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.

warboss wrote: 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).

Exactly. The miniature is still flawed, regardless of why you bought it.

If anything, it's better that the mini was bought by someone who is aware of the flaws rather than by some 12-year-old who doesn't know enough to be aware that he's getting ripped off.

The problem is the condition of the miniature, not the customers' motivations for buying them.

Everyone just needs to see this for what it is. GW has a long sighted vision of how Nurgle is going to become the preminant force in 40k. Blisters and boils on everything. They are just preparing everyone for this future fluff change. This way nobody rage quits because their entire army is missing the essential fluff.
You should all be thankful that GW is now modelling all their higher dollar figs in this fashion and saving you the trouble.
Thanks GW.

I'm not in any way defending GW for the faults in Fincast and the lack of QC.

i do take issue with people making it harder for others with real claims to get replacements.

i personally think that an air bubble or 2 is fine as long as it's not interfering with any detail. filling a bubble is easy for me, and a lot less hassle than all the gap filling, sculpting and pinning i had to do with alot of metal mini's i have had from GW and other companies

pitboy2710 wrote:i do take issue with people making it harder for others with real claims to get replacements.

Here's the thing... if your model is faulty, you have a 'real' claim. It's that simple.


GW have always been entitled to ask for proof, or to ask for people to return the original model. If they're starting to insist on that, yes, that makes it a little harder to get a replacement... but not outrageously so, and no harder than it is for pretty much any other product on the planet.

The positive way to look at this would be to suggest that if they're getting hit so hard for returns that they feel the need to tighten up their returns policy, maybe, just maybe the message might be getting through to management that 'Fine'cast is not quite as 'fine' as GW would like us to believe.


Whether or not that will result in any action beyond tightening the returns policy is anyone's guess... but we can hope.

warboss wrote:

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.

No, I'm claiming theft when people are purposely buying models which they know they can fix and they are taking advantage of a standing policy which is well-known for not requiring models to be returned.

When your intent is to get something which you would have to pay for, without having to pay the cost for it--you are doing something which is commonly known as "theft".

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.

This is what is wrong with the whole stance you're proposing.

Rather than y'know, not buying the model and telling the shop in question to return the models as they're defective, you're suggesting people buy the model and "request a replacement" and expect to keep the original purchase for themselves as bits and pieces.

I'm well aware of GW's policy not being out of the goodness of their hearts, and I'd kindly request you take a moment to step back and realize that the idea you're proposing is not to "make them pay". It's to get stuff for free, because the company is doing something you disagree with. It's the same stance that many software pirates took when EA introduced Origins.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

insaniak wrote:

pitboy2710 wrote:i do take issue with people making it harder for others with real claims to get replacements.

Here's the thing... if your model is faulty, you have a 'real' claim. It's that simple.


GW have always been entitled to ask for proof, or to ask for people to return the original model. If they're starting to insist on that, yes, that makes it a little harder to get a replacement... but not outrageously so, and no harder than it is for pretty much any other product on the planet.

I'm not disputing that if you have a faulty model you should not be entitled to make a claim, no matter the fault.

I'm disputing the fact that an individual who is actively trying to cut corners and avoid paying for multiples of a unit is not doing anything wrong by taking advantage of the policy and the situation.

The positive way to look at this would be to suggest that if they're getting hit so hard for returns that they feel the need to tighten up their returns policy, maybe, just maybe the message might be getting through to management that 'Fine'cast is not quite as 'fine' as GW would like us to believe.

And the negative way to look at it is that they're getting hit so hard by people trying to take advantage of the open policy which has been "on the honor system" that they're having to start requesting proof.

Whether or not that will result in any action beyond tightening the returns policy is anyone's guess... but we can hope.

Yes, we can hope. It'd be nice.

Kanluwen wrote:No, I'm claiming theft when people are purposely buying models which they know they can fix and they are taking advantage of a standing policy which is well-known for not requiring models to be returned.

When the word 'buying' is used, it kind of negates the use of the word 'theft'...

Here's a couple of simple question:
- If a customer buys a faulty model unknowingly, is the product they are buying faulty?
- If a customer knowingly buys a faulty model, is the product they are buying faulty?

If your answer is the same for both questions, which it certainly should be, then why should there be any difference as to what happens next?

Rather than y'know, not buying the model and telling the shop in question to return the models as they're defective, you're suggesting people buy the model and "requesting a replacement".

