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.
2010/05/15 19:04:26
Subject: Should GW have a "loss-leader" product to suck new players into 40k?
So I'm a YouTube subscriber to Beasts of War and they released a vid on the GW Price Rises:
Now, they eventually come out with two interesting points:
GW was mad to make Space Hulk a "one-off" and it would've been a great entry point for new players and should've been in every toy shop around the world... I don't think many Dakkaites are going to disagree with that
But the second interesting point was that AoBR should be cheap, perhaps even sold at a *loss*.
Now, I agree with the idea of a break-even price for a starter set... But AoBR? It's far too useful to Marine players to be made cheap, thanks to AoBR we can get Marines for £1 each off of e-bay or cheaper, a cheapskate who cares little for customisation could never buy a tactical boxset again. There's a lot of conversion material and you can just buy the boxset yourself and sell off the rest.
AoBR was their loss leader and it worked. People probably wouldn't want to buy more than one box, since the poses get really repetitive. I know I only needed one box. From there I started an Ork army with all the trimmings, and my Marines got some reinforcements. I do think Space Hulk should still be around though - it works as a good "gateway drug" into the GW hobby.
Check out my Youtube channel!
2010/05/15 20:23:06
Subject: Should GW have a "loss-leader" product to suck new players into 40k?
i bought AoBR just to boost my marines and gave the ork stuff to a friend, i think they are a good idea to get new people into the hobby but maybe there should be 2 or 3 choices?
like eldar v necron
tau v ig
perfer et obdura; dolor hic tibi proderit olim
2010/05/15 20:50:33
Subject: Should GW have a "loss-leader" product to suck new players into 40k?
shakey787 wrote:
i bought AoBR just to boost my marines and gave the ork stuff to a friend, i think they are a good idea to get new people into the hobby but maybe there should be 2 or 3 choices?
like eldar v necron
tau v ig
"I have a dream...."
GW probably couldn't turn a profit from it. It would be amazing if you could "build-your-own-starter-set" but it would cost uite a bit in production.
Night Watch SM
Kroot Mercenaries W 2 - D 3 - L 1
Manchu wrote: This is simply a self-fulfilling prophecy. Everyone says, "it won't change so why should I bother to try?" and then it doesn't change so people feel validated in their bad behavior.
GW doesn't like discounting, and AoBR was the last "loss leader" product they carried. GW is now consistent, and there's no pretending that any of their stuff is (or ever will be) "cheap".
I have just one question for the mono posed GW products...
Why dont they ever make their pose animated as if they are shooting or something , why are they all sculpted to be standing there looking dumb and doing nothing?
LunaHound wrote:I have just one question for the mono posed GW products...
Why dont they ever make their pose animated as if they are shooting or something , why are they all sculpted to be standing there looking dumb and doing nothing?
Maybe GW wants you to buy the multi-pose models which cost more?
LunaHound wrote:I have just one question for the mono posed GW products...
Why dont they ever make their pose animated as if they are shooting or something , why are they all sculpted to be standing there looking dumb and doing nothing?
Maybe GW wants you to buy the multi-pose models which cost more?
It's why I didn't buy any AoBR.
It has more to do with the fact that "actiony" poses tend to have parts of the model that would be obscured from painting or just fragile as hell in a single piece model.
2010/05/18 05:50:31
Subject: Should GW have a "loss-leader" product to suck new players into 40k?
Rather, take a look at action poses, and try and figure out how you'd remove that from an inflexible steel mold if made as a single piece.
"-Nonsense, the Inquisitor and his retinue are our hounoured guests, of course we should invite them to celebrate Four-armed Emperor-day with us..." Thought for the Day - Never use the powerfist hand to wipe.
2010/05/18 07:37:46
Subject: Should GW have a "loss-leader" product to suck new players into 40k?
LunaHound wrote:I have just one question for the mono posed GW products...
Why dont they ever make their pose animated as if they are shooting or something , why are they all sculpted to be standing there looking dumb and doing nothing?
Maybe GW wants you to buy the multi-pose models which cost more?
It's why I didn't buy any AoBR.
It has more to do with the fact that "actiony" poses tend to have parts of the model that would be obscured from painting or just fragile as hell in a single piece model.
Doubt it , take a look at the current models. Nothing is stopping GW from turning their head to where their bolters are pointing at and changing the angle of their bolter + arm alittle.
Here is something recent , your theory doesnt work.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/05/18 07:42:50