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.

tallshortguy wrote:You seriously have no idea what luxury items are apparently. By it's base definition anything you don't necessarily need to live in an acceptable state (food, housing, etc.) is a luxury. Unless you eat GW minis to sustain your life they are indeed luxury items.

Also as stated earlier by brettz123, please do some research in basic economics before starting a rant like this.

There are people in the world who consider proper plumbing an luxury item. Stop raging, it's just annoying.

I don't necessarily agree. I, and I would assume marketers, would define something like miniatures as a "want" or a "discretionary purchase", while a "luxury good" is something that is either significantly more expensive than a comparable item, is a "status" item, or is an item that by its nature is very expensive, such as middle to high end jewelry. Of course, in some goods, luxury can vary from item to item depending on the item in question. For instance, a 20k$ car is not considered a luxury car, but a 20k$ watch would be considered a middle level luxury watch.

I think you're the one claiming that the OP is saying miniatures are a "need", which I don't think he's saying at all. His view, I believe, is that "want" does not equal "luxury good".

No real reason to be rude anyhow, a simple " I disagree, and this is why" would probably suffice.

Grignard wrote:...I quickly move over and casually steer the conversation toward my latest purchase of OOP harlequin jetbike canopies. I'll mention with a slight chuckle that they're still *making* his model of watch.

I have over 30 now. You?

Grignard wrote: I, and I would assume marketers, would define something like miniatures as a "want" or a "discretionary purchase", while a "luxury good" is something that is either significantly more expensive than a comparable item

Well, by that definition GW minis would in fact be a luxury item, since the majority of people seem to think they're horribly overpriced compared to what other companies are charging for like items.

The entire discussion is a matter of how open to black/white and shades of grey you are.
Black and white: I don't need it, it's a luxury.
Shades of grey: It's not a super high-end product, so it's obviously not a luxury.

Myself, I'm more black/white. If you think it's a luxury, you're probably a rational, practical person. If you don't, you're probably a pretentious .

JohnHwangDD wrote:
This is pure comedy gold. Privateer's plastic costs more than their metals. Infinity and Malifaux models are more expensive than GW.As we've seen with Battlefront's Flames and Privateer's Warmachine, they will simply follow GW's lead and charge more to ensure they get a fair profit themselves.

Point of fact: GW sets a price floor for the other players in the market. Nobody stays around with a business model that undercuts GW prices when gamers have demonstrated again and again that they will pay ever-increasing amounts for their toys.

I agree with you. I was looking at the other games but they are incredibly more expensive than GW as far as unit costs are concerned. I realize that they are smaller games but the consumer in me just can't abide paying more than I think something is worth.

I think a better comparison of a smaller company that might threaten GW is Mantic; they have an attractive price point and nice minatures. It will be interesting to watch them as they grow their product line.

As was pointed out already, the examples that you listed are considered Veblen goods as defined by my economics text book...Veblen goods are a group of commodities for which people's preference for buying them increases as a direct function of their price, as greater price confers greater status, instead of decreasing according to the law of demand. A Veblen good is often also a positional good.

Ripped straight from my Economics text book we get the following...a luxury good is a good for which demand increases more than proportionally as income rises, in contrast to a "necessity good", for which demand is not related to income.

So, as much as your nerd rage is attempting to justify GW's pricing or whatever it is that you are trying to prove, you are, in fact, incorrect. I am sorry to have broken your pace as you where on quite a roll there and I should know as I rant locally quite often and have gotten rather good at it, but when I rant I do attempt to make sure that I have my facts straight before i get started.

I do wish you luck in your future attempts to rant and hope that you have learned something from this one.

And I am jealous. I only have 5 Harlequin jetbike canopies.

Ailaros wrote:

Gorechild wrote:Because of the INSANE price (when you consider the cost of the raw material's, production and stuff is probably about 30% of the retail price)

Have you ever drunk a can of Coke?

MeanGreenStompa wrote: once those guys can mass produce multipart fantasy and scifi minis, GW will finally, FINALLY, have the competition it needs to cut it down into a competitively priced company with a changed attitude.

This.

It's interesting to note that GW's shareholder statement came out yesterday. After nearly being run into the ground 5 years ago, the company is to the point where it plans on repaying the last of it's debts this year. This kind of recapitalization is astonishing, given that lots of companies are folding due to the recession.

Anyways, to the OP, their strategy is pretty clearly stated:

Games Workshop wrote:We know that, for a niche like ours, people who are interested in collecting fantasy miniatures will choose the best quality and be prepared
to pay what they are worth.