Riiight. So if I walk into a GW store, grab a 'Fine'cast mini off the shelf and point out the staff that it has air-bubbles and should be returned, they'll just send it on back to head office?

Somehow, I doubt that.

I'm disputing the fact that an individual who is actively trying to cut corners and avoid paying for multiples of a unit is not doing anything wrong by taking advantage of the policy and the situation.

There is nothing to 'take advantage of',,, A defective product is a defective product.

I think i should of been clearer.

The people i know of who have deliberately bought models with defects did so with the sole intent of getting extras for free.

If i see a defective model in my local GW i point it out to the staff and they remove it from sale.

That is the proper way to do it IMO

Kanluwen wrote:No, I'm claiming theft when people are purposely buying models which they know they can fix and they are taking advantage of a standing policy which is well-known for not requiring models to be returned.

Here's the thing: They shouldnt HAVE to fix the model.

Cleaning flash? check
filing mold lines? check
Unbending parts? check

Repairing model? No. Not part of the description when buying.

insaniak wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:No, I'm claiming theft when people are purposely buying models which they know they can fix and they are taking advantage of a standing policy which is well-known for not requiring models to be returned.

When the word 'buying' is used, it kind of negates the use of the word 'theft'...

Here's a couple of simple question:
- If a customer buys a faulty model unknowingly, is the product they are buying faulty?
- If a customer knowingly buys a faulty model, is the product they are buying faulty?

If your answer is the same for both questions, which it certainly should be, then why should there be any difference as to what happens next?

And here's an even simpler question:
Are you buying the faulty model, with the intent of fixing the model to use and making a complaint to the company who made the model to get a replacement model?

At that point, you're engaged in behavior which is morally questionable. It's great that you can accept that--but I can't. It's beyond acceptable in my opinion.

If you want to complain about the prices of models, the quality of the models, or how there are better alternatives out there--that's one thing.
If you actively go out of your way to defraud a company from a sale--you are, in my opinion, engaged in outright theft.

Rather than y'know, not buying the model and telling the shop in question to return the models as they're defective, you're suggesting people buy the model and "requesting a replacement".

Riiight. So if I walk into a GW store, grab a 'Fine'cast mini off the shelf and point out the staff that it has air-bubbles and should be returned, they'll just send it on back to head office?

Somehow, I doubt that.

If they don't, that's on them. You've done the right thing to do in the situation.

I'm disputing the fact that an individual who is actively trying to cut corners and avoid paying for multiples of a unit is not doing anything wrong by taking advantage of the policy and the situation.

There is nothing to 'take advantage of',,, A defective product is a defective product.

A defective product is a defective product, but a person who is buying that defective product with the intent of avoiding having to pay for a second defective product which they wanted anyways is taking advantage of the returns policy.

I think we're going to have agree to disagree here because I cannot in good conscience agree with your stance. I understand the argument you're trying to make, but I just can't agree with it. Intent is key here, and I truly do feel that if you're actively trying to avoid having to pay for a second model--you're engaging in behaviors which compromise the basic moral principle of "Don't lie, cheat, or steal" for the sake of not paying for some miniatures.

@Kanluwen Thats what i was trying to say. Thanks for articulating better it than i can.

Kanluwen wrote:
I'm well aware of GW's policy not being out of the goodness of their hearts, and I'd kindly request you take a moment to step back and realize that the idea you're proposing is not to "make them pay". It's to get stuff for free, because the company is doing something you disagree with. It's the same stance that many software pirates took when EA introduced Origins.

Insaniak has already pretty much responded in a like minded fashion to the rest of your post so I'll just try to address this (sort of). What does this have to do with EA and Origins? Are people trying to exchange misprogrammed games while getting another copy of the game free? I have no idea where you're going with that.

In the end, any customer buying a faulty product has protections guaranteed to varying extent by law up to and including replacement regardless of their intent in buying it. Asking a store owner (who, just like gamers, come in all varieties of laziness and/or morality) to return the product for you instead of just putting the same unopened blister right back onto the shelf (magnitudes of order easier to do) is a crapshoot. As pipboy said, returning it to the manufacturer is the proper thing to do but certainly not the only (or most realistic) choice available.

At that point, you're engaged in behavior which is morally questionable. It's great that you can accept that--but I can't. It's beyond acceptable in my opinion.

yet it is acceptable, morally, that gw continue to release finecast in the state that it is?

end user intent makes no difference to gw, whether it be to paint or to ground into dust.

