66057
Post by: jcrone2
So, before you blast, let me clarify.
I have been taking a look comparing models from different places, and while GW prices seem high to me initially, after some consideration they don't seem that bad as a whole.
std troops
-Lets take a simple box of space marines for example...37.50...call it 40 bucks...is $4/per model...
-Compare to mantic enforcers...you get them at 2.30/model..almost half the price...
-Now compare them to Dark potential...standard unit box of 7 is 60 bucks... 8.60/model!!
------>When you factor in the quality vs cost factor...does not seem too bad...maybe I'm wrong. Lets continue.
Large size
GW model, say hive tyrant is around $50....land raider at $75......so..................................$50-75
-take on of the similar sized dragons off of reapers site and he is anywhere between $40-70....
-Banelegion banebeast Ophius, Gorgon Lord the war store................................. .............. $50
-Although I cannot speak for the pathfinder quality, I know GWs models are very nice.
Single std size models
Here I will say theyre gak cra because they can be wanting you to pay $15-20 for a single std size model just because he is 'speshal' or something........not even worth comparison.
Also, a couple of the certain units they have seem high based on lower number need in an army,,,,,,as if they take advantage of unit power to jack price....(terminators at $10 a piece) and then turn around and not give the opposite courtesy (such as making gaunts a little cheaper because you need more)
So I make the challenge that the overwhelming thought that GW products, while a little pricey, are not as bad as they seem. The condition that changes the opinion is that people want giant armies, in which to play the games, which makes sense. So it's not that their product is too crazy overpriced....but that the price of a collection.....army certainly adds up.
Thoughts?
Lets not talk about forge world.
37700
Post by: Ascalam
Actually it's getting to the point that FW is barely more expensive, and generally better looking.
I'm looking at placing a hefty FW order for my Nurgle force, and if we forget the shipping the price would be near identical for the 'standard' models...
As to standard GW, they are spendy. I still buy them, as they haven't yet become too spendy to justify (though like you said the single figure prices are a touch much ) but there will come a point where it is no longer worth it, which will be sad since i've been with 40K since its inception..
I have more expensive hobbies. As long as the price is still justifiable by the return i have no huge problem.
I would, of course, like to see a price drop though  Wouldn't we all 
53375
Post by: hotsauceman1
It is true, I think of models like scourges and other things that ar 25-30 dollers, that is potentiall 5-6$ a model with left over toys. If these came in blisters, people would be applaoding their cheapness.
14070
Post by: SagesStone
*cough*
1021
Post by: AesSedai
Hi, 40k player in Japan here. Prices are higher here than anywhere in the world which is too say... very expensive
37700
Post by: Ascalam
But are they worth it?
If they are, the prices are not yet insane.
YMMV of course My wife thinks i'm insane for spending what i do on robot components, and they are FAR spendier than models in the main..
11574
Post by: bolo
OP lives in the US, his point is invalid. 
I'd like to make a challenge of my own. Change your GW webstore to be "Australia", spend a year buying models at our prices, then post how you feel about GW pricing then.
57811
Post by: Jehan-reznor
 AesSedai wrote:Hi, 40k player in Japan here. Prices are higher here than anywhere in the world which is too say... very expensive
Yep just like down under, but strangely Dust tactics is very cheap here on the Japanese Amazon!
63000
Post by: Peregrine
The biggest problem with GW's prices is the total cost of an army. Sure, Infinity models might cost as much per model, but I only need 10-15 of them compared to 50-100+ and multiple vehicles for a 40k army. If you want to get started in a GW game you're spending $500+ before you can even play a single game, and that's a big barrier to entry for new players.
66057
Post by: jcrone2
 bolo wrote:OP lives in the US, his point is invalid.
I'd like to make a challenge of my own. Change your GW webstore to be "Australia", spend a year buying models at our prices, then post how you feel about GW pricing then.
Just checked.
I apologize for you.
Why is dark vengeance 165$? Is there something that can be done to help you guys ? Automatically Appended Next Post:  Ascalam wrote:But are they worth it?
If they are, the prices are not yet insane.
YMMV of course My wife thinks i'm insane for spending what i do on robot components, and they are FAR spendier than models in the main..
You build robots!?
34242
Post by: -Loki-
jcrone2 wrote: bolo wrote:OP lives in the US, his point is invalid. I'd like to make a challenge of my own. Change your GW webstore to be "Australia", spend a year buying models at our prices, then post how you feel about GW pricing then.
Just checked. I apologize for you. Why is dark vengeance 165$?
Because that's how much GW thinks Australians should pay for it. Not unless you can change the pricings structure of a multi million dollar international organisation. We're not that bad off - we can still order from the US from stores that sell bits and sell boxes of stuff stripped from their packaging like Dicebucket.
68802
Post by: TheAuldGrump
Is GW pricing insane?
Mostly... yes, for me at the least.
I have not bought any GW in quite some time, so it becomes obvious that for me at least, no, I am not getting what I see as value for money.
Your mileage may vary... but, yeah... no.
One thing that I have noticed - as I have grown away from buying GW miniatures I have grown away from the GW rules. So congruently that I really cannot say which is the chicken, which is the egg.
So... I am going to guess that it was a price increase on top of a dissatisfaction with the rules, on top of growing dissatisfaction with the sculpts.
There are still some wonderful GW sculpts, but it seems like the sculpts that I am dissatisfied with are growing ever larger in proportion.
The Auld Grump
37700
Post by: Ascalam
jcrone2 wrote: bolo wrote:OP lives in the US, his point is invalid.
I'd like to make a challenge of my own. Change your GW webstore to be "Australia", spend a year buying models at our prices, then post how you feel about GW pricing then.
Just checked.
I apologize for you.
Why is dark vengeance 165$? Is there something that can be done to help you guys ?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ascalam wrote:But are they worth it?
If they are, the prices are not yet insane.
YMMV of course My wife thinks i'm insane for spending what i do on robot components, and they are FAR spendier than models in the main..
You build robots!?
To quote A-team's 'you speak swahili??' line ...
'you don't??'
Robots are my spendy-as-gak hobby that occasionally has me teetering on the edge of sleeping on the couch/porch/park bench (depending on the severity of the credit card bill) when the wife sees it.
By comparison sneaking a box of plaguebearers or whatever past the audit is easy
I build combat robots (think battlebots/Robotwars et al) and they often get vaped in fights. Right now the only one i have on the boil is a bipedal (my first) superheavy (450-500 lbs when complete approx), but that's a year or more away. The control board and remote are the first part of any robot i build, and the components run to thousands of bucks, though the remote can be reused and modified for each bot rather than starting from scratch.
I'll do a P and M blog on the guy, when i start doing his body. Right now he's mostly piles of wire and gizmos
edit: can't spell for gak on a 7'' tablet
7361
Post by: Howard A Treesong
GW just seem expensive in themselves, pointing out other miniatures companies that might cost more doesn't negate that, the majority cost less. GW ceased being value for money to me, simply, there isn't enough plastic in the box to warrant the price they put on it.
Their single figures have some of the stupidest prices. A single piece casting of a 28mm figure is not a complex thing, the majority of companies I buy from would charge £3-4 for such a thing, others charge perhaps £5-6. Companies I like are Hasslefree, Reaper, Heresy, Crooked Dice, etc.
GW regularly charge over £20 for single piece minis, see their Hobbit Whit council where one piece castings are four for £45. That's a joke. That box shouldn't be half that.
What I don't like about GW is their business practices, the way they mess independent retailers around and their hostile approach to protecting their IP which I feel is toxic to the wider hobby. On their prices, well GW can charge what they like. As I don't buy their stuff I'm not so bothered, I think they are stupid but they only harm themselves ultimately.
48412
Post by: treslibras
Totally redundant discussion, this topic has been milked to death.*
For the sake of forum hygene, you might want to have a look at the top of the forum, one of the features reads "Forum Tools", there you will find "Search". Try it.
*Mind you, that won't keep half the dakkanauts from unloading the same opinions again.
28659
Post by: dbsamurai
jcrone2 wrote:So, before you blast, let me clarify.
I have been taking a look comparing models from different places, and while GW prices seem high to me initially, after some consideration they don't seem that bad as a whole.
std troops
-Lets take a simple box of space marines for example...37.50...call it 40 bucks...is $4/per model...
-Compare to mantic enforcers...you get them at 2.30/model..almost half the price...
-Now compare them to Dark potential...standard unit box of 7 is 60 bucks... 8.60/model!!
Large size
GW model, say hive tyrant is around $50....land raider at $75......so..................................$50-75
-take on of the similar sized dragons off of reapers site and he is anywhere between $40-70....
-Banelegion banebeast Ophius, Gorgon Lord the war store................................. .............. $50
-Although I cannot speak for the pathfinder quality, I know GWs models are very nice.
first off, GW quality is not as great as you'd think. There are terrible scale problems, their models have lots of flash and their finecast is well...a misnomer in the worst way possible. And their overall model quality is pretty much inferior to just about any other model company out there. Hell the worst examples are the fine details like faces and such, where you can get horrible warping in GW models with the same heads, while stuff like reaper is drastically more repeatable.
Next, you're comparing monopoly luxury items, not a truly competative market. Considering the cost of mold making, plastic purchasing, boxing, and printing, they're making quite a large markup in profit. To give you an idea:
today, a Citadel Leman Russ (a 95-part kit entirely cast in plastic) costs about the same as a Dragon M1A2 Abrams (an 817-part multimedia kit including 98 in etched brass and a turned metal gun barrel).
Thus, your arguement is invalid. There is absolutely no justification beyond greed (and poor economic monetary decisions in that they're aiming for a greater profit per model rather than greater sales profits) for the price of Citadel Miniatures.
Do not think this is a mistake exclusive to Citadel either, they, like any model company that produces minatures for their exclusive game system, hold a monopoly and are exploiting it.
44326
Post by: DeffDred
Slaughtebeast, 2 sprues of plastic, $85
Ork Stompa, 16 sprues of plastic, $115.50
WTF?
That's all I have to say.
4062
Post by: TheSecretSquig
I stopped buying GW Stuff more than 4 years ago. I spent about £900 to buy all the Orks I’d ever need, and no more. I really wanted to invest in a new Dark Eldar Army, but no. Their ridiculous pricing just does not justify the models. That being said……
It’s not just the cost of the models, it’s the cost to buy into it that’s prohibitive. Let’s say I want to field an Ork Army with a couple of FW models. I now need the rulebook, the codex, and the FW rulebook, and now I’m close to £130 into the hobby, just before I can put my army onto the table. Compare that to other Games Systems I’ve recently started playing, Firestorm Armada, DUST Tactics, Relic Knights. All the rule sets, army specific codex are all available FREE to download. Within the Firestorm Armada book there is even a section for creating rules so you can use other companies models!
£9.50 for a tin of GW Black Undercoat spray. £7.50 for a tin of Army Painter black that does exactly the same job (actually better for FW models due to the increased adhesive quality in the paint). And I could go on with hobby related products………….
9230
Post by: Trasvi
One of the reasons GW gets so expensive so quickly is the *amount* of models you need to buy.
A decently sized game in 40k is above 1000pts - most people play between 1500-2000. (I know, you can play 5pt games of one Termagant each, but that's not going to happen and isn't relevant to the discussion). Fantasy goes even higher, where 3000pts isn't uncommon.
Lets say I play Tau, and want a unit of broadsides in my army. One broadside runs 50 USD, and is reasonably comparable to a PP heavy warjack for $35. Except I actually need 3 broadsides, which costs $150 and represents somewhere between 13-20% of a 1500pt army. 1500pts of 40k is roughly equivalent to 35(40)pts of Warmachine. That $50 warjack will be Conversely, a $35 warjack from PP is between 7-12 pts, or 18-30% of your army.
To summarise:
40k: $150 buys you one unit worth about 15% of your army., or 0.1% per dollar spent
Warmachine: $35 buys you one model worth about 22% of your army., or 0.6% per dollar spent.
Dollars spent in Warmachine get you SIX TIMES MORE ARMY than dollars spent on warhammer.
Fantasy has it even worse, where a full box of troops can contribute as little as 30 pts to your army (Goblins, Skaven).
Its the repetition of buying that frustrates me. Per model, Broadsides aren't bad. Per unit, they're getting worse. And the play style of 40k means that you are always doubling up on particular units - taking 9 broadsides per army wasn't uncommon last edition. Other games might be comparable per model (though most of the time they still come out a lot better) but you can field just a single one of those models.
Look at something like Malifaux, where an entire force costs less than a box of space marines - and if you double your investment, you're maxing out on that faction and won't need to buy any more for them ever again.
65463
Post by: Herzlos
jcrone2 wrote:...
-take on of the similar sized dragons off of reapers site and he is anywhere between $40-70....
Reaper will shortly be launching a new range of figures in a new resin material ("Bones") which should drop the price by about half. When GW went to resin the prices went up.
That said, you'll always be able to find someone selling figures for more than GW, but as has been said the cost of figures isn't as important as the cost of entry. I don't mind paying $10 for a figure if I only need 5-10 of them for a game, but I don't want to be paying anything like that much when I need 50 of them.
59981
Post by: AllSeeingSkink
Trasvi wrote:A decently sized game in 40k is above 1000pts - most people play between 1500-2000.
I actually feel the biggest "price rise" for me was the change from 2nd to 3rd edition. In 2nd edition, a 40-50 model army was huge and would take a decent time to play a game. 3rd edition, 40-50 models pretty much became a minimum for a decent game. The fact that plastic models now cost slightly more than metal models in 2nd edition isn't a big deal in isolation until you consider how many more models you need now to play an average to large sized game.
55306
Post by: Hivefleet Oblivion
WE have 1500 points of Orks; all paid for by old metal LOTR elves and Xbox games we sold off, or swaps; about £160, including two battlewagons, biker warboss conversion courtesy of hoardobits, boyz and gretchen, all new items coming from Dark Sphere at 25% off.
That's a bargain, in terms of the use you get from them, especially the fact you can turn up and get an afternoon's entertainment in any GW shop across the UK. There still are a lot of great GW staff out there.
But if I was in Oz then yes, I'd want to burn down that HQ in Nottingham. If it weren't so far away.
44326
Post by: DeffDred
Another way to save cash is to pain other peoples models for money or models.
My roommate is paying me $5 a Daemonette right now and hes got 20 of them.
I finished 5 in two days. So this weekend I'll make myself $75. Time to get those chariots.
47367
Post by: Fenrir Kitsune
Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:That's a bargain, in terms of the use you get from them, especially the fact you can turn up and get an afternoon's entertainment in any GW shop across the UK .
Until GW put a stop to gaming in their stores.
55306
Post by: Hivefleet Oblivion
Fenrir Kitsune wrote:Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:That's a bargain, in terms of the use you get from them, especially the fact you can turn up and get an afternoon's entertainment in any GW shop across the UK .
Until GW put a stop to gaming in their stores.
They were playing games in the store in Hull three weeks ago, Truro a fortnight ago, and Bluewater last week.
(I've read about that memo on here, plainly however drew it up is a moron, but every store i know is ignoring it).
34906
Post by: Pacific
I wouldn't go as far as insane... more like a screw loose perhaps, a few bricks short of a chimney or however you want to phrase it
47367
Post by: Fenrir Kitsune
Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:Fenrir Kitsune wrote:Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:That's a bargain, in terms of the use you get from them, especially the fact you can turn up and get an afternoon's entertainment in any GW shop across the UK .
Until GW put a stop to gaming in their stores.
They were playing games in the store in Hull three weeks ago, Truro a fortnight ago, and Bluewater last week.
(I've read about that memo on here, plainly however drew it up is a moron, but every store i know is ignoring it).
Doesn't mean that its never going to happen though. May take a while, but they'll do it eventually "table are for demo games only".
57811
Post by: Jehan-reznor
What people always forget in these discussions is that small companies make less profit on their miniature runs than larger companies (like GW) the more you produce the cheaper the product gets, but it seems that GW doesn't get basic economics.
55306
Post by: Hivefleet Oblivion
Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
Doesn't mean that its never going to happen though. May take a while, but they'll do it eventually "table are for demo games only".
Always look on the bright side of death!
(I recall, on dakka, there was a statement that individual store managers have discretion. And as four out of four stores (I forgot to mention Cambridge) we visited in the last month still have instore games, it looks like the policy has been quietly dropped).
52450
Post by: gunslingerpro
So long as you find value in what it is you have purchased, you will not find the cost aborrent.
Conversely, if you find the cost to be greater than your level of enjoyment, you will find the prices difficult to swallow.
The consensus, here at least, appears to be the latter.
115
Post by: Azazelx
jcrone2 wrote:So, before you blast, let me clarify.
I have been taking a look comparing models from different places, and while GW prices seem high to me initially, after some consideration they don't seem that bad as a whole.
Thoughts?
Lets not talk about forge world.
1. Australia
2. From here, Forge World is cheaper than regular GW.
/thread
9699
Post by: Deathklaat
jcrone2 wrote:So, before you blast, let me clarify.
I have been taking a look comparing models from different places, and while GW prices seem high to me initially, after some consideration they don't seem that bad as a whole.
std troops
-Lets take a simple box of space marines for example...37.50...call it 40 bucks...is $4/per model...
-Compare to mantic enforcers...you get them at 2.30/model..almost half the price...
-Now compare them to Dark potential...standard unit box of 7 is 60 bucks... 8.60/model!!
------>When you factor in the quality vs cost factor...does not seem too bad...maybe I'm wrong. Lets continue.
Large size
GW model, say hive tyrant is around $50....land raider at $75......so..................................$50-75
-take on of the similar sized dragons off of reapers site and he is anywhere between $40-70....
-Banelegion banebeast Ophius, Gorgon Lord the war store................................. .............. $50
-Although I cannot speak for the pathfinder quality, I know GWs models are very nice.
Single std size models
Here I will say theyre gak cra because they can be wanting you to pay $15-20 for a single std size model just because he is 'speshal' or something........not even worth comparison.
