Switch Theme:

You and me against the Scalpers.  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in gb
Major




London

If people really want the model that badly and are prepared to pay for it, then that's up to them. Scalpers just fulfil a need.
   
Made in ca
Preacher of the Emperor






I don't understand the 'that's just capitalism' argument people keep citing. GW is the supplier, and whether or not they implement a one-per-customer policy is their business; their ability to do so is also capitalism, and that too is limited.

Ultimately if you can convince GW that it's in their interest to take action against against resellers one of the easiest and least obtrusive methods for combating is to abandon event exclusives entirely. Release the new model at your event at a certain price and then start selling it on your website the following week. If your markup for selling it online beats their markup (or frankly, even comes close) you win, and you've dealt a blog to any of them that haven't moved product yet.

An even meaner way to do it is to immediately announce you're taking the above action based on how quickly the event units sold. GW took similar action when they did the resin Cannoness.

   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





 n0t_u wrote:
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
If you're seeing Scalpers with 50 of supposedly 'one per customer' things, let GW know. It's entirely possible someone somewhere isn't doing their job.

I know this sounds trite, but it's up to us as a community to make displeasure known


I have no idea who to point such a thing to or what GW can really even do about it.


Print more, so the scalpers don't have a market?

CHAOS! PANIC! DISORDER!
My job here is done. 
   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka




n0t_u wrote:Who missed it the first time cause these guys bought a good chunk of a store's stock to sell for almost twice the price.


And wouldn't have happened in the first place if GW made enough product in the first place.

That said, just show GW the numbers that the money they could have made instead of the money going else where. So instead of worrying about scalpers, just worry show GW the money they could have had.

But then if that happened, GW would loose all that money on impulse buys. And that is why we have scalpers. Again, impulse buys.

Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.

Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?

Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong".  
   
Made in us
Consigned to the Grim Darkness





USA

You know, limits on the number of tickets at a concert is relatively sane-- there's literally only so much seating, or if it's standing room, the concert hall is only rated for so much capacity before violating safety regulations, et cetera. But harsh limits on the number of miniatures produced really doesn't make much sense. It literally CREATES scalping for no adequate purpose... unless the maker wants to be screwed out of its money by scalpers.

Basically, GW is working to make scalping appear in the first place-- why would they want to work against it when their apparent goal was to make it happen?

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/01/24 04:54:34


The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
 
   
Made in au
Lady of the Lake






Davor wrote:
n0t_u wrote:Who missed it the first time cause these guys bought a good chunk of a store's stock to sell for almost twice the price.


And wouldn't have happened in the first place if GW made enough product in the first place.

That said, just show GW the numbers that the money they could have made instead of the money going else where. So instead of worrying about scalpers, just worry show GW the money they could have had.

But then if that happened, GW would loose all that money on impulse buys. And that is why we have scalpers. Again, impulse buys.


I don't really know how I can show GW me spending my money elsewhere when they run out of something they decided would be limited edition. But, that's what happens.

   
Made in jp
Fixture of Dakka





Japan

 kronk wrote:
 Undead_Love-Machine wrote:

Any beef should be directed at GW themselves for engineering scarcity.



This is the biggest issue, IMHO.

"Sir, we sold out all of our stock in 1 minute!"

"Great! Er, how many was that, exactly?"

"100! We even have 10,000 emails in the last 2 days angry that we didn't make more!"

"...Why didn't we make 10,000 to begin with?"

"They might not sell out in 1 minue!"

"..."



Kronk is right like always

I am patient, i usually buy it of someone after a few years
(and i wonder how many of those first minute buyers are re-casters )

Squidbot;
"That sound? That's the sound of me drinking all my paint and stabbing myself in the eyes with my brushes. "
My Doombringer Space Marine Army
Hello Kitty Space Marines project
Buddhist Space marine Project
Other Projects
Imageshack deleted all my Images Thank you! 
   
Made in ie
Calculating Commissar




Frostgrave

 Melissia wrote:

Basically, GW is working to make scalping appear in the first place-- why would they want to work against it when their apparent goal was to make it happen?

Exactly, the low supply model drives the impulse purchasing they seem to rely on "buy now whilst you still can!" and encourages scalping as it's a sure-fire way to make some money (I was at the last real games day, and they were encouraging everyone to buy loads of the LE models to sell on, even saying "Some guy bought a whole tray of them for eBay").

That they can sell out any limited run (except AoS books) in a short time is great for their business. It's easy, low risk money. