rubbish ones tend to disappear into the background and the great ones stick in the memory.

I can understand your view and in a way admire your drive to get models that look exactly like you want them to look.

I think if they sold squads at $10-$20 and vehicles at 20-30, they'd still turn a decent profit with more boxes being sold. I could easily stomach a box a week at that price. At its current pricing, i buy online from third parties every one or two months, the time between purchases even longer due to the online price being just less than or equal to buying direct from GW, shipping time, and pursuit of other interests when the hobby doesn't fill my time

Their sell price should be exactly the way Warlord Games prices their stuff. Bolt Action is analogous to 40k and the games like Hail Caesar and Black Powder are similar enough to WHFB.

50 guys, a tank and usually a transport sells for $128 for Bolt Action and is a normal-sized army @ 1,000 points. That's what 40k should be doing - even if the normal game size was say 2,000 points, that's still a little over $250 which is perfectly reasonable. Instead, you often spend more than that for the bare minimum force you can play outside of demo games.

$35 rulebook, $25 armybook/codex. Troops about $25, Vehicles about $20-30, characters $15. Decent sized units, not crap like giving 10 guys when you need at least 20 (WHFB). Starter armies at $130 for every faction.

The comparison to Warlord is apt. GW actually should be able to do better than them given GW's available capital, owning their own milling and injection machines and a potentially higher volume of sales. They should be able to handily outcompete Warlord on price.

 frozenwastes wrote:
The comparison to Warlord is apt. GW actually should be able to do better than them given GW's available capital, owning their own milling and injection machines and a potentially higher volume of sales. They should be able to handily outcompete Warlord on price.

They should, but even if they did it the same (hell even a little bit more per box) it would be infinitely better than what they do now.

I agree. Having a playable army out of a box for ~$110 would help GW attract new players. Of course, this would require Gee Dubs to either lower their game sizes or the cost of their boxes.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
I agree. Having a playable army out of a box for ~$110 would help GW attract new players. Of course, this would require Gee Dubs to either lower their game sizes or the cost of their boxes.

The game size doesn't have to be lowered that much, I mean Bolt Action's size is a typical 40k game just without a lot of the vehicles (only 1 tank allowed per platoon, basically per detachment), the problem is that a bare minimum starting 40k army can cost upwards of $300 even before you factor in the rules. I still remember looking at a 750 point Necron force for a league and it running over $300. $300 for a barely playable force! Or let's not even get into things like being able to get an entire Undead army with over 100 figures from Mantic Games for around the same cost as a couple of boxes of GW skeletons that barely made two units.

They don't have to have the game smaller like Bolt Action being 1,000 points, the 1,000 points can just be the entry point and they can still encourage a lot of figures, just make prices reasonable instead of trying to just frontload the cost of everything.

Kirby mind meld begins:

If anything GW should crank up the prices even higher. The cost to entry are high, but are they really high enough? If their typical customer is going to make a large up front purchase and then maybe buy something a couple times a year until they disappear, GW needs to get as much money out of each customer before they quit.

People should feel honored and privileged that they even have the opportunity to hope to be able to afford the "jewel like objects of magic and wonder that are Citadel miniatures."

Forge World demonstrates that the walking wallets can afford to puke out a bit more money than they have been. So prices should continue to be increased with every new release at an even higher rate. And thanks to unbound every product can be pressed into the hands of every customer who wanders into the single employee sales kiosks-- sorry I mean hobby centres!

The games aren't real games but just an idea GW uses to sell people on the idea of having a larger collection, so if they really accept that people don't actually need a collection large enough to play but only need to attempt to get it before they finally quit, then GW can raise the prices even further and people will spend the same amount of money on less product before they quit without ever really experiencing the game as promoted in WD Weekly.

Does it really matter if the typical chump pays $500+ and gets 500 points rather than 1000 for the money? The end result is the same-- they'll quit without ever getting to a full army and GW will have gotten the money. GW's real customers don't actually play their games, their hobby is collecting, after all. The new mantra for GW pricing should be a dollar a point. At least to start. Once GW has pushed the price up to that they can revisit the idea of further increases on new products.

