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.

Davor wrote:This bothers me a bit. Someone said that GW said that they don't allow non painted armies because other people have taken the time to paint them and it's not fair to them. How is this so? What's not fair? I don't get it. Do unpainted armies get better dice rolls? Do unpainted armies get better stats? Please explain to me how is it unfair for a painted army? I can't see how it is unfair. It's all about selling GW paint and brushes.

First, if you're buying GW brushes, shame on you! They have all the quality of a Walmart special at several times the price!

It's called "Standards." Some people have them, some people don't. Some people who run tournaments and leagues decide to set a standard that everyone has to abide by. If GW says "this is the standard" then yes, it would be unfair for people who don't meet that standard to be able to compete with other people that do. People who spend time painting their models so they can use them on the table are meeting a standard of GW's. People who aren't, don't. It's an abstract, something one can only understand if they are open to them.

I'm not really surprised when I hear people complain about such things. People are becoming lazier and lazier, not to mention whinier and whinier. As I said before, if you say you consider 40k your "hobby," then painting models is an integral part of it being a hobby. If you don't want to paint your models, then you're in the wrong hobby, there are many game systems that come with pre-painted miniatures and simple and fun game systems. I'm sure you can find someone to sell or trade your minis so you can get minis for those game systems.

Skinnattittar wrote: I'm not really surprised when I hear people complain about such things. People are becoming lazier and lazier, not to mention whinier and whinier. As I said before, if you say you consider 40k your "hobby," then painting models is an integral part of it being a hobby. If you don't want to paint your models, then you're in the wrong hobby, there are many game systems that come with pre-painted miniatures and simple and fun game systems. I'm sure you can find someone to sell or trade your minis so you can get minis for those game systems.

You left out this view in your breakdown of the painter vs non-painter viewpoint trends.

Well, I've been in this thread for a couple pages, and I think I've found the trends:

Painters : "I prefer to play other painted armies over non-painted armies, though I will generally still play against non-painted armies, and if I don't feel like playing a non-painted army (for whatever reason) I will politely decline playing that person (though their army not being painted isn't the only factor to me declining playing against/with them). I can understand and appreciate how some people don't have a lot of time to paint their armies, but as long as they are making improvements, that's okay with me." But I'll basically think they are lazy and whiney and are in the wrong hobby."

Non-Painters : "I don't have the time to be bothered with painting my army and I don't want to wait a single second to play something I bought. Even if I own something for 50 years and never even glue its arms on, I have no second feelings about it while other gamers spend their time painting their armies to a minimum three color standard. I don't particularly care about the hobby aspect of 40k, I just want to play the rules. Also, anyone who believes that painting armies is a requirement to be considered a '40k Hobbyist' is obviously an elitist and a prick."

It's comments like those that can bring out the "elitist" labels. If you want to try and show both sides of the argument, at least sum them up correctly. You make it sound like you're completely reasonable and understanding but every non-painter is pissed off at all painters and calls them all elitists without justification. I would argue that most non-painters are just as pragmatic about things as the painters. They'll respect your decision to want to play painted armies and go about their business. They understand that the hobby offers different things for different people. Don't make non-painters out to be lazy, whiney people who don't deserve to be in the same hobby/game as you while you're arguing that you are some benevolent person that is more than willing to grace them with a game and wonder why someone would think you sound like an elitist.

Dashofpepper wrote:

Night Lords wrote:
Its funny actually, because while you are posting off these over-exaggerated statements, you are actually just proving the other side's point. You are a power gamer. I dont think it's unreasonable to say that if someone wants to play painted miniatures, they're most likely looking for more of a fun/cinematic game than a pure game of W40k (otherwise they'd play you).

So funny enough, you, with the unpainted army, dont provide that either. You are going to play to win, argue small rules, watch your opponent's every move, etc., and while that's fine, that's not what everyone wants out of the game.

And the stereotypes continue. So you've got us sorted into two groups now: Painters who enjoy thematic games, and non-painters who are power-gamers and aren't fun to play with. Very nice.

And the exaggerations continue. Now with generalizations!

If you notice I said "People who want to play a painted army are most likely painters who enjoy cinematic/fun games as opposed to just a pure W40k game". Not all painters, painters who care enough to refuse to play a non painted army. To someone willing to dedicate a ton of hours painting, the game is probably more than a game to them because theyve put their time and heart into it. You wouldnt know this feeling because youre not willing to even try, so why even comment?