Also, a couple of the certain units they have seem high based on lower number need in an army,,,,,,as if they take advantage of unit power to jack price....(terminators at $10 a piece) and then turn around and not give the opposite courtesy (such as making gaunts a little cheaper because you need more)
So I make the challenge that the overwhelming thought that GW products, while a little pricey, are not as bad as they seem. The condition that changes the opinion is that people want giant armies, in which to play the games, which makes sense. So it's not that their product is too crazy overpriced....but that the price of a collection..... army certainly adds up.
Thoughts?
Lets not talk about forge world.
i dont know how long you have been in the hobby so i'll presume you are new. that land raider you used as an example has not changed in is basic form since it was released in its current verion. Yes they added variants which is really only swapping 2 sprues, the hull has not changed. In fact, other than the new box art they do for each edition the CSM land raider is still exactly the same from when it was released in 3rd Edition and it was $45 back then. So how do you explain a $30 price increase on a plastic model?
21853
Post by: mattyrm
Third edition was a while back...
Inflation?
Seriously though, I dont think GWs prices are abdolutely awful, but they could be cheaper.
I think in the long run they would make more if they dropped the price a little though, as it stands I only use ebay and discounters, and that would not be the case if they dropped the price a tad, they just dont seem to want to meet us halfway!
62863
Post by: ExNoctemNacimur
I think the main reason why people complain about the prices isn't so much because the models are far more expensive than other companies (which they aren't really, compared to PP or something), it's how many you need. Like selling 10 orc boys in a box. You'll need loads of them. You may not need 10 units of Druids of Orboros, however.
65463
Post by: Herzlos
I think these 2 products sum things up pretty well.
GW: 10 Plastic Catachan infantry for £18 (£1.80/each), positively ancient sculpt (mid 90's?) - http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat440249a&prodId=prod2080005
Warlord Games: 40 Plastic soviet infantry (what the IG are modelled on) for £28 (70p each, or 39% the cost of the Catachans), brand new sculpts (only launched this year) - http://www.warlordgames.com/store/bolt-action/soviet-army/soviet-infantry-plastic-box-set.html
Granted the Warlord mini's are true 28mm scale and GW's are heroic (to the point they are bigger than marines), but if the smaller company can undercut GW by 2.7 times on a product that paid off it's mould costs at least a decade ago, then GW must be charging much more than they need to.
67781
Post by: BryllCream
Basic infantry boxes tend to be alright. Vendettas are way too expensive though, as are most individual characters.
Transports don't *seem* expensive to me until I remember how few points they cost. There is something galling about paying £22 for a 35 point rhino.
14765
Post by: paulson games
Plastic sells for about $1 for 4 lbs, average weight of a plastic 28mm mini is less than .5oz
There's obviously additional production costs involved and they of course need to make a profit, but it's dirt cheap for GW to make that $50 box o' terminators.
I look at kits that Tamiya and Testors can put out, their tanks are often comperable in size with better detail and a higher parts count for a fraction of the price. I still buy their stuff every now and then but yeah GW is expensive.
42470
Post by: SickSix
jcrone2 wrote:So, before you blast, let me clarify.
I have been taking a look comparing models from different places, and while GW prices seem high to me initially, after some consideration they don't seem that bad as a whole.
std troops
-Lets take a simple box of space marines for example...37.50...call it 40 bucks...is $4/per model...
-Compare to mantic enforcers...you get them at 2.30/model..almost half the price...
-Now compare them to Dark potential...standard unit box of 7 is 60 bucks... 8.60/model!!
------>When you factor in the quality vs cost factor...does not seem too bad...maybe I'm wrong.
Oh, you are.
You cannot compare different game genres. Dark Potential is a skirmish game. The number of models required is a small percentage of the number of models required to play WH40K. So throw out the DP comparison and you are left with mantic coming in at half the cost.
Now, throw in the Dream Forge infantry, and we cement that GW figures are double the cost they should be.
And they have raised the prices far beyond inflation every summer for the past three years and will likely do it again this year. It is insane.
28305
Post by: Talizvar
I can see the point a bit.
Our Australian and Japanese friends I can appreciate their pain.
I hate looking at the WD and comparing the HUGE difference in cost of USA vs. Canada cost. Our dollar has been higher and they can charge as much as 20% more? I have ordered from the US and got models cheaper than locally.
**edit**
I must add that is including shipping and any other incidental costs...
63257
Post by: krazykishere
I have 2 issues with GW's pricing model.
1. They increase the prices every year over inflation even when the entire worlds economy was going down.
2. Some models pricing makes no sense other than "the rule of cool". To wit the Hell turkey is roughly the same size and has arguably less detail, and most certainly less spare part than, the ork Bommer but cost 1/3 again as much.
I am sure I have more but these instantly popped into my head.
50832
Post by: Sigvatr
Oh, a thread on GW prices. Why hasn't there been one like these yet?
36184
Post by: Alfndrate
 Sigvatr wrote:Oh, a thread on GW prices. Why hasn't there been one like these yet?
To really encompass everything, we need a Kickstarter thread to get the funds so that we can send a C&D to these types of threads.
50832
Post by: Sigvatr
 Alfndrate wrote: Sigvatr wrote:Oh, a thread on GW prices. Why hasn't there been one like these yet?
To really encompass everything, we need a Kickstarter thread to get the funds so that we can send a C&D to these types of threads.
Well played
34906
Post by: Pacific
Sigvatr wrote:Oh, a thread on GW prices. Why hasn't there been one like these yet?
.. expect a 30-40 page special within the next month or so, when the perennial price rise hits Europe and the US.
1523
Post by: Saldiven
Ok, let me show you a different way to think about this. Instead of looking at gaming companies, who always think they need to sell at a premium, let's look at model/miniature companies. Heck, GW likes to call themselves a model/miniature company first and foremost, so let's entertain them.
My favorite example is Tamiya. As a rule, Tamiya USA's models are fare more detailed, have far more pieces, and yet their 1/48 scale models are fairly similar in mass (though slightly larger) to GW's 28mm Heroic scale.
Tamiya's German Destroyer Jagdtiger tank hunter model retails for $36.00 on their webstore. According to the PDF of the instruction manual, the model has over 100 pieces on four sprues.
Let's look at Tamiya's infantry.
Tamiya's WWII German Infantry--1/48 On Maneuvers kit costs $16.00. The kit contains pieces for 15 infantry figures.
The most expensive Tamiya 1/48 scale military miniature is the "German 88mm Gun Flak37 -- Siege of Tobruk" model that prices at $54.00. The model is designed to be convertible between the deployed position and/or riding on it's gun carriage. It comes with 8 infantry/gunner models and their encampment (sand bag walls, tent, oil drums, crates, table & chairs, radios and ladders, etc.) in addition to the gun and carriage models.
If you look at the model industry as a whole, instead of just looking at the game industry, you'll see that pretty much all the gaming companies charge way too much for their models relative to companies that simply make models not associated with a game. Some of the smaller companies might have an argument due to the small scale of their production, but a company as extensive as GW certainly doesn't.
70225
Post by: Jack_Death
I think the relevant point here is that GW does not consider Tamiya et. al. to be competition for their customers. Clearly, they are not focused on competitive pricing. This conversation is overdone and moot.
Saldiven wrote:
Ok, let me show you a different way to think about this. Instead of looking at gaming companies, who always think they need to sell at a premium, let's look at model/miniature companies. Heck, GW likes to call themselves a model/miniature company first and foremost, so let's entertain them.
My favorite example is Tamiya. As a rule, Tamiya USA's models are fare more detailed, have far more pieces, and yet their 1/48 scale models are fairly similar in mass (though slightly larger) to GW's 28mm Heroic scale.
Tamiya's German Destroyer Jagdtiger tank hunter model retails for $36.00 on their webstore. According to the PDF of the instruction manual, the model has over 100 pieces on four sprues.
Let's look at Tamiya's infantry.
Tamiya's WWII German Infantry--1/48 On Maneuvers kit costs $16.00. The kit contains pieces for 15 infantry figures.
The most expensive Tamiya 1/48 scale military miniature is the "German 88mm Gun Flak37 -- Siege of Tobruk" model that prices at $54.00. The model is designed to be convertible between the deployed position and/or riding on it's gun carriage. It comes with 8 infantry/gunner models and their encampment (sand bag walls, tent, oil drums, crates, table & chairs, radios and ladders, etc.) in addition to the gun and carriage models.
If you look at the model industry as a whole, instead of just looking at the game industry, you'll see that pretty much all the gaming companies charge way too much for their models relative to companies that simply make models not associated with a game. Some of the smaller companies might have an argument due to the small scale of their production, but a company as extensive as GW certainly doesn't.
73552
Post by: surixurient
I actually sent a belligerent email to games workshop recently about their pricing. This was the canned response they gave.
"Hello,
Games Workshop makes the best fantasy miniatures in the world. Our pricing reflects that. Each year our product gets better and better and each year we adjust our pricing to reflect that improvement in quality. How much? Over the last 5 years, our objective has been to keep our prices in line with UK retail price inflation, which has been 3-4% per annum. In our opinion product quality has improved by more than this, but we feel that limiting price increases to inflation offers hobbyists fantastic value for money. Over that same period, Games Workshop has had to deal with some major cost price increases, significantly higher than the prices we have charged our customers. We protect hobbyists from those cost pressures by efficiency improvements in the way we make our products. We intend to keep doing that in the future. I hope you can see that the changes we make to our prices are neither excessive nor unreasonable, especially given the constant improvements in product quality we make each year.
Games Workshop
North America Customer Services "
There's just so much B.S. in that statement I don't even know where to start. Yet I keep buying regardless I am such an enabler of the B.S.
34906
Post by: Pacific
++Edit++ What did you expect surixurient? Although it's nice that they bothered to reply at least.
Yes.. the point is that only GW make a Landraider. Saying that a Landraider is equivalent to a Revell/modern Airfix kit that costs £20 or so is a moot point.
There are probably more than a dozen companies making WW2 tank kits, and so each one competes with each other to make the most accurate portrayal of the tank for the best price. It's why you get the likes of Hasegawa designers getting hold of the original design blueprints of a Stug, even travelling to Eastern Europe to see one of the few surviving examples get dragged out of a swamp, then make a miniature (with hundreds of pieces) that is 99.9% accurate to the actual tank.
There is no impetus on GW (or any other fantasy vehicle maker for that matter) to go to those lengths - of course, I and no doubt many others wish they would put a little bit of effort into making their stuff look like it might fly, so it doesn't bring to mind the comedy flying bed-spread or the launching of the Mary Rose - but they are dictating what exists and what doesn't within their own game universe. And unless something foolish happens with GW not looking after their IP, you will have to expect the price to remain high, and the relative 'value' (in terms of workmanship of the plastic kit, and the effort that has gone into it) to stay as low as the company can get away with.
47367
Post by: Fenrir Kitsune
Keep doing that and the prices keep going up. Easy really.
1523
Post by: Saldiven
Jack_Death wrote:I think the relevant point here is that GW does not consider Tamiya et. al. to be competition for their customers. Clearly, they are not focused on competitive pricing. This conversation is overdone and moot.
You're missing the point.
GW claims they make the best models out there and charge a premium for the quality of their product.
Other companies make better models for half the price.
GW doesn't charge what they do because of the "quality" of their product; they charge it because they haven't yet gotten to a point where their pricing policy hurts their profit margin by a figure larger than what they can adjust for through internal cost-cutting measures.
54708
Post by: TheCustomLime
Eh, I've come to accept GW's price gouging a long time ago. I love the game despite it's flaws. Plus hobbies are expensive no matter where you go so.... yeah.
I'll quit the day Cadian squads cost $50, though.
62863
Post by: ExNoctemNacimur
Yeah, it's all to do with oppurtunity cost.
36184
Post by: Alfndrate
 TheCustomLime wrote:Eh, I've come to accept GW's price gouging a long time ago. I love the game despite it's flaws. Plus hobbies are expensive no matter where you go so.... yeah.
I'll quit the day Cadian squads cost $50, though.
50 dollars in what country ?
44272
Post by: Azreal13
I returned about two years ago, having done nothing tabletop based for over a decade, only BL books had kept me in touch with the GW universe in any way at all.
On deciding to start wargaming again, I automatically picked up 40k, because that's what I knew.
Fast forward to the present day, and I'm frankly staggered that GW has still managed to maintain the market share it holds. Back in the day, there really weren't any viable alternatives, and the Internet didn't really offer the same level of information it does now, so it was much harder to generate awareness if you were offering an alternative.
While I'm still in the process of finishing two 40K armies, and have no intention of giving up the game, that's mainly down to a nostalgic affection rather than being dazzled by how things have moved forwards, in fact 6th seemed to almost move backwards towards 2nd in some respects. However, I now also play X Wing regularly, am familiar with the Infinity rule set and have an Aleph force lined up in my painting queue, and am currently working my way through the Dropzone Commander rulebook and I can't really see me not starting at least one faction for that either.
The point all this rambling is getting around to is that these are good games, with attractive, good quality miniatures and, importantly, much lower entry prices. Although Im not a huge fan of the models, Warmahordes also falls into this category, although the pricing isn't hugely different from GW, the price to get started is much lower.
The only argument I can offer as to why these products haven't taken bigger chunks out of GW is you have to look harder to find out about them. GW have a presence in Most large town centres in the UK, so even those who aren't interested in the hobby have heard of them. However, the massive cost of running the retail operation must surely dictate their price policy to some degree.
This then explains their near fanatical attempts to completely blinker their customer base, because once you've progressed from Noob to Vet, you're almost certain to start to look further afield, the longer they can keep you locked into the HHHobby, the better, for once a customer goes through the looking glass they risk losing them permanently.
So GW are stuck in a vicious circle, their retail arm is key to them staying ahead of the competition by being the most recognisable brand by far, but are forced to charge high prices in order to turn a profit, this in turn means that consumers who enter the hobby seriously are at a higher risk of moving away from GW to the competition and spending their money with them because of the prices.
If you take the view of GW, their prices are not insane, they are necessary. I for one choose not to pay them most of the time, and look for alternatives whenever possible, and from this point onwards I doubt I will ever invest in starting a new game or faction again. They have managed themselves into a corner, and I cannot see a bright future for them without radical changes, its not the 90s anymore, and the sooner they realise that the sooner they can start moving forward again.
TLDR GW prices are insane, but they have to charge them to keep afloat and the reasons they have to charge them are entirely their fault.
28659
Post by: dbsamurai
 mattyrm wrote:Third edition was a while back...
Inflation?
Seriously though, I dont think GWs prices are abdolutely awful, but they could be cheaper.
I think in the long run they would make more if they dropped the price a little though, as it stands I only use ebay and discounters, and that would not be the case if they dropped the price a tad, they just dont seem to want to meet us halfway!
You're talking 100% increase in price when not only has GW's sales numbers gone up in the 15 years since second edition (meaning production costs would have gone down) but the newer modeling systems mean that production costs have only gone down.
Once again though, to illustrate just how outrageous GW's prices are:
A Leman Russ (95 all plastic parts) costs about the same as a Dragon M1A2 Abrams (an 817-part multimedia kit including 98 in etched brass and a turned metal gun barrel). Considering the cost of brass and CNC turning operations (which I know something about, being a mechanical engineer) there is absolutely no justification for GW's prices.
If you wan't a perfect explanation on just how much GW's prices dun goofed, check out http://1d4chan.org/wiki/Games_Workshop#Why_Games_Workshop_is_Bad_and_it_Should_Feel_Bad. They did a complete run down of GW's economic policies and just how flawed their prices are.
51365
Post by: kb305
 Peregrine wrote:The biggest problem with GW's prices is the total cost of an army. Sure, Infinity models might cost as much per model, but I only need 10-15 of them compared to 50-100+ and multiple vehicles for a 40k army. If you want to get started in a GW game you're spending $500+ before you can even play a single game, and that's a big barrier to entry for new players.
40k isnt too bad if you stick with marines. you have a point though, i think this is part of the reason why fantasy is falling on its ass. No one wants to buy blocks of 30-50 troops. Few want to assemble and paint giant blocks of infantry either. all that work and can hardly even see the guys in the middle of the unit. That and ranking stuff up is a pain in the ass.
fantasy has alot of strikes against it.
54708
Post by: TheCustomLime
Alfndrate wrote: TheCustomLime wrote:Eh, I've come to accept GW's price gouging a long time ago. I love the game despite it's flaws. Plus hobbies are expensive no matter where you go so.... yeah.
I'll quit the day Cadian squads cost $50, though.
50 dollars in what country ?
United States. But dear god... how can an australian even make a footguard army at $55 a pop? The prices may not be terribad here but... those poor Australians!
3933
Post by: Kingsley
The market can bear GW's prices, and it does. Therefore GW's prices aren't insane. I suspect GW will increase their prices again this year (by the typical small amount, of course), that the usual suspects on the Internet will freak out and say the sky is falling, and that everyone will go right on buying GW products.
I personally think some of GW's prices are pretty silly. For instance, the new Finecast Tau Commander, while a very cool model, definitely doesn't strike me as a good deal relative to the Forge World suits you can get for a similar price. However, people keep buying them-- neither of my FLGS can keep copies of that (IMO) overpriced commander on the shelves!
The thing you have to remember is that very few miniatures companies offer products that enjoy the level of customization and cross-range support that GW can offer. For instance, a Space Marine player has the Commander, Command Squads, Tactical Marines, Assault Squads, Bikes, and Devastator Marines. And that's just in terms of multi-part plastics, with tons of conversion sprues, bitz, metal/Finecast models, etc. This wide range of options makes it very easy for players to "make an army their own." Similarly, GW's rules and publications encourage conversions and customization.
While some of GW's competitors are approaching this-- Dreamforge and Defiance have some very nice multi-part plastic kits-- GW is established to the extent where they are very hard to compete with thanks to their very large range of models, excellent IP, and open setting. When it comes to making an army your own, GW seems to more or less have things locked up.
