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

 notprop wrote:

 Vermis wrote:

 notprop wrote:
When you pay for GW, you are paying for the retail chain whether you like it or not.

GW will never drop the retail chain as it is what drives their turnover.

Drives their turnover into the ground, amirite? It doesn't seem to be driving their growth or even maintaining what they have, anyway. More people just want to buy minis these days, without supersizing their order to include a shop.

Rurite? No.

It drives turnover by creating new players and maintain brand presence. At that point thy are ideally placed to pick up the initial binge spend by the new player and recover it at 100% of RRP. That's the theory anyway and seemingly reaonanbly successful at doing this. It would be be a huge vanity operation if these didn't cover their costs and I've never seen GW shy away from shutting something down if it costs money or doesnt meet targets. I would imagine that HO Overheads are seperate to this.

Existing players then have the option of discounting or continue supporting 'their' shop at full RRP.

I'd say that the chain is demonstrably not pulling it's weight.

Why move to one man stores if stores with multiple staff were making money? Surely even the densest mind at GW management wouldn't think that having the stores closed on days they were previously open, and open for shorter periods in the day would somehow net more cash than a multiple FTE model if that was already making money?

Why have this rolling program of store closures and openings if the locations were profitable? I'll concede that retail locations can require a special sort of alchemy, and sometimes locations which have no reason not to succeed crash and burn and others prosper where they have no right to, so a certain amount of risk and experimentation is required, regardless of how much research one does, but if that were the only reason we wouldn't be seeing well established stores closed in favour of new locations in the next town, or next shopping centre, or next street. We also wouldn't be seeing a near complete withdrawal from some locations (chiefly in the States and Antipodes) if those stores (many of which have been open for some time, so, presumably, making cash or at least paying for themselves) were pulling their weight.

I've said before that the chain is GW's biggest problem, it is inhibiting the way they can do business, and they are now stuck with the legacy of the decision to focus on their own stores to the detriment of third parties when, ideally, they need to be free of this sort of commitment. GW's gross margin on their products is nearly 75%, their net profit is around 10% - a substantial part of that difference can only be accounted for by the costs of running the stores.

Let me state that explicitly - if GW dropped their whole retail chain and their sales almost halved as a result, they wouldn't be in a significantly different position than they are now.

I think it's more arrogance than stupidity. I think the assumption is that the customer will buy anyway and there aren't opportunity sales, so a reduction in opening hours just means the wallets will come back another time or use the webstore.

Sadly, I have absolutely no trouble believing that. GW management's apparent disconnect with the reality of their business is quite troubling.

 Azreal13 wrote:

 notprop wrote:

 Vermis wrote:

 notprop wrote:
When you pay for GW, you are paying for the retail chain whether you like it or not.

GW will never drop the retail chain as it is what drives their turnover.

Drives their turnover into the ground, amirite? It doesn't seem to be driving their growth or even maintaining what they have, anyway. More people just want to buy minis these days, without supersizing their order to include a shop.

Rurite? No.

It drives turnover by creating new players and maintain brand presence. At that point thy are ideally placed to pick up the initial binge spend by the new player and recover it at 100% of RRP. That's the theory anyway and seemingly reaonanbly successful at doing this. It would be be a huge vanity operation if these didn't cover their costs and I've never seen GW shy away from shutting something down if it costs money or doesnt meet targets. I would imagine that HO Overheads are seperate to this.

Existing players then have the option of discounting or continue supporting 'their' shop at full RRP.

I'd say that the chain is demonstrably not pulling it's weight.

Why move to one man stores if stores with multiple staff were making money? Surely even the densest mind at GW management wouldn't think that having the stores closed on days they were previously open, and open for shorter periods in the day would somehow net more cash than a multiple FTE model if that was already making money?

I don't know, we are dealing with Tom 'Osmium' Kirby....

The Auld Grump

 Azreal13 wrote:


Let me state that explicitly - if GW dropped their whole retail chain and their sales almost halved as a result, they wouldn't be in a significantly different position than they are now.