Kanluwen wrote:A defective product is a defective product, but a person who is buying that defective product with the intent of avoiding having to pay for a second defective product which they wanted anyways is taking advantage of the returns policy.

Despite the number of times it is reported to happen in thread like this (up to and including the 7+ in a row reported here on dakka), I don't think many people are buying defective products specifically to have them replaced with yet another defective product. I suspect that isn't what you were actually going for but due to the sad state of GW QA it's actually true. We'll just agree to disagree where the problem truely lies and/or the magnitude of the actions involved. You consider the customer purposely buying a flawed product to be the big issue whereas I see the company making flawed products to be the root problem.

warboss wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
I'm well aware of GW's policy not being out of the goodness of their hearts, and I'd kindly request you take a moment to step back and realize that the idea you're proposing is not to "make them pay". It's to get stuff for free, because the company is doing something you disagree with. It's the same stance that many software pirates took when EA introduced Origins.

Insaniak has already pretty much responded in a like minded fashion to the rest of your post so I'll just try to address this (sort of). What does this have to do with EA and Origins? Are people trying to exchange misprogrammed games while getting another copy of the game free? I have no idea where you're going with that.

People complained endlessly about the introduction of Origins, how they would boycott EA's games, never buy from them again, and then proceeded to pirate the games.

It's the idea of "I really hate this company, but I still want their product!".

@Warboss....Sure if you don't have a problem buying the mini and sending the whole thing to GW for a replacement then you don't even have an argument with Kan....that's not what he's saying.

If you buy a faulty FC with the intent of getting a second one for use or bits or resale without sending the original back (ya know, so you can have two) then that's the lying, cheating, stealing that Kan has got a problem with. And frankly that's the problem that GW has got with some of their customer base too, as made evident of them enforcing their replacement policy.

While I can completely advocate buying a crappy mini with the intent of keeping it away from some noob unaware of this Finecast debaucle and sending it back and forth to GW for replacements, I also completely acknowledge that buying that same mini with the intent of getting a second whole or piece for free is the kind of action/attitude that helps to hurt the community as a whole.

2 wrongs don't make a right.

Is it right GW putting out sub standard product? No

Is it right that some people are exploiting the returns policy? No

I don't know how wide spread it is in the community as a whole. It seems fairly prevalent in my area

If you actively go out of your way to defraud a company from sale...

This is where you're losing me. How are they losing a sale? If the mini was purchased by someone who didn't realise it was faulty, would it not be entitled to the same replacement, costing GW the exact same sale?

Regardless of intent, the model is faulty, and so the customer is entitled to a replacement. GW lose the same amount of money either way... And if they weren't selling dodgy models, this wouldn't be an issue.

MightyGodzilla wrote:While I can completely advocate buying a crappy mini with the intent of keeping it away from some noob unaware of this Finecast debaucle and sending it back and forth to GW for replacements, I also completely acknowledge that buying that same mini with the intent of getting a second whole or piece for free is the kind of action/attitude that helps to hurt the community as a whole.

And I see the knowing production, distribution, and sale of that crappy mini in the first place with the hope of keeping all the profit from the sale as hurting the community significantly more. Like I said, I don't think it's unreasonable for them to ask for the mini back AT GW's EXPENSE despite the obvious inconvience to the customer... keeping the crappy mini IMO makes up for this inconvience and is a nice gesture for a failure on their part but certainly not necessary.

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".

Ahahahahahahaahhahahaahaahaha

Thats where it goes wrong kan kan.

Because for you, you never thought GW pretty much theft their customer by introducing finecast right?
I know you'll disagree thats fine.
Because I know plenty that agrees.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

insaniak wrote:

If you actively go out of your way to defraud a company from sale...

This is where you're losing me. How are they losing a sale? If the mini was purchased by someone who didn't realise it was faulty, would it not be entitled to the same replacement, costing GW the exact same sale?

Regardless of intent, the model is faulty, and so the customer is entitled to a replacement. GW lose the same amount of money either way... And if they weren't selling dodgy models, this wouldn't be an issue.

Bingo

LunaHound wrote:

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".

Ahahahahahahaahhahahaahaahaha

Thats where it goes wrong kan kan.

Because for you, you never thought GW pretty much theft their customer by introducing finecast right?

How is it stealing? You're not obligated to buy anything from GW. You willing put the money up for each and every model you buy knowing full well what the possible issues are.

