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.

pitboy2710 wrote:I believe they were doing it to get free figs, with GW just sending out replacements without asking for the faulty ones back

Now QC and the production of Finecast needs to improve but people taking advantage is not the way to do it

Hmm I don't know about that to be honest. As annoying as it is for the honest people who buy a botched finecast mini and have to go through a longer process for replacement/refund, in the longterm only a hurt to their profit is going to force GW into action. Having to provide an additional model (or two, or three) for each purchased model hurts them where it matters most.

Groundh0g wrote:

pitboy2710 wrote:I believe they were doing it to get free figs, with GW just sending out replacements without asking for the faulty ones back

Now QC and the production of Finecast needs to improve but people taking advantage is not the way to do it

Hmm I don't know about that to be honest. As annoying as it is for the honest people who buy a botched finecast mini and have to go through a longer process for replacement/refund, in the longterm only a hurt to their profit is going to force GW into action. Having to provide an additional model (or two, or three) for each purchased model hurts them where it matters most.

But GWs response would probably be a price rise to hide the issue (as far as profits go) rather than actually fix it.

Groundh0g wrote:

pitboy2710 wrote:I believe they were doing it to get free figs, with GW just sending out replacements without asking for the faulty ones back

Now QC and the production of Finecast needs to improve but people taking advantage is not the way to do it

Hmm I don't know about that to be honest. As annoying as it is for the honest people who buy a botched finecast mini and have to go through a longer process for replacement/refund, in the longterm only a hurt to their profit is going to force GW into action. Having to provide an additional model (or two, or three) for each purchased model hurts them where it matters most.

So let's get this straight.

You're outright encouraging lying--because make no mistake, calling up a company and saying "I need a replacement for X, because it was broken beyond the point of useability" when in fact it was useable is lying--as a way to "force GW into action"?

You're not going to "force GW into action" to fix their quality control with this method, all you're going to do is "force GW into action" by doing exactly what we're seeing right now--taking a firmer stance on how they do their replacement policy.

all you're going to do is "force GW into action" by doing exactly what we're seeing right now--taking a firmer stance on how they do their replacement policy.

If GW is going to do that, they better make sure they up their competence.
Customers arn't going to keep up with GW's failures if GW make their replacement policy firm.

There is a need of balance, without one, GW have no foothold in such minute threats.

And GW is making their replacement policy tighter because--apparently--people are digging through, ignoring miniatures without faults and taking models with minor fixable faults and calling to get replacements.

They can up their competence all they want. That's not a "Quality Control" issue, that's a "People are scum" issue. To try to pawn it off as an issue that GW needs to fix, in this particular situation, is downright silly. We know Finecast has problems. They've done a fairly good job of replacements. But if people are taking advantage of it to avoid paying for models, by claiming that they need a replacement for something like a bent spear or a broken horn on a helmet which is fixable with superglue? That's on the person choosing to lie to the company, with the idea that "it's a company--they can afford it!" or that "we need to teach them a lesson!".


There is a huge difference between a "firm replacement policy" and "having to alter your replacement policy to deal with fraudulent claims".

Kanluwen wrote:So let's get this straight.

You're outright encouraging lying--because make no mistake, calling up a company and saying "I need a replacement for X, because it was broken beyond the point of useability" when in fact it was useable is lying--as a way to "force GW into action"?

You're not going to "force GW into action" to fix their quality control with this method, all you're going to do is "force GW into action" by doing exactly what we're seeing right now--taking a firmer stance on how they do their replacement policy.

I'm not really encouraging it - and it's not something I would do personally - all I'm saying is that I don't know if you could call it ineffective.

Might it cause GW to raise prices? Probably. Will they increase them anyway regardless? Definitely.

Bottom line is that they are at this point in time finecast is not up to scratch, and the way they are going about it - such as the claim earlier in the thread that metal models have as many bad casts as finecast - makes it hard for me to sympathise much with the company's position. If some people are going to take advantage of that, then so be it. It's only possible because they are putting unsatisfactory products on their shelves that should never have made it through QC.