When I was talking about "power gamers", I was more so specifically talking about you because youre the perfect opposite of what a relaxed game of 40k is about. You argue. Ive seen you make topics where you ask clarification on a rule after arguing about it. The point is, youre whining that people are saying they wont play you, yet youre the exact type of person they would probably want to avoid - someone not into the hobby/fluff aspect at all.

So congratulations, you managed to generalize my reply into two types gamers, yet got both completely wrong. Please read before you spurt more BS. Thanks.

@ Gornall : When did not being lazy and whiny become elitist? When did not painting an army include whiny? I only meant to say (and I think I did) that people who insist that not painting their armies is just as much a part of the 40k hobby as painting their armies are lazy and whining. Very different, and I would appreciate you not putting dumb-feth (and no, that is not insulting you, just what you're doing) exaggerations into my posts and claiming that is what I said. I very calmly and, in my own way, rationally wrote out how I feel the two arguments are presenting themselves. I have not seen anyone actually say "I will never play a non-painted army because people who don't plaint their armies are poopy-faces." What I have seen is "I prefer to play painted armies and I would prefer to only play painted armies over only playing non-painted armies because [blah]." Some people have voiced that some day they may only play other painted armies, but the major census I would say is playing both.

It's alright for people to be different and like different sorts of things and to rationalize such things to themselves. Heck, it's even alright for them to dislike other sorts of people for rational reasons. We're not talking about the color of people's skin, we're talking about the color, or more specifically lack there of, of their armies.

In any codex, magazine, article, website, etc... have you ever seen professionals using unpainted miniatures to advertise their game? How many official battle reports do you see with gray and unpainted armies? How many issues of White Dwarf, the official GW Hobby magazine, use unpainted miniatures (outside of "How To" guides)? Painting miniatures is just as much, if not more, important than the playing aspect of the game itself. If it weren't, then paper discs with "Space Marine" written on it would be just as a valid model as the actual latest and greatest thing being sold.

Once again what about those snobby folks who don't even play with their painted minis, remember how HALF the hobby is painting? So are those folks only taking advantage of half a hobby? should they find something better to do with their time?

GW i know did have rule like that, where you had to show progress and what not, and really its so you buy their paints and brushes and what not. You know that 12 year old kid thats all "i have to paint....?" and then the redshirt goes "Yeah, here let me show you our paints" Thats the GW experience. I think GW has a new approach now, with their academy classes, to encourage a more rounded hobbiest, who builds, paints, and plays.

Gamers: Just want to have a fun game, never interfere with painters painting.
Painters in this thread: Refuse to game with gamers when looking for a game, lessening other peoples fun in the part of the hobby they like because of personal biases and prejudices. Claim they're not jerks or elitist.

Got it. Glad my FLGS is about fun and not excluding people.

My armies aren't painted for the simple reason that 40K and Fantasy aren't my primary games. I play games to have fun, and don't need a painted model to have fun.

In the end, I probably have more Battletech models painted than you know even exist, and have painted more of them than you have ever, or will ever, paint Games Workshop figures.

"Hobby" is a pretty simple term. If you won't play against someone with an unpainted army, you are limiting your fun. That's a YOU problem.

Gamers: Just want to have a fun game, never interfere with painters painting, claim all people who want to play with painted miniatures only, or even wanting someone to ATTEMPT to paint their army to a tabletop standard are "elitist".

Painters in this thread: Just want to paint. Obviously, being painters y'know?

Gamers who want painted armies for both sides: ...Want exactly that. It's a preference. Much like not wanting to play video games with people who hack, or preferring to play in a party formed from their friends list rather than a bunch of whiny tweens spouting their new racial slur of the day.

Gorkamorka wrote:Gamers: Just want to have a fun game, never interfere with painters painting.

Of course not, how could they? Painting is an individual activity not a social thing unlike gaming which requires interaction with others. Figures are not diminished by not being gamed with, but the quality of games is diminished by models not being painted.

Painters in this thread: Refuse to game with gamers when looking for a game, lessening other peoples fun in the part of the hobby they like because of personal biases and prejudices. Claim they're not jerks or elitist.

How does someone refusing to play people with unpainted armies lessening other people's fun? Why? If I don't wish to play a game with you for any reason, I'm now "diminishing your fun"? You must be easily disappointed to not get to play anyone you want to try and put the painters on this guilt trip.