The share holder statement was quite interesting thanks for posting it i wouldnt of read it otherwise.

I was never a big model maker before I got into miniatures, but from what I've seen, all this crap is expensive. I was looking at woodland scenics stuff for terrain wondering if I'd get away a whole lot cheaper, but it isn't. I use Vallejo paint, which IIRC is priced about the same as Citadel. I've talked to model railroaders who have spent far more on their layout than I've ever spent on miniatures, but they tell me they know people who have a lot more.

The GW statement is interesting. That pretty much wraps up the thread right there. That is a very direct statement, the fact of which tells you all you need to know. GW feels they produce the best quality miniatures ( I'm not going to argue over that statement, I frankly don't know enough about models), and that they can bluntly say their customers will pay what their product is worth. What its worth is what GW says it is worth. I guess a particularly sadistic poster could say they're even being generous with us.

GW says that if their price is giving you a red hot poker, they think you'll pay for it, and they're probably right. Their competitors have a long way to go, and I think the only way they could price too high is if enough people start buying old stuff on Ebay, and they haven't done that yet.

They aren't luxury goods but they should only be bought with disposable income.

If they were luxury goods they'd ocupy the same shelf as my scotch and that's not happening.

Shepherd23 wrote:
Ripped straight from my Economics text book we get the following...a luxury good is a good for which demand increases more than proportionally as income rises, in contrast to a "necessity good", for which demand is not related to income.

Exactly. When I have more disposable income, I buy more miniatures. When I have to make house repairs or pay higher gas and electricity bills, I buy fewer minis. Hobbies, in general, are what we choose to do with our money and our time after our obligations are met. Those who don't realize that have very skewed priorities. And, GW isn't that expensive - as far as middle-class adult hobbies go. Golf can cost over $100 for an afternoon's play. At least my $100 gets me miniatures that I'll spend 10+ hours painting and who knows how many gaming with, and if/when I tire of them, I can sell them off to recoup much of that.

Redbeard wrote:

Shepherd23 wrote:
Ripped straight from my Economics text book we get the following...a luxury good is a good for which demand increases more than proportionally as income rises, in contrast to a "necessity good", for which demand is not related to income.

Exactly. When I have more disposable income, I buy more miniatures. When I have to make house repairs or pay higher gas and electricity bills, I buy fewer minis. Hobbies, in general, are what we choose to do with our money and our time after our obligations are met. Those who don't realize that have very skewed priorities. And, GW isn't that expensive - as far as middle-class adult hobbies go. Golf can cost over $100 for an afternoon's play. At least my $100 gets me miniatures that I'll spend 10+ hours painting and who knows how many gaming with, and if/when I tire of them, I can sell them off to recoup much of that.

I can play golf on a decent course for 18 bucks where I live.

Disposable income is very flexible though. I'm perfectly fine with no cable TV, limiting my use of an air conditioner, and buying generic crap. Is that a little obsessive to do so that you have more money to spend on miniatures? Perhaps, but I find 180$ cable bills strange.

Does that $18 cover a cart, balls, access to a club to get food/drinks afterwards, etc?

That comes out to around $100 for a single afternoon.

I don't golf, so I was taking my co-workers word for it. I'm with you on the cable thing - I don't have cable because I'd have my back to it while painting.

Agreed. Sometimes the background noise is worth it though.

Kanluwen wrote:Does that $18 cover a cart, balls, access to a club to get food/drinks afterwards, etc?

That comes out to around $100 for a single afternoon.

Nope but there's a cute lady that sells beer driving around the course.

a "luxury good" is something that is either significantly more expensive than a comparable item, is a "status" item, or is an item that by its nature is very expensive,

The above describes GW products to a tee.

Gw products are some of the most expensive of their kind. Heck i can buy a bag of 100 army men for less then five of GW's models, yet both are "toy soldiers".

Gw models are certainly a status symbol amongst wargamers, and GW gamers often compare their investment totals, and brag about the high cost/value of their collections, etc.

Many GW gamers also often slag other companies an their miniatures as inferior, thus proving that some see GW minis as status items.

I also know many people that would love to play GW games but can't afford to do so, and I don't mean "don't like the prices" can't afford them, I mean "need the money to keep my lights on and food on the table" can't afford them, so yes they are a luxury item to be sure...

agnosto wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Does that $18 cover a cart, balls, access to a club to get food/drinks afterwards, etc?

That comes out to around $100 for a single afternoon.

Nope but there's a cute lady that sells beer driving around the course.

That's a recipe for disaster.