The model count of all kits should probably be reduced to five models. WFB players can then enjoy buying each rank of their units individually. And 40k collectors have already shown how much they enjoy the 5 model elite boxes. Less models for the same money is the way of the future. Lowers costs as smaller sprues mean less tooling costs and it gives those who aspire to make a full sized army more individual products to purchase.

Since the actual hobby is buying Citadel Miniatures and not miniature wargaming, it's a win win for everyone!

Kirby mind meld ends.

---

1 dollar = 1 point.
I'm pretty sure fantasy already averages out that way with the Australian pricing scheme...

Some armies and kits can work out higher than that now. Many more at Australian/NZ pricing (and Canadian to a slightly lesser degree).

I'm not 100% sure how right GW is with their pricing model. It's possible that there is this core customer base that will keep buying, and keep buying enough to keep GW going at a dollar a point in all markets.

To be fair to GW, Australia is the most expensive country in the world to maintain a business.

On that their prices have to be much higher, and it is not only Games-Workshop that has huge mark ups than same products that can be bought from overseas.

The range of mark-ups can range from 50% to well over 500%. Case in point Australian made products can be purchased from overseas at a vastly cheaper rate.

Example, a woman I know purchases sports compression gear from the USA, the stuff is made right here in Australia and gets it 75% cheaper than a local sports store selling the same garment.

As I said in my previous post, I would love to purchase locally, but can't.

 master of ordinance wrote:
Well one thing we can all agree on is that GW kits are vastly overpriced.

And not just there kits either but things like paint's, codex's and dice/templates/measures are far pricier than they should be.

we can all agree on this???
i don't agree...
i feel like i get my value out of everything i buy...

i don't claim to know what the prices should be, but i have said it over and over in discussions here...
nothing inspires me to paint like a Space Marine does...
i own minis from at least half of the companies on the market, but it is the Space Marine that makes me want to paint...

when i look at a box of Sternguard (bought from a discounter because i'm not stupid, and will save money if it is possible), at about $8 a mini, and then i look at one of my beautiful Studio McVey LE's that cost $20, i am more than happy to pay $8 for a model i want to paint, while the McVey mini gathers dust...
the McVey mini is cool, and i'm happy to have it in my collection, but the Sternguard gets me excited to paint, so $8 a pop sure as hell doesn't seem "vastly overcosted" to me...

cheers
jah

As a person who designs precision injection molded plastic assembly lines similar to GW's, from a business standpoint their prices make no sense in a non-monopoly. They have no assembly costs, all their kits can be 100% sorted packaged and plastic wrapped by automation and their QC doesn't have to be half as rigorous as many of the med device lines I've worked on. Add that to the fact that their design overheads aren't even for engineers, and the potential market is enormous compared to some industries... They're literally just price gouging because they're terrible business people. Their kits could be half as expensive as they are now, they could literally demolish the 3rd party counterfeit market and easily compete with warms hordes by being the "big epic scale" war game that costs the same for more models.

That's the problem with being as beholden to shareholders as they are. Shareholders have the patience of rodents-they don't want a sustainable, steady growth business plan they want sharp gains every quarter or they'll panic and sell.

I would even support their prices if it went back to circa 2002 levels. For instance, the most I would pay for a Tactical Squad would be $35, and I would expect it to come with all available options (e.g. 1 of each special and heavy weapon, extra bits for the Sergeant).

The overall problem isn't so much the sell price it's the amount needed. If I'm paying $150 or more, I expect to get a good amount of points in the game, not like 500 points.

The price of the rules though is just out and out ridiculous. There is zero reason those books need to be hardcover except to justify the high price, and absolutely no reason it should be that much for the rules period.

One thing I notice a lot in their verbiage is they focus on the parts. For example if you look at a typical box it'll say some crap like "This box contains 85 highly detailed plastic pieces..." and then later on it tells you how much you can actually make. So they are being intentionally misleading by claiming the price is due to a high amount of pieces, except those pieces only let you make 10 complete figures.

I like those extra bits, they are great for conversion work.

Besides, there is nothing stopping you from seeling extra stuff on Ebay or swap with friends for stuff you need.