People with unpainted armies know that they aren't participating in all areas of the hobby compared to others, they can't actually legitimately criticise people with painted armies so they come out with this illogical nonsense about them being elitist and spoiling everyone else's fun. Being elitist for just buying stuff, building and painting it and turning up to play expecting others to do the same. Why is it elitist to expect people playing games to assemble a presentable army, which includes full assembly including a lick of paint. It's ridiculous, building and painting your models used to be considered the expected standard for wargaming for years, I don't know where this creep of belligerent non-painters has come from.

hcordes wrote:Once again what about those snobby folks who don't even play with their painted minis, remember how HALF the hobby is painting? So are those folks only taking advantage of half a hobby? should they find something better to do with their time?

Well, I don't know why you're calling them snobby, I know several people who just paint and hang out, and they're usually the most interesting people to talk to. But if they just paint models and don't play then they're not 40k "Hobbyists," but 40k Modeller hobbyists.

hcordes wrote:GW i know did have rule like that, where you had to show progress and what not, and really its so you buy their paints and brushes and what not. You know that 12 year old kid thats all "i have to paint....?" and then the redshirt goes "Yeah, here let me show you our paints" Thats the GW experience. I think GW has a new approach now, with their academy classes, to encourage a more rounded hobbiest, who builds, paints, and plays.

While I agree that GW paints are outrageously priced, I find them to be great paints. They apply well, dry quickly, and look good! But they are expensive. You can't really fault them for wanting to sell product, every business you go to is only really interested in selling product.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gorkamorka wrote:Painters in this thread: Refuse to game with gamers when looking for a game, lessening other peoples fun in the part of the hobby they like because of personal biases and prejudices. Claim they're not jerks or elitist.

Who is saying all painters are not going to game with nonpainters? I certainly am not. Please don't lie, it hurts us all and detracts from everyone else's fun! You biased and elitist person you

Mattlov wrote:My armies aren't painted for the simple reason that 40K and Fantasy aren't my primary games. I play games to have fun, and don't need a painted model to have fun.
In the end, I probably have more Battletech models painted than you know even exist, and have painted more of them than you have ever, or will ever, paint Games Workshop figures.
"Hobby" is a pretty simple term. If you won't play against someone with an unpainted army, you are limiting your fun. That's a YOU problem.

Very nice, no one cares about your painted Battletech when you're talking about painted 40k models. I have probably rebuilt more engines than you ever have or ever will, taken targets at longer ranges than you probably ever see, and operated heavier equipment than you know exists. But nobody particularly cares about that stuff, so why mention it? And who says people who are only playing painted armies are limiting their fun? Wouldn't forcing them to play unpainted armies be reducing their fun?

Just throwing this out there. I know this is stupid talk but bear with me for a few minutes. I am trying to make a point, but I am not good with words unfortunately.

If this is suppose to be a hobby, and if you are not painting you are lazy, as some people have said. I said some people. A few people did actually say some people are lazy if they don't paint.

So if you say someone is lazy and that person has an unpainted army, why are you buying miniatures? Why not make them from scratch? Why are you only doing a half assed job in painting only? Why are you not doing it all the way, buy making instead of buying? If you can call a person with an unpainted army lazy, well then you are lazy for not making the army from scratch. You can call me lazy for not painting an army (btw I do paint mine, slowly but shurely) but I can call you lazy for not making an army from scratch. See we get nowhere with this kind of talking. BTW, Now that is a hobby where you make your own mini's and paint and assemble them as well.

Also what about the person who buys the mini's but pays someone else to paint them? They never painted the army themselves so do they deserve to play a game? Are they any less of a person? As you say, they only do half the hobby, so they shouldn't be able to play as well, or at least play you? Is this a double standard now? They didn't paint, so only is doing half the hobby, or 1/3rd of the hobby since they didn't make the minis either.

See we all are in the Hobby for different reasons. It's like telling someone they can't play street hockey since they are not using a puck and they are not on ice. You only are doing it half way since you don't have the proper equipment on, and not wearing jearsies.

PS
Again what ever happened to people being polite and non judgemental?

I've got two decent sized painted armies, i'm about to start a third, it'll get playtested around my place but i probably won't take it on the road till it's a bit more painted.

I don't mind if i'm playing someone who's got a painted army or not, i'd rather play a painted army on properly done terrain, as there is a visual part of this hobby that really appeals.

I'd also rather that my opponent enjoys themself, if thats by just playing brilliant, i'd rather someone not rush and ruin their models.

guess that my 2 pence

Davor wrote:Just throwing this out there. I know this is stupid talk but bear with me for a few minutes. I am trying to make a point, but I am not good with words unfortunately.