Grignard wrote:

tallshortguy wrote:You seriously have no idea what luxury items are apparently. By it's base definition anything you don't necessarily need to live in an acceptable state (food, housing, etc.) is a luxury. Unless you eat GW minis to sustain your life they are indeed luxury items.

Also as stated earlier by brettz123, please do some research in basic economics before starting a rant like this.

There are people in the world who consider proper plumbing an luxury item. Stop raging, it's just annoying.

I don't necessarily agree. I, and I would assume marketers, would define something like miniatures as a "want" or a "discretionary purchase", while a "luxury good" is something that is either significantly more expensive than a comparable item, is a "status" item, or is an item that by its nature is very expensive, such as middle to high end jewelry. Of course, in some goods, luxury can vary from item to item depending on the item in question. For instance, a 20k$ car is not considered a luxury car, but a 20k$ watch would be considered a middle level luxury watch.

I think you're the one claiming that the OP is saying miniatures are a "need", which I don't think he's saying at all. His view, I believe, is that "want" does not equal "luxury good".

No real reason to be rude anyhow, a simple " I disagree, and this is why" would probably suffice.

By the economic models I've studied, the most basic split occurs at supply at demand where you have items that will increase in demand as income goes down while decreasing in demand while income goes up(ramen noodles for example) and those on the opposite spectrum(ipods). Now, most would categorize luxury as the latter products.

The reason luxury cars are called luxury is because in the instance where you "have" to have a car (in probability terms, given that you have a car), the base car is a basic Honda civic/accord. Thus, the luxury is those above the base cases (20-30k cars). Now in real life the actual base case (needs) is food, shelter, etc. While many consider cars very useful, it is still not a necessary item since you can take public transport if you need transportation.

I hope I've explained myself sufficiently, I've tried to use the appropriate terms but they may be confusing.

Kanluwen wrote:

agnosto wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Does that $18 cover a cart, balls, access to a club to get food/drinks afterwards, etc?

That comes out to around $100 for a single afternoon.

Nope but there's a cute lady that sells beer driving around the course.

That's a recipe for disaster.

Oh yes, but it's a heckuva excuse for being terrible,"Sorry, too much beer."

Gotta love public courses.

Kanluwen wrote:Does that $18 cover a cart, balls, access to a club to get food/drinks afterwards, etc?

That comes out to around $100 for a single afternoon.

That 18 dollars covers carts at one course, but in fairness I haven't played that one. The county course is around the same price but doesn't include a cart, but I usually use a pull cart which I own. Those are twilight rates of course, but the regular rates are only 10 bucks more. Its not Pebble Beach, but its not a half bad course, and I think the Nationwide Tour has an event there. Yes, if you actually eat at the golf course you have to add that, but even at courses that aren't as cheap there is no way I'll need 100 bucks even including cart and food. I can play a Nicklaus designed course ( unfortunately about 120 miles from where I live right now) for 40 bucks including cart on a weekend, but its a state course and that includes my state employee discount. With land and property taxes at extremely low levels, do you understand why East Tennessee is becoming a big retirement area? Of course, they don't give jack squat back to their community, but that is another story.

I think you're used to playing more whitebread courses than I do. I can't imagine spending 100$ per person for golf unless I'm on vacation.

tallshortguy wrote:

Grignard wrote:

tallshortguy wrote:You seriously have no idea what luxury items are apparently. By it's base definition anything you don't necessarily need to live in an acceptable state (food, housing, etc.) is a luxury. Unless you eat GW minis to sustain your life they are indeed luxury items.

Also as stated earlier by brettz123, please do some research in basic economics before starting a rant like this.

There are people in the world who consider proper plumbing an luxury item. Stop raging, it's just annoying.

I don't necessarily agree. I, and I would assume marketers, would define something like miniatures as a "want" or a "discretionary purchase", while a "luxury good" is something that is either significantly more expensive than a comparable item, is a "status" item, or is an item that by its nature is very expensive, such as middle to high end jewelry. Of course, in some goods, luxury can vary from item to item depending on the item in question. For instance, a 20k$ car is not considered a luxury car, but a 20k$ watch would be considered a middle level luxury watch.

I think you're the one claiming that the OP is saying miniatures are a "need", which I don't think he's saying at all. His view, I believe, is that "want" does not equal "luxury good".

No real reason to be rude anyhow, a simple " I disagree, and this is why" would probably suffice.

By the economic models I've studied, the most basic split occurs at supply at demand where you have items that will increase in demand as income goes down while decreasing in demand while income goes up(ramen noodles for example) and those on the opposite spectrum(ipods). Now, most would categorize luxury as the latter products.