I personally hope that some of GW's competitors are able to compete at this level in the near future, because I think that more competition would be good for the industry as a whole. But right now, GW has a privileged place, and I don't think it could reasonably be described as "insane" that they're leveraging that to make more money.
Some might call it shortsighted, but even that remains to be seen-- to be honest, I think there's a decent chance that none of GW's competitors will ever be able to compete on its level, and if GW thinks that too there isn't really a strong reason for them to not keep doing what they're doing.
36184
Post by: Alfndrate
 Kingsley wrote:The market can bear GW's prices, and it does. Therefore GW's prices aren't insane. I suspect GW will increase their prices again this year (by the typical small amount, of course), that the usual suspects on the Internet will freak out and say the sky is falling, and that everyone will go right on buying GW products.
I'm taking an over/over under on the average price increase on vehicles. Will we have 82 dollar Heldrakes?
3933
Post by: Kingsley
Alfndrate wrote: Kingsley wrote:The market can bear GW's prices, and it does. Therefore GW's prices aren't insane. I suspect GW will increase their prices again this year (by the typical small amount, of course), that the usual suspects on the Internet will freak out and say the sky is falling, and that everyone will go right on buying GW products.
I'm taking an over/over under on the average price increase on vehicles. Will we have 82 dollar Heldrakes?
I wouldn't be surprised if the Heldrake were to hit the 85 dollar Riptide price point.
59141
Post by: Elemental
Kingsley wrote:The market can bear GW's prices, and it does. Therefore GW's prices aren't insane. I suspect GW will increase their prices again this year (by the typical small amount, of course), that the usual suspects on the Internet will freak out and say the sky is falling, and that everyone will go right on buying GW products.
But a few less people will keep on buying with each price hike. I'll hazard a guess that while the people who are loud about their abusive relationship with GW usually don't stop buying, there are others who just quietly and undramatically figure they're not paying these prices any more and stop buying new stuff.
You can't keep raising prices and chopping bits of your company off forever, the question is how long.
71201
Post by: JWhex
25$ for a single plastic infantry figure is bat crap insane. I have had many hobbies during my life, almost all of which are more expensive than 40K/whfb but the price insanity for some GW products is completely out of whack.
I have decided to just get by with what I have, and luckily I have a lot of stuff in the que for painting and modeling. If I need figs to update an army I will just get them used or not at all.
I started buying GW figures in 1983 and for the most part I just no longer think many of the models are worth what they cost.
70225
Post by: Jack_Death
I'm missing what point? You are repeating my point back to me. Did you miss the part where I said " GW is not focused on competitive pricing"?
Saldiven wrote:Jack_Death wrote:I think the relevant point here is that GW does not consider Tamiya et. al. to be competition for their customers. Clearly, they are not focused on competitive pricing. This conversation is overdone and moot.
You're missing the point.
GW claims they make the best models out there and charge a premium for the quality of their product.
Other companies make better models for half the price.
GW doesn't charge what they do because of the "quality" of their product; they charge it because they haven't yet gotten to a point where their pricing policy hurts their profit margin by a figure larger than what they can adjust for through internal cost-cutting measures.
44272
Post by: Azreal13
Jack_Death wrote:I'm missing what point? You are repeating my point back to me. Did you miss the part where I said " GW is not focused on competitive pricing"?
Saldiven wrote:Jack_Death wrote:I think the relevant point here is that GW does not consider Tamiya et. al. to be competition for their customers. Clearly, they are not focused on competitive pricing. This conversation is overdone and moot.
You're missing the point.
GW claims they make the best models out there and charge a premium for the quality of their product.
Other companies make better models for half the price.
GW doesn't charge what they do because of the "quality" of their product; they charge it because they haven't yet gotten to a point where their pricing policy hurts their profit margin by a figure larger than what they can adjust for through internal cost-cutting measures.
His point was that GW base their pricing on a false assertion.
They claim to make the best toy soldiers in the world. While its impossible to disprove that objectively, many people disagree.
The factual claim would be "we make reasonable kits at a higher price than we can reasonably justify, but if anyone tries to undercut us with a similar product, we'll litigate them to feth."
Which isn't as catchy.
59265
Post by: BunkerBob
Just a small input from being a friend of a store owner. When 6th edition hit, GW dropped the cut independent stores get for ordering from them in half. The normal discount for a store would recieve was 20% off anything custom ordered or regular order. Now it is only 10% off on new orders and suddenly GW was reporting record profits again with a new release from the edition and each redone army.
Take that as you will.
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
Kingsley wrote: Alfndrate wrote: Kingsley wrote:The market can bear GW's prices, and it does. Therefore GW's prices aren't insane. I suspect GW will increase their prices again this year (by the typical small amount, of course), that the usual suspects on the Internet will freak out and say the sky is falling, and that everyone will go right on buying GW products.
I'm taking an over/over under on the average price increase on vehicles. Will we have 82 dollar Heldrakes?
I wouldn't be surprised if the Heldrake were to hit the 85 dollar Riptide price point.
Maybe they'll surprise us all and just hike the price up to triple digits already. Considering how much the storm raven went up that one year it's not exactly out of the realm of possibility, either, since it would take a similar increase for the heldrake to reach that point. And then bump the riptide up to $100 too, why the feth not.
66057
Post by: jcrone2
Ascalam wrote:jcrone2 wrote: bolo wrote:OP lives in the US, his point is invalid.
I'd like to make a challenge of my own. Change your GW webstore to be "Australia", spend a year buying models at our prices, then post how you feel about GW pricing then.
Just checked.
I apologize for you.
Why is dark vengeance 165$? Is there something that can be done to help you guys ?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ascalam wrote:But are they worth it?
If they are, the prices are not yet insane.
YMMV of course My wife thinks i'm insane for spending what i do on robot components, and they are FAR spendier than models in the main..
You build robots!?
To quote A-team's 'you speak swahili??' line ...
'you don't??'
Robots are my spendy-as-gak hobby that occasionally has me teetering on the edge of sleeping on the couch/porch/park bench (depending on the severity of the credit card bill) when the wife sees it.
By comparison sneaking a box of plaguebearers or whatever past the audit is easy
I build combat robots (think battlebots/Robotwars et al) and they often get vaped in fights. Right now the only one i have on the boil is a bipedal (my first) superheavy (450-500 lbs when complete approx), but that's a year or more away. The control board and remote are the first part of any robot i build, and the components run to thousands of bucks, though the remote can be reused and modified for each bot rather than starting from scratch.
I'll do a P and M blog on the guy, when i start doing his body. Right now he's mostly piles of wire and gizmos
edit: can't spell for gak on a 7'' tablet
hahahahahha.....get past the 'audit' lololol
I'm not gonna lie the robot thing is pretty sick. Do you have a masters or Phd or just really into it ? Automatically Appended Next Post: I don't want to use the search tool. I like this thread.
Lighten up Francis.
treslibras wrote:Totally redundant discussion, this topic has been milked to death.*
For the sake of forum hygene, you might want to have a look at the top of the forum, one of the features reads "Forum Tools", there you will find "Search". Try it.
*Mind you, that won't keep half the dakkanauts from unloading the same opinions again.
19754
Post by: puma713
 Pacific wrote: Sigvatr wrote:Oh, a thread on GW prices. Why hasn't there been one like these yet?
.. expect a 30-40 page special within the next month or so, when the perennial price rise hits Europe and the US.
I cannot wait until the next price rise. Literally. Since I don't buy GW anymore, this is one of the most entertaining times of the year for thread-reading.
19754
Post by: puma713
Kingsley wrote:I suspect GW will increase their prices again this year (by the typical small amount, of course)
Ah, your posts are always good for a laugh. Below you'll find last year's price increase, with percentage of increase to the right. A 25% increase on Stormraven Gunships. Yeah, that's the typical small amount.
70225
Post by: Jack_Death
I think I said something about overdone and moot. I think you are missing the point after all
I'd bet GW set a target for their gross margins and price accordingly. In fact I think I've read that somewhere (in a financial report published by GW, of all places). But carry on, very entertaining.
 azreal13 wrote:Jack_Death wrote:I'm missing what point? You are repeating my point back to me. Did you miss the part where I said " GW is not focused on competitive pricing"?
Saldiven wrote:Jack_Death wrote:I think the relevant point here is that GW does not consider Tamiya et. al. to be competition for their customers. Clearly, they are not focused on competitive pricing. This conversation is overdone and moot.
You're missing the point.
GW claims they make the best models out there and charge a premium for the quality of their product.
Other companies make better models for half the price.
GW doesn't charge what they do because of the "quality" of their product; they charge it because they haven't yet gotten to a point where their pricing policy hurts their profit margin by a figure larger than what they can adjust for through internal cost-cutting measures.
His point was that GW base their pricing on a false assertion.
They claim to make the best toy soldiers in the world. While its impossible to disprove that objectively, many people disagree.
The factual claim would be "we make reasonable kits at a higher price than we can reasonably justify, but if anyone tries to undercut us with a similar product, we'll litigate them to feth."
Which isn't as catchy.
68802
Post by: TheAuldGrump
Jack_Death wrote:I think I said something about overdone and moot. I think you are missing the point after all
I'd bet GW set a target for their gross margins and price accordingly. In fact I think I've read that somewhere (in a financial report published by GW, of all places). But carry on, very entertaining.
azreal13 wrote:Jack_Death wrote:I'm missing what point? You are repeating my point back to me. Did you miss the part where I said " GW is not focused on competitive pricing"?
Saldiven wrote:Jack_Death wrote:I think the relevant point here is that GW does not consider Tamiya et. al. to be competition for their customers. Clearly, they are not focused on competitive pricing. This conversation is overdone and moot.
You're missing the point.
GW claims they make the best models out there and charge a premium for the quality of their product.
Other companies make better models for half the price.
GW doesn't charge what they do because of the "quality" of their product; they charge it because they haven't yet gotten to a point where their pricing policy hurts their profit margin by a figure larger than what they can adjust for through internal cost-cutting measures.
His point was that GW base their pricing on a false assertion.
They claim to make the best toy soldiers in the world. While its impossible to disprove that objectively, many people disagree.
The factual claim would be "we make reasonable kits at a higher price than we can reasonably justify, but if anyone tries to undercut us with a similar product, we'll litigate them to feth."
Which isn't as catchy.
Overdone?
Moot?
Possibly.
But also... most likely not untrue.
Which, if correct, means that the basic premise of 'not overpriced' is.
Optimistic.
Naive.
And untrue.
If the premise of the thread is untrue then there can be no true reply within the context of that thread.
Which means that it is the thread has missed the point, not the replies thereto.
You are complaining because people are cluttering up your beautiful theory with ugly facts.
Which... worked so well for Aristotle.... 
The Auld Grump, there is a reason that Newton discarded Aristotle....
37700
Post by: Ascalam
jcrone2 wrote: Ascalam wrote:jcrone2 wrote: bolo wrote:OP lives in the US, his point is invalid.
I'd like to make a challenge of my own. Change your GW webstore to be "Australia", spend a year buying models at our prices, then post how you feel about GW pricing then.
Just checked.
I apologize for you.
Why is dark vengeance 165$? Is there something that can be done to help you guys ?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ascalam wrote:But are they worth it?
If they are, the prices are not yet insane.
YMMV of course My wife thinks i'm insane for spending what i do on robot components, and they are FAR spendier than models in the main..
You build robots!?
To quote A-team's 'you speak swahili??' line ...
'you don't??'
Robots are my spendy-as-gak hobby that occasionally has me teetering on the edge of sleeping on the couch/porch/park bench (depending on the severity of the credit card bill) when the wife sees it.
By comparison sneaking a box of plaguebearers or whatever past the audit is easy
I build combat robots (think battlebots/Robotwars et al) and they often get vaped in fights. Right now the only one i have on the boil is a bipedal (my first) superheavy (450-500 lbs when complete approx), but that's a year or more away. The control board and remote are the first part of any robot i build, and the components run to thousands of bucks, though the remote can be reused and modified for each bot rather than starting from scratch.
I'll do a P and M blog on the guy, when i start doing his body. Right now he's mostly piles of wire and gizmos
edit: can't spell for gak on a 7'' tablet
hahahahahha.....get past the 'audit' lololol
I'm not gonna lie the robot thing is pretty sick. Do you have a masters or Phd or just really into it ?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
I don't want to use the search tool. I like this thread.
Lighten up Francis.
treslibras wrote:Totally redundant discussion, this topic has been milked to death.*
For the sake of forum hygene, you might want to have a look at the top of the forum, one of the features reads "Forum Tools", there you will find "Search". Try it.
*Mind you, that won't keep half the dakkanauts from unloading the same opinions again.
Taking reply to PM, as it's off-topic
71007
Post by: SwampRats45MK
 Talizvar wrote:I can see the point a bit.
Our Australian and Japanese friends I can appreciate their pain.
I hate looking at the WD and comparing the HUGE difference in cost of USA vs. Canada cost. Our dollar has been higher and they can charge as much as 20% more? I have ordered from the US and got models cheaper than locally.
**edit**
I must add that is including shipping and any other incidental costs...
This, its almost got to the point that its cheaper to drive across the border. The FLGS I buy my stuff at basically has a discount that equates the price to what Americans pay for GW store price, makes no sense whatsoever.
17152
Post by: Andrew1975
All you have to do is look at the dreamforge stuff to see what can be done.
The detail on these figs are amazing, light years ahead of the Cadians. I got mine for less than $1 a piece.
There is no reason GW could not make their minis cheaper. They just know what some people will pay.
Sure dreamforge does not have to pay for retail stores, but neither does GW. Maybe the US is different but I have never even seen a GW store here, why the hell do I have to pay for them. If your retail stores don't make money, you should close them. Are there any other retailers that use this f'ed up concept.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
If you look at the whole market you will find that historical figures are about 1/3rd to 1/2th the price of equivalent GW figures. (Basic infantry and cavalry.) The most expensive metals (vari-pose figures) -- Wargames Foundry -- are about the same price as snap-fit single pose GW figures.
Historicals doesn’t have major characters and monsters, of course, so we can’t compare.
Specialist, SF and Fantasy models from boutique makers like Hasslefree, Heresy and Studio McVey, are more even with GW prices, being about 1/2th to equal for what are effectively minor character figures rather than bulk infantry.
Vehicle kits are roughly comparable in price. You can certainly get cheaper historical and SF kits than GW, but there are also many kits which are just as expensive. These tend to be the larger kits aimed at high end modellers, and are larger with more detail than GW models. With the Yen value falling, we are going to see Japanese kits becoming cheaper again.
On the whole I would not say that GW are insane, but they are more expensive for what you get.
34906
Post by: Pacific
As Andrew1975 says, really the situation will only change when they realise they are not operating in a monopoly. And that will only happen when the sale levels start to take enough of a hit, and they start to look around at what might be causing it and what they can do to start remedying the situation (beyond laying off hundreds of staff, and other cost cutting measures).
Actually.. it might be kind of nice, and a pleasant surprise to the fans, if they had a price freeze this year?
I made this comment last year, just before the 2012 increase (hence it not being entirely relevant - FC comments, and Mark Wells etc) - can you imagine if this was released by GW, just prior to when the price-rise period arriving?
"To the customers and supporters of Games Workshop,
You, as our fans, are really important to us. We appreciate the support you have given Games Workshop over the years and through our development from a small business, into an internationally spanning franchise bringing more people than ever before the high quality miniatures, evocative and fun gaming world and community-building games that they have come to expect.
We also understand that the introduction of our new Finecast product has been met with some minor issues. The switch to Finecast miniatures has required a massive overhaul of infrastructure and the technology involved in ensuring that you as the customer receive the highest quality miniatures possible. As such some teething difficulties were unavoidable. We at Games Workshop pride ourselves on producing the highest quality miniatures possible, and rest assured that we are doing everything that we can to rectify the situation. We know that resin as a material is the future of miniature production, and we fully expect both Games Workshop and it's customers to benefit from the direction we have taken once the initial minor difficulties have been corrected.
With this in mind, and with the knowledge that the world is facing an unprecedented level of economic difficulty both at home and abroad, Games Workshop would like to announce that for the year 2012 we will be applying a price freeze to all of our products across our entire range.
We hope that this will allow our customers to try more Games Workshop games and miniatures, and also to remain as our valued customers in these trying and difficult financial times.
We hope that you as customers will continue to benefit from our wonderful products both now and in the future. Thank you for your support."
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
If you want to play 40K with official figures, GW is a monopoly.
If you accept playing a different game, or 40K with unofficial figures, there are plenty of alternatives depending on your choice of army.
IG, Marines and Orks are all covered by cheaper alternatives (IG especially!) There are no good substitutes for Tau or (D)Eldar as far as I know.
Tyranids are difficult to find a whole range for.
3933
Post by: Kingsley
 Andrew1975 wrote:All you have to do is look at the dreamforge stuff to see what can be done.
The detail on these figs are amazing, light years ahead of the Cadians. I got mine for less than $1 a piece.
There is no reason GW could not make their minis cheaper. They just know what some people will pay.
Sure dreamforge does not have to pay for retail stores, but neither does GW. Maybe the US is different but I have never even seen a GW store here, why the hell do I have to pay for them. If your retail stores don't make money, you should close them. Are there any other retailers that use this f'ed up concept.
I have a box of Dreamforge guys myself. They are definitely much better than GW's Cadians, and cheaper to boot. That said, they're out of scale for 40k use-- even taller than a Marine, and with different proportions. I was quite disappointed by this, as I was hoping to use them for Inquisition guys.
34906
Post by: Pacific
You could say that they are some form of 'gene-hanced' humans, made in the Inquisitors secret labs. The background is full of stuff like that
31784
Post by: Flood
I'm certain I am not alone in looking at the price of say, the Tyranid Biovore (unavailable for online discount which is where I normally make my purchases), taking pause, glancing at my pile of unpainted mini's, and then deciding that no I'm not forking out that much; I have plenty to keep me occupied for now until either the price is reasonable, I find one on ebay or look for a substitute.
Little by little people are being put off buying this or that model, either withholding indefinitely or looking for alternatives. It isn't a mass boycott or landside protest, it's individuals deciding one at a time not to spend money on that one item.