What I find really hard to understand is the people who have requested 3, 4 or more replacements. You would think at the very least GW would be inspecting their replacements before shipping them out. It boggles the mind. I've bought 3 finecast miniatures, my big mek was refunded due to the amount of bubbles/detail lost, my weirdboy has some bubbles but is otherwise pretty good, and my 25th anniversary mini has a lot of bubbles but is probably fixable with a few hours work that I'd rather spend doing something else. I am wary of buying any finecast models at the moment, especially by mailorder (which is an issue given the in-store costs in Australia) because I just don't want to deal with the hassle.

If the idiots at GW would simply take notice of what is going on and work to improve their casting methods/casting materials, then we wouldn't be having this conversation. Instead, they stick their head in the ground and ignore the community that has made them the largest miniature wargaming company. How long can this last? Of all the things people might gripe about this company, selling us flawed models is something that can not and will not be ignored. At some point GW is going to have to get their gak together or lose a lot of customers to other companies.

Frankly ANY breakage of a model kit's actual parts is a huge no-no. The requirement to resculpt ANY detail is a no-no. Any significant mould slip is a no-no. A model that doesn't self-support (without at least warning the customer) is a no-no.

A model bought should arrive UNBROKEN and of suitable quality to assemble into and display as what you see on the box or advertising materials. Anything else and a gamer may as well be using card tokens or buttons rather than models.

Now, I'm not saying if I get a broken arm on one mini in a box set I'd want a whole new box set - but I would want the replacement part. Somewhere down the line GW decided that sending out whole kits was more efficient than storing and packing from 'dead sprues' for part replacement. Funny - Airfix/Hornby Hobbies, and a few other big manufacturers have always seemed to do fine with that. (Incidentally the replacements I've had from them were dealt with efficiently, and were all a result of my own mistakes (spilling glue on a canopy, that sort of thing).
Interestingly a lot of Finecast replacements seem to be going back this way.

The problem is they (at least in the production management area) think this gak is acceptable - I'd dread to see what they actually classify as a miscast internally -someone else made the joke that they say 'Yay, another successful cast!' everytime they put resin instead of marmite in the mould. It is hyperbolic, but you have to wonder...

helium42 wrote:How long can this last?

If it's GW we're talking about? Um...they'll probably run themselves out of business before ever admitting they made a mistake. So pretty god-damned long.

I recently bought an Event only Forge world model, the Skin Wolf, at a convention in London called Salute.
The model is heavily afflicted with wafer thin pieces of resin that are thicker on the body parts than on the extremities like hands and feet. However every single piece of this model has resin flash on it and in some areas it is obscuring the model.
I'm sure i can get it all off with extensive blading and filing but what a giant pain in the $%^&*

Captain Toad wrote:I recently bought an Event only Forge world model, the Skin Wolf, at a convention in London called Salute.
The model is heavily afflicted with wafer thin pieces of resin that are thicker on the body parts than on the extremities like hands and feet. However every single piece of this model has resin flash on it and in some areas it is obscuring the model.
I'm sure i can get it all off with extensive blading and filing but what a giant pain in the $%^&*

Thats probably why GW doesnt really care about finecast, we've already been putting up with Forgeworlds junk for so long.

The skinwolf is finecast(ish). That flash is easy enough to remove with a toothbrush type implement, BUT the model is also horribly susceptible to bubbling. Check the fingers are all there, they're often bubbled through. I'm in dancing the replacement tango about it at the moment.

Kanluwen wrote:And GW is making their replacement policy tighter because--apparently--people are digging through, ignoring miniatures without faults and taking models with minor fixable faults and calling to get replacements.

Define minor fixable faults- flash and bent models happen, even in metal. On the other hand, if your expecting me to fill in pcok marks or marks that come from cast, thats not minor. Thats a flaw. I neevr had that with metal or plastic. That needs to be replaced.

carmachu wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:And GW is making their replacement policy tighter because--apparently--people are digging through, ignoring miniatures without faults and taking models with minor fixable faults and calling to get replacements.