The reason luxury cars are called luxury is because in the instance where you "have" to have a car (in probability terms, given that you have a car), the base car is a basic Honda civic/accord. Thus, the luxury is those above the base cases (20-30k cars). Now in real life the actual base case (needs) is food, shelter, etc. While many consider cars very useful, it is still not a necessary item since you can take public transport if you need transportation.

I hope I've explained myself sufficiently, I've tried to use the appropriate terms but they may be confusing.

In the most rural areas where I live, because of changes in the structure of the economy, people pretty much have to have a car or motorbike to get to a job. There is no public transportation. Its a need enough that charities exist to help low income families get more reasonable loans than they otherwise could on used automobiles.

Grignard wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Does that $18 cover a cart, balls, access to a club to get food/drinks afterwards, etc?

That comes out to around $100 for a single afternoon.

That 18 dollars covers carts at one course, but in fairness I haven't played that one. The county course is around the same price but doesn't include a cart, but I usually use a pull cart which I own. Those are twilight rates of course, but the regular rates are only 10 bucks more. Its not Pebble Beach, but its not a half bad course, and I think the Nationwide Tour has an event there. Yes, if you actually eat at the golf course you have to add that, but even at courses that aren't as cheap there is no way I'll need 100 bucks even including cart and food. I can play a Nicklaus designed course ( unfortunately about 120 miles from where I live right now) for 40 bucks including cart on a weekend, but its a state course and that includes my state employee discount. With land and property taxes at extremely low levels, do you understand why East Tennessee is becoming a big retirement area? Of course, they don't give jack squat back to their community, but that is another story.

I think you're used to playing more whitebread courses than I do. I can't imagine spending 100$ per person for golf unless I'm on vacation.

Honestly, I don't play golf outside of once with a friend. That was an 18 hole course out in Wake Forest that came out to $100/person. That's just what I'm going by.

Kanluwen wrote:

Grignard wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Does that $18 cover a cart, balls, access to a club to get food/drinks afterwards, etc?

That comes out to around $100 for a single afternoon.

That 18 dollars covers carts at one course, but in fairness I haven't played that one. The county course is around the same price but doesn't include a cart, but I usually use a pull cart which I own. Those are twilight rates of course, but the regular rates are only 10 bucks more. Its not Pebble Beach, but its not a half bad course, and I think the Nationwide Tour has an event there. Yes, if you actually eat at the golf course you have to add that, but even at courses that aren't as cheap there is no way I'll need 100 bucks even including cart and food. I can play a Nicklaus designed course ( unfortunately about 120 miles from where I live right now) for 40 bucks including cart on a weekend, but its a state course and that includes my state employee discount. With land and property taxes at extremely low levels, do you understand why East Tennessee is becoming a big retirement area? Of course, they don't give jack squat back to their community, but that is another story.

I think you're used to playing more whitebread courses than I do. I can't imagine spending 100$ per person for golf unless I'm on vacation.

Honestly, I don't play golf outside of once with a friend. That was an 18 hole course out in Wake Forest that came out to $100/person. That's just what I'm going by.

Yah, imagine you could do better than that pretty much anywhere in the country. The days of municipal and state courses having rock hard fairways and patchy greens are mostly over.

Luxury is relative. If a person could maybe afford a 20 dollar model every 3 months then it would be a luxury to him. Its monetary value or any other value a person puts on it.

You guys are taking this in the wrong direction. I'm not saying that GW minis are necessities, I'm saying that if your only definition of "luxury" is "anything that's not a necessity" then at best that provides no justification for increased cost and at worst renders the word "luxury" completely meaningless.

Look at chocolate. Hershey chocolate would by the !necessity = luxury definition be a luxury good- and yet we do not see year-on-year price increases on Hershey products. In fact, they have consistently been an extremely cheap product. As a result they've grown to become the largest chocolate manufacturers in North America and one of the top chocolate makers in the world. Their product is not especially good- in fact, many people would say it's low quality. But it's consistent and it's cheap, so Hershey dominates and I've even heard that better chocolatiers in the US feel pressure to immitate Hershey's chalky consistency just to get a foot into the US market.

A step up in quality would be a company like Cadbury or Mars - the second-largest and largest chocolate makers in the world respectively. Their products are a bit more expensive than Hershey, but they are a consistently high-quality product while still being accessable to most people. Because nearly anyone can easily pick up their products on a whim (even if they're slightly more expensive than the minimum), their brands are well-recognized and popular around the world.