Give you an example, I love putting Space Marine helms on my Chaos stuff, paint them blue and whooshka I have decapitated Ultramraine trophies.

See.

Or, as an alternative, cheaper kits without superfluous bits I might use or might not, and a bits service where I could buy the bits I wanted when I wanted them?

Or a more modular system where I can buy core models and then buy the add ons to make them into some sort of sub specialist? So I buy a box of ten marines with nothing but bolters, then I can buy a devastator kit or assault marine kit, or a veteran kit with all the whizzy bits on the sprue, keeping the cost of core models down but still allowing the variety for those who want it.

I would really like GW to lower their prices.
The thing is they make great products and great games (in my opinion anyways). I am not sure if the products are worth the price they charge though but I can't see them lowering their prices only maintaining the prices they are at now is all we can really hope.

They have reached a point where they ARE loosing customers due to their prices. If they lowered their prices they would most definitely attract more customers and I would be buying more stuff.

Well, seeing as I haven't yet written this in a post today..

The issue isn't price, it is value. Value is a much easier issue to address and potentially much less traumatic to the bottom line than price cuts.

For instance, the eponymous Tactical Squad. I believe one of GW's better value offerings, but imagine how much better value it would seem if they included a Devastator heavy weapon sprue, meaning you could build it with all the options and have the guns spare. Not just a random collection of extra heads and shoulder pads, but extra pieces with a real tangible application?

I don't recall the sprue layout, but assuming a re-cut wasn't needed, this would add a tiny amount to the production costs of the Tac Squad, but would give the impression of much better value to the customer, and a likely uptick in goodwill because of it.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Well, seeing as I haven't yet written this in a post today..

The issue isn't price, it is value. Value is a much easier issue to address and potentially much less traumatic to the bottom line than price cuts.

For instance, the eponymous Tactical Squad. I believe one of GW's better value offerings, but imagine how much better value it would seem if they included a Devastator heavy weapon sprue, meaning you could build it with all the options and have the guns spare. Not just a random collection of extra heads and shoulder pads, but extra pieces with a real tangible application?

I don't recall the sprue layout, but assuming a re-cut wasn't needed, this would add a tiny amount to the production costs of the Tac Squad, but would give the impression of much better value to the customer, and a likely uptick in goodwill because of it.

Man, at $30-$40 per basic squad, I'd want all wargear choices as well as detailed plastic bases and maybe some man sized terrain to hide behind. THAT would be what I call value. As it is, at that price, I can't stomach buying more than $50 worth a month. I spend less on outside food every month.
Can't wait to get myself a 3D printer. I'll be printing my own models to paint. They're currently still a bit pricey considering the technology that goes into them. But as soon as the cost of infrastructure is paid off, the price is going to drop fast.

Fair enough, value IS subjective at the end of the day, the key for the retailer is to hit the highest price point where the majority people are still happy to pay it.

GW appear to have passed that point at some point in he last couple of years.

Azreal13 wrote:Well, seeing as I haven't yet written this in a post today..

The issue isn't price, it is value. Value is a much easier issue to address and potentially much less traumatic to the bottom line than price cuts.

I think you're definitely talking sense here.

I listened to an interview with the guy who owns Victrix (maker of historical plastics) and he was talking about the pricing issue per kit and how things people may only buy one or two off just need to cost more. So where did he end up with the reletively recent ancient Greek release?

£22.95 for the regular kits and £29.95 for the ones that will sell at lower volumes. The key difference beyond the price: Normal kits have 48 figures and the expensive ones have 56.

The exact opposite approach of GW's 5 model elite boxes. And Victrix is able to do this without owning his own tooling machines and having to outsource much of the production process.

GW likely can't survive slicing the price of kits, but they can revisit their contents and sprue design going forward. The Blightkings are a perfect example:

5 models with 21 weapon arms with the 11 torsos and 17 head options. All they had to do was find the room for 5 more legs and the kit could have been released at 10 models per box. 11 torsos for 5 models is just wasting sprue space to intentionally give your customer less models for the money.

Over the weekend I got bored and so I decided to find out how GW has fared since January 2007 to October 2014 within the Australian Market.