Define minor fixable faults- flash and bent models happen, even in metal. On the other hand, if your expecting me to fill in pock marks or marks that come from cast, that's not minor. Thats a flaw I never had that with metal or plastic. That needs to be replaced.

"Minor fixable faults" are things like a small dent in an otherwise smooth cape, or something of that nature which will require you to do some minor fill-work but not resculpt detail.

Once you're getting into sculpting detail, you're past a "minor fixable fault".

Kanluwen wrote:
"Minor fixable faults" are things like a small dent in an otherwise smooth cape, or something of that nature which will require you to do some minor fill-work but not resculpt detail.

Once you're getting into sculpting detail, you're past a "minor fixable fault".

Hmmmm, disagree. Not sure if I'm paying more money for a finecast model then a metal one I should be fixing it.

My theory is(assuming I would even touch fine case) if it wouldnt have happened to its metal equivilent, then it needs replacement. Dont expect me to buy your liquid green stuff to fix something like that.

Finecast certainly has more than the expected amount of flaws but can we please stop pretending that metal figures were always perfect and that GW never shipped a bad metal figure in their entire history?

For me, if detail is obscured or obliterated then I expect the figure (or at least that piece) to be replaced. If it's just bending or warping then I'm okay with that mainly because that's the nature of resin and I can fix it with hot water from the tap. I reluctantly accept casting problems in Finecast if they were present in the metals (like the assemby of King Liquor of Britonnia) but I don't particularly like it.

Still, for those of you who can, buy Finecast at a GW store, open the figure then and there (don't walk out with it), examine it and have unsatisfactory pieces replaced. You take your chances if you order direct. Oh, I finally got the last of my 25th Anniversary Model bits replaced, so let that be a warning as to how long it can be if you go the mail-order route with GW.

Kanluwen wrote:And GW is making their replacement policy tighter because--apparently--people are digging through, ignoring miniatures without faults and taking models with minor fixable faults and calling to get replacements.

Assuming that not everyone is going to agree on what constitute a 'minor fixable fault' ... or whether or not they warrant replacement... if there are flawed models on the racks, does it matter who buys them or what their intentions are?

But if people are taking advantage of it to avoid paying for models, by claiming that they need a replacement for something like a bent spear or a broken horn on a helmet which is fixable with superglue?

Asking for a replacement because the model is broken is not fraudulent.

insaniak wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:And GW is making their replacement policy tighter because--apparently--people are digging through, ignoring miniatures without faults and taking models with minor fixable faults and calling to get replacements.

Assuming that not everyone is going to agree on what constitute a 'minor fixable fault' ... or whether or not they warrant replacement... if there are flawed models on the racks, does it matter who buys them or what their intentions are?

But if people are taking advantage of it to avoid paying for models, by claiming that they need a replacement for something like a bent spear or a broken horn on a helmet which is fixable with superglue?

Asking for a replacement because the model is broken is not fraudulent.

Normally I would agree, but if people are going into this with the intent of getting a "Two for one!" styled deal where they're hunting out a miniature (or a set of miniatures) with a flaw which they can fix while still calling for a replacement--yeah, that is what I would consider fraudulent.

Kanluwen wrote:

insaniak wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:And GW is making their replacement policy tighter because--apparently--people are digging through, ignoring miniatures without faults and taking models with minor fixable faults and calling to get replacements.

Assuming that not everyone is going to agree on what constitute a 'minor fixable fault' ... or whether or not they warrant replacement... if there are flawed models on the racks, does it matter who buys them or what their intentions are?

But if people are taking advantage of it to avoid paying for models, by claiming that they need a replacement for something like a bent spear or a broken horn on a helmet which is fixable with superglue?

Asking for a replacement because the model is broken is not fraudulent.