If this is suppose to be a hobby, and if you are not painting you are lazy, as some people have said. I said some people. A few people did actually say some people are lazy if they don't paint.

Well, I said if they are refusing to paint their models because they think it is not worth their time, and still want to be considered a 40k Hobbyist. That was my standing.

Davor wrote:So if you say someone is lazy and that person has an unpainted army, why are you buying miniatures? Why not make them from scratch? Why are you only doing a half assed job in painting only? Why are you not doing it all the way, buy making instead of buying? If you can call a person with an unpainted army lazy, well then you are lazy for not making the army from scratch. You can call me lazy for not painting an army (btw I do paint mine, slowly but shurely) but I can call you lazy for not making an army from scratch. See we get nowhere with this kind of talking. BTW, Now that is a hobby where you make your own mini's and paint and assemble them as well.

(a) GW won't let you build your own models from scratch and play them. (b) Making a model from scratch and painting a model are two very different things. (c) A major part of the hobby is assembling and painting the models, not building them from scratch. (d) Standards are subjective, not relativistic objective; i.e. painters feel painting your models is a minimum standard for being 40k Hobbyist.

Davor wrote:Also what about the person who buys the mini's but pays someone else to paint them? They never painted the army themselves so do they deserve to play a game? Are they any less of a person? As you say, they only do half the hobby, so they shouldn't be able to play as well, or at least play you? Is this a double standard now? They didn't paint, so only is doing half the hobby, or 1/3rd of the hobby since they didn't make the minis either.

I would say they are some sort of hobbyist. They appreciate painted armies, though they may lack the time or ability to paint one themselves and make the sacrifice in some other way. Benefit of the doubt would give them "Hobbyist" status, but I would place them more in the Gamer status. I would play that by ear if I was caring.

Davor wrote:See we all are in the Hobby for different reasons. It's like telling someone they can't play street hockey since they are not using a puck and they are not on ice. You only are doing it half way since you don't have the proper equipment on, and not wearing jearsies.

No, you might still consider yourself to be playing street hocky, but you're probably not going to be able to join a Street Hockey Association or whatever. This is an apples to oranges thing... well, more like apples to banannas, or maybe striated legal systems to sub-nuclear fusion theory applied to thermo-conductivity theory. They're just not related.

Davor wrote:PS
Again what ever happened to people being polite and non judgemental?

Never existed. Everyone judges everyone and politeness is subjective. I think I'm being polite, maybe I'm abrasive, but I am certainly being civil.

Just woke up after a small nap. Man I am not feeling good today. What did I type? What was I trying to prove? LOL, guess I shouldn't be reading forums when I don't feel good.

I wasn't directing anything at you Skinattattar. You are being polite, and your arguements and rebutals are good.

I am trying to start painting my Tyrainds, and man I hate painting. It use to be fun, but I guess I suck at it, and don't like the result I see so it's more of a chore now than fun as it use to be. I guess I have to keep at it to get better.

Just wundering, did I miss the OP replying after he made his 2nd or so post? I am wundering what he thinks after reading all this.

Davor wrote:It's all about selling GW paint and brushes.

Q.F.T
Dont forget , it also allows GW to push their prices out of logic just by slapping on
"Warhammer is a game , and ALSO a hobby you get 2 activities so you should pay more."

LunaHound wrote:

Davor wrote:It's all about selling GW paint and brushes.

Q.F.T

If that were true, they wouldn't let you play with models painted with Vallejo, etc.

They do, so it's a wrong statement.

The "painting standard" for official GW events is to make an enjoyable photograph that they can print in White Dwarf/their website.
It does NOT make people want to play seeing bare metal/plastic facing each other over a gorgeous landscape.

Kanluwen wrote:

LunaHound wrote:

Davor wrote:It's all about selling GW paint and brushes.

Q.F.T

If that were true, they wouldn't let you play with models painted with Vallejo, etc.

They do, so it's a wrong statement.

The "painting standard" for official GW events is to make an enjoyable photograph that they can print in White Dwarf/their website.
It does NOT make people want to play seeing bare metal/plastic facing each other over a gorgeous landscape.

1) They cant police what paints you use at home , and they arnt going to strap you to lie detector test and investigate every painted army .
One easy way to test this theory Kan , bring vallejo paints and brushes to paint in GW store , if they let you , i'll forfeit my point.

2)See the 2nd part i added in the paragraph above.

