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.

Are they ? or arnt they? If possible after your vote , give a brief explanation to why .

Define the premise. What is 'Premium Pricing' Luna?

H.B.M.C. wrote:Define the premise. What is 'Premium Pricing' Luna?

The explanation i assume = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premium_pricing
Though i hesitated quoting them because i was afraid that this sentence :

The practice is intended to exploit the (not necessarily justifiable) tendency for buyers to assume that expensive items enjoy an exceptional reputation or represent exceptional quality and distinction.

would have a biased outcome within the vote if GW fans end up judging the whole question based on that sentence alone.

And a cupcake option wouldnt be able to save it o_o

OK, based on that definition, I don't think so.

Maybe?

GW charges what they feel their particular market will bear...

I prefer the word unreasonable. You can buy better for less, and most people who have been in the miniatures hobby for long enough know it.

Why Channel or Gucci are priced the way they are? After all they probably come from the same Chinese factory that manufactures the 10$ fleamarket ones.

GW simply tries to project added value to their figures with pricing making them look as if they are not toys because would you pay 40$ for a box of army men? No, we do it because it´s a HOBBY and everybody knows that toys are cheap and hobbies expensive.

M.

I <3 Miguelsan!

Voted no based on that definition. Price is the LAST THING that encourages favorable views of GW products.

Manchu wrote:Voted no based on that definition. Price is the LAST THING that encourages favorable views of GW products.

You'll be surprised to hear convo like " wow why do you buy that drill from none GW store , im sure it sucks "
and replace that with w/e product GW makes and i have heard them.

Hence too often have i see people claiming GW product is good just because its "GW"
despite them never having any other company's product to try it with at all yet.

Miguelsan wrote:Why Channel or Gucci are priced the way they are? After all they probably come from the same Chinese factory that manufactures the 10$ fleamarket ones.

Firstly, good job implying that chinese labor by nature is cheap and poor. Secondly incorrect as Gucci products are entirely "hand made in italy" though that label could spuriously still imply assembly or parts construction in china or taiwan. Finally quality is utterly disconnected from country of origin. American cars now suck, korean items weren't worth the toxic plastic they were made of 20 years ago while being top quality today, and you can get some great steel in asia.

GW simply tries to project added value to their figures with pricing making them look as if they are not toys because would you pay 40$ for a box of army men? No, we do it because it´s a HOBBY and everybody knows that toys are cheap and hobbies expensive.

M.

Value is entirely relative. If they sell figures at those prices and those figures then sell, then those figures are worth those prices. As for the topic title, the figures are roughly equivalent to what the competition charges. Privateer is no cheaper, nor is infinity, nor is reaper. As the leader GW sets a price, but the competition almost immediately steps in to copy. Citadel, privateer, and Vallejo paints are now roughly equivalent, and all are below art store prices.

ShumaGorath wrote:Value is entirely relative. If they sell figures at those prices and those figures then sell, then those figures are worth those prices. As for the topic title, the figures are roughly equivalent to what the competition charges. Privateer is no cheaper, nor is infinity, nor is reaper. As the leader GW sets a price, but the competition almost immediately steps in to copy. Citadel, privateer, and Vallejo paints are now roughly equivalent, and all are below art store prices.

So... you 2 agree on that.

LunaHound wrote:

Manchu wrote:Voted no based on that definition. Price is the LAST THING that encourages favorable views of GW products.

You'll be surprised to hear convo like " wow why do you buy that drill from none GW store , im sure it sucks "
and replace that with w/e product GW makes and i have heard them.

Hence too often have i see people claiming GW product is good just because its "GW"
despite them never having any other company's product to try it with at all yet.

I've heard the opposite. "GW stuff is crap. You only pay for the name brand." I know it's false in some cases. I have "Atlus" brand brushes (they were cheap) and I have to say that I preferred using my friend's Citadel brushes. Likewise, I bought a pair of cheap snps from a hobby shop that suck compared to the Citadel ones. I no longer even use the old pair. Now, I'm sure they do charge more--but it's probably because they can rather than a strategy to make people think their product is superior because the price is higher. I don't think that kind of "branding" really applies to the hobby scene. At least not yet.

LunaHound wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Value is entirely relative. If they sell figures at those prices and those figures then sell, then those figures are worth those prices. As for the topic title, the figures are roughly equivalent to what the competition charges. Privateer is no cheaper, nor is infinity, nor is reaper. As the leader GW sets a price, but the competition almost immediately steps in to copy. Citadel, privateer, and Vallejo paints are now roughly equivalent, and all are below art store prices.

So... you 2 agree on that.

Firstly, use the language correctly. Numbers are not words. Secondly agree on what? that supply and demand exists? That price curve comparisons exist between companies within the same field? What do I agree on? I didn't even vote because that isn't a yes or no question without specifics and relative terminology.