There are other, smaller, much higher-quality chocolates out there that command a higher price. Green & Black's for example. These are premium chocolates- what I would call low-end luxury chocolates. They're expensive enough they may not be a reasonable frequent purchase by people with low incomes, but they are of exceptional quality. And there are obviously many brands of even more luxurious chocolates out there commanding smaller and smaller market shares.

Games Workshop says they're Green & Black's and deserve Green & Black's-level prices, but the quality of their product fluctuates all over the place- sometimes at that same high quality level as Green & Black's, often dropping down to the Mars/Cadbury level, and sometimes even dipping to sub-Hershey level. They have no consistency. And yet they claim they want to dominate the market like Cadbury and Mars do. It just doesn't work.

JOHIRA wrote:You guys are taking this in the wrong direction. I'm not saying that GW minis are necessities, I'm saying that if your only definition of "luxury" is "anything that's not a necessity" then at best that provides no justification for increased cost and at worst renders the word "luxury" completely meaningless.

Look at chocolate. Hershey chocolate would by the !necessity = luxury definition be a luxury good- and yet we do not see year-on-year price increases on Hershey products. In fact, they have consistently been an extremely cheap product. As a result they've grown to become the largest chocolate manufacturers in North America and one of the top chocolate makers in the world. Their product is not especially good- in fact, many people would say it's low quality. But it's consistent and it's cheap, so Hershey dominates and I've even heard that better chocolatiers in the US feel pressure to immitate Hershey's chalky consistency just to get a foot into the US market.

A step up in quality would be a company like Cadbury or Mars - the second-largest and largest chocolate makers in the world respectively. Their products are a bit more expensive than Hershey, but they are a consistently high-quality product while still being accessable to most people. Because nearly anyone can easily pick up their products on a whim (even if they're slightly more expensive than the minimum), their brands are well-recognized and popular around the world.

There are other, smaller, much higher-quality chocolates out there that command a higher price. Green & Black's for example. These are premium chocolates- what I would call low-end luxury chocolates. They're expensive enough they may not be a reasonable frequent purchase by people with low incomes, but they are of exceptional quality. And there are obviously many brands of even more luxurious chocolates out there commanding smaller and smaller market shares.

Games Workshop says they're Green & Black's and deserve Green & Black's-level prices, but the quality of their product fluctuates all over the place- sometimes at that same high quality level as Green & Black's, often dropping down to the Mars/Cadbury level, and sometimes even dipping to sub-Hershey level. They have no consistency. And yet they claim they want to dominate the market like Cadbury and Mars do. It just doesn't work.

Ok well that makes a lot more sense than your first post perhaps next time instead of ranting you could actually just post your more rational thoughts the first time. And perhaps more importantly did we really need another GW price hate thread? Of course GW prices are completely stupid but how is that any different now then the last four or five years?

JOHIRA wrote:Games Workshop says they're Green & Black's and deserve Green & Black's-level prices, but the quality of their product fluctuates all over the place- sometimes at that same high quality level as Green & Black's, often dropping down to the Mars/Cadbury level, and sometimes even dipping to sub-Hershey level. They have no consistency. And yet they claim they want to dominate the market like Cadbury and Mars do. It just doesn't work.

Well GW can say what they want... One cannot say they arent consistent about gauging prices

Seriously though their quality of late is getting to excelent levels.
As for us considering it a luxury, Im a bit simplistic minded concerning this because to me... a hobby is a luxury.

I have found that its not so much what I think it is, but what my wife thinks it is.

NAVARRO wrote:

JOHIRA wrote:Games Workshop says they're Green & Black's and deserve Green & Black's-level prices, but the quality of their product fluctuates all over the place- sometimes at that same high quality level as Green & Black's, often dropping down to the Mars/Cadbury level, and sometimes even dipping to sub-Hershey level. They have no consistency. And yet they claim they want to dominate the market like Cadbury and Mars do. It just doesn't work.

Well GW can say what they want... One cannot say they arent consistent about gauging prices

Seriously though their quality of late is getting to excelent levels.

*cough*

In this country, you gotta make the money first. Then when you get the money, you get the pewter. Then when you get the pewter, then you get the women.

They are luxury items. Move along . Have a nice day.


If you talk about chocolate like that again I may have to shoot you.

Dont let the door hit your arse on the way out.

MIKEtheMERCILESS wrote:In this country, you gotta make the money first. Then when you get the money, you get the pewter. Then when you get the pewter, then you get the women.

End of thread.