Let's see;
>Massive redundancies, so an unnecessary cost in jobs and a use of capital to get rid of all those Redshirts.
>Breaking hundreds of leases would also generate a drop in capital.
>R&D and manufacturing that are out of scale with the business as a whole, this would so be lost/downscaled to fit but this would equally have an impact on output and capability.
>Stock prices would tank and the overall value of GW would reduce a fraction, ultimately being removed from trading on any major market - not good for the many people that own shares.
>I think your estimation of turnover is way off and your being way too generous. The last time GW had little or no shops was the late 80's so a comparable level of turnover might be more accurate, say £15-20M would be my estimate. So about the same size as PP. So that's basically handing the competitive advantage you have built up over 20years and pissing down the swany. I suspect GW would lose that battle.
>No more little Timmys. Hooray call the audience but you've wiped out a generation of new players plus all of the othe players that like the ubiquity of GW product will start to walk.

Hardly that similar commercially or structurally.

If you do not like their prices then do not buy it! Buy used on ebay and craigslist! You will help other players recoup their money.

 notprop wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:


Let me state that explicitly - if GW dropped their whole retail chain and their sales almost halved as a result, they wouldn't be in a significantly different position than they are now.

Let's see;
>Massive redundancies, so an unnecessary cost in jobs and a use of capital to get rid of all those Redshirts.
>Breaking hundreds of leases would also generate a drop in capital.
>R&D and manufacturing that are out of scale with the business as a whole, this would so be lost/downscaled to fit but this would equally have an impact on output and capability.
>Stock prices would tank and the overall value of GW would reduce a fraction, ultimately being removed from trading on any major market - not good for the many people that own shares.
>I think your estimation of turnover is way off and your being way too generous. The last time GW had little or no shops was the late 80's so a comparable level of turnover might be more accurate, say £15-20M would be my estimate. So about the same size as PP. So that's basically handing the competitive advantage you have built up over 20years and pissing down the swany. I suspect GW would lose that battle.
>No more little Timmys. Hooray call the audience but you've wiped out a generation of new players plus all of the othe players that like the ubiquity of GW product will start to walk.

Hardly that similar commercially or structurally.

Not quite the point I was making, I was more trying to illustrate what a significant impact the running of the chain has on their profit, not put forward an actual proposal to close it all overnight!

That said, to address some of your points as a theoretical exercise -

GW apparently has high turnover of staff - as a result it would probably be quite a lot cheaper to divest a lot of the staff than you think. Staff with less than a year's service can be drop kicked for any reason, with no comeback, and at a months salary per year of service redundancy, I doubt many staff would be entitled to significant payouts.

Leases would be a little harder, but ultimately landlords are only interested in getting their rent, so are often open to lease transfers etc. It wouldn't be easy, but the costs could be mitigated.

You're massively overestimating R+D costs, their cost of sales is less than a quarter of their revenue, and that includes production costs, materials etc, as well as design. Production costs would fall with a fall in unit sales, but I don't think it would be impossible to protect the design team, with perhaps a few redundancies.

Turnover is vanity, profit is sanity. It isn't relevant what their turnover is compared to PP, if PP are making the same profits at the end of the day, who's in a better position? Plus I'm not really estimating, I might be using round figures and loose mental arithmetic, but the numbers I'm using are taken from GW's statements, so while I might be off by a few percent here or there, the fundamentals are more or less accurate.

There were little Timmys before GW, otherwise where did all the wargamers that predate them come from? There are little Timmys finding their way into the hobby all the time in the US where GW's stores in no way are as saturated as they are in the UK. Know why? GW isn't the beginning or the end of the wargaming hobby. If all GW stores closed overnight, it wouldn't be long before independents began to replace them, that's in the parts of the world where anyone would notice the closure of all the GW's shops, of course.

 Azreal13 wrote:
GW apparently has high turnover of staff - as a result it would probably be quite a lot cheaper to divest a lot of the staff than you think. Staff with less than a year's service can be drop kicked for any reason, with no comeback, and at a months salary per year of service redundancy, I doubt many staff would be entitled to significant payouts.

In a lot of places it would be free to get rid of those employees. For example, here in NC unions are an abomination before god and you can be fired at any time for any reason, and all your employer owes you is your last paycheck for the hours you've already worked.

There are little Timmys finding their way into the hobby all the time in the US where GW's stores in no way are as saturated as they are in the UK. Know why? GW isn't the beginning or the end of the wargaming hobby. If all GW stores closed overnight, it wouldn't be long before independents began to replace them, that's in the parts of the world where anyone would notice the closure of all the GW's shops, of course.

And this needs to be emphasized. GW stores in the US might as well not exist, there aren't very many of them and they're rarely in high-traffic areas that would attract customers. So even when new customers do start buying at a GW store it's almost certainly because they heard about GW online/had a friend that plays/etc, things that would still happen at an independent store. If GW closed all of their stores overnight hardly anyone would notice their absence. The few people who buy and play at a GW store because it happens to be the closest store in their area would drive a bit longer and move to independent stores, and the majority that already buy and play at independent stores would continue on without any interruption.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
The value of GW stores can't be measured purely off what they sell. They are a form of advertising as well. How many people bought their first box from a GW but now buy from an FLGS, how many people play in GW's but buy their stuff from an FLGS, how many people would have quit if it weren't for their local GW, but still buy their stuff elsewhere? Those are the relevant questions. Even going back to the mid 90's when I started out, I bought my first box in an FLGS before I discovered GW existed, but the GW store is most definitely what kept me in the game... but I still bought stuff from the FLGS.

It's a really expensive form of advertisement, though - they spend 50m in it every year. It might be that it used to be important for GW presence and availability, but I doubt the same thing is true today. There's a good FLGS presence (despite competition from 400 GW stores!) and web shops serve you 24/7.

What would happen if GW dropped their stores? They might lose a few sales, but I'd say more than half of that would go to FLGS/internet. That would be +25m of profit, part of which they could use for advertisement and presence. Also, we probably would see a couple more FLGS's pop up, with some of the competition removed.

Being VERY general here:

Cut prices to the point Land Raider sized stuff is 50 bucks.
10 man squads 25
A codex with everything in it, paperback (No dlc bs) 25
Big Rulebook 50

And boom GW's stuff will sell like hotcakes.

Subject: What should GW sell there models for?

Answer: About half of current prices would still be "high".

Herzlos wrote:

 notprop wrote:
The thing is GW are running at a margin of between 10-13% most years so a price reduction of any significant amount would cut into their margin dramatically.

At a basic level reducing price by 20% requires an increase in sales of over 30% to maintain margin position and mitigate the extra overhead (assuming only 5% cost uplift and a 10% margin position).

That's hell of a lot of effort and a bigger risk just to break even. I'm no salesman but I'm not sure the extra sales are possible given such a reduction. It would be a massive roll of the dice to try and put this into action.

As a business trying to please shareholders there is zero chance of a Chairman putting his cock on the block for numbers like that.

Realistically I think the best GW could offer is holding prices for an extended period of time. The move to resin and the paring down of shops/staff makes this possible.

Agreed; a price cut is risky. But there's almost no risk or cost in increasing value. Doubling the number of sprues in a troop box costs pretty much nothinv but makes the box better value and should increase sales by more than enougb to compensate.

This is basically my thought. Don't make things cheaper by halving the price of current boxes, make them cheaper by doubling the number of models in a box, or make everything 3 for the price of 2. The cost of the sprues themselves seems minor compared to the other costs involved in selling the models, so your main goal should be to get the most money out of each customer even if it means giving them more product.

Azreal13 wrote:I'd say that the chain is demonstrably not pulling it's weight.

Do we even know how much it costs GW to keep the shops open? I flicked through their report and couldn't see it explicitly stated, but maybe I just missed it. Is 50M what they have said or what we have guessed?

Given the hobby centres make 42% of sales, I would not be too hasty to close them. Especially since I think a lot of sales come from other sources but are still a result of the stores existing. I would be taking a far closer look at which stores are making money and which ones aren't and aim to improve the poor performers long before I consider just giving up on them completely (rather than GW's current strategy of simply culling staff and moving them to areas of cheaper rent).



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 prowla wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
The value of GW stores can't be measured purely off what they sell. They are a form of advertising as well. How many people bought their first box from a GW but now buy from an FLGS, how many people play in GW's but buy their stuff from an FLGS, how many people would have quit if it weren't for their local GW, but still buy their stuff elsewhere? Those are the relevant questions. Even going back to the mid 90's when I started out, I bought my first box in an FLGS before I discovered GW existed, but the GW store is most definitely what kept me in the game... but I still bought stuff from the FLGS.

It's a really expensive form of advertisement, though - they spend 50m in it every year. It might be that it used to be important for GW presence and availability, but I doubt the same thing is true today. There's a good FLGS presence (despite competition from 400 GW stores!) and web shops serve you 24/7.

What would happen if GW dropped their stores? They might lose a few sales, but I'd say more than half of that would go to FLGS/internet. That would be +25m of profit, part of which they could use for advertisement and presence. Also, we probably would see a couple more FLGS's pop up, with some of the competition removed.

That would be a hugely epic gamble to think closing your stores would result in customers still buying but from elsewhere. Not something I'd expect any company to do without far more thought and planning. When half your customers buy directly from your stores that sell only your products I'd be very hesitant to tell them go buy from an independent store that is also pushing a bunch of other products that are your direct competition.

 notprop wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:


Let me state that explicitly - if GW dropped their whole retail chain and their sales almost halved as a result, they wouldn't be in a significantly different position than they are now.

Let's see;
>Massive redundancies, so an unnecessary cost in jobs and a use of capital to get rid of all those Redshirts.
>Breaking hundreds of leases would also generate a drop in capital.
>R&D and manufacturing that are out of scale with the business as a whole, this would so be lost/downscaled to fit but this would equally have an impact on output and capability.
>Stock prices would tank and the overall value of GW would reduce a fraction, ultimately being removed from trading on any major market - not good for the many people that own shares.
>I think your estimation of turnover is way off and your being way too generous. The last time GW had little or no shops was the late 80's so a comparable level of turnover might be more accurate, say £15-20M would be my estimate. So about the same size as PP. So that's basically handing the competitive advantage you have built up over 20years and pissing down the swany. I suspect GW would lose that battle.
>No more little Timmys. Hooray call the audience but you've wiped out a generation of new players plus all of the othe players that like the ubiquity of GW product will start to walk.

Hardly that similar commercially or structurally.

You're assuming they'd just drop the retail wing at once, with redundancies. Most likely would be that they'd just stop renewing leases unless they are cheap enough to get out of, and not replacing staff when they leave. Sure it'd probaly take them 10 years to run them all down but they'd be able to shed a dozen or so stores a year and make comparative savings, and it'd allow them some opportunity to migrate to a FLGS model at the same time.

Though this is GW, so that might be too sensible.

I'm not assuming I'm just following the premise that another had started.

Quick or Slow, There is nothing sensible in dropping a retail arm that generates 42% of sales at 100% of RRP.

This is one of the major factors why GW is 10 times larger than its nearest competitor.

 notprop wrote:
I'm not assuming I'm just following the premise that another had started.

Quick or Slow, There is nothing sensible in dropping a retail arm that generates 42% of sales at 100% of RRP.

This is one of the major factors why GW is 10 times larger than its nearest competitor.

That retail arm is also a very big reason on why their profit on each model sold goes from 78% to 12%. That is what Azreal13 is saying. It doesn't matter how many sales they are generating if they are stifling their profits by this much.

Also, their retail arm might be one of the major factors why GW is so big IN THE UK, the rest of the world couldn't care less about it and it still has to pay for it.

PhantomViper wrote:
Also, their retail arm might be one of the major factors why GW is so big IN THE UK, the rest of the world couldn't care less about it and it still has to pay for it.

Exactly. Here in the US GW's own stores might as well not exist. For example, in my area there are 3-5 independent stores (depending on how far you're willing to drive) and a single GW store, and the fact that we have even one GW store is unusual. Up until (IIRC) 2-3 years ago there wasn't a GW store in the entire state. So no, GW's retail stores have not in any way contributed to the success of GW products in this area, and the rest of the US is pretty much the same.

And if you reduce the turnover by dropping you do not reduce the base costs of manufacture. So the 78% gross profit will reduce at at least the same rate as the lost retail sales possibly more as you will now have increased the reliance on sales to distributors and FLGs (i.e. 55% RRP and not 100%). The cost would become a much greater factor against the smaller turnover making even a minor a price reduction very unlikely assuming it was possible to make any margin. It simply isn't possible to shear off a huge chunk of a company and discard it.

As for the UK vs RotW, its entirely relevant as its a UK company with a major stake in its home market. You pays your money you takes your chance on that one I'm afraid.

We are also forgetting another big chunk of the after gross profit charges will be international distribution and storage. 6 of one half a dozen of the other it would seem.

 notprop wrote:
And if you reduce the turnover by dropping you do not reduce the base costs of manufacture. So the 78% gross profit will reduce at at least the same rate as the lost retail sales possibly more as you will now have increased the reliance on sales to distributors and FLGs (i.e. 55% RRP and not 100%). The cost would become a much greater factor against the smaller turnover making even a minor a price reduction very unlikely assuming it was possible to make any margin. It simply isn't possible to shear off a huge chunk of a company and discard it.

If you take a -50% hit on sales and -50% hit on RRP, you're still at +12,5m, though. That would have doubled this year's profit

Obviously they don't need to axe all of their stores, but with 140 stores in the UK alone, I'd say there's some pruning to do. They could remove 80% of the UK stores, and still have a good presence with 30 strategic locations.

I remember about a year ago seeing a job advert on their website looking for someone to basically go around all the shops in all the countries where they operate and report directly to Kirby on what works or not, so I don't think they're going to just drop the retail arm anytime soon. Even with the decline of the high street, it'd be excessively hasty to do so.

 Davylove21 wrote:
I remember about a year ago seeing a job advert on their website looking for someone to basically go around all the shops in all the countries where they operate and report directly to Kirby on what works or not, so I don't think they're going to just drop the retail arm anytime soon. Even with the decline of the high street, it'd be excessively hasty to do so.

No your absolutely right mate. I was trying to give some logic to the position so that there could be some more realism to the wishlisting.

Conversely GW have been one of the few examples of UK High Street (read Main Street) retails that have strengthened their presence when many such locations are increasingly bereft of any shops other than the usual High Street Chain suspects.

I buy all of my GW minis from eBay. Currently building an Imperial Guard/Scions army.


30 Scions: $210 from GW, payed around $70 buying the bits instead of the box sets.

2 Taurox primes: $100 from GW, payed about $15 for each of them buying the bits individually.

Recently won an auction for a Cadian Defense Force set for $90. Sells for $165 on GW's site and has about $200 "worth" of IG in it.

I get what you guys are saying about GW's ridiculous prices, and I completely agree. However, there are cheaper ways of getting minis if you put in the effort.

 notprop wrote:
When you pay for GW, you are paying for the retail chain whether you like it or not.

GW will never drop the retail chain as it is what drives their turnover. It is why they are the size they are comparatively to all others wargames companies.

That is why they became that big, it's not why they stay big. And I only got into the hobby because I could get second-hand miniatures for half the price or less from ebay etc. And even that only because I have a job.
If they reduce their prices, more people might flock to them. I was interested in 40k when I was 12 or so, but i couldn't afford it back then and not every little Timmy has got rich parents.
So yeah, they would need to dramatically improve their sales numbers if they slash the prices. But that might revert the trend of dwindling customers and ever-higher pricing, scaring off more and more newcomers.

Hi folks.
Here are some figures I was given by my friend who works in manufacturing at Nottingham GW site.
The TOTAL cost of manufacturing the plastic kits and boxing them ready for shipping, including ALL over heads for manufacture , is 8% of the retail price.
(Design-development, materials, labour costs, and depreciation of assets,buildings and machinery etc.)

This rises to 24% of retail cost when the over heads of all other GW functions apart from retail and logistics are added.(Corporate/corporation level overheads.)

And finally a 32% of retail cost when all over heads EXCLUDING retail are added.

So if GW plc did not have a retail chain they would make 68% profit of their current retail prices, not just 12%

So 42% sales through GW stores costs them 56% of their profit!

(Note figures were only for plastic kits manufacture and packed in Nottingham facility, last year.)

Da Stormlord wrote:
I'm back into making threads now guys

So I went into GW on Friday and the prices were ridiculous. One model and two paints costing over £20? I think that GW could lower prices by 20% and actually get a better profit. A battlesuit commander (tau empire) costs £25. Doesn't anyone agree that this could be dropped to £20 and still be considered overpriced? What really pisses me off though is that a model half the size and made of the same materials is just £9.50? I'm tempted to abandon GW and head to the outpost, a store across the street that sells the same models for £15. A much cheaper solution to GW. I recommend you all visit there sight, they do other games such as dystopian wars and dropzone commander too.