I wonder how many people will vote before reading the wikipedia definition of premium price Luna provided.

...... Again i get lectured on english... sorry sensei -_-

you mean laoshi

I want to say no, but I also want to say yes.

I'm no expert, but I feel that GW could bring down prices a tad.

I mean, I understand a $49.50 Trygon. But $41 for 10 Greatswords? Pushing it, IMHO.

Cryonicleech wrote:I'm no expert, but I feel that GW could bring down prices a tad.

They certainly could. But that's not the issue.

The question that Luna is asking, as outlined by the linked definition, is whether GW's prices are as high as they are to encourage their perception as a quality product.

Premium Pricing relies on people choosing an expensive product over a cheaper one on the assumption that the expensive one should be better.

That's not what GW are about at all. They price as they do because they can, not because they think that being more expensive improves the perception of their product.

Hobby historical or scifi model kits are typically demonstrably more expensive than GW kits.

insaniak wrote:

Cryonicleech wrote:I'm no expert, but I feel that GW could bring down prices a tad.

They certainly could. But that's not the issue.

The question that Luna is asking, as outlined by the linked definition, is whether GW's prices are as high as they are to encourage their perception as a quality product.

Premium Pricing relies on people choosing an expensive product over a cheaper one on the assumption that the expensive one should be better.

That's not what GW are about at all. They price as they do because they can, not because they think that being more expensive improves the perception of their product.

And it's not even really that.

This thread came about after a discussion where she brought up the notion that Games Workshop charges the prices on their models due to the fact that you're "paying for both a hobby AND a game."

In that case, I'd say no.

I've never thought that GW prices are the way they are due to them being a 'name brand' or anything similar.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Miguelsan wrote:Why Channel or Gucci are priced the way they are? After all they probably come from the same Chinese factory that manufactures the 10$ fleamarket ones.

Firstly, good job implying that chinese labor by nature is cheap and poor. Secondly incorrect as Gucci products are entirely "hand made in italy" though that label could spuriously still imply assembly or parts construction in china or taiwan. Finally quality is utterly disconnected from country of origin. American cars now suck, korean items weren't worth the toxic plastic they were made of 20 years ago while being top quality today, and you can get some great steel in asia.

Talk about implying things!. Chinese labor is cheap, full stop. The poor and low quality due to being Chinese is something you decided to add by yourself.
Some years ago I had to do some research on brands and counterfeiting and found that the biggest problem luxury brands had was when they changed suppliers and the former supplier kept on manufacturing the handbags, purses, without authorization, putting the same product on the market at the real manufacturing cost. So my comment was related to that, due to having the regular markets closed on trademark reasons they go to outlets, fleamarkets and other places where the consumer can buy almost the same product for a fraction of the price. I was not dishing against the factories.

GW simply tries to project added value to their figures with pricing making them look as if they are not toys because would you pay 40$ for a box of army men? No, we do it because it´s a HOBBY and everybody knows that toys are cheap and hobbies expensive.

M.

Value is entirely relative. If they sell figures at those prices and those figures then sell, then those figures are worth those prices. As for the topic title, the figures are roughly equivalent to what the competition charges. Privateer is no cheaper, nor is infinity, nor is reaper. As the leader GW sets a price, but the competition almost immediately steps in to copy. Citadel, privateer, and Vallejo paints are now roughly equivalent, and all are below art store prices.

See above, Mercedes sells cars at the prices they do because people are expecting an added value from the brand name. If Porche were to sell cars at Toyota or Ford prices they would lose clients because then a) The added value from having an exclusive car brand is lost and b) People would think that there was something fishy about a cheap Porche, perhaps not top of the line quality, problems with the design...

So, yeah added value is relative but very, very real and follows a certain set of rules. Market segmentation by price is a basic pillar of pricing policies and GW is trying to set themselves apart from the competition by saying my product is expensive because it´s worth every €/$/Yen. I charge 40€ for the Goldswords because the box is dripping quality. And the other big players follow because they don´t want to be branded as cheap GW´s knockoffs (It doesn´t hurt that they are milking the market as much as they can too)

M.

Talk about implying things!. Chinese labor is cheap, full stop. The poor and low quality due to being Chinese is something you decided to add by yourself.
Some years ago I had to do some research on brands and counterfeiting and found that the biggest problem luxury brands had was when they changed suppliers and the former supplier kept on manufacturing the handbags, purses, without authorization, putting the same product on the market at the real manufacturing cost. So my comment was related to that, due to having the regular markets closed on trademark reasons they go to outlets, fleamarkets and other places where the consumer can buy almost the same product for a fraction of the price. I was not dishing against the factories.

My bad. I get the cheap chinese stealin our jobs thing a lot, and it grates.