1) *sigh* Once again--GW CAN enforce what you do on their storegrounds. And it will vary, repeatedly. The GW store I visited in NY had no issue letting me paint a little bit with unmarked things of Vallejo paints. If someone commented on the color, I'd give them a link to Squadron shop's Vallejo line. Part of the issue is that GW stores won't really react well to it if someone in turn asks them where to get that specific kind of paint. But provided you don't try to push the paints on customers or badmouth GW's stuff, I don't see why they'd really have an issue.

2) That's a ridiculous statement. Their prices, while out of line, are no worse than Privateer's or any other miniature competitor. The painting standard is for, once again, display purposes.

Which would get you more interested in a game:
A gorgeously painted pair of armies duking it out over a gorgeously themed table...
-OR-
Terribly painted/bare models duking it out over the same quality table

1) Remember the point Davor pointed out and i "QFT" for , is regarding GW wanting to capitalize the customers buying their product for extra profit.
Then you said the main purpose is for better presentation for the GW armies + players get more enjoyment out of playing painted army.

Now if thats the "main reason" then there is nothing wrong with allowing other company paint because the main priority you brought up was to present and play with a painted army.

2) Ridiculous or not , you will be surprised to see it been true. Dig up the thread "how do you justify GW prices"
PP's price are made purely on because "because they can , and because we still buy it"

If you are going to try and convince me that GW product or PP products are worth anymore than 1/4 of what they are priced at , its not going to happen.

I don't think the the GW Hobby (TM) angle is really where the money is to be made--i.e., buying paints and brushes. Seems like the real money is in selling people expensive plastic kits faster than they can assemble and paint them.

Manchu wrote:I don't think the the GW Hobby (TM) angle is really where the money is to be made--i.e., buying paints and brushes. Seems like the real money is in selling people expensive plastic kits faster than they can assemble and paint them.

Very interesting Manchu , rather then me explaining this , let me point out the buisness plan of why large stores like walmart or ... ( oops i dont know much USA chain stores )
But why walmart would put so much effort into gathering all kind of products even though they know perfectly well their prices and quality cannot always match.

Its the same with GW

Kanluwen wrote:1) *sigh*

I just want to say in advance , i appreciate not needing to read this type of things that doesnt contribute in any positive manner.

@Luna: I'm not saying that GW is losing money by selling paints and brushes. I'm just saying that they probably make most of their money by selling kits. And they make more money when we buy more kits more quickly. But the more quickly we buy kits, the less chance there is that we will actually assemble and/or paint all of them. This is one of the reasons I think insaniak's "myth of the hobby" theory is weak.

Manchu wrote:@Luna: I'm not saying that GW is losing money by selling paints and brushes. I'm just saying that they probably make most of their money by selling kits. And they make more money when we buy more kits more quickly. But the more quickly we buy kits, the less chance there is that we will actually assemble and/or paint all of them. This is one of the reasons I think insaniak's "myth of the hobby" theory is weak.

Ah but you see , GW's buisness plan as many many GW vets have pointed out through most of 2008-2010 is , GW is concentrating all their efforts into pushing product for new customers.
So just like all customers all need new army , chances are they'll be getting the paints / hobby product to go with it.

Which i agree with you, the vets with existing product will not need to repurchase hobby product .

LunaHound wrote:

Manchu wrote:I don't think the the GW Hobby (TM) angle is really where the money is to be made--i.e., buying paints and brushes. Seems like the real money is in selling people expensive plastic kits faster than they can assemble and paint them.

Very interesting Manchu , rather then me explaining this , let me point out the buisness plan of why large stores like walmart or ... ( oops i dont know much USA chain stores )
But why walmart would put so much effort into gathering all kind of products even though they know perfectly well their prices and quality cannot always match.

Its the same with GW

Kanluwen wrote:1) *sigh*

I just want to say in advance , i appreciate not needing to read this type of things that doesnt contribute in any positive manner.

Then *please* stop trying to make the same point, over and over and over again.

Games Workshop stores, just like any other chain in its vein(with laid back OR overzealous staff, etc etc), will have different rules in place. Some stores will have no issue with it, provided you don't sit there espousing the values of Vallejo or trying to convince every customer out of buying what they want from GW. Others will just ask you, flatout, to put it away--for the very same reason(if you can't figure it out, then ask around at stores if they'd let you do something for their competitors on the premise). Cheap snipe shots at the store policies is ridiculous, and completely unlinked to your original point(That Games Workshop's prices are based upon the sales of "the hobby") .