Most people I know dont really care about the Prices... If the game was FUN to play people would pay its that simple.. I think the reason why the question about the prices keeps coming up is because people can no longer justify paying what they are for GW, when they are no longer having any fun playing the game

Other game systems that offer alot more FUN for your money are cheaper so why PAY more for less??...

 zlayer77 wrote:

Da Stormlord wrote:
I'm back into making threads now guys

So I went into GW on Friday and the prices were ridiculous. One model and two paints costing over £20? I think that GW could lower prices by 20% and actually get a better profit. A battlesuit commander (tau empire) costs £25. Doesn't anyone agree that this could be dropped to £20 and still be considered overpriced? What really pisses me off though is that a model half the size and made of the same materials is just £9.50? I'm tempted to abandon GW and head to the outpost, a store across the street that sells the same models for £15. A much cheaper solution to GW. I recommend you all visit there sight, they do other games such as dystopian wars and dropzone commander too.

Most people I know dont really care about the Prices... If the game was FUN to play people would pay its that simple.. I think the reason why the question about the prices keeps coming up is because people can no longer justify paying what they are for GW, when they are no longer having any fun playing the game

Other game systems that offer alot more FUN for your money are cheaper so why PAY more for less??...

I buy figures mostly for the painting and modelling interest as I get few few games of anything in. I used to buy and play GW a lot. Currently I'm earning more than ever in my life with the fewest other responsibilities, and I just can't justify the expense. You just don't get enough plastic in the box for what GW charge. Their prices are sky high for a weedy amount of product. I can afford it, but I can't justify it.

Lanrak wrote:
And finally a 32% of retail cost when all over heads EXCLUDING retail are added.

So if GW plc did not have a retail chain they would make 68% profit of their current retail prices, not just 12%

So 42% sales through GW stores costs them 56% of their profit!

That doesn't add up. If 32% of retail price is before it gets to stores and GW made 12.5% profit last year the cost of running the stores would be 55%. If you then close the retail chain, unless all your sales go to the online store (unlikely) but rather go to independents, they discount around 45% (I believe) for independents so their profit would only be 23% assuming they managed to have the same number of final sales.

Now obviously 23% is better than 12.5%, but I wouldn't be rushing out to close all the stores and expect to not lose any sales. I think the smarter thing to do is micromanage the stores better than just closing them, figure out which stores are doing well and which are doing poorly, figure out which stores were doing well before the shift to 1 man stores and are now doing worse, close stores that are unsuccessfully competing with FLGS's, in regions where there aren't many FLGS's and local GW stores are doing poorly look at some local advertising campaigns (global ad campaigns are massively expensive, but some local stuff might be realistic). I'd even look at doing sales and running local events in areas where sales are poor.

GW would also have the benefit of knowing (since the shift to having a lot of direct only items) if there's areas where there aren't many FLGS's, there are local GW's which are doing poorly but they still get decent online sales in those locations (indicating there's a community there but they mostly buy online rather than from stores) and they could try and work with local clubs in those areas.

 Filch wrote:
If you do not like their prices then do not buy it! Buy used on ebay and craigslist! You will help other players recoup their money.

I don't buy of ebay.
You know why?
People think that because they've painted an £18 tau pirahna they can suddenly sell it for £25


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And if you guys want to save around 40% on your models, I have a trick: Buy the web bundles instead of individual boxes

Da Stormlord wrote:

And if you guys want to save around 40% on your models, I have a trick: Buy the web bundles instead of individual boxes

Are...are you being serious?

When you say 'Web Bundles', do you really mean 'Special Boxed Sets', because the web bundles are literally only saving clicks. They are the exact sum of the all the kits in the bundle with zero discount.

Da Stormlord wrote:

 Filch wrote:
If you do not like their prices then do not buy it! Buy used on ebay and craigslist! You will help other players recoup their money.

I don't buy of ebay.
You know why?
People think that because they've painted an £18 tau pirahna they can suddenly sell it for £25


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And if you guys want to save around 40% on your models, I have a trick: Buy the web bundles instead of individual boxes

As mentioned earlier: 3k points of orks, 3k points of CSM, 1.5k points of demons and not a single piece bought for full GW price. When buying from ebay, 60% of retail is the absolute maximum I am willing to pay, and even that only if it's precisely what I need or is still in the box.

And yeah, Blacksails has it right: the web bundles don't save anything. Never did.

 Blacksails wrote:

Da Stormlord wrote:

And if you guys want to save around 40% on your models, I have a trick: Buy the web bundles instead of individual boxes

Are...are you being serious?

When you say 'Web Bundles', do you really mean 'Special Boxed Sets', because the web bundles are literally only saving clicks. They are the exact sum of the all the kits in the bundle with zero discount.

Well, its what a dude said on youtube.