What I got was a shock at how bad the situation has befallen GW and why it posted sales loss after sales loss.

During this period GW started out with 28 stores (previous WD magazines did not list GW Stores).

From 28 stores its gross expansion rose to 53 stores, meaning they opened a further 25 stores, however in that time they have closed 16 stores.

A net increase of just 9 stores in under 4 years, however the bulk of those stores were Hobby Stores and one Battle Bunker a massive reduction of the size of their stores.

From January 2007 to October 2014 has had at various times 425 Independent stockists reaching a peak of 290 independent stockists.

Now the barely have 90 independent stockist and for what ever the reason GW has lost 335 independent stockists that no longer sell their product.

I can tell of what I have been told and that GW is looking at posting a record sales loss for their mid-year reporting period, it is expected that they are looking at over 1.5 million pounds.

They are looking at a total year of over 3 million pounds, that means that GW again needs to cut over 3 million pounds out of its operational expenditure to make an operational profit.

GW standard practice now is to cut costs yearly rather than try and sell more product.

 Achaylus72 wrote:

I can tell of what I have been told and that GW is looking at posting a record sales loss for their mid-year reporting period, it is expected that they are looking at over 1.5 million pounds.

They are looking at a total year of over 3 million pounds, that means that GW again needs to cut over 3 million pounds out of its operational expenditure to make an operational profit.

GW standard practice now is to cut costs yearly rather than try and sell more product.

Forgive me, your phrasing is a little unusual, but are you saying someone has told you that GW are tracking to post a loss for the first half of this year?

 Azreal13 wrote:

 Achaylus72 wrote:

I can tell of what I have been told and that GW is looking at posting a record sales loss for their mid-year reporting period, it is expected that they are looking at over 1.5 million pounds.

They are looking at a total year of over 3 million pounds, that means that GW again needs to cut over 3 million pounds out of its operational expenditure to make an operational profit.

GW standard practice now is to cut costs yearly rather than try and sell more product.

Forgive me, your phrasing is a little unusual, but are you saying someone has told you that GW are tracking to post a loss for the first half of this year?

Sorry for the confusion. What I meant was that following on from the full year report of 2013/14 which saw a full year sales loss of over 2 million pounds, the next half year report for the later half of 2014 will see a massive half year sales loss of 1.5 million pounds.
Also the following full year report of 2014/15 will reveal a massive 3 million pound + sales loss in their forward projections. Incidently will see GW go under the 10 million pounds of total sales for the first time in its history. So this again would mean that GW has to gut a further 3 million pounds out of its operational side of things to post a false profit. GW only know one thing to make the investors happy and that is rather sell more product they slash and burn their operational regime year in and year out, they know no other way, it is entrenched policy.

Question is are they going to shut down in the year future if they don't change direction?

 Achaylus72 wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

 Achaylus72 wrote:

I can tell of what I have been told and that GW is looking at posting a record sales loss for their mid-year reporting period, it is expected that they are looking at over 1.5 million pounds.

They are looking at a total year of over 3 million pounds, that means that GW again needs to cut over 3 million pounds out of its operational expenditure to make an operational profit.

GW standard practice now is to cut costs yearly rather than try and sell more product.

Forgive me, your phrasing is a little unusual, but are you saying someone has told you that GW are tracking to post a loss for the first half of this year?

Sorry for the confusion. What I meant was that following on from the full year report of 2013/14 which saw a full year sales loss of over 2 million pounds, the next half year report for the later half of 2014 will see a massive half year sales loss of 1.5 million pounds.
Also the following full year report of 2014/15 will reveal a massive 3 million pound + sales loss in their forward projections. Incidently will see GW go under the 10 million pounds of total sales for the first time in its history. So this again would mean that GW has to gut a further 3 million pounds out of its operational side of things to post a false profit. GW only know one thing to make the investors happy and that is rather sell more product they slash and burn their operational regime year in and year out, they know no other way, it is entrenched policy.

Eh? Where on earth are you getting this from?

It his opinion, although he appeared to phrase it as some sort of inside news, based on extrapolating their recent couple of reports, as far as I can tell.

kerikhaos wrote:Question is are they going to shut down in the year future if they don't change direction?