At some point GW will have to change tact or die, simple as that.
23810
Post by: Flippa
Peregrine wrote:The biggest problem with GW's prices is the total cost of an army. Sure, Infinity models might cost as much per model, but I only need 10-15 of them compared to 50-100+ and multiple vehicles for a 40k army. If you want to get started in a GW game you're spending $500+ before you can even play a single game, and that's a big barrier to entry for new players.
This is exactly the kind of mis-information that is prevalent on the interwebz. It gets people riled up until at fever point a tirade of rubbish starts spouting from everyone.
$500 before you can play a single game of WFB or 40k right?
Island of Blood = $100
Dark Vengeance = $100
That's $50 a piece for you and a friend to have a perfectly enjoyable game of 40k or WFB, it might not be what you want to collect but to say you can't is plain wrong.
Would I like to see cheaper prices? Sure... Will it happen? Doubtful... given that when I was working for GW the only time they ever had a sale was on a store opening and to the best of my knowledge they have never reduced prices on their models.
Also the quality of the models now is incredible! Sure they make some howlers but some of them are just brilliant.
One more thing...
Space Marine Dreadnought mid 90's = £20 now £28 not a bad rise in nearly 20 years
Ork Meganob mid 90's £5.50 now £15 sure now that's excessive but GW have been pricing their models on the models effectiveness in game since the early 90's nothing will ever change that I don't think. For a company to suddenly be damned over what they have done for 20+ years seems a little daft.
On the flip side, I've had a look at some bank statements from the same sort of times... Electric early 90's £17 for 3 months... now £185 and you think GW are bad. Petrol £0.57 per litre now £1.42.
So lets have a little perspective eh... Oh and I bash radio control cars too... car+radio gear £800 + £10-£20 per month maintenance and running costs plus that will only depreciate. I have some models that will sell for well over £100 unpainted.
664
Post by: Grimtuff
 Flippa wrote: Peregrine wrote:The biggest problem with GW's prices is the total cost of an army. Sure, Infinity models might cost as much per model, but I only need 10-15 of them compared to 50-100+ and multiple vehicles for a 40k army. If you want to get started in a GW game you're spending $500+ before you can even play a single game, and that's a big barrier to entry for new players.
This is exactly the kind of mis-information that is prevalent on the interwebz. It gets people riled up until at fever point a tirade of rubbish starts spouting from everyone.
$500 before you can play a single game of WFB or 40k right?
Island of Blood = $100
Dark Vengeance = $100
That's $50 a piece for you and a friend to have a perfectly enjoyable game of 40k or WFB, it might not be what you want to collect but to say you can't is plain wrong.
Thanks for missing the point.
Neither of those contain legal armies, nor do they give you the full rules to play them. So we'll need to drop another 50 odd quid on a couple of army books. Thirdly, unless you only plan to play your friend over and over again with just the starter box then you're not going to get what GW considers to be the standard sized game against anyone. GW wants you to play at around 1500 to 2000pts, with it veering heavily towards the latter with the 6th ed. codexes (the CSM one being a standout example).
These are the size of games GW wants you to play. Finally, what happens if I don't want to play DA/ CSM/HE/Skaven? Hm?
63000
Post by: Peregrine
Flippa wrote:That's $50 a piece for you and a friend to have a perfectly enjoyable game of 40k or WFB, it might not be what you want to collect but to say you can't is plain wrong.
The starter sets are not complete games. They're only useful if you're playing the two starter set armies in the starter set scenarios. If you show up to 40k/ WHFB night at your local store you aren't going to be able to play.
So lets have a little perspective eh... Oh and I bash radio control cars too... car+radio gear £800 + £10-£20 per month maintenance and running costs plus that will only depreciate. I have some models that will sell for well over £100 unpainted.
Nobody is claiming that GW's prices are high compared to all hobbies, the point is that GW's prices are high compared to other similar products. Obviously playing 40k is cheaper than $150/hour airplane rentals (though much less fun), but if I'm a new player looking at 40k vs. Infinity it's pretty obvious that one of them is a lot more expensive than the other.
23810
Post by: Flippa
It's not a question of missing the point, the point is you can play WFB/40k without spending $500 per army on it and it will be a perfectly enjoyable game.
Sure it's designed to get you into the hobby and therefor spend more money but isn't that what all business is about.
Compared to other stuff it's not hugely expensive my RC cars cost more. I spend more than $100 on 1 night out with my friends so again it's not hugely expensive and if you do what you claim GW want you to do it's to buy something for your army, paint it up pick something new for your army, buy it, paint it up etc.
Spread the cost out over a period of months/years. That's what GW want you to do, not blow all your wad on a $500 army get disheartened at the massive amount of painting you have to do and ebay it.
63000
Post by: Peregrine
Flippa wrote:It's not a question of missing the point, the point is you can play WFB/ 40k without spending $500 per army on it and it will be a perfectly enjoyable game.
And, again, it's not the same game. It's a variant game that can only be played with the starter set. If you don't have a friend willing to play special starter set games with you then you aren't going to be playing at all. If you want to get a real army and play the normal game with random opponents then you're spending $500+ just to get started.
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
Flippa wrote:Spread the cost out over a period of months/years. That's what GW want you to do, not blow all your wad on a $500 army get disheartened at the massive amount of painting you have to do and ebay it.
Actually that is what GW wants you to do. They don't expect any of their customers to stick with the game for longer than a year. They do indeed want you to blow your wad and don't really care if you like the game or not after you've left the shop, so long as you helped them meet their sales quota and bought whatever hot new models just got released.
55108
Post by: V1ND4LOO
 surixurient wrote:I actually sent a belligerent email to games workshop recently about their pricing. This was the canned response they gave.
"Hello,
Games Workshop makes the best fantasy miniatures in the world. Our pricing reflects that. Each year our product gets better and better and each year we adjust our pricing to reflect that improvement in quality. How much? Over the last 5 years, our objective has been to keep our prices in line with UK retail price inflation, which has been 3-4% per annum. In our opinion product quality has improved by more than this, but we feel that limiting price increases to inflation offers hobbyists fantastic value for money. Over that same period, Games Workshop has had to deal with some major cost price increases, significantly higher than the prices we have charged our customers. We protect hobbyists from those cost pressures by efficiency improvements in the way we make our products. We intend to keep doing that in the future. I hope you can see that the changes we make to our prices are neither excessive nor unreasonable, especially given the constant improvements in product quality we make each year.
Games Workshop
North America Customer Services "
There's just so much B.S. in that statement I don't even know where to start. Yet I keep buying regardless I am such an enabler of the B.S.
Haha, so why are their older sprues also rising in price?
664
Post by: Grimtuff
 Sidstyler wrote: Flippa wrote:Spread the cost out over a period of months/years. That's what GW want you to do, not blow all your wad on a $500 army get disheartened at the massive amount of painting you have to do and ebay it.
Actually that is what GW wants you to do. They don't expect any of their customers to stick with the game for longer than a year. They do indeed want you to blow your wad and don't really care if you like the game or not after you've left the shop, so long as you helped them meet their sales quota and bought whatever hot new models just got released.
Yup, their whole model is built around 2 big purchases (Christmas and birthday) from the parents. Anything else in between or after is just gravy.
67781
Post by: BryllCream
Sidstyler wrote: Flippa wrote:Spread the cost out over a period of months/years. That's what GW want you to do, not blow all your wad on a $500 army get disheartened at the massive amount of painting you have to do and ebay it.
Actually that is what GW wants you to do. They don't expect any of their customers to stick with the game for longer than a year. They do indeed want you to blow your wad and don't really care if you like the game or not after you've left the shop, so long as you helped them meet their sales quota and bought whatever hot new models just got released.
What you've just said is confusing -
Newcomers will likely fill up the FOC chart first - HQ and two troops. Neither of these are likely to be new models, since new troop models are rare and most new HQs tend to be quite niche (i.e. not the ones that are commonly played).
Also, can you explain why GW would make more profit from new kits than they do from older kits?
4042
Post by: Da Boss
Why do we need to have so many discussions about this? If you think the prices are unreasonable, switch (I have). If you think the prices are reasonable, keep paying. It's not rocket science.
(I may be grumpier than usual today)
42034
Post by: Scipio Africanus
Ascalam wrote:Actually it's getting to the point that FW is barely more expensive, and generally better looking.
I'm looking at placing a hefty FW order for my Nurgle force, and if we forget the shipping the price would be near identical for the 'standard' models...
As to standard GW, they are spendy. I still buy them, as they haven't yet become too spendy to justify (though like you said the single figure prices are a touch much ) but there will come a point where it is no longer worth it, which will be sad since i've been with 40K since its inception..
I have more expensive hobbies. As long as the price is still justifiable by the return i have no huge problem.
I would, of course, like to see a price drop though Wouldn't we all
FW is cheaper for us.
62863
Post by: ExNoctemNacimur
Well, costs for moulds have gone down, meaning the price of the newer models are cheaper. GW charge a higher price for them.
That's what I think they mean.
Re: FOC chart: they probably don't. The biggest aim for a 12 year old Warhammerer is to play as large a battle as possible in the shortest amount of time. They'll buy anything and everything.
42034
Post by: Scipio Africanus
 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:Well, costs for moulds have gone down, meaning the price of the newer models are cheaper. GW charge a higher price for them.
That's what I think they mean.
Re: FOC chart: they probably don't. The biggest aim for a 12 year old Warhammerer is to play as large a battle as possible in the shortest amount of time. They'll buy anything and everything.
as a fourteen year old I always preferred smaller, 250 point games without an HQ. It was cool having every trooper named and writing little stories to go along with the battle as it played out.
62863
Post by: ExNoctemNacimur
That's not what everyone feels, and you're probably in the minority. Personally, that's what I like doing as well. However, my friends, their friends and nearly everyone I've met who plays prefers playing large, throw-every-fething-model-possible-on-the-table games.
3806
Post by: Grot 6
jcrone2 wrote:So, before you blast, let me clarify.
I have been taking a look comparing models from different places, and while GW prices seem high to me initially, after some consideration they don't seem that bad as a whole.
std troops
-Lets take a simple box of space marines for example...37.50...call it 40 bucks...is $4/per model...
-Compare to mantic enforcers...you get them at 2.30/model..almost half the price...
-Now compare them to Dark potential...standard unit box of 7 is 60 bucks... 8.60/model!!
------>When you factor in the quality vs cost factor...does not seem too bad...maybe I'm wrong. Lets continue.
Large size
GW model, say hive tyrant is around $50....land raider at $75......so..................................$50-75
-take on of the similar sized dragons off of reapers site and he is anywhere between $40-70....
-Banelegion banebeast Ophius, Gorgon Lord the war store................................. .............. $50
-Although I cannot speak for the pathfinder quality, I know GWs models are very nice.
Single std size models
Here I will say theyre gak cra because they can be wanting you to pay $15-20 for a single std size model just because he is 'speshal' or something........not even worth comparison.
Also, a couple of the certain units they have seem high based on lower number need in an army,,,,,,as if they take advantage of unit power to jack price....(terminators at $10 a piece) and then turn around and not give the opposite courtesy (such as making gaunts a little cheaper because you need more)
So I make the challenge that the overwhelming thought that GW products, while a little pricey, are not as bad as they seem. The condition that changes the opinion is that people want giant armies, in which to play the games, which makes sense. So it's not that their product is too crazy overpriced....but that the price of a collection..... army certainly adds up.
Thoughts?
Lets not talk about forge world.
Oh, look.
One of those...
You don't know what your talking about, and the subject has been beat like a Government mule.
The prices are gak. The company is gak, and a giant in the industry would rather rest on past laurals then actually work for it and put out quality.
Reaper? yeah, go on and talk about them. A company that has and continues to put out good quality and at a reasonable price.
GW are a bunch of gak herders compared to the rest of the gaming world. We're only waiting on FF to take them over so we can address how Kirby's Klown posse has gaked the bed and wasted our time while cerimonially laughing his way to retirement.
19754
Post by: puma713
Pacific wrote:As Andrew1975 says, really the situation will only change when they realise they are not operating in a monopoly. And that will only happen when the sale levels start to take enough of a hit, and they start to look around at what might be causing it and what they can do to start remedying the situation (beyond laying off hundreds of staff, and other cost cutting measures).
Or, this has already happened and the guys in the white tower are so myopic and head-in-sand that the measures they're taking (attacking fansites, trying to deny bit sales, etc.) are what they think they need to do to right the ship. They could be so self-absorbed that they know there is nothing wrong with their business model, but it's the rest of the world market causing their sales to stagnate.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
As long as GW get the biggest chunk of their income from 12-year olds buying Space Marines in their own shops, they will not worry too much about the buying behaviour of veterans.
31306
Post by: Brother Gyoken
 Kilkrazy wrote:As long as GW get the biggest chunk of their income from 12-year olds buying Space Marines in their own shops, they will not worry too much about the buying behaviour of veterans.
I still desperately want to see actual data on this because people insist it is true but I don't think it is.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
There isn't any data.
You would have to get hold of detailed POS records from GW and analyse how many sales were being done by credit or debit card, cross-reference these with bank accounts to get the names, and cross-ref that with age of any children, etc.
Then make some reasonable assumptions, like a 35-year old man with children aged 1 and 3 is buying for himself, but a woman with children aged 12 and 14 is buying for them. And so on.
This obviously wouldn't be completely accurate, and anyway not even GW can probably go into so much detail.
However we can take soundings of the number of veterans who have cut back their buying.
For example, between 2005 and 2010 I spent about £1,000 on stuff for Tau and SMs, then between 2010 and 2012 I spent about £300 on Tyranid stuff, buying as much as possible from eBay, then I have spent nothing since mid 2012 except for a copy of the boxed set to get the rulebook, and I sold the figures on eBay. At some point I shall buy the new Tau codex, and probably a Riptide.
There are various reasons for this behaviour. Partly I have finished the armies I want to make, and secondly the prices are too high. If I make any more armies, like IG, it will be with non-GW models.
Common sense tells me that I am not that strange and different to a lot of vets. And a lot of vets on DakDak have said they have cut back much like I have, and for the same reasons.
Common sense also says that vets who already have two or three armies are less likely to buy more armies, than a newb who needs to buy a complete first army and maybe start a second.
However there isn't any real proof one way or the other.
5256
Post by: NAVARRO
There is a good reason small skirmish games are growing and no its not GW and their prices, It's more the today informed gamer that looks at things in a wider perspective.
The companies and their games sell you a package. This package needs to be evaluated to see what you get in the end and when you can spend say 100 and get the full package and compare with more expensive companies that 100 would buy you 20% the final decision is easier.
By package I mean, Rules, Paints, Minis, Fluff and all you need to have a game... So in this perspective the price of 1 mini is totally irrelevant.
Speaking of data or the lack of it... there was some reports on dakka that claimed that the Hobby is growing in general but when you see GW "growth" you can see the light at the end of the tunnel and make your own conclusions... I see vets migrating to other packages and see GW not investing in the long therm and dropping the ball on many old school projects that is enough data for me.
WIth this said today I buy miniatures everywhere for any game I fancy because I despise the anal philosophy that you can only play X game with X brand minis... that BS must be expurgated from all gamers for the sake of a better industry.
70225
Post by: Jack_Death
What? I have a theory now? I am responding to fact-based arguments without facts? The incoherence proceeds unabated.
 TheAuldGrump wrote:Jack_Death wrote:I think I said something about overdone and moot. I think you are missing the point after all
I'd bet GW set a target for their gross margins and price accordingly. In fact I think I've read that somewhere (in a financial report published by GW, of all places). But carry on, very entertaining.
azreal13 wrote:Jack_Death wrote:I'm missing what point? You are repeating my point back to me. Did you miss the part where I said " GW is not focused on competitive pricing"?
Saldiven wrote:Jack_Death wrote:I think the relevant point here is that GW does not consider Tamiya et. al. to be competition for their customers. Clearly, they are not focused on competitive pricing. This conversation is overdone and moot.
You're missing the point.
GW claims they make the best models out there and charge a premium for the quality of their product.
Other companies make better models for half the price.
GW doesn't charge what they do because of the "quality" of their product; they charge it because they haven't yet gotten to a point where their pricing policy hurts their profit margin by a figure larger than what they can adjust for through internal cost-cutting measures.
His point was that GW base their pricing on a false assertion.
They claim to make the best toy soldiers in the world. While its impossible to disprove that objectively, many people disagree.
The factual claim would be "we make reasonable kits at a higher price than we can reasonably justify, but if anyone tries to undercut us with a similar product, we'll litigate them to feth."
Which isn't as catchy.
Overdone?
Moot?
Possibly.
But also... most likely not untrue.
Which, if correct, means that the basic premise of 'not overpriced' is.
Optimistic.
Naive.
And untrue.
If the premise of the thread is untrue then there can be no true reply within the context of that thread.
Which means that it is the thread has missed the point, not the replies thereto.
You are complaining because people are cluttering up your beautiful theory with ugly facts.
Which... worked so well for Aristotle....
The Auld Grump, there is a reason that Newton discarded Aristotle....
44272
Post by: Azreal13
Jack_Death wrote:What? I have a theory now? I am responding to fact-based arguments without facts? The incoherence proceeds unabated.
TheAuldGrump wrote:Jack_Death wrote:I think I said something about overdone and moot. I think you are missing the point after all
I'd bet GW set a target for their gross margins and price accordingly. In fact I think I've read that somewhere (in a financial report published by GW, of all places). But carry on, very entertaining.
azreal13 wrote:Jack_Death wrote:I'm missing what point? You are repeating my point back to me. Did you miss the part where I said " GW is not focused on competitive pricing"?
Saldiven wrote:Jack_Death wrote:I think the relevant point here is that GW does not consider Tamiya et. al. to be competition for their customers. Clearly, they are not focused on competitive pricing. This conversation is overdone and moot.
You're missing the point.
GW claims they make the best models out there and charge a premium for the quality of their product.
Other companies make better models for half the price.
GW doesn't charge what they do because of the "quality" of their product; they charge it because they haven't yet gotten to a point where their pricing policy hurts their profit margin by a figure larger than what they can adjust for through internal cost-cutting measures.
His point was that GW base their pricing on a false assertion.
They claim to make the best toy soldiers in the world. While its impossible to disprove that objectively, many people disagree.
The factual claim would be "we make reasonable kits at a higher price than we can reasonably justify, but if anyone tries to undercut us with a similar product, we'll litigate them to feth."
Which isn't as catchy.
Overdone?
Moot?
Possibly.
But also... most likely not untrue.
Which, if correct, means that the basic premise of 'not overpriced' is.
Optimistic.
Naive.
And untrue.
If the premise of the thread is untrue then there can be no true reply within the context of that thread.
Which means that it is the thread has missed the point, not the replies thereto.
You are complaining because people are cluttering up your beautiful theory with ugly facts.
Which... worked so well for Aristotle....
The Auld Grump, there is a reason that Newton discarded Aristotle....
Firstly, could you please start following the board convention of posting your response under the quote, I know it isn't always the way, but it throws my addled old brain right off. Thanks. 
Secondly, you really do seem to be rather sure of yourself, given your tiny post count. I've already run across you in one other thread where you simply mocked my posts, until someone who (claimed at least) was eminently qualified to know, pointed out that I was correct. After that you kinda...disappeared? from the discussion.
You're not the first person I've said this to recently, but you seem to mistake telling other people they're wrong with actually putting forward an argument. If you disagree with those who think GW prices are excessive, kindly put forward your arguments as to why they are not. Simply saying "you're wrong, yah boo sucks to you" is a debate technique best left in the playground.
31306
Post by: Brother Gyoken
That's mostly my point. People shouldn't be saying that tidbit is true without proof.
My gut personally says that minors are a REAL small part of GW's profits. But without proof either way, we can't make assertions.
18282
Post by: Grimstonefire
I've scanned through the thread, so apologies if it's been mentioned already (I'd be surprised if it hasn't), but the reason GW may seem about the industry standard (according to OP), is because they set the market prices.
Historically because GW were completely dominant whenever they raised their prices the other large companies did over time as well. Because they knew the market was willing to pay.
Obviously not as much, but most of the biggest companies did.
Some of them reached the point where they could see they were damaging their growth, whilst GW keeps on rising.
54708
Post by: TheCustomLime
Every time I see a "Little Timmy" in my FLGS they either never get anything or just get one thing. It's usually the teens or adults that buy stuff. I very much doubt that "Little Timmies" make up most of GW's audience. GW charges way too much for your average parents to be willing to pay.
8932
Post by: Lanrak
Going back to the original topic.
if we define insanity as repeating the same actions while expecting different outcomes.
Then GW plc pricing IS insane.
They raise prices, and sales volume shrinks, so they raise prices and sales volume shrinks.(8 years running now.)
ALL logic dictates that to actually GROW their market share and sales volumes. GW plc has to do something other than just increase RRP, and restrict sales outlets.
But they keep doing the same things year on year.
Therfore GW plc pricing is insane!
70225
Post by: Jack_Death
azreal13 wrote:Jack_Death wrote:What? I have a theory now? I am responding to fact-based arguments without facts? The incoherence proceeds unabated.
TheAuldGrump wrote:Jack_Death wrote:I think I said something about overdone and moot. I think you are missing the point after all
I'd bet GW set a target for their gross margins and price accordingly. In fact I think I've read that somewhere (in a financial report published by GW, of all places). But carry on, very entertaining.
azreal13 wrote:Jack_Death wrote:I'm missing what point? You are repeating my point back to me. Did you miss the part where I said "GW is not focused on competitive pricing"?
Saldiven wrote:Jack_Death wrote:I think the relevant point here is that GW does not consider Tamiya et. al. to be competition for their customers. Clearly, they are not focused on competitive pricing. This conversation is overdone and moot.
You're missing the point.
GW claims they make the best models out there and charge a premium for the quality of their product.
Other companies make better models for half the price.
GW doesn't charge what they do because of the "quality" of their product; they charge it because they haven't yet gotten to a point where their pricing policy hurts their profit margin by a figure larger than what they can adjust for through internal cost-cutting measures.
His point was that GW base their pricing on a false assertion.
They claim to make the best toy soldiers in the world. While its impossible to disprove that objectively, many people disagree.
The factual claim would be "we make reasonable kits at a higher price than we can reasonably justify, but if anyone tries to undercut us with a similar product, we'll litigate them to feth."
Which isn't as catchy.
Overdone?
Moot?
Possibly.
But also... most likely not untrue.
Which, if correct, means that the basic premise of 'not overpriced' is.
Optimistic.
Naive.
And untrue.
If the premise of the thread is untrue then there can be no true reply within the context of that thread.
Which means that it is the thread has missed the point, not the replies thereto.
You are complaining because people are cluttering up your beautiful theory with ugly facts.
Which... worked so well for Aristotle....
The Auld Grump, there is a reason that Newton discarded Aristotle....
Firstly, could you please start following the board convention of posting your response under the quote, I know it isn't always the way, but it throws my addled old brain right off. Thanks.
Secondly, you really do seem to be rather sure of yourself, given your tiny post count. I've already run across you in one other thread where you simply mocked my posts, until someone who (claimed at least) was eminently qualified to know, pointed out that I was correct. After that you kinda...disappeared? from the discussion.
You're not the first person I've said this to recently, but you seem to mistake telling other people they're wrong with actually putting forward an argument. If you disagree with those who think GW prices are excessive, kindly put forward your arguments as to why they are not. Simply saying "you're wrong, yah boo sucks to you" is a debate technique best left in the playground.
Ok, posting at the bottom.
I am not "sure of myself", I am simply quoting published financial data in response to wild speculation about motives and hoped-for outcomes. If that seems overtly cocksure or snarky, it is meant to be matter-of-fact.
What on earth does my "post count" have to do with anything? Do you imply that I should give a rat's ass what some piece of software thinks my "rank" should be? That is not a question I would expect from someone that I assume (based on your moniker) is close enough to my age to know better.
You'll have to give me a better idea what conversation I disappeared from. Usually, when I am quoting facts and figures and the other parties are repeating the same sophomoric nonsense that is true because another equally misinformed forum member agrees, I don't start arguing I just stop posting. Many of the threads on this forum that have anything to do with financial data in the real world vs. in the posters imaginations quickly pass the "why bother responding" threshold. Had you simply repeated your assertions (again) that GW's pricing policy is "insane" I would not be responding now. What would be the point?
I have backed up the points I have made with actual financial data or by referencing statements from GW's annual reports. What I haven't done is pile on the psycho-analytical BS bandwagon. Sorry for that ;-> I didn't say anything about whether GW's prices are "excessive" as it is a meaningless term. Excessive to whom, and compared to what? That point I have given a reasoned opinion about. Re: playground debate techniques, well, let's just agree to disagree on that one after your ad-hominen, argumentum ad populum, and appeal to accomplishment/authority based on, of all things, post count.
70365
Post by: Gentleman_Jellyfish
azreal13 wrote:Secondly, you really do seem to be rather sure of yourself, given your tiny post count.
What does post count have to do with anything?
44272
Post by: Azreal13
Ooh, splendid, a response with no real content masquerading as an argument!
I refer to your post count, not because its any gauge of real world experience, that would be ludicrous, but if someone is 'new' to any social situation, online or IRL, it seems highly counterproductive to come in swinging when you have absolutely no idea of the personalities you are dealing with. You obviously disagree.
The conversation I was referring to was the "what is GW worth thread" where you not only disagreed with my statements, you flat out mocked me for posting them. That was until an actual financial analyst posted I pretty much was in the right.
I have yet to see you quote one actual fact, merely criticise other people for daring to venture an opinion, but I look forward to being contradicted. You do realise the 'facts' you claim to refer to are highly subjective and while the financial data they are based on is stone cold fact, how GW, or any organisation, choose to represent them are open to interpretation, or psycho-analytical BS as you put it.
Again, your post attacks my points, but "the argument is stupid and beneath me" is still not a counter argument to the relative insanity or otherwise of GW's pricing.
Banana, ship, custard, dinosaur. Automatically Appended Next Post:
Explained in my other post, and I liked that it sounded a bit like he had a tiny... post count.
70225
Post by: Jack_Death
azreal13 wrote:Ooh, splendid, a response with no real content masquerading as an argument!
I refer to your post count, not because its any gauge of real world experience, that would be ludicrous, but if someone is 'new' to any social situation, online or IRL, it seems highly counterproductive to come in swinging when you have absolutely no idea of the personalities you are dealing with. You obviously disagree.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Explained in my other post, and I liked that it sounded a bit like he had a tiny... post count.
Uh, whatever. I could care less about the "personalities" I am "dealing with". Nothing personal, I am engaging the argument.
You seem to have an awful lot of ego invested in the discussions on this board. I assure you, I do not. Perhaps that explains the difference ...
44272
Post by: Azreal13
You aren't engaging the argument, you're just telling people they're wrong!
I have no ego, I assure you, but I do have a problem with posters who seem to do nothing but criticise other people's opinions without putting up their own for similar treatment.
5245
Post by: Buzzsaw
Flippa wrote:It's not a question of missing the point, the point is you can play WFB/ 40k without spending $500 per army on it and it will be a perfectly enjoyable game.
Sure it's designed to get you into the hobby and therefor spend more money but isn't that what all business is about.
Compared to other stuff it's not hugely expensive my RC cars cost more. I spend more than $100 on 1 night out with my friends so again it's not hugely expensive and if you do what you claim GW want you to do it's to buy something for your army, paint it up pick something new for your army, buy it, paint it up etc.
Spread the cost out over a period of months/years. That's what GW want you to do, not blow all your wad on a $500 army get disheartened at the massive amount of painting you have to do and ebay it.
Not to belabor the point, but is it actually possible to play using the Island of Blood set? I remember when I picked one up being shocked that there were no rules for the units included (no army/unit specific rules), has this changed?
70225
Post by: Jack_Death
You keep repeating that. I think you are mistaken, and I would point out that you have done a fair bit of criticizing my non-existent position.
Let's agree to disagree, and I will throw in a sincere apology for patronizing you in the other thread. I've just looked it up and my post was rather rude and assumed that a snarky reply was a good stand-in for a nuanced argument. It ain't, sorry about that. In the interest of fair play, I've added the nuanced reply 
azreal13 wrote:You aren't engaging the argument, you're just telling people they're wrong!
I have no ego, I assure you, but I do have a problem with posters who seem to do nothing but criticise other people's opinions without putting up their own for similar treatment.
44272
Post by: Azreal13
Ok, I have responded in that thread. We'll call it a draw.
54790
Post by: DiabolicAl
 DeffDred wrote:Slaughtebeast, 2 sprues of plastic, $85
Ork Stompa, 16 sprues of plastic, $115.50
WTF?
That's all I have to say.
Shhhh Delete this post quickly before they put the Stompa up to $650!!!!
73695
Post by: Gman1985
When you look at the cost for putting an average sized army on the table including painting, some scenery etc, it costs a fortune. If you look at it from the perspective of the amount of enjoyment you get out of it and the amount of time you can invest in what you purchase, it's totally worth the money. That's my humble opinion anyway...
5256
Post by: NAVARRO
Gman1985 wrote:When you look at the cost for putting an average sized army on the table including painting, some scenery etc, it costs a fortune. If you look at it from the perspective of the amount of enjoyment you get out of it and the amount of time you can invest in what you purchase, it's totally worth the money. That's my humble opinion anyway...
Good point but the argument is that you can do all that for less money.
8932
Post by: Lanrak
Hi Gman1985.
Now just work out much LESS money you would spend if you did this table top war gaming hobby with other companies products.. .
37325
Post by: Adam LongWalker
 NAVARRO wrote:Gman1985 wrote:When you look at the cost for putting an average sized army on the table including painting, some scenery etc, it costs a fortune. If you look at it from the perspective of the amount of enjoyment you get out of it and the amount of time you can invest in what you purchase, it's totally worth the money. That's my humble opinion anyway...
Good point but the argument is that you can do all that for less money.
Yup doing articles on how to do the hobby on a budget so that people can save money when getting into this expensive 40K hobby.
68802
Post by: TheAuldGrump
Gman1985 wrote:When you look at the cost for putting an average sized army on the table including painting, some scenery etc, it costs a fortune. If you look at it from the perspective of the amount of enjoyment you get out of it and the amount of time you can invest in what you purchase, it's totally worth the money. That's my humble opinion anyway...
For some, not all.
Making it a blanket statement makes that statement wrong.
You can say 'For many, including myself, looking at it from the amount of enjoyment' etc. and be correct.
Though you did put 'in my humble opinion' - if even one person disagrees then the statement is still false....
So, let me be that one person - No, for me the expense is not 'totally worth the money'.
In large part because I have less expensive games that I like better.
Less expensive + More enjoyable game > More expensive + Less enjoyable game.
Given a choice between laying Kings of War and playing Warhammer Fantasy Battle, I will choose Kings of War - even if I get the armies for both games for free.
Given a choice between Kings of War and Mordheim... ... ... I will be a happy grump! (Mordheim remains one of my favorite games of all time.)
Mind, many of the models that I will be playing with will have nothing to do with GW aside from the game being played.
The Auld Grump Automatically Appended Next Post: azreal13 wrote:You aren't engaging the argument, you're just telling people they're wrong!
I have no ego, I assure you, but I do have a problem with posters who seem to do nothing but criticise other people's opinions without putting up their own for similar treatment.
Monty Python wrote:A man walks into an office.
Man: (Michael Palin) Ah. I'd like to have an argument, please.
Receptionist: Certainly sir. Have you been here before?
Man: No, this is my first time.
Receptionist: I see. Well, do you want to have the full argument, or were you thinking of taking a course?
Man: Well, what would be the cost?
Receptionist: Well, It's one pound for a five minute argument, but only eight pounds for a course of ten.
Man: Well, I think it's probably best if I start with the one and then see how it goes from there, okay?
Receptionist: Fine. I'll see who's free at the moment.
(Pause)
Receptionist: Mr. DeBakey's free, but he's a little bit conciliatory. Ahh yes, Try Mr. Barnard; room 12.
Man: Thank you. (Walks down the hall. Opens door.)
Angry man: WHADDAYOU WANT?
Man: Well, Well, I was told outside that...
Angry man: DON'T GIVE ME THAT, YOU SNOTTY-FACED HEAP OF PARROT DROPPINGS!
Man: What?
A: SHUT YOUR FESTERING GOB, YOU TIT! YOUR TYPE MAKES ME PUKE! YOU VACUOUS TOFFEE-NOSED MALODOROUS PERVERT!!!
M: Yes, but I came here for an argument!!
A: OH! Oh! I'm sorry! This is abuse!
M: Oh! Oh I see!
A: Aha! No, you want room 12A, next door.
M: Oh...Sorry...
A: Not at all!
A: (under his breath) stupid git.
Sorry.... that sketch seems to come to mind.
As does standing on a desk shouting ' What facts?! at some of the participants....
I think there's enough room on top of this desk for both of us to stand, shouting....
The Auld Grump
1395
Post by: MajorSoB
GW prices are insane and if you think that they aren't you are either:
1) Someone who prints his/her own currency.
2) A drug dealer looking to launder money.
3) The US Government
4) Jervis Johnson or any other idiot at GW
Your examples do not hold water or compare because many of the games you named are skirmish level games and require fewer models that 40K or Fantasy. When you need 50 -200 plus models to play as opposed to 10 or so it makes a huge difference. You know I understand economics, the principles of supply and demand, etc. and on one hand I can agree that if the customer is wiling to pay that outrageous price than by all means GW should charge it. I also understand the converse as well in that further raising prices tends to take the initial starting cost out of more and more would be players as well. This being said, I think you are mad to think GW has reasonably priced anything in their line. It used to be that GW made very affordable paths into its core games via the bargain priced starter boxes as well as $10-20 codex / army books. Now days many would be gamers that are interested in starting armies turn away when they see the initial cost. You can state all the garbage you like, but those people who are curious enough to look at the starter sets most often place them back on their dusty shelves and go to their FLGS counter to buy a few packs of Magic cards since they can afford $20-40 not $100 plus. Couple this with some of the core players who stop buying GW crap because they no longer can afford it and maybe you can see the problem. With prices being what they are GW armies cost $500 or well more to put a decent army on the table, let alone the cost of cases, rules, paints, glue, etc. So my friend maybe in your world GW prices are A-OK but in the world I live in I see them well above what the average consumer is willing to spend on entertainment.
73740
Post by: CloudRider
DeffDred wrote:Slaughtebeast, 2 sprues of plastic, $85
Ork Stompa, 16 sprues of plastic, $115.50
WTF?
That's all I have to say.
In regards to overpricing based on the sprues/ amounts of plastic used in each mould. GW bases there price based on how 'effective' the squad/vehicle/whatever is or/and on how detailed the kit is.
For example, currently in Australia
A box of 12 Khorne Berzerkers straight from old GW itself costs $62
Whereas a squad of 7 Plague marines costs $72 ... Makes you wonder... 
41697
Post by: Dynamix
Depends on your definition of Insanity and context .
One could argue that as a business model its not particularly sane when taking into account the general economic situation , the competition and other factors .
I have been price sensitive on principle for some time now - and I can recall an instance one Sunday evening in a GW store that actually induced a feeling of anger when witmessing the staff price - re-stickering of some of the range - in particular the sudden £8 - £10 increase in Tau Battlesuits on the shelf ( I did Tau at that time ) . That appears to have been the point my GW spending started to drop off sharply ( its now at zero ) - prices not being the sole reason though
Now , while I wouldnt call the GW prices generally Insane , there have been some obvious examples of sharp-intake -of -breath prices .
I was after Hordes ( PP ) Raptors a couple of weeks back but £56 was a bit too much for me so its not just GW that I am price sensitive to .
20887
Post by: xxvaderxx
While i do think they practices are anti consumer and their prices outrageous, the market will sort it out eventually. Its plain, on their annual report they have steadily and significantly lost sales volume over the years (when taking into account yearly price rices).
There is a reason why Disney is Disney and GW on its own ecosystem has shrinked in comparison to the competition over the years. Disney being the dominant player can coast to higher dominance by keeping the same quality standard and simply not pissing off its consumer base. GW on the other hand has done everything in its power over the years to piss off its consumer base, and it shows.
33539
Post by: Coldhatred
MajorSoB wrote:Now days many would be gamers that are interested in starting armies turn away when they see the initial cost. You can state all the garbage you like, but those people who are curious enough to look at the starter sets most often place them back on their dusty shelves and go to their FLGS counter to buy a few packs of Magic cards since they can afford $20-40 not $100 plus.
I see this all the time. There are so many people who are (or would) be interested in GW products, but the price before they can even play a game, let alone the paints and models needed for a full army causes many to turn aside.
(Mantic, if it seizes the opportunity to really put itself out there is in a prime position to eat up a lot of potential customers not to mention veterans. The thing keeping me around is the IP, but I'm almost at that stage where I'd rather pay for less dynamic models and repose them myself than pay for these multi-part kits that should be made of gold.)
55306
Post by: Hivefleet Oblivion
MajorSoB wrote:GW prices are insane and if you think that they aren't you are either:
1) Someone who prints his/her own currency.
2) A drug dealer looking to launder money.
3) The US Government
4) Jervis Johnson or any other idiot at GW
Y...This being said,....
I knew this thread was going to deliver some well-reasoned arguments!
67781
Post by: BryllCream
 Coldhatred wrote:MajorSoB wrote:Now days many would be gamers that are interested in starting armies turn away when they see the initial cost. You can state all the garbage you like, but those people who are curious enough to look at the starter sets most often place them back on their dusty shelves and go to their FLGS counter to buy a few packs of Magic cards since they can afford $20-40 not $100 plus.
I see this all the time. There are so many people who are (or would) be interested in GW products, but the price before they can even play a game, let alone the paints and models needed for a full army causes many to turn aside.
(Mantic, if it seizes the opportunity to really put itself out there is in a prime position to eat up a lot of potential customers not to mention veterans. The thing keeping me around is the IP, but I'm almost at that stage where I'd rather pay for less dynamic models and repose them myself than pay for these multi-part kits that should be made of gold.)
doesn't mantic have like a dozen guys on each team? I.don't see how that competes with 40k.
59141
Post by: Elemental
 BryllCream wrote:
doesn't mantic have like a dozen guys on each team? I.don't see how that competes with 40k.
Try a forum search for "Kings of War" or "Warpath".
68802
Post by: TheAuldGrump
 Elemental wrote: BryllCream wrote:
doesn't mantic have like a dozen guys on each team? I.don't see how that competes with 40k.
Try a forum search for "Kings of War" or "Warpath".
Heh, I have seen some BIG games of Kings of War.
One army had 300 zombies, and zombies were not all that he had. (They were the part that I painted for him though.)
The Auld Grump
34242
Post by: -Loki-
TheAuldGrump wrote: Elemental wrote: BryllCream wrote:
doesn't mantic have like a dozen guys on each team? I.don't see how that competes with 40k.
Try a forum search for "Kings of War" or "Warpath".
Heh, I have seen some BIG games of Kings of War.
One army had 300 zombies, and zombies were not all that he had. (They were the part that I painted for him though.)
The Auld Grump
To be fair, you can do that easily with Vampire Counts. 300 zombies is 900pts. Plenty of room left for some decent units.
71201
Post by: JWhex
From the pictures, the Mantic minis of undead look a bit smaller than GW models. Can anyone with models confirm or deny this?
34242
Post by: -Loki-
They're the same scale, but they'r emore realistically proportioned, which makes them about a millimeter or so shorter and thinner all over.
68802
Post by: TheAuldGrump
 -Loki- wrote: TheAuldGrump wrote: Elemental wrote: BryllCream wrote:
doesn't mantic have like a dozen guys on each team? I.don't see how that competes with 40k.
Try a forum search for "Kings of War" or "Warpath".
Heh, I have seen some BIG games of Kings of War.
One army had 300 zombies, and zombies were not all that he had. (They were the part that I painted for him though.)
The Auld Grump
To be fair, you can do that easily with Vampire Counts. 300 zombies is 900pts. Plenty of room left for some decent units.
And at how much money for that 300 zeds?
We got these when Mantic was having a Hallowe'en sale - and included tombstones. If I recall correctly it was $45 US for 60 zeds and a sprue of tombstones - and we got 5 of those to make the 300.
Now those same packages of zeds go for $64.99 each - still decent, but no where near as sexy.
The BIG armies comment was in terms of dollars cost as well as points cost.
Also... while this is entirely a matter of taste, I think that the Mantic Zeds look better. Not always the case, mind, but undead are pretty lucky in that regard. ( GW zeds and skellies tend to look a wee bit silly....)
The Auld Grump
54790
Post by: DiabolicAl
The alledged price of the repackaged Dire Avengers is insane. As in guano.
17152
Post by: Andrew1975
Their pricing is just insane. Aren't the new Dire Avengers about $7 a piece, I remember getting whole units of them for that much. I just finished the Robotech kickstarter, got 192 multi-pose plastic minis for $260 including shipping. That's $1.35 a piece, I doubt they will be as good as some of the latest GW stuff, but who knows.
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
While not all of GW's prices are necessarily insane, some most definitely are. Dire Avengers that just a couple of years ago retailed at $30 for ten, and currently have risen (at a rate faster than that of inflation btw) to $37 for ten, are now going to be $70 for ten, making Dire Avengers more expensive than many Forgeworld lines, like Elysians or DKoK infantry.
Something has clearly gone wrong at GW with sillyness like that.
67781
Post by: BryllCream
JWhex wrote:From the pictures, the Mantic minis of undead look a bit smaller than GW models. Can anyone with models confirm or deny this?
This is true. The Corporation Marines I got look rediculous standing next to Cadians, I had planned to use them to proxy as stormtroopers but after I saw how little they were I realised how rediculous they would look
47367
Post by: Fenrir Kitsune
BryllCream wrote:JWhex wrote:From the pictures, the Mantic minis of undead look a bit smaller than GW models. Can anyone with models confirm or deny this?
This is true. The Corporation Marines I got look rediculous standing next to Cadians, I had planned to use them to proxy as stormtroopers but after I saw how little they were I realised how rediculous they would look
Seems to be quite a common thing. GW really should learn how to scale to 28mm properly.
67781
Post by: BryllCream
Or Mantic need to learn the Rule of Cool. It swings both ways.
47598
Post by: motyak
I dunno, there is something to be said when the humans are about the height of the super humans. I wish the IG models were a bit smaller, it'd help with the overall look I reckon
1795
Post by: keezus
YMMV. A number of GW ranges have decended into parodies of themselves, where models are dripping with detail, often at the expense of anatomy and posing. GW is not alone here, as PP is going down this path as well. Sometimes less is more.
edit: IMHO, as an example of newer not necessarily better: 2nd Edition (Jes Goodwin) Asmodai vs 6th Edition Asmodai, the original sculpt, is much better posed. The new sculpt benefitting from the finer detail, but poorer posing, comical skull shoulderpad and detail for the sake of detail (purity seal placement, skull pommel on the crozius, smokestacks)
55015
Post by: The Shadow
Peregrine wrote:The biggest problem with GW's prices is the total cost of an army. Sure, Infinity models might cost as much per model, but I only need 10-15 of them compared to 50-100+ and multiple vehicles for a 40k army. If you want to get started in a GW game you're spending $500+ before you can even play a single game, and that's a big barrier to entry for new players.
This is pretty much summed up very well here.
I'm hoping to start a small Dark Eldar force in the near future but, to get a decently sized force, I'm spending somewhere in the region of £150-200, which is a lot of money.
I think another argument in favour of GW's pricing is that they do come with tons of awesome bits, which you can convert which is, not only a lot of fun, but also very satisfying when you take your unique army to a game. It also means you end up saving a lot. Take the Flamespyre Phoenix. I recently bought one at 20% off the GW RRP of £35, which is still a lot of money for what is, although large, still only a single model. However, with a few items from my bitz box, I managed to make an Anointed of Asuryan on foot, as well as a BSB Noble. So, if we presume that, roughly speaking, these two characters would have cost me £6-8 each, factoring in this along with the discount from an independent retailer, I've bought that Phoenix for about £14 quid. If GW put a model of that size for that price on sale, people would be very happy indeed.
6872
Post by: sourclams
I think that can largely cut both ways, though. Perhaps moreso in 40k, but rarely do you have the weapons bits to make the specialised squads that do well in the game. When I built my SW Long Fangs with missile launchers, I had two options: buy roughly 1 box of Tac Marines for every missile launcher I wanted to obtain, or go to 3rd party bits sites. Long story short, the ML Long Fangs ended up costing an additional $5 per guy ($25/squad).
68802
Post by: TheAuldGrump
I kind of wish that GW would get rid of the rule of cool - all too often Cool=Crap....
At this point... I prefer much of the Mantic line, in part because I prefer a more realistic product - you know, skeletons that have skulls that would fit into a human sized head... things like that.
I also like the Corporation figs more than most Guard figs... but will admit to liking the Death Korp of Kreig more than Corporation, but that is FW not GW....
The Auld Grump
38451
Post by: Guildsman
The new Eldar kits are the ultimate example of insane prices. Dire Avengers for $70?! $115 for the wraithknight?!?! Simply absurd. For the same price as those two kits, I could have a leviathan and 40 Eisenkern stormtroopers from Dreamforge, with a few bucks left over.
71201
Post by: JWhex
 Guildsman wrote:The new Eldar kits are the ultimate example of insane prices. Dire Avengers for $70?! $115 for the wraithknight?!?! Simply absurd. For the same price as those two kits, I could have a leviathan and 40 Eisenkern stormtroopers from Dreamforge, with a few bucks left over.
$50 for the Eldar supplement is also nuts.
I think the challenger has been pretty much been curbstomped in this thread.
42470
Post by: SickSix
I am very concerned for the cost of Baneblade and Stompa kits.
The Eldar Gundam is priced the same as Baneblades at current.
This is surely to be corrected soon....
54708
Post by: TheCustomLime
I wonder if they'll jack up the price of the "new" Eldar Dire Avenger kit in June after they release it.
49666
Post by: REDEATH
Yeah GW prices are rising at a much higher rate than inflation.....for instance the Citadel Realm of Battle Gameboard set I remember when it first came out here in USA it was $199 USD and back then I thought that was a bit pricey for 6 pieces of plastic and a bag since then it has gone up to a whopping $348 USD and around this past X-mas 2012 it was $299 USD...I don't even know when it jumped up to $348 I can buy a 40" LCD TV here for that price which has a lot more material cost and more complexity in manufacturing it.
Really how do they expect the game to be sustainable when no one can afford to even start playing the game because it is now priced for an elitist white collar consumer. between me and the wife we make about $140K before taxes so you figure $85K-$90K after income taxes then we have one kid (5 year old son) and a house geez after all the normal living expenses plus mortgage and insurance there is not much left for us heck I only get around $350 every 2 weeks for my self all the rest of my paycheck goes into the shared checking account to pay for all the family and house stuff and bills. That $350 has to cover my $34 Path train cost for 2 weeks, Car parking $40, and food and my own damn bills or things like going to the movies not much left to buy GW stuff with......I have had to resort to selling a lot of my old stuff on ebay to get money to buy stuff for this hobby.
At this rate instead of buying GW stuff I can buy a 3D scanner and printer and start printing all their models and sell them back to people at half the GW cost and probably still make a profit to pay for the cost of the Printer, Plastic spools and Scanner. There is the Makerbot Retail store right here in New York City near my job......
MakerBot Replicator™ 2X: $2,799.00 USD
NATURAL PLASTIC, 1kg Spool $43.00 USD ea
Matterform's 3D Scanner $583.00 USD.
49515
Post by: WarlordRob117
treslibras wrote:Totally redundant discussion, this topic has been milked to death.*
For the sake of forum hygene, you might want to have a look at the top of the forum, one of the features reads "Forum Tools", there you will find "Search". Try it.
*Mind you, that won't keep half the dakkanauts from unloading the same opinions again.
useless post is useless
What makes me angry is the logic behind totally revamping something for the sake of money... like the 10 man dire avengers box for $35, is now a 5 man box for the same price... nothing new about it, except it shrunk... supposedly you need alot less of them now according to the rumors, but that isnt the point... suppose someone wants to use nothing but DA, GW has kicked these people in the jimmy and said tough, its our product... nothing says "@#$% customers" like jacking up prices... inflation is not an excuse...
70626
Post by: Dakkamite
jcrone2 wrote:
-Lets take a simple box of space marines for example...37.50...call it 40 bucks...is $4/per model...
Pfft, its double that in AUS/NZ. Explain how that isn't insane.
Checkmate.
54427
Post by: Dr.Avalanche
I have been playing GW games more than 20 years now, and had a 11 year run as a manager for a FLGS in the '90s and early '00, and I just want to make a point about GW's prices and business practices: They are still here, they still support and develop the main games, they evolve. I can't think of any miniature wargame that was around when I started gaming in the late '80s that can make the same claim. The price you pay for GW products today is at the upper limit of (and in some cases above) reasonable, but I am quite sure that we, or our children, will be able to have this discussion 20 years from now conserning the rise in prices that came with 12th edition, and for me that continuety is worth paying extra for. There are other games today with better rules and/or better miniatures, but not with better support.
And to be honest, some of the reason you new players have to buy a gakload of miniatures before you can start playing is that the size of the game has evolved with the size of the collections old farts like me have acumulated over the years. 40K started as a skirmish game, after all. All I have to buy are the new codex and maybe one or two new, cool models whenever GW upgrades one of my armies.
2548
Post by: jmurph
A little disingenious to say it's the same ame as 40k v.6.0 is nothing like Rogue Trader. It uses similar models (none of the originals are still produced) but at much higher prices, even income adjusted. Plenty of historicals can say the same, minus price. Indeed, you can use your 60s WW2 Airfix figures just as well today as then, and I bet they will always be useful. And there will always be other (often cheaper and arguably better) sci fi and fantasy rules to use your galactic knights, space elves, or Jedi with.
GW is just overpriced toys. If you are willing to accept that, that's fine. But don't try to phrase it like some sort of investment.
37325
Post by: Adam LongWalker
Dr.Avalanche wrote:I have been playing GW games more than 20 years now, and had a 11 year run as a manager for a FLGS in the '90s and early '00, and I just want to make a point about GW's prices and business practices: They are still here, they still support and develop the main games, they evolve. I can't think of any miniature wargame that was around when I started gaming in the late '80s that can make the same claim. The price you pay for GW products today is at the upper limit of (and in some cases above) reasonable, but I am quite sure that we, or our children, will be able to have this discussion 20 years from now conserning the rise in prices that came with 12th edition, and for me that continuety is worth paying extra for. There are other games today with better rules and/or better miniatures, but not with better support.
And to be honest, some of the reason you new players have to buy a gakload of miniatures before you can start playing is that the size of the game has evolved with the size of the collections old farts like me have acumulated over the years. 40K started as a skirmish game, after all. All I have to buy are the new codex and maybe one or two new, cool models whenever GW upgrades one of my armies.
Axis and Allies 1981. A far more successful product in mainstreaming miniatures gaming than GW ever can be. GW = Niche and a small niche in the modeling community.
62863
Post by: ExNoctemNacimur
 jmurph wrote:A little disingenious to say it's the same ame as 40k v.6.0 is nothing like Rogue Trader. It uses similar models (none of the originals are still produced) but at much higher prices, even income adjusted.
That's true, but the game, since third edition, has changed only slightly with the editions. There haven't really been radical changes like WM and WM MkII.
72945
Post by: Baktru
Peregrine wrote:The biggest problem with GW's prices is the total cost of an army. Sure, Infinity models might cost as much per model, but I only need 10-15 of them compared to 50-100+ and multiple vehicles for a 40k army. If you want to get started in a GW game you're spending $500+ before you can even play a single game, and that's a big barrier to entry for new players.
My FLGS got around that by having games for newbies named "Fight Club".
The rules are simple, you bring one HQ, one Troop and one whatever. The armies are not point-costed or anything. Objectives are secret, and drawn from a stack of cards. Which stack you draw from is based on how many points that army is worth. So if you have a much stronger army, you get much harder objectives typically to compensate.
It does allow for new people to get going fairly quickly. My first ever game was my old 4th Carnifex, my old 16 Termagants and the only ones I bought new when I got back into being interested in 40K, a Hive Tyrant and a Guard.
I do not think that such an army is prohibitively expensive to start off with, I fielded all of 19 models against a similarly costed BT army that had around 21 models or so (essentially two full marine squads, a drop pod, and two characters or something).
Of course if you want to jump straight into a 1500 points regular battle ten yes, the initial investment will be prohibitive.
47598
Post by: motyak
Baktru wrote: Peregrine wrote:The biggest problem with GW's prices is the total cost of an army. Sure, Infinity models might cost as much per model, but I only need 10-15 of them compared to 50-100+ and multiple vehicles for a 40k army. If you want to get started in a GW game you're spending $500+ before you can even play a single game, and that's a big barrier to entry for new players.
My FLGS got around that by having games for newbies named "Fight Club".
The rules are simple, you bring one HQ, one Troop and one whatever. The armies are not point-costed or anything. Objectives are secret, and drawn from a stack of cards. Which stack you draw from is based on how many points that army is worth. So if you have a much stronger army, you get much harder objectives typically to compensate.
It does allow for new people to get going fairly quickly. My first ever game was my old 4th Carnifex, my old 16 Termagants and the only ones I bought new when I got back into being interested in 40K, a Hive Tyrant and a Guard.
I do not think that such an army is prohibitively expensive to start off with, I fielded all of 19 models against a similarly costed BT army that had around 21 models or so (essentially two full marine squads, a drop pod, and two characters or something).
Of course if you want to jump straight into a 1500 points regular battle ten yes, the initial investment will be prohibitive.
I think the point Peregrine is making is that the game you were playing isn't the actual game of Warhammer 40,000. It is an alternate, house ruled version to allow you to play with low numbers of models without the normal rules getting in the way (it does sound fun though). But it isn't actual Warhammer 40,000. To play regular 40k, at a regular store, the initial investment is large when compared to other games.
42470
Post by: SickSix
Yes let's all keep refuting the norm with the abnormal. Because that gets us somewhere.
72945
Post by: Baktru
Motyak: Yes I will grant that. This system does throw overboard the FOC and the usual victory conditions.
I have to say though, that first match was fun. And it allowed me to buy models a few at a time and give them a try until I could field a 1000 point army and play normally.
This kind of ideas do mitigate the issue of the high initial investment, but yes indeed it is not pure WH40K.
67781
Post by: BryllCream
It's a good job we have you guys around to define how 40k should be played.
If playing with a handful of models isn't 40k, what is it? I mean you're using 40k models and using a perfectly legal 40k ruleset, isn't that 40k? Can easily get a HQ and two troops for under £100.
38157
Post by: RoninXiC
Uh wow... that's 21 Models for 100 pounds?
What, what a bargain *rofl*
494
Post by: H.B.M.C.
BryllCream wrote:It's a good job we have you guys around to define how 40k should be played.
Says the guy who thinks a balanced set of rules would make the game "boring".
67781
Post by: BryllCream
H.B.M.C. wrote: BryllCream wrote:It's a good job we have you guys around to define how 40k should be played.
Says the guy who thinks a balanced set of rules would make the game "boring".
And I explained why I thought that. Feel free to reply in that thread rather than dragging this one off topic. Automatically Appended Next Post: RoninXiC wrote:Uh wow... that's 21 Models for 100 pounds?
What, what a bargain *rofl*
Well for £100 I can get 3*Imperial Guard Squads, a Company Command Squad a bucket of plasma guns and a leman russ. That's 4 decently outfitted squads and some heavy support, easily enough for a skirmish against a similarly sized force against marines or whoever.
59456
Post by: Riquende
Did you buy the rulebook and codex with that £100 also?
10920
Post by: Goliath
RoninXiC wrote:Uh wow... that's 21 Models for 100 pounds?
What, what a bargain *rofl*
To be fair, I play Orks, and I can get a HQ and two troops units for £31 at full GW retail. However that would only be about 150 points.
so yeah, a "legal" army can be done cheaply, but it would probably lose to a single space marine.
13937
Post by: BrassScorpion
It's true that many other companies have caught up to GW and perhaps in some cases gone further than GW in their pricing.
Frankly, I think the price on something like the Wraithknight is less disturbing (nasty though it is relative to all previous Codex model releases) than the roughly 88% price increase on the Eldar Dire Avengers. Since its first release the set has gone from $30 to $37.25, not too terrible, but effectively jumping to $70 US for the same ten models all in one go will seem like highway robbery to anyone who knows they were $37.25 just days before.
GW has in recent years made 40K and Warhammer Fantasy much more oriented toward collecting and fielding huge armies than ever before, yet their approach from just a few years earlier when they made the core troops affordable to collect in large number then understandably gouged a bit on the more special and elite choices is gone. Price increases in the past couple years on basic troop choices for both games have been significant, making it more difficult than ever for newer customers to field large collections. For example, Imperial Guard Platoons as troop choices are virtually a thing of the past since the troopers went from $35 US for 20 models to $29 for 10 models. When one factors in that army books have jumped to near $50 US and other increases I fear for the growth of the hobby and GW's customer base. Last year the Land Raider jumped $8.25 US for the second consecutive year while other popular Space Marine vehicles also went up about $8 US in price. Earlier annual increases were usually only a dollar or so.
As a customer of more than two decades I like to see new customers in GW's stores, it keeps the stores open and the design studio busy cranking out cool new stuff. I hope GW doesn't implode from it's own draconian price increase philosophy of the past couple years.
5256
Post by: NAVARRO
Implode? probably a bit later down the road but atm you will see 2 things happening, armies will become even bigger and prices higher... I dont think the amount of models they want per army is appropriate for 28mm scale, tables look to cluttered to the point of looking ridiculous... 40k and wfb scale is wrong IMO. Yet its much more rentable for gw to keep on pushing a skirmish game into a mass battle game.
As for the 100 quid "legal" army, dont forget you need cleaning tools, glues, paints, varnish, dex, dices, flock and all kind of stuff so yeah that money would get you.... not much.
Actually went to GW store and one 40k rulebook and a dex will cost you 70 quid total...
67781
Post by: BryllCream
If we're being facetious then add the cost of a gaming table and terrain, heating too. And the rent for your apartment. Etc.
Or you could be a grown up and recognise that you can get a decent, legal army for under £100.
36184
Post by: Alfndrate
BryllCream wrote:If we're being facetious then add the cost of a gaming table and terrain, heating too. And the rent for your apartment. Etc.
Or you could be a grown up and recognise that you can get a decent, legal army for under £100.
Are you talking new models? And could you make the list? I'm honestly curious about the army on the cheap
664
Post by: Grimtuff
BryllCream wrote:
Or you could be a grown up and recognise that you can get a decent, legal army for under £100.
Legal army. So we're counting at the very least the relevant codex. Well there's £20-£30 of your budget gone already....
It simply cannot be done. Even if you buy a copy of Dark Vengeance (and maybe swap the contents with a friend who wants the other ones), you've only got £8.50 left to spend on your army. You can hardly even get a single blister for that these days.
59456
Post by: Riquende
BryllCream wrote:If we're being facetious then add the cost of a gaming table and terrain, heating too. And the rent for your apartment. Etc.
Or you could be a grown up and recognise that you can get a decent, legal army for under £100.
I couldn't 'recognise' a legal GW army if it smacked me round the head with the massive rulebook the game somehow needs. I don't play any GW games, don't have any idea. I also don't follow GW pricing threads so don't know what sort of models you can get for £100. I enquired genuinely about whether you'd factored in the large amounts of paper the game requires you to purchase to play.
Perhaps you found the question confusing. That must be it.
6872
Post by: sourclams
 Grimtuff wrote: BryllCream wrote:
Or you could be a grown up and recognise that you can get a decent, legal army for under £100.
Legal army. So we're counting at the very least the relevant codex. Well there's £20-£30 of your budget gone already....
It simply cannot be done. Even if you buy a copy of Dark Vengeance (and maybe swap the contents with a friend who wants the other ones), you've only got £8.50 left to spend on your army. You can hardly even get a single blister for that these days.
This was my first thought as well. unless scraping the paint off of discarded crap marines found in bulk on ebay is supposed to count...
59141
Post by: Elemental
BryllCream wrote:
Or you could be a grown up and recognise that you can get a decent, legal army for under £100.
Just picking up this and going on a tangent, I wonder what that same £100 would get me in other systems. Let's do a quick check with the ones I'm most familiar with:
Dystopian Wars:
Rulebook: £15
Battallion Box: £59. These vary, but they're around 37 miniatures, worth around 1200pts (where 1000pts is a good evening's gaming) and include dice, rulers, token sheets, some scenery and all the unit stats.
That leaves £26, which can go on a scenario book, or one or two big impressive models like a Sky Fortress or Mobile Airfield, which pushes the total value to around 14 - 1500pts.
Malifaux:
Rulebook: £18. The other three books are optional, since every miniature comes with a stat card. It doesn't seem to be available now, but you could get a mini "just the rules" book for around £10.
Card Deck: I can use a regular deck, but let's go with an official one for £4.50
Starter Box: Varies, so lets go for the most costly one--"Freikorps" or "Desolate & Soulless", at £27 each. They're worth about 25pts each, which is a below-average size game, but still good for a couple of hours.
Let's get enough stuff to bulk the force up to 40pts, which is "good evening's gaming" level. I'll get the Dead Rider (a big impressive miniature) for £18, Lazarus (medium-sized) for £10 and a bunch of infantry like, say, Necropunks (£11 for 3), and Canine Remains (£9 for 2). So that leaves me with a good selection of models for an "average sized" game, since I have well over 40pts now, and also means I don't need to add much more to have a viable alternate crew with a different master.
Warmachine:
Two-Player Starter Box: £52 (£62, but let's assume I get at least a lowball estimate of 10 back from selling the stuff I'm not using, or splitting the cost). Contains the mini rulebook, all relevant stat cards, and around 21pts worth of models for Khador or the Protectorate of Menoth (let's go Khador). The typical "good evening's gaming" level is 35pts, though the system works down to 15pts.
I've got enough warjacks, so let's grab some more infantry--a ten-man unit of Winter Guard, plus the unit attachment and three weapon attachments clocks in at around £37, adding about 12pts to my battle box total.
Let's round this out to 35 with a 2pt solo such as a Koldun Lord, Kovnik Joe, a Manhunter or a mercenary, the most expensive of which come in at about £8.
Warmachine (assuming I don't want a faction from a two-player set, I randomly choose Legion of Everblight):
Softback Rulebook: £18
Starter Box: £32
Heavy warbeast kit: £22
6x Striders + unit attachment: 28
Not as efficient as the two player set, but it comes to around 25pts which is good for a couple of hours.
And it's worth adding that as far as I know, those aren't armies of random cheapest stuff, each of them should work well as a competitive force. Also, this is at full retail price (using Firestorm Games as my base), assuming you don't get any of this stuff at a discount or second-hand. So the comparisons should be a Warhammer army bought new.
10193
Post by: Crazy_Carnifex
Ooh! Lets try this with Infinity!
Rulebook- Freebie!
Pan O starter- 30
Fusilier, HMG- 7.5
Dragoes- 27
Aquila Guard- 7.5
Machinist- 7.5
Full 300pt army, plus 20.5 Pounds to play with.
71201
Post by: JWhex
Comparing these other games that dont play anything like 40k is fairly useless.
I am sure 40k will be around longer than Dystopian Wars.
People compare warmahordes to 40k and fantasy a lot. That is another fairly useless comparison of apples and bananas. Another amusing thing about all these comparisons is some underlying assumption that people have the same amount of disposable income.
If one person has ten times the amount of money as another it is a rather futile comparison to make.
10193
Post by: Crazy_Carnifex
Why does different wealth matter? If something has greater "Bang-for-your-buck" than something else, you get comparatively more bang from it than it's competitors, whether you are spending $1 (  ) or $10 ( )
Secondly, why is comparing a product to its nearest competitor useless? The basic element of "test wits for a couple hours by commanding troops in a fantasy setting" doesn't change. The approach does, but it's still comparing fruit (Hint: one is round and red or green, tastes sour-to-sweet, and is formed from the stem at the base of the flower, while the other is yellow, vaguely phallic, tastes sweet. both are delicious, although I do prefer one over the other).
And finally:
Yeah, probably. Unless GW screws up.
71201
Post by: JWhex
 Crazy_Carnifex wrote:
Secondly, why is comparing a product to its nearest competitor useless? The basic element of "test wits for a couple hours by commanding troops in a fantasy setting" doesn't change. The approach does, but it's still comparing fruit (Hint: one is round and red or green, tastes sour-to-sweet, and is formed from the stem at the base of the flower, while the other is yellow, vaguely phallic, tastes sweet. both are delicious, although I do prefer one over the other).
Because warmahordes and 40k are so different you really have no idea that they are even competing with each other in a meaningful way. The default position from 40k for a person could be a very wide variety of games from warmachine to infinity to flames of war to etc.
A large amount of the appeal to many people for 40k is the background, those people may just choose not to play a miniature game at all if they leave 40k. They may move on to board games, historicals or some other leisure activity. For teenage boys the biggest competitor to 40k is probably girls, cars, motorcycles and other age related activities.
I play FoW, 40k and warmahordes and they are all so different that they just do not compare well.
68802
Post by: TheAuldGrump
No... they really aren't that different.
Miniatures? Check.
Magic? Check.
Skirmish level game? Check.
Even the amounts moved by most units are comparable.
We are not comparing apples to oranges, we are comparing apples to pears.
And, sorry, I have played with enough folks that could not care less about the background in any of these games.
I will grant you girls and vehicles, but when it comes to gaming... yeah, Warmahordes is a competitor.
As for the girls, cars, and motorcycles... now who is comparing apples to oranges?
Miniatures? Giirrrlll!
Magic? Giirrrlll!
Skirmish level game? Go away! There's a giirrrlll!
The Auld Grump, wait? It's a girl that plays games? ROCK ON!
62863
Post by: ExNoctemNacimur
I think he's saying that for a teenager, if he gave up 40k, he wouldn't move to Warmachine or whatever, he'd just give up the hobby altogether and probably focus on girls, motorcycles, cars and other age related activities instead of painting plastic men.
59141
Post by: Elemental
JWhex wrote:
People compare warmahordes to 40k and fantasy a lot. That is another fairly useless comparison of apples and bananas.
Funny, WM/H reminds me fairly strongly of second edition 40K, at least in terms of scale, approximate model count and rules-detail-per-mini level.
JWhex wrote:Another amusing thing about all these comparisons is some underlying assumption that people have the same amount of disposable income. If one person has ten times the amount of money as another it is a rather futile comparison to make.
Maybe so, but I was answering a specific question about if you could get a viable 40K force on a £100 budget. The conclusion seems to be yes you could, but only a very bare-bones one (esp, after including the rulebook & codex cost). It seems that you could get an army at or close to in the "standard" point range that most people actually play games at for some or most other systems, with that money.
44272
Post by: Azreal13
Lets drop Dropzone Commander into the £100 mix too!
Ok, so it plays differently to 40k, but it's still a miniatures based tabletop Wargame.
A smidge over £100 will not only garner you the rulebook and a starter army designed to be playable from the get go, but you can also buy enough terrain to outfit a 6'x4' table with enough cover to be fully playable.
664
Post by: Grimtuff
azreal13 wrote:Lets drop Dropzone Commander into the £100 mix too!
Ok, so it plays differently to 40k, but it's still a miniatures based tabletop Wargame.
A smidge over £100 will not only garner you the rulebook and a starter army designed to be playable from the get go, but you can also buy enough terrain to outfit a 6'x4' table with enough cover to be fully playable.
I completely forgot DZC existed until you've brought it up. That's yet another game I've always wanted to get into.
Also, whilst we're here. Brylly; we're all still waiting on that answer to the "decent and legal army for £100 is possible" boast. Don't be shy.
44272
Post by: Azreal13
Grimtuff wrote: azreal13 wrote:Lets drop Dropzone Commander into the £100 mix too!
Ok, so it plays differently to 40k, but it's still a miniatures based tabletop Wargame.
A smidge over £100 will not only garner you the rulebook and a starter army designed to be playable from the get go, but you can also buy enough terrain to outfit a 6'x4' table with enough cover to be fully playable.
I completely forgot DZC existed until you've brought it up. That's yet another game I've always wanted to get into.
Also, whilst we're here. Brylly; we're all still waiting on that answer to the "decent and legal army for £100 is possible" boast. Don't be shy.
I've picked up the rulebook (£13.50 from troll trader) and it looks to play somewhat like certain iterations of Epic, but the movement, as is its intention, allows for fast redeployment. Plus you can blow buildings up, which adds an interesting dimension.
I'm going to have a quick look on GW site and try and undertake the Bryllcreem challenge, will post again when I've got an idea.
Edit, ok, surprisingly, it CAN be done, but not well.
1x Draigo £15
1 x Castellan Crowe £11
1 x Box GK Terminators £28
1 x box PA GKs £20.50
1 x Razorback £25
Not sure on the points as I don't have a GK book anymore, and I certainly won't comment on the quality of the list, but that is a legal list which allows both squads to wear two hats (can be regular or paladins/purifiers) and can transport themselves across the board.
Just under £100.
If we're factoring in cost of codex and rulebook, its really not feasible.
20887
Post by: xxvaderxx
You can put this thread to rest, Dire Avengers, same price as last week, 50% of the product = 100% markup. Have fun.
5256
Post by: NAVARRO
BryllCream wrote:If we're being facetious then add the cost of a gaming table and terrain, heating too. And the rent for your apartment. Etc.
Or you could be a grown up and recognise that you can get a decent, legal army for under £100.
Troll harder.
To play you at least need the rulesets and those alone cost you 70... its not rocket science.
67781
Post by: BryllCream
 sourclams wrote: Grimtuff wrote: BryllCream wrote:
Or you could be a grown up and recognise that you can get a decent, legal army for under £100.
Legal army. So we're counting at the very least the relevant codex. Well there's £20-£30 of your budget gone already....
It simply cannot be done. Even if you buy a copy of Dark Vengeance (and maybe swap the contents with a friend who wants the other ones), you've only got £8.50 left to spend on your army. You can hardly even get a single blister for that these days.
This was my first thought as well. unless scraping the paint off of discarded crap marines found in bulk on ebay is supposed to count...
Codex - £25
Librarian - £9.50
Tactical Squad - £23
That would give you a legal army, iirc tactical squads can be bought in 5s. But if they're not, and to flesh out our £100 anyway, let's add
Tactical squad - £23
Sterguard Squad - £25.50
Comes to £101. Sure it's not apocolypse, but it's enough to mess around with a friend who's on the same scale. Say..
Imperial Guard Codex - £25
Company Command Squad - £15.50
Infantry Squad - £18
Infantry Squad - £18
Pack of plasma guns - £6
Stormtroopers - £12.30
Stormtrooper special weapons - £8.70
Marbo - £8.20
Total - £103
No idea how the points values would work out, but you can build a perfectly fun small army at that level, with enough tactical scope to actually make the game interesting, if not uber-long.
edit - Ogryns are stupid expensive.
47598
Post by: motyak
And the BRB, like the other counts have included. And under 100. So take 45 quid off each of those.
Codex - £25
Librarian - £9.50
Tactical Squad - £23
Comes to £57.50 (out of 55 pounds left, so overbudget anyway)
Imperial Guard Codex - £25
Company Command Squad - £15.50
Infantry Squad - £18
Total - £58.50 (out of 55 pounds left, so overbudget anyway)
So the Marine one is technically legal, and the IG one isn't. Neither are large enough to play any kind of game with. Say you split with your mate, so you only spend 22.50 each on the rulebook
Codex - £25
Librarian - £9.50
Tactical Squad - £23
Combat Squad/Scout Squad - £15.50
Plasma Guns - £6.00
Comes to £79.00 (out of 77.50 pounds left, without the Plasma Guns its legal)
Imperial Guard Codex - £25
Company Command Squad - £15.50
Infantry Squad - £18
Infantry Squad - £18
Total - £76.50 (out of 77.50 pounds left)
Now they are both legal. Except you don't own a rulebook, you are sharing it.
The SM army (going a bit over budget) is worth, with maximum upgrades, 460. I'm not sure which weapon upgrades are available to the sergeant on the sprue so I didn't include those, but if it's PPs then give it another 30 points. Leaving you at 490. That is with the other combat squad playing the role of a third tac squad to maximise points cost.
For the IG, 570 with Veterans getting all the doctrine upgrades (which aren't really presented on those models, but giving you some proxying leeway which the other games don't need), assuming 3 flamers/gl on the sprue (can't quite remember), and a meltagun on the command squad sprue (again, can't quite remember). You get a horrific army that won't really be any fun to play, tactically or otherwise.
67781
Post by: BryllCream
I said "You can make a decent legal army for under £100". I didn't say you could get the rulebook into that. I think you may well just be wishing to pick a fight with someone who's "defending" GW in some way.
I'm not, but I think a lot of the reaction to prices are hysteria. Most core troops are still reasonably priced. For the IG, Russes are maybe £5 too expensive, and Vendettas (with lascannons) are about £30 too expensive. Not to mention the stupidity of not getting plasma or melta in infantry kits.
47598
Post by: motyak
Well if you aren't counting the things you need to play the game then yeah you can get an army for 100 pounds, you are right. 155 AU though (the rough equivalent, rounding up)? Not as easy. And it's hardly hysteria in that case. Not to mention the stupidity of not getting plasma or melta in infantry kits.
Good god yes. As an IG player this is just maddening.
59141
Post by: Elemental
BryllCream wrote:I said "You can make a decent legal army for under £100". I didn't say you could get the rulebook into that.
Oh right. It's just that all of the other examples did. Not to mention in all the other examples, the rulebook itself costs a heck of a lot less than the 40K brick. Though to be fair, we could value a resold softback DV book at £20 in this experiment, which seems to be the going rate on Ebay. It's not like most players haven't read the fluff in earlier editions, and can't just look up the 100 pages of glossy photos online. Or would want to physically carry the hardback to and from the club.
Incidentally, because the thread's about GW prices rather than 40K prices, how does Warhammer Fantasy measure up here?
54392
Post by: cowen70
The big issue is accessability. What do I mean by this?
I get more enjoyment x1000 per £ or $ in comparison to a can of beer. I spend way more on a weekly basis for the beer to go with my Warhammer habit than I do on the Warhammer itself.
But its a bit of a wrench laying out the money sometimes. I wish with squads I could buy models individually occasionally. So I could go and buy two strike squad members or a Paladin. But it would not be efficient at all.
Overall I'm not that unhappy at all. Occasionally my wallet wishes I really didn't like 40k but meh I like it.
23979
Post by: frozenwastes
BryllCream wrote:I said "You can make a decent legal army for under £100". I didn't say you could get the rulebook into that. I think you may well just be wishing to pick a fight with someone who's "defending" GW in some way.
Why not just stop moving the goal posts? If you can't play the game because you don't have the rules, you don't have a decent legal army.
6872
Post by: sourclams
Just going to point out a few things here...
First. GW is one of tbe few systems that requires two books to play. Rulebook and codex are more or less mandatory. The other systems require between one and zero books. That by itself is a big money sink.
Second. The lists proposed for other systems are very close to being normal game sized. A 500 point list for 40k is so far from normal games that you will have trouble finding games. That ought to be an obvious criterion for deciding whether an 'army' is 'decent'.
10920
Post by: Goliath
sourclams wrote:Just going to point out a few things here...
First. GW is one of tbe few systems that requires two books to play. Rulebook and codex are more or less mandatory. The other systems require between one and zero books. That by itself is a big money sink.
Second. The lists proposed for other systems are very close to being normal game sized. A 500 point list for 40k is so far from normal games that you will have trouble finding games. That ought to be an obvious criterion for deciding whether an 'army' is 'decent'.
I will agree on this point. I recently dropped the eldar half of my ork/eldar alliance as it was fairly cack, and so only had 850pts of models, so I removed a warboss leaving 748pts.
Only two people were willing to have a 750pt battle with me out of the 15 or so that were at the club.
Now, admittedly I play orks, so getting all of the big stuff is slightly easier as I can just throw some plasticard together if I don't want to shell out £32 for a battlewagon (and that's with a 20% discount), but even then getting a reasonably sized army that I would enjoy using is going to take a very long time, especially since Orks are somewhat of a Horde army.
28305
Post by: Talizvar
Anyone who got into the Robotech Kickstarter with the "Battlecry" package works out to about $1.40 per model including shipping. I just got to see the models in person "casting of the 3d printer models" and they are scary detail at this stage for a larger model. It really is they can charge less but why should they? If the market can bear it they are good.
The lack of money when I switch to Robotech from me alone may create layoffs.
24567
Post by: Kroothawk
xxvaderxx wrote:You can put this thread to rest, Dire Avengers, same price as last week, 50% of the product = 100% markup. Have fun.
Now prices are twice as reasonable
BTW, always wondered, why from June onward, almost no 10man Xeno Box is required for GW stockists 
33539
Post by: Coldhatred
Elemental wrote:Incidentally, because the thread's about GW prices rather than 40K prices, how does Warhammer Fantasy measure up here?
1 BRB $74.25
1 Ogre Kingdoms Army Book $45.50
1 Ogre Kingdoms Battalion Box $110.00
- 6 Ogres ($40 by the box)
- 6 Ogre Ironguts ($40.00 by the box)
- 4 Ogre Leadbelchers ($40 by the box)
1 Ogre Slaughtermaster $40
Total Points: 946
Total Cost: $269.75 (Roughly 180 quid)
And that's with an army that has a high points to model ratio in fantasy. So you're looking at around another 75-100 quid to get to the standard(current? don't play it anymore due to low interest in my area) 2000 points army.
You think 40k is bad, fantasy is a nightmare nowadays.
32159
Post by: jonolikespie
Coldhatred wrote:So you're looking at around another 75-100 quid to get to the standard(current? don't play it anymore due to low interest in my area) 2000 points army.
You think 40k is bad, fantasy is a nightmare nowadays.
2000 is practically the minimum these days, most tourneys seem to be 2400/2500 so yeah, you're looking at a good $500 US/$750 or so au before you buy glue/paint/tools/etc for fantasy.
71201
Post by: JWhex
Fantasy is very expensive, locally the standard game is 2500 points. It can vary quite a bit with Ogre Kingdoms, as described above being very costly in points per model, so relatively cheap to buy. You could probably have a nice low model count WoC army as well.
Skaven, even with the IoB models is expensive due to the sheer amount of models you need. Dark Elves have many metal and finecast models so that army is just insanely expensive to buy new.
Many armies benefit from a unit in the "special" category that GW prices at 50$ for 10 models and you often need 4 to 5 boxes to make the unit, grave guard, bestigors, greatswords etc.
Bottom line is that it is very difficult to recruit new players, not only for the cost but just the modelling and painting effort required.
59456
Post by: Riquende
An increasing number of local players are using Mantic models in their WFB armies. Don't blame them at all (just wish they'd give KoW a go while they're at it!)
74032
Post by: Suicidal Grot
GW are very high quality but nothing will deter from the ridiculously high prices, i have resorted to buying everything second hand and thats worked well for me though
47367
Post by: Fenrir Kitsune
 Suicidal Grot wrote:GW are very high quality but nothing will deter from the ridiculously high prices, i have resorted to buying everything second hand and thats worked well for me though
There was a high quality a few years ago, but finecast saw to that and to GW's reputation as high level casters.
6872
Post by: sourclams
GW's newest stuff is by and large excellent in technical execution, but the snap-together-ness of big models combined with their shifting further into the 'cartooney' end of the spectrum has resulted in many notable new models becoming silly self-parodies.
They really are becoming expensive toys that you have to paint yourself.
23979
Post by: frozenwastes
Suicidal Grot wrote:GW are very high quality but nothing will deter from the ridiculously high prices, i have resorted to buying everything second hand and thats worked well for me though
With GW not really caring about retaining customers, there are probably lots of people looking to sell used stuff. It's probably the perfect time to switch to buying used only.
8932
Post by: Lanrak
Not to mention the perfect time to switch to a company who DO want to retain customers.
As they tend to offer much better value for money.
23979
Post by: frozenwastes
Baby steps, Lanrak. They'll get there.
53210
Post by: hellpato
MDR, I read this pointless topic and all I can do is laughing. Over price or not? Quality or not? Who care at the end. When you like something you buy it at the end.
44272
Post by: Azreal13
hellpato wrote:MDR, I read this pointless topic and all I can do is laughing. Over price or not? Quality or not? Who care at the end. When you like something you buy it at the end.
Well, I'm laughing at the fact you've wasted however long it took you to read 7 pages of this thread and still have somewhat missed the point.
68802
Post by: TheAuldGrump
azreal13 wrote:hellpato wrote:MDR, I read this pointless topic and all I can do is laughing. Over price or not? Quality or not? Who care at the end. When you like something you buy it at the end.
Well, I'm laughing at the fact you've wasted however long it took you to read 7 pages of this thread and still have somewhat missed the point.
You mean the point of 'I don't like it enough to pay that much'?
Yeah... it was hidden out in the open, folks miss things like that....
And the price on the Dire Avengers.... Oy! It's not even as though there that good.
The Auld Grump
22133
Post by: Spartan089
The is issue of price is going to be even more prevalent considering the annual GW tribute to the money god...errr I mean price hike is right around the corner.
17152
Post by: Andrew1975
hellpato wrote:MDR, I read this pointless topic and all I can do is laughing. Over price or not? Quality or not? Who care at the end. When you like something you buy it at the end.
Should have spent the time learning grammar!
23979
Post by: frozenwastes
As a fan of ranked up army combat games like WHFB, the recent releases of hard plastic historicals are quite telling. Supposedly GW is much larger and produces a greater volume of each sprue than Warlord, Perry, Fireforge, Victrix, Conquest, etc., and yet despite the volume advantage, the historical producers beat GW on a price-per-figure basis. In fact, they make the dire avengers look absolutely insane. £20.50 for 5 Dire Avengers or £20.00 for 12 cavalry. Even if you want to claim the Dire Avengers are larger and more detailed than the historical infantry, they're certainly not larger than the cavalry. As for detail:  EDIT: Oops. My mistake. A box of those is £18 for 12 cavalry, not £20 EDIT 2: GW has some kits that are more comparable to what these historical kits offer. For £20, you can get 8 cavalry for GW's plastic cav. So that's a bit better. EDIT 3: If you want to compare infantry, Perry has theirs at 40 figures for £18 and Gripping Beast is 44 for £20. There are a bunch of others as well like Victrix who come in at 48 miniatures for £23. And then you need to take into account that people in the US, Canada and Australia don't have access to GW at UK prices. The historical manufacturers don't try to control the exchange rates and let the distributors do their thing to get the product into stores at reasonable price.
494
Post by: H.B.M.C.
What a dog pile this turned into.
'Cause then he'd have to admit he's wrong.
Or trolling.
And I really don't think he's trolling.
47367
Post by: Fenrir Kitsune
 Spartan089 wrote:The is issue of price is going to be even more prevalent considering the annual GW tribute to the money god...errr I mean price hike is right around the corner.
I'm not sure that they will be hiking the annual prices this year as they've been bumping up prices of stuff each time a new army is released & theres been quite a few recently.
Obviously, I'd love it if they did "adjust" the prices next month for the entertainment value alone.
8932
Post by: Lanrak
Well I personally think that GW plc have gone from a strategy of maximizing profit with annual price rises.
To desperate money grabs on each release to try to maintain a stable gross profit of a shrinking sales volume. AND if their is an annual price rise on top of this , it just shows how desperate for cash they really are.
23979
Post by: frozenwastes
It's also entirely possible that at some point they really will think they have hit the maximum revenue in terms of units sold x price and not raise prices for a year.
I can't believe I was able to type that with a straight face. It theoretically could happen, but if they really are only supporting revenue on falling volume through price increases, then they can never stop raising them without a drop in revenue.
65463
Post by: Herzlos
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: Spartan089 wrote:The is issue of price is going to be even more prevalent considering the annual GW tribute to the money god...errr I mean price hike is right around the corner.
I'm not sure that they will be hiking the annual prices this year as they've been bumping up prices of stuff each time a new army is released & theres been quite a few recently.
I think they probably will, though they've kept quiet about it pretty well so far.
It's almost guaranteed to leak right after I unload a few hundred dollars of stuff at ~50% of current RRP, though.
7954
Post by: Morachi
So now we have GW CA as the new whipping boy ($140 Wraithknights? woooww). Seems the US pricing is fast catching up to down under as well with $115 USD vs $125 AUD kits now coming into standard 40k.
Good thing I had 100 Dire Avengers sitting aside.
That next price hike is going to be a doozey.
13937
Post by: BrassScorpion
Supposedly GW is much larger and produces a greater volume of each sprue than Warlord, Perry, Fireforge, Victrix, Conquest, etc., and yet despite the volume advantage, the historical producers beat GW on a price-per-figure basis. In fact, they make the dire avengers look absolutely insane.
A local store here in the US special ordered Victrix Ancient Athenians for me recently, it was $44 for 48 beautiful models! Yeah, that makes the new Dire Avenger pricing seem all the more absurd.
67781
Post by: BryllCream
Andrew1975 wrote:hellpato wrote:MDR, I read this pointless topic and all I can do is laughing. Over price or not? Quality or not? Who care at the end. When you like something you buy it at the end.
Should have spent the time learning grammar!
you should have spent the time learning grammar too. Read up on 'subjects'. Automatically Appended Next Post:  H.B.M.C. wrote:What a dog pile this turned into.
'Cause then he'd have to admit he's wrong.
Or trolling.
And I really don't think he's trolling.
your ad Hom straw man is missing the point.
68802
Post by: TheAuldGrump
BryllCream wrote: Andrew1975 wrote:hellpato wrote:MDR, I read this pointless topic and all I can do is laughing. Over price or not? Quality or not? Who care at the end. When you like something you buy it at the end.
Should have spent the time learning grammar!
you should have spent the time learning grammar too. Read up on 'subjects'.
While on the subject of grammar, look up capitalization.
I swear, debates about grammar make everybody's grammer, vocababulary, and speling the worser. 
The Auld Grump
*EDIT* I have decided to hold on to the term 'vocababulary'... while intended as a joke, it is so descriptive.... You will be seeing that term again....
664
Post by: Grimtuff
Ironic statement is ironic.
59923
Post by: Baronyu
Spartan089 wrote:The is issue of price is going to be even more prevalent considering the annual GW tribute to the money god...errr I mean price hike is right around the corner.
Kinda looking forward to it if just to see the world burns.
...I'm not a good person. 
664
Post by: Grimtuff
Baronyu wrote: Spartan089 wrote:The is issue of price is going to be even more prevalent considering the annual GW tribute to the money god...errr I mean price hike is right around the corner.
Kinda looking forward to it if just to see the world burns.
...I'm not a good person.
"One more day to go,
One more day of sorrow
One more day to go,
Then we'll raise the prices tomorrow!"
33539
Post by: Coldhatred
Grimtuff wrote:Baronyu wrote: Spartan089 wrote:The is issue of price is going to be even more prevalent considering the annual GW tribute to the money god...errr I mean price hike is right around the corner.
Kinda looking forward to it if just to see the world burns.
...I'm not a good person.
"One more day to go,
One more day of sorrow
One more day to go,
Then we'll raise the prices tomorrow!"
I sang that in my head to Tom Bombadil's song.
53592
Post by: Shaozun
Read a few pages.
Last time I checked their 2011-2012 report (2012-2013 isn't out til June IIRC), they were making roughly 75% of their revenue back into gross profit.
In total, I think they were like 10% Net Profit Margin? Which is somewhat-ish standard (although you can't really compare 2 companies as they have very different business strategies, methods of production, and the likes). If they dropped their price a quarter of what it was, then it'd take a few years for sales to rise to compensate (theoretically), which is just too risky with too much of a chance to kill GW.
With that being said, they made a loss in Australia for many years until 2011-2012 where they finally came out with a net profit in our area.
As for me, I like mantic games stuff as well as others (especially the recent kickstarts). The other stuff is also dirt cheap (Reaper? Not so much) and gives me creativity with conversions as their kits come pretty standardised.
However, the other stuff don't have the models I like, like Terminators, Dreadnoughts, or Daemon Princes. So I'm still willing to buy a Daemon Prince on ebay for $30.
37097
Post by: blood lance
Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
I'm not sure that they will be hiking the annual prices this year as they've been bumping up prices of stuff each time a new army is released & theres been quite a few recently.
.
They already have. Have you not looked at the latest releases? Prices for the respective kits are higher than they usually are on release. GW seem to think people wont notice.
47367
Post by: Fenrir Kitsune
blood lance wrote:Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
I'm not sure that they will be hiking the annual prices this year as they've been bumping up prices of stuff each time a new army is released & theres been quite a few recently.
.
They already have. Have you not looked at the latest releases? Prices for the respective kits are higher than they usually are on release. GW seem to think people wont notice.
"as they've been bumping up prices of stuff each time a new army is released "
|
|