You don't expect to walk into a Burger King and sit down to eat your McDonald's burger. Just like the prices of oil don't affect the price of that burger.

Which brings us back to the original point of "why" is GW doing this.

Which again i'll remind you , to keep competition away from the product they are selling. Which Davcor said earlier and i QFT with.

@Luna: Once again, not saying GW won't make money off of the hobby stuff. So let's take your example: person getting into 40k buys $200 dollars of models and $100 of hobby supplies on her/his first order/trip to the shop. Wha's the next trip to the shop going to be like? Most likely another $35-$100 on models and $5-$10 on supplies. And the next trip? Some money for models probably little to nothing on supplies. And this is assuming the new customer is actually assembling and painting some of what s/he buys. I think it's much more likely for a customer (especially a new one but vet also) to buy more models than to assemble/paint one s/he already owns. So the rate of buying models is probably much higher than buying supplies. Also, I'd be VERY surprised if the hobby supply products had a higher mark-up than the kits.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

LunaHound wrote:Which again i'll remind you , to keep competition away from the product they are selling.

Seems correct to me. Then again, GW's in-store policies seem reasonable to me, too.

Manchu wrote:@Luna: Once again, not saying GW won't make money off of the hobby stuff. So let's take your example: person getting into 40k buys $200 dollars of models and $100 of hobby supplies on her/his first order/trip to the shop. Wha's the next trip to the shop going to be like? Most likely another $35-$100 on models and $5-$10 on supplies. And the next trip? Some money for models probably little to nothing on supplies. And this is assuming the new customer is actually assembling and painting some of what s/he buys. I think it's much more likely for a customer (especially a new one but vet also) to buy more models than to assemble/paint one s/he already owns. So the rate of buying models is probably much higher than buying supplies. Also, I'd be VERY surprised if the hobby supply products had a higher mark-up than the kits.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

LunaHound wrote:Which again i'll remind you , to keep competition away from the product they are selling.

Seems correct to me. Then again, GW's in-store policies seem reasonable to me, too.

Yes , but i dont consider repeat / multi time customers "new"
When i meaned "new" i was talking about the type that just got into warhammer. The type that is drawn in by AOBR , purashes AOBR + Hooby + W/E army they end up choosing.
Basically the type of "new customers" GW is catering to , the type that is making the vets angry in so many threads.

GW's policy is reasonable , i never said its not. Manchu you need to know something about me , just because i dont like somethings GW do , that doesnt mean
i'll automatically think EVERYTHING they do is wrong. Further more , im used to seeing how corporation work , i have seen it all my live growing up.
Just because it makes sense in a very cold heartless , no mercy way , doesnt mean i'll have to like it.

I really don't think GW caters to one-time-only purchasers.

Luna, I'm not trying to overextend your arguments into something that you aren't saying. I know you don't hate GW or think it's HUGE EVIL CORP. I know you are making observations based on your experience. I'm simply reiterating my point about GW making more money off of you buying new stuff instead of painting what you have in response to the idea that GW has made up the idea that you should paint minis in order to sell paints and brushes.

LunaHound wrote:Which brings us back to the original point of "why" is GW doing this.

Which again i'll remind you , to keep competition away from the product they are selling. Which Davcor said earlier and i QFT with.

You think that the purpose behind them having a painted standard for the *official* events, which they like to photograph for promotional efforts(and have said as much) is to sell more hobby product?


I'm going to put it nice and simple here:

Yes. They do maintain hobby products. Yes, they do mainly also make their sales to 'new' players.
HOWEVER

Those new players DO eventually find out about other hobby products via word of mouth, forums, or just plain going to a non-GW shop.

Your logic in this area is flawed. If they were to maintain a 100% GW paint/brush policy, then you'd be right.

But they don't. So you're, quite simply, not.

Kanluwen wrote:You think that the purpose behind them having a painted standard for the *official* events, which they like to photograph for promotional efforts(and have said as much) is to sell more hobby product?

Nope , i have mentioned different reasons GW have for doing so , and selling paints are just among the small reasoning , like i said , just like Walmart.

Manchu wrote:I'm simply reiterating my point about GW making more money off of you buying new stuff instead of painting what you have in response to the idea that GW has made up the idea that you should paint minis in order to sell paints and brushes.

Yes , however i also added very strongly as well , that by making the GW product also an "hobby" it allows them to charge premium pricing for their products.