Normally I would agree, but if people are going into this with the intent of getting a "Two for one!" styled deal where they're hunting out a miniature (or a set of miniatures) with a flaw which they can fix while still calling for a replacement--yeah, that is what I would consider fraudulent.

To be honest, I need to hunt for one without flaws, and still fail, so they probably don't need to look hard.

But I know what you mean.

Kanluwen wrote:Normally I would agree, but if people are going into this with the intent of getting a "Two for one!" styled deal where they're hunting out a miniature (or a set of miniatures) with a flaw which they can fix while still calling for a replacement--yeah, that is what I would consider fraudulent.

I still fail to see how the flaw being fixable should make a difference. A flaw is a flaw. A flawed model shouldn't be sold in the first place.

The problem here isn't with the people buying flawed models. It's with a company being aware that there is a problem with their product and choosing to sell it anyway. If people then choose to take advantage of that company's exchange policy by buying flawed product... well, an old adage about reaping what you sow springs to mind.

Ultimately, a flawed model is a flawed model. Whether someone buys it deliberately expecting to get a freebie, or buys it unawares the end result is the same... the customer has bought a flawed model that shouldn't have been sold in the first place, and is entitled to a replacement.

insaniak wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Normally I would agree, but if people are going into this with the intent of getting a "Two for one!" styled deal where they're hunting out a miniature (or a set of miniatures) with a flaw which they can fix while still calling for a replacement--yeah, that is what I would consider fraudulent.

I still fail to see how the flaw being fixable should make a difference. A flaw is a flaw. A flawed model shouldn't be sold in the first place.

I'm not debating that, Insaniak. A model with any flaw which is detrimental to the model holding its detail or structural soundness is unacceptable.

But I do think that there is some leeway to be given for flaws in resin.

The problem here isn't with the people buying flawed models. It's with a company being aware that there is a problem with their product and choosing to sell it anyway. If people then choose to take advantage of that company's exchange policy by buying flawed product... well, an old adage about reaping what you sow springs to mind.

Ultimately, a flawed model is a flawed model. Whether someone buys it deliberately expecting to get a freebie, or buys it unawares the end result is the same... the customer has bought a flawed model that shouldn't have been sold in the first place, and is entitled to a replacement.

And by that same vein, the fact that people are buying flawed products to take advantage of this exchange policy will lead to flawed models getting out there.

Because hey, people are still buying it.

Breo, I don't think anyone is saying that metal miniatures were always perfect, but they were very good for the most paret and they were definitely vastly better than the quality control being offered up by the Finecast resin miniatures which also happen to be exorbitantly expensive.

Kanluwen wrote:
I'm not debating that, Insaniak. A model with any flaw which is detrimental to the model holding its detail or structural soundness is unacceptable.

But I do think that there is some leeway to be given for flaws in resin.

Not for the money they are charging, and promises of quality they have made. This isnt a garage level operation. Its a multi-million dollar company. Leeway isnt something I'd be willing to give when your charging $22 for a single marine librarian terminator or over $50 for marneus and honor guard, no no there shouldnt be any leeway.

Kanluwen wrote:But I do think that there is some leeway to be given for flaws in resin.

The choice of material was GW's. If they choose to use a material with inherent flaws, then no, sorry, I'm not inclined to allow them some 'leeway' for the inherent flaws in that material.

Broken or deformed parts are no more acceptable in 'Fine'cast than they would be in plastic or pewter.

You have to ask yourself if you give leeway for anything else with the same value.

If you went out and spent 50 quid on a DVD (which you knew was a total rippoff but you really wanted it ) and it was scratched but you could spend time buffing it up to be useable, would you shrug and say "oh well"?

These models are being sold for absolutely extortionate prices, we all know that. To accept crappy quality that requires us to spend time FIXING the piece of 10 cent resin we just bought for 50 euro is madness.

The mini's should not be exempt from the same quality you would expect from any other extremely price inflated product.

