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.

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

 Bottle wrote:
Sure. The problem in my opinion is the individual prices per model are so different between the starter set and the boxes that it is likely to put users off.

The thing is people assign value to something based on the price they were first sold it. Of course everyone can understand that starter sets or bundles come at cheaper prices, but I think with the Stormcast we are now seeing a massive gap more than ever due to GW's good value starter sets and high price "dual-build" kits.

Unfortunately i don't think we'll see that gap stabilizing anytime soon. AoS has provided GW with yet another reason to raise its price-per-model tag all across the table (models are bigger, a bit more detailed and most of the boxes are now dual kits for a bundle of price-increasing excuses) and then hiking it up to tremendous prices on the Elite/SC slots. You can also see this price increase in the books, though it's not as steep - it mostly happened during ET.

And, naturally, 40k will follow along - just look at the Tau.

Possibly for new models, but GW have actually reduced the price per model in some of their reboxings, like Dryads and Skullcrushers.

coldgaming wrote:

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

 Bottle wrote:
Sure. The problem in my opinion is the individual prices per model are so different between the starter set and the boxes that it is likely to put users off.

The thing is people assign value to something based on the price they were first sold it. Of course everyone can understand that starter sets or bundles come at cheaper prices, but I think with the Stormcast we are now seeing a massive gap more than ever due to GW's good value starter sets and high price "dual-build" kits.

Unfortunately i don't think we'll see that gap stabilizing anytime soon. AoS has provided GW with yet another reason to raise its price-per-model tag all across the table (models are bigger, a bit more detailed and most of the boxes are now dual kits for a bundle of price-increasing excuses) and then hiking it up to tremendous prices on the Elite/SC slots. You can also see this price increase in the books, though it's not as steep - it mostly happened during ET.

And, naturally, 40k will follow along - just look at the Tau.

Possibly for new models, but GW have actually reduced the price per model in some of their reboxings, like Dryads and Skullcrushers.

How did they do that? Did they reduce the price or did they add sprues to the box itself? I am actually curious because I don't remember that specific bit.

Skullcru$hers cost 60 quid for six models and I think they used to be 33.5 or 35 quid (I may be wrong) for 3. You are now buying more than you possibly need, though...

 CoreCommander wrote:
Well Malifaux is certainly not as big as Warhammer, but it still sells absurdly good here and I know and there are customers that are just collectors - they do not play. They continue to pay GW prices for a weaker brand. When we were starting DZC here (pity it did not hold) we threw around 500 euro per man in the first 2 months. What brand does DZC have? It's still a kickstarter funded game. Mantic's models were not liked at all hence no one bought these. If there is a trend here (as in where I am) it is the following - if a person likes a model and it is reasonably priced for his budget he will buy it regardless of which company makes it, provided he plays the appropriate game. In the other case, where the person is just a collector, he will buy it either way - hobbyists are just used to such prices and many have moved beyond the worry of how much they are being ripped off (relative to the manufacturing cost of the model), provided they are offered to buy something they like at a price they're willing to pay.

But who set up the price ceiling that those companies are also going for? I am pretty sure it's GW, and now Wyrd and the rest are just tagging along on the trend set by the (still but I don't think it'll be for much longer if they keep acting like this) dominant company in the market. With the added bonus that, if they ever get called out on their prices, they have the convenient GW scapegoat.

However, I think you hit the nail right in the head when you mentioned how hobbyists are just so used to being ripped off that they just take it in a stride nowadays, regardless of where it's coming from. Which is kinda sad when I think of it that way as I have a lot of mates who are simply priced out of most games nowadays due to the continuing waves of price hikes


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CoreCommander wrote:
Skullcru$hers cost 60 quid for six models and I think they used to be 33.5 or 35 quid (I may be wrong) for 3. You are now buying more than you possibly need, though...

Blargh! So while it's theoretically a reduction of the price per model they are forcing players to spend more money regardless. Ah GW, you evil, greedy bums

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

But who set up the price ceiling that those companies are also going for? I am pretty sure it's GW, and now Wyrd and the rest are just tagging along on the trend set by the (still but I don't think it'll be for much longer if they keep acting like this) dominant company in the market. With the added bonus that, if they ever get called out on their prices, they have the convenient GW scapegoat.

I think there is probably a simpler explanation: miniatures are just really expensive to produce as a product.

(GW is still too expensive. There's no way that the $30 Celestant Prime is consumer priced.)

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

Which is kinda sad when I think of it that way as I have a lot of mates who are simply priced out of most games nowadays due to the continuing waves of price hikes

Sadly, the ability to buy hobby miniatures is not yet a fundamental human right, nor are they necessity goods and thus the price is not governed by any regulations. You got the ca$h - you get the toys

 CoreCommander wrote:

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

Which is kinda sad when I think of it that way as I have a lot of mates who are simply priced out of most games nowadays due to the continuing waves of price hikes

Sadly, the ability to buy hobby miniatures is not yet a fundamental human right, nor are they necessity goods and thus the price is not governed by any regulations. You got the ca$h - you get the toys

But it should be a fundamental human right already, god dang it!

There is close to as much plastic used in Stormcast Eternals as is used in 40K Terminators. They may not have quite the the selection of weapons or types of models that can be created, but I can see the $50 price point. Dark Angel Deathwing Terminators are $60 per box (but also allow three different variations to be built as well as several weapons, banners, and bits for different kinds of models).

So, I don't see it as being that bad. I'm a little disappointed because of how few options there are compared to say a DA Terminator Squad box, but for $10 less, I can deal with it.

SG


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Bottle wrote:
Yep. I understand those will be the reasons. Still, I think GW should have made the Stormcast cheaper to help soften the blow when new players want to expand on the starter set.

Dark Angels have to be one of the most expensive Space Marine armies out there yet they are in the current 40K Starter Box. Granted, they offer some amazing savings in the Dark Angels Expansion. But, overall, the DA models are just very expensive by comparison to their other Space Marine counterparts.

So, while I agree that starter box faction models should be at some kind of discount while the starter box is GW's current starter box, it's definitely not the case :(

SG

It's nothing to do with the price of plastic.

The amount of plastic used to make a single infantry figure, even a large one like a Terminator or a Sigmarine, is worth about a penny.

GW models cost a lot because of two factors; 1. GW need you to pay a lot for them to stay afloat, and 2. you are happy to pay that much.

Well, technically they have to recoup the cost of producing the mould too, that's always been the most expensive part of producing a model because plastic moulds are ridiculously expensive.

However the cost of those has become a fraction of what it once was and as soon as they are paid off the models are basically pure profit with practically 0 production costs.

Indeed, the modern cost of a plastic mould is about 10% of what it was 25 years ago.

However, in accounting the cost of the mould must be depreciated during its working life and apportioned to the units produced during that time.

If a mould cost £10,000 and was used to produce 10,000 kits in three years, then being scrapped for a new mould, the cost per kit would be £1, not £10,000 for the first kit and £0 for the next 9,999.

Perry Bros of course face the same plastic and moulding costs as GW, and probably produce smaller numbers of of sprues, but their kits are much cheaper.