Just because GW is asking people to send models in (at GW's expense) instead of just shipping out free ones like they used to doesn't mean there's theft. Well, except theft of your time because GW doesn't seem to hurry with part replacement. That's a different issue though.

Must we dwell on word semantics Breotan?

GW upped the price, switched materials, worse results.
Alright you two don't want to use the word theft ( thats alright :3 )

You can replace it with which ever else that fancies you.
But ultimately, its not going to make GW look any better.

Actually I'll concede to everything you said just because Im too tired to argue against you, I have been in the hospital too many times this week.

LunaHound wrote:Actually I'll concede to everything you said just because Im too tired to argue against you, I have been in the hospital too many times this week.

But I'm not too tired! Tag me in! Tag me in!

Here we go...

Most customer-facing companies will operate under the principle that 80% of customers making complaints will cease their pursuit of a proper resolution at each stage of the process. For example, if you have 100 customers with defective toys, only 20 of those customers will complain about it. Of those 20, only 4 will escalate to a manager level.

This means that if a company knows that a product is defective, and still releases the product anyway because they are aware that the savings earned from the cheaper, crappier product exceed the replacement cost to those customers pursuing their resolution at each customer service tier, then that is grift.

Yes I completely agree azazel, but good luck having the fans understand that concept ( I tried, though yours is more eloquent xD )

LunaHound wrote:Must we dwell on word semantics Breotan?

If you don;t want to be dragged down on semantics, don't make ridiculous statements like this:

LunaHound wrote:Because for you, you never thought GW pretty much theft their customer by introducing finecast right?

I wouldn't accuse GW of theft over it's introduction of Finecast. I would however, put them on equally morally ambiguous standing as a thief, over their selling of known miscast models to their customer base. They can't just keep their heads in the ground and hope this will go away.

GW, please just come out and apologize for the problems with Finecast. Tell us you are working on a solution, and that it will be implemented within the next year. I'm sure that will be enough to satisfy most of us. We're here posting in this forum because we love the models/games. More than anything we all want to continue buying your products, but they need to be of a better quality.

Probably meant it like that, as in a rip off, instead of just blatantly taking your money for nothing as they do give out replacements to try and counteract what comes across as a shakey introduction period at best. To apologise would be to admit there is an issue, it would be much simpler to just fix up the process eventually than admit a fault and potentially hurt future sale even further. Remember not all of their customers will be informed of the general fault rate the line appears to have, an apology about it would give the impression the fault is there and more apparent than it is; even if the faults were gone at the time of it.

Simply put neither confirm nor deny an issue and you can pretend there isn't one long enough for it to no longer be a concern.

GW have just moved a whole bunch more space marine stuff to Finecast. The Facebook post is getting some flak. Wonder if we'll have a statement from Wells / Kirby like the last time there was a backlash?

Perhaps, but it seems no matter the news they're at the point where they'll at least get a bit of flak on most announcements.

pitboy2710 wrote:I think i should of been clearer.

The people i know of who have deliberately bought models with defects did so with the sole intent of getting extras for free.

If i see a defective model in my local GW i point it out to the staff and they remove it from sale.

That is the proper way to do it IMO

I have to be honest - in 70 or so pages of this thread, and the others that have been written about it, this is the first instance of this I have read about.

We have to assume that, by and large, most customers are decent enough folk. They want a high quality miniature, and will hand money over the till for it. If you're into the business of trying to get stuff 'for free', or at a much lower rate, there are surely far easier ways.

I can't help but feel this is deflecting attention away from what the real issue is here, which should be regarding the quality of Finecast miniatures and whether it is improving.

Sorry guys but 80 pages here hundred's reports everywhere, checked blisters/boxs IRL and they where totally unacceptable etc etc.... I'm amazed that people are still buying this huge fiasco and going into all kinds of trouble to get something that GW does not have the ability to produce anymore...

As much as anyone can like GW models and their armies its on you to decide which horse you ride and if you want to ride an old mule its your call just don't expect it to have the pedigree of a stallion. As far as I'm concerned GW can do whatever they want it IS their stuff and its my decision to refuse to ride a fleabag mule.

I believe people should just accept things for what they are now, things changed for the worse and yes we are disappointed but come on just move elsewhere if you are not happy... this is going on for how many months now? half a year? There's plenty of good companies and better produced minis today so you do have a choice... and to be honest the vast majority can cast things a million times better than Fcast.