Kanluwen wrote:Normally I would agree, but if people are going into this with the intent of getting a "Two for one!" styled deal where they're hunting out a miniature (or a set of miniatures) with a flaw which they can fix while still calling for a replacement--yeah, that is what I would consider fraudulent.

I agree that it's fraudulent... on GW's part. The quality control on finecast is orders of magnitude worse than with metal minis yet their name and advertising claims it to be the finest in the world. A person's motive in purposely buying a badly cast mini doesn't change the fact that someone would get that POS regardless; I'd rather have a customer knowledgeable about the defects get it rather than someone who will discover that too late. Making the cost of replacing Finecast higher thant he cost of proper quality control is the only way to get the message across to GW. A friend bought his first finecast mini a couple weeks ago and was excited to be working in resin (his first time). He plays 40k, reads the books, plays the video games, etc... but doesn't follow the latest news much online and had no idea about any issue with finecast. When we looked at his Termie Librarian, the double headed eagle had a single head and part of a wing missing due to a bubble, part of the staff's body was missing, the ammo belt into the storm bolter was simply gone (not broken off but simply missing), and the base of the book where it attaches to the termie body was miscast and didn't fit. He ended up returning that mini after I looked at it (he was simply going to open it later at home 25+ miles away as he's always done with metals) and switching it out for one that "only" had a half dozen small bubbles on it's front and back tunic.

Again:

Not saying that the flaws are acceptable.

But it's ridiculous that people are trying to justify what is out and out theft because "GW shouldn't be selling it".
Are the models with huge gaping deformities, missing pieces, and breaks all over them acceptable?
Of course they're bloody not.

But that does not make it acceptable for people to be taking advantage of what has been an open returns policy to avoid paying the price of another model--before you say anything, the price of another model is for an additional model of the same type not for a replacement model.

Kanluwen wrote:But it's ridiculous that people are trying to justify what is out and out theft because "GW shouldn't be selling it".

The what to the who now?

Getting a replacement for a flawed product is not theft. Your motive for buying the product doesn't change that.

But that does not make it acceptable for people to be taking advantage of what has been an open returns policy to avoid paying the price of another model--before you say anything, the price of another model is for an additional model of the same type not for a replacement model.

You're balancing the acceptability of 'taking advantage' of a returns policy against the acceptability of selling models in a condition that allows people to 'take advantage' in that fashion.

Frankly, if GW are going to continue to sell models that are not of an acceptable standard, I see absolutely nothing wrong with people holding them to ransom over it. If they want people to stop asking for replacements for crap models they can always, I don't know... stop selling crap models...

while everyone is fixating on whether it is acceptable to buy models for the sake of getting free replacements...

GW is changing its policy, thus making it harder for those with legitimate complaints to get what they paid for.

Oh if only GW would actually FIX the Finecast issue. That would be the dream

*looks wistfully out the window*

Kanluwen wrote:But it's ridiculous that people are trying to justify what is out and out theft because "GW shouldn't be selling it".
Are the models with huge gaping deformities, missing pieces, and breaks all over them acceptable?
Of course they're bloody not.

But that does not make it acceptable for people to be taking advantage of what has been an open returns policy to avoid paying the price of another model--before you say anything, the price of another model is for an additional model of the same type not for a replacement model.

I think the disagreement here is that alot of people don't think its "theft" if the minis are truely miscast. If someone gets a perfectly good mini and calls GW to just get another one for free, that is theft. If someone actually gets a mini (albeit without catastrophic defects but instead moderate ones) even if they specifically bought it for that reason, it's not theft to call and complain (nor is it unreasonable for GW to pay for the postage to return the original). You're claiming theft when the majority of posts in this thread aren't describing anything of the sort.

In addition, you're trying to make it seem like the motivation of a shopper makes it some evil act. I *WANT* people who know about the issue to actively search out finecast blisters to get the miscast ones (in order to obtain replacement minis/parts) instead of having gullible buyers like my friend getting them and not realizing it until its too late. Corporations only learn from their mistakes when they're made to pay for them, not out of the goodness of their nottingham lil' hearts.