So, yeah added value is relative but very, very real and follows a certain set of rules. Market segmentation by price is a basic pillar of pricing policies and GW is trying to set themselves apart from the competition by saying my product is expensive because it´s worth every €/$/Yen. I charge 40€ for the Goldswords because the box is dripping quality. And the other big players follow because they don´t want to be branded as cheap GW´s knockoffs (It doesn´t hurt that they are milking the market as much as they can too)

Except GW is not and has never been a premium dealer. They do not bill themselves as the top of the ladder, and indeed they sell kits that are quite simple, cheap and low quality (black reach, the model/paint tie in sets) as well as kits that are very high end (forge world titans). They are a company that is not in the business of dominating a specific and small segment of the model economy. They are not the most expensive, this is easily established, they are not the cheapest, this is also easily established.

If every company suddenly became a premium seller because it raised prices than every company would be a premium seller.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Talk about implying things!. Chinese labor is cheap, full stop. The poor and low quality due to being Chinese is something you decided to add by yourself.
Some years ago I had to do some research on brands and counterfeiting and found that the biggest problem luxury brands had was when they changed suppliers and the former supplier kept on manufacturing the handbags, purses, without authorization, putting the same product on the market at the real manufacturing cost. So my comment was related to that, due to having the regular markets closed on trademark reasons they go to outlets, fleamarkets and other places where the consumer can buy almost the same product for a fraction of the price. I was not dishing against the factories.

My bad. I get the cheap chinese stealin our jobs thing a lot, and it grates.

No problem there. Some times I think that everybody is in a similar PoV to mine and don´t explain myself enough.

M.

Edit: This thread from the modeling forums is the one that makes me think that GW might be trying for price segmentation.

DeathGod wrote:
But if you just buy a toy WWII tank, you'll be that guy who just bought a toy WWII tank for $9.95 at the Hobby Depot discount bin. And nobody wants to be THAT guy.

Edit: All that being said, I totally advocate using historical model kits to rip off parts from. For example, I'm using a Tamiya 1:35 STuG kit to rip off the tracks and steel road wheels from to give my russes a better, more realistic look. Just don't be the guy who buys a $15 tank kit and throws it down on the table...

If DeathGod´s sentiment is the exception rather than the rule I´m on the wrong here, but some local tendencies make me think that his feelings are more widespread than what I would wish. But of course I live on Japan the Land of the Branding so I´m more than a little bit biased.

M.

Kanluwen wrote:

insaniak wrote:

Cryonicleech wrote:I'm no expert, but I feel that GW could bring down prices a tad.

They certainly could. But that's not the issue.

The question that Luna is asking, as outlined by the linked definition, is whether GW's prices are as high as they are to encourage their perception as a quality product.

Premium Pricing relies on people choosing an expensive product over a cheaper one on the assumption that the expensive one should be better.

That's not what GW are about at all. They price as they do because they can, not because they think that being more expensive improves the perception of their product.

And it's not even really that.

This thread came about after a discussion where she brought up the notion that Games Workshop charges the prices on their models due to the fact that you're "paying for both a hobby AND a game."

Kan , just alittle bit more you need to know about me.
My threads are standalone , just because they seem to relate to other issues that doesnt mean they are.
I'll appreciate you not mixing them together , sounds fair to you?

LunaHound wrote:
Are they ? or arnt they? If possible after your vote , give a brief explanation to why .

Based on the powers of Wikki-Wikki.

"Premium pricing is the practice of keeping the price of a product or service artificially high in order to encourage favorable perceptions among buyers, based solely on the price.[1] The practice is intended to exploit the (not necessarily justifiable) tendency for buyers to assume that expensive items enjoy an exceptional reputation or represent exceptional quality and distinction."- Wikki def.

And GW

http://investor.games-workshop.com/downloads/results/results2009/gw_year_end_09.pdf


The answer is an unequivical YES.

To the average minion, consumer, and unknowing, unwashed masses- They are pimping a product at thier idea of a profit.

YOU pay for it, so there is no reason to lower it. Remember who these guys are? If you don't know about them, you might take a few minutes to go over to thier investor site, look up some alternative information about them, and dig into about three or four more references and find out a little about who you are dealing with.


To even ask this question, though....

Luna, has anyone ever told you not to look to hard, YOU MIGHT NOT LIKE WHAT YOU FIND?

If not, Let me be the first.

Maybe, but they have alot of people to pay for each product.

@Grot 6: Could you quote (with page citation) that annual report as indicating GW employs the premium pricing strategy?

*Deleted since i have a feeling i'll just be laughed at -_-

All I have to do is look at the 118 ml squeeze-bottle of Games Workshop PVA glue, and know that I can buy a quart of the exact same PVA glue from a hardware store for a lower price, to realize that Games Workshop is employing the premium pricing strategy.