In a year? No. In the "near" future? The answer changes depending on your definition of near and your definition of shut down, but still likely no.

They'll continue on their managed decline, prioritizing protecting their margins over supporting their revenue and unless they get a huge revenue shock, they'll be able to keep doing so. You can see why in people's signatures when they list multiple armies of thousands of points each. There are probably enough people willing to keep paying what GW is asking even at FW prices for plastic miniatures. Instead of having 5000 pts of this and 4000 pts of that, we'll see people with 2000 and 1500 but having paid the same amount of money.

 frozenwastes wrote:

kerikhaos wrote:Question is are they going to shut down in the year future if they don't change direction?

In a year? No. In the "near" future? The answer changes depending on your definition of near and your definition of shut down, but still likely no.

They'll continue on their managed decline, prioritizing protecting their margins over supporting their revenue and unless they get a huge revenue shock, they'll be able to keep doing so. You can see why in people's signatures when they list multiple armies of thousands of points each. There are probably enough people willing to keep paying what GW is asking even at FW prices for plastic miniatures. Instead of having 5000 pts of this and 4000 pts of that, we'll see people with 2000 and 1500 but having paid the same amount of money.

What makes you think it's a managed decline? Their costs dropped slower than their revenue. Also why on earth would any company want to be in a managed decline in a market that they not only used to have a near monopoly on, but one that is expanding by double digit percentages YOY?

 Daedleh wrote:

 frozenwastes wrote:

kerikhaos wrote:Question is are they going to shut down in the year future if they don't change direction?

In a year? No. In the "near" future? The answer changes depending on your definition of near and your definition of shut down, but still likely no.

They'll continue on their managed decline, prioritizing protecting their margins over supporting their revenue and unless they get a huge revenue shock, they'll be able to keep doing so. You can see why in people's signatures when they list multiple armies of thousands of points each. There are probably enough people willing to keep paying what GW is asking even at FW prices for plastic miniatures. Instead of having 5000 pts of this and 4000 pts of that, we'll see people with 2000 and 1500 but having paid the same amount of money.

What makes you think it's a managed decline? Their costs dropped slower than their revenue. Also why on earth would any company want to be in a managed decline in a market that they not only used to have a near monopoly on, but one that is expanding by double digit percentages YOY?

Because their management is insane and arrogant and think that they still have a near monopoly. A constant stream of new products isn't a bad thing but when it's all very overpriced for what you get, plus the expensive rules and a lack of caring about writing concise or balanced rules...

I just find it hard to believe the peeps in charge are such plonked. To what end will this play out having this kind of business mind? Isn't it obvious they are losing power under the GW hood??

 Daedleh wrote:

 frozenwastes wrote:

kerikhaos wrote:Question is are they going to shut down in the year future if they don't change direction?

In a year? No. In the "near" future? The answer changes depending on your definition of near and your definition of shut down, but still likely no.

They'll continue on their managed decline, prioritizing protecting their margins over supporting their revenue and unless they get a huge revenue shock, they'll be able to keep doing so. You can see why in people's signatures when they list multiple armies of thousands of points each. There are probably enough people willing to keep paying what GW is asking even at FW prices for plastic miniatures. Instead of having 5000 pts of this and 4000 pts of that, we'll see people with 2000 and 1500 but having paid the same amount of money.

What makes you think it's a managed decline? Their costs dropped slower than their revenue. Also why on earth would any company want to be in a managed decline in a market that they not only used to have a near monopoly on, but one that is expanding by double digit percentages YOY?

It's considered a managed decline because they are still fighting against it. If it wasn't managed, they would be in the red a year ago if not sooner. I doubt they want to decline, but the company is failing nonetheless because of mismanagement and dartboard marketing.

Yes, "managed" doesn't mean intentional. It means they're doing the best they can to control a decline they see happening anyway. Sometimes industry insiders get it wrong. I don't know how many times Ryan Dancy (ex Wizards of the Coast guy) has predicted the end of table top gaming and been wrong.

I think GW is making the wrong choice going after protecting margins over their market share. But it is what they are doing.