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.

Well, I stopped in to my old games store that I can't stand because I wanted to try to buy the old 3.5 Chaos codex from them-it's buried somewhere, so the second owner (who I'm still friends with) promised to look into grabbing it for me. Anyway, point of my rambling is that they got two copies of Dreadfleet into the store at order time. One was a special order for two brothers who love warhammer. The other? It went on a shelf. Guess what was still on the shelf when I went in tonight Still unsold, still unwanted. What a shock, eh?

timetowaste85 wrote:I would have happily paid $50 for it. Even $60 would have been okay. $115 though? No thanks. If they torch it, well...they can go wild. It isn't worth $115 to me-and even my friends who are nuts about warhammer thought it was a foolish idea and refused to take part in it-and they love 8th edition, storms of magic, and everything else current in fantasy-but Dreadfleet got the leper treatment. So, it can be torched-unless somebody wants to offer me a new copy for $50-then I'll take it. Just shoot a PM. For $50, I'll give it a try. Anything more, I'll spend on my Orcs or BT. If they ever release Bloodbowl though, we'll give that a try for sure-unless it follow the current sale prices and goes for $130. Then it can piss off too.

Precisely. Amen, brother. I only read to this post so if others echo your sentiments then count my quoting you as another vote.

Dreadfleet seems to sum up GW's marketing ethos for most of their products:

Very pretty dollies attached to badly written game designs which ultimately amounts to nothing more than overpriced garbage in the end.

Thanks GW for saving me even more money.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mr Proudhoof wrote:They should of just done the re-release of Warhammer Quest.....

This also is a true statement.

Dungeon crawls are really hot right now. As are reprints of older games. Those two factors combined would have made Warhammer Quest a very successful product.

Instead, GW thought they fart magical money making gases and brought out Dreadfleet instead of at least attempting to recreate Man'O'War. The idiocy of the bean counters controlling that company never ceases to amaze.

The product might have had more success in Australia had it been priced around $50-90AUD. The $190AUD for a 10 model board game was way too extreme IMO (for that price, you’d expect 4 times the amount of ships).

Nightwatch wrote:Even where I work, when a customer returns something "damaged" (the wrong colour for their living room) and we have to accept it so as to keep the customer happy so he/she will visit our stores again, we file an adjustment card to the head office and then break it completely, throwing it in the trash. We can't just give it away on the side because it damages the reputation of the chain and someone could return it again even without a receipt, effectively stealing money from the company.

This confuses me - does the firm not think of the potential for good PR available in donating such goods to charities for the homeless (or other areas that might appreciate the support - nursing/care homes, for instance)? If they're concerned about the potential for fraudulent returns, remove the brand label and/or add a second label/tag making it clear that this is what has happened to the product.

The homeless don't have plastic glue.




I know that wasn't the point you were making.

Dysartes wrote:This confuses me - does the firm not think of the potential for good PR available in donating such goods to charities for the homeless (or other areas that might appreciate the support - nursing/care homes, for instance)? If they're concerned about the potential for fraudulent returns, remove the brand label and/or add a second label/tag making it clear that this is what has happened to the product.

This is actually extremely common. Target, WalMart, etc. all throw away all goods that are returned as damaged/defective. I've had friends who worked retail and said how they had to throw away goods that were still fine.

Space Hulk is rightly regarded as a classic. 1st edition is possibly the most tactically interesting, well-designed game GW ever made. The game balance on 3E is kind of screwy, but it's still not a bad game, and it looks amazing.

You only have to look at the popularity of various similar games, to realise how well another Space Hulk type game would do -- Incursion is brilliant fun; even the Gears of War boardgame has similarities to Spulk (although it's probably closer to Tyranid Attack in style). Descent, Super Dungeon Explore, etc., all have that dungeon bash / boarding action feel that is just inherently more interesting than cartoon pirate ships. (And I speak as someone who loves pirates and would play a decent pirate-themed game to death.)

This type of game also fills a massive gap in 40K too -- close quarter combat inside a spacecraft or other structure. It's fascinating and it's fun. So yeah. Spulk sequels, that stand alone and yet are compatible with 3E? They could sell me one of those every year, no problem, even at a £70 price point. Because it's a solidly designed game, and because the minis are inherently appealing too. I've no interest in Dreadfleet when I could buy a Eurogame of proven quality for less than half the price.

I'm hoping for a full page in the September 2012 issue of White Dwarf that just says:

Are you ready for another game?
Well we wanted to re-release Warhammer Quest
but Dreadfleet . . . . . . . . .
So there you go*


*next time better buy the stand alone game or else

Dysartes wrote:

Nightwatch wrote:Even where I work, when a customer returns something "damaged" (the wrong colour for their living room) and we have to accept it so as to keep the customer happy so he/she will visit our stores again, we file an adjustment card to the head office and then break it completely, throwing it in the trash. We can't just give it away on the side because it damages the reputation of the chain and someone could return it again even without a receipt, effectively stealing money from the company.

This confuses me - does the firm not think of the potential for good PR available in donating such goods to charities for the homeless (or other areas that might appreciate the support - nursing/care homes, for instance)? If they're concerned about the potential for fraudulent returns, remove the brand label and/or add a second label/tag making it clear that this is what has happened to the product.

No, they don't want poor and messy people being associated with their furniture. Just like some clothes companies don't make clothes above a certain size (many draw the line at a UK 10 some less), they only want the thin and rich to wear their clothes.

Ian Sturrock wrote:Space Hulk is rightly regarded as a classic. 1st edition is possibly the most tactically interesting, well-designed game GW ever made. The game balance on 3E is kind of screwy, but it's still not a bad game, and it looks amazing.

You only have to look at the popularity of various similar games, to realise how well another Space Hulk type game would do -- Incursion is brilliant fun; even the Gears of War boardgame has similarities to Spulk (although it's probably closer to Tyranid Attack in style). Descent, Super Dungeon Explore, etc., all have that dungeon bash / boarding action feel that is just inherently more interesting than cartoon pirate ships. (And I speak as someone who loves pirates and would play a decent pirate-themed game to death.)

This type of game also fills a massive gap in 40K too -- close quarter combat inside a spacecraft or other structure. It's fascinating and it's fun. So yeah. Spulk sequels, that stand alone and yet are compatible with 3E? They could sell me one of those every year, no problem, even at a £70 price point. Because it's a solidly designed game, and because the minis are inherently appealing too. I've no interest in Dreadfleet when I could buy a Eurogame of proven quality for less than half the price.

Aye, totally agree. Even Doom is worth a couple of hours of a groups time due to the style of game.

Imagine if they re-released Advanced Space Crudase, calling in something a little more catching, with 3-d terrain to go on the board pieces. That sort of release would be a must buy for me. However it also sets a price point for newer players to try out GW's 'worlds' and will often lead to expansion into 40K armies of the same type. I mean how many of us either know folks, or ourselves took up an army based on what came in various boxes over the years.

Hell I think Battlemasters started my interest in Empire for Fantasy.

Completely agree Morathi's Darkest Sin, might be interesting running a poll to see how many of the people who populate these boards were first brought into it through boardgames. My guess would be a fair few.

What with WD being withdrawn from WHSmiths, it has never been harder to stumble across GW and get pulled into wargaming. And if someone does walk into the shop, unless they are mental or rich (or both) the prices would make most parents start looking nervously for the exit.

And absolutely zero effort was made to tie in the Space Marine video game with events in store and tabletop gaming. Why not have a voucher inside for a free plastic mini, or some other reason to get people to enter the store?

It's almost like they want to stay as small as possible, either that or they really need to rethink whether the people in their marketing department deserve their jobs.

timetowaste85 wrote:I would have happily paid $50 for it. Even $60 would have been okay. $115 though? No thanks.

But OTOH, would it sold even that well if it had been just another $60 board game with cheap components as that price range mandates? One part of the appeal which Space Hulk and Dreadfleet do have is that their components are top-notch, beyond what you usually see at board games and there are always people who are willing to pay for what they perceive as premium. If it had been one of the dozens FFG games in their catalogue, would it have stood out? I highly doubt it. In fact, I am pretty sure that even with probably less-than-expected sales, DF still sold much more than most FFG games do, even GW licensed ones.

Gonna have to back up claims like that Backfire. Also a lot of subjectivity there ("beyond what you usually see at board games").

Howard A Treesong wrote:

That's pretty common with magazines. What else are you supposed to do with unsold magazines other than pulp them? When White Dwarf was a quality magazine you could buy back issues, but they were only limited in quantity. The same is often true of books, although discount stores often buy them up.

They used to give them away to kids that started any of the systems! At least that was the case in stores I frequent.

bolo wrote:
This is not quite true; Every store has a Facebook account, not employee.

That I knew! An employee actually told me he had to have an account, and that it was company policy. Im a bit sceptical though.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Gonna have to back up claims like that Backfire. Also a lot of subjectivity there ("beyond what you usually see at board games").

Well, I have played many FFG games, and the miniatures there (whilst not necessarily bad, and for example in Descent, often pretty good) are not similar quality what seen in SH or DF. Of course, they're cheaper (Descent box has 80 minis).

FFG is not a large company, I think they're about 1/10th the size of Games Workshop. I don't know how much their individual games sell, but given that they have something like 200 titles, and their total annual revenue is 10-15 million dollars, I guess most of their games sell only few thousand copies each. Compare this to rumoured print run of Space Hulk and Dreadfleet, which were said to be 100 000 and 65 000, respectively.

Backfire wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:Gonna have to back up claims like that Backfire. Also a lot of subjectivity there ("beyond what you usually see at board games").

Well, I have played many FFG games, and the miniatures there (whilst not necessarily bad, and for example in Descent, often pretty good) are not similar quality what seen in SH or DF. Of course, they're cheaper (Descent box has 80 minis).

FFG is not a large company, I think they're about 1/10th the size of Games Workshop. I don't know how much their individual games sell, but given that they have something like 200 titles, and their total annual revenue is 10-15 million dollars, I guess most of their games sell only few thousand copies each. Compare this to rumoured print run of Space Hulk and Dreadfleet, which were said to be 100 000 and 65 000, respectively.

Man, I really want to know where you get your numbers beyond mere assumption.

Sources to back up your claims to lend credence to your statements would sure be handy right about now.

Hellfury wrote:

Backfire wrote:
Well, I have played many FFG games, and the miniatures there (whilst not necessarily bad, and for example in Descent, often pretty good) are not similar quality what seen in SH or DF. Of course, they're cheaper (Descent box has 80 minis).

FFG is not a large company, I think they're about 1/10th the size of Games Workshop. I don't know how much their individual games sell, but given that they have something like 200 titles, and their total annual revenue is 10-15 million dollars, I guess most of their games sell only few thousand copies each. Compare this to rumoured print run of Space Hulk and Dreadfleet, which were said to be 100 000 and 65 000, respectively.

Man, I really want to know where you get your numbers beyond mere assumption.

Sources to back up your claims to lend credence to your statements would sure be handy right about now.

It's all in the almighty Interwebs. FFG company profiles says their 2008 revenue was $12.9 million, with 57 employees: http://www.inc.com/inc5000/profile/fantasy-flight-games

Article from 2010 said they had 64 employees and "revenue of more than $10 million".

SH and DF print run sizes were rumours circulating around when the games were released. Don't know where they originated from.

edit. Should have clarified that I was comparing ANNUAL sales. Most FFG games are available for years (even decades), thus you can't make direct comparison to "limited edition" game.

"Limited edition" is probably one reason why unsold Dreadfleets are being recalled. Makes mockery of whole "limited edition" thing if the game boxes sit in bargain boxes for years to come. Plus, the boxes are huge & take lot of shelf space.

Backfire wrote:
FFG is not a large company, I think they're about 1/10th the size of Games Workshop. I don't know how much their individual games sell, but given that they have something like 200 titles, and their total annual revenue is 10-15 million dollars, I guess most of their games sell only few thousand copies each. Compare this to rumoured print run of Space Hulk and Dreadfleet, which were said to be 100 000 and 65 000, respectively.

That being said, Mantic's Dwarf King's Hold is rumoured to have sold out of it's initial run of 100,000. More have been sold since, so who knows what their total figure is?
While I don't think the components are up to the sculpting quality of Space Hulk (which was exceptional) they have a rough parity with general WFB stuff, and are far better than a lot of the more generic board games (the D&D ones etc.) which are more expensive. You get 25 or so figures, some nice board tiles and rules in a game that has significant replay value and expandability for 30 GBP on some sites.

That would seem to show there is definitely a big market there. Mantic seems to be making a business out of filling gaps left by GW, so I would say there is definitely room for some kind of future release by the latter if the price and content are right.

What does destroying them involve? Does it involve recycling of the plastic? Or the smashing f them with a hammer?

aka_mythos wrote:I think it says something of GW that they'd rather destroy the unsold games than to reduce the price and put it on sale so that more people can afford it and have the opportunity to enjoy it.

Its actually super common, GW regulary destroys BL books by tearing off the cover and chucking them, apparently its worse to get additional stock in store. At the local GW here one of the higher ups pretty much threw all the extra kits and bitz in the back into his trunk before finding a dumpster, they actually refuse to just give it away.

Ravenous D wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:I think it says something of GW that they'd rather destroy the unsold games than to reduce the price and put it on sale so that more people can afford it and have the opportunity to enjoy it.

Its actually super common, GW regulary destroys BL books by tearing off the cover and chucking them, apparently its worse to get additional stock in store. At the local GW here one of the higher ups pretty much threw all the extra kits and bitz in the back into his trunk before finding a dumpster, they actually refuse to just give it away.

What is the deal with tearing of the covers? We used to get a lot of books without covers for free from a bookstore buddy. Is that just the traditional symbolic way that a book is no longer in circulation and destroyed?

d-usa wrote:

Ravenous D wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:I think it says something of GW that they'd rather destroy the unsold games than to reduce the price and put it on sale so that more people can afford it and have the opportunity to enjoy it.

Its actually super common, GW regulary destroys BL books by tearing off the cover and chucking them, apparently its worse to get additional stock in store. At the local GW here one of the higher ups pretty much threw all the extra kits and bitz in the back into his trunk before finding a dumpster, they actually refuse to just give it away.

What is the deal with tearing of the covers? We used to get a lot of books without covers for free from a bookstore buddy. Is that just the traditional symbolic way that a book is no longer in circulation and destroyed?

A line of black felt-tip over the upper edge of the pages is good enough for most publishers when a book is remaindered, it essentially ensures that the book can't be sold 'as new', but without making copies unsaleable in second-hand bookshops.

Edit: seems I'm not wholly correct there, unsold hardbacks and trade paperbacks (larger size, usually better paper) get the black felt tip treatment and remaindered (sold off at reduced prices), unwanted stocks of mass market paperbacks (size of a standard Black Library novel) are customarily stripped of their covers (essentially making them unsaleable) and pulped.

English Assassin wrote:

d-usa wrote:

Ravenous D wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:I think it says something of GW that they'd rather destroy the unsold games than to reduce the price and put it on sale so that more people can afford it and have the opportunity to enjoy it.

Its actually super common, GW regulary destroys BL books by tearing off the cover and chucking them, apparently its worse to get additional stock in store. At the local GW here one of the higher ups pretty much threw all the extra kits and bitz in the back into his trunk before finding a dumpster, they actually refuse to just give it away.

What is the deal with tearing of the covers? We used to get a lot of books without covers for free from a bookstore buddy. Is that just the traditional symbolic way that a book is no longer in circulation and destroyed?

A line of black felt-tip over the upper edge of the pages is good enough for most publishers when a book is remaindered, it essentially ensures that the book can't be sold 'as new', but without making copies unsaleable in second-hand bookshops.

Edit: seems I'm not wholly correct there, unsold hardbacks and trade paperbacks (larger size, usually better paper) get the black felt tip treatment and remaindered (sold off at reduced prices), unwanted stocks of mass market paperbacks (size of a standard Black Library novel) are customarily stripped of their covers (essentially making them unsaleable) and pulped.

What I was told when I worked retail lo these many years ago is that the covers are returned to the publisher as proof of destruction.

Sorry to de-rail thread but I need to ask where the rumour of a Bloodbowl box next year is from. I haven't heard of this before and would like to know more.

Also, interestingly enough, I was at my local GW yesterday and they not only still had their copy of Dreadfleet still on the shelf, they didn't know anything about the recall.

Two caveats:
This was their 4th or 5th order of Dreadfleet because they had sold all their previous copies.

They just conducted an inventory Sunday night, so it's possible that GW didn't even know they still had one there...

I am curious as to how GW can produce a plastic limited edition game with rules, boards, terrain, cards and models, etc., but constantly says that the reason that plastics are so expensive is because of mold cost? If mold cost is so high then how are they getting their money back with limited edition stuff?

Don't forget that GW stopped doing sales as people would hold back on purchases until then. I would imagine this is the same here. They don't want people hanging back to see how it goes.

Shepherd23 wrote:I am curious as to how GW can produce a plastic limited edition game with rules, boards, terrain, cards and models, etc., but constantly says that the reason that plastics are so expensive is because of mold cost? If mold cost is so high then how are they getting their money back with limited edition stuff?

Please see my post a page or 2 back re. 'limited edition', and what that actually means.

Shepherd23 wrote:I am curious as to how GW can produce a plastic limited edition game with rules, boards, terrain, cards and models, etc., but constantly says that the reason that plastics are so expensive is because of mold cost? If mold cost is so high then how are they getting their money back with limited edition stuff?

Well, that's why it's an expensive game. Large print run spreads out the costs. I mean, most of the individual miniatures on GW's range probably aren't made in tens of thousands.

Wolfstan is correct too. Whereas destroying perfectly useful product is horribly wasteful, one probably does not want to train customers to forego initial offering in the hopes that it will be later available at reduced price.

VikingScott wrote:Sorry to de-rail thread but I need to ask where the rumour of a Bloodbowl box next year is from. I haven't heard of this before and would like to know more.

AFAIK its not so much a rumour as it is wishful thinking due to 2012 being the 25th anniversary of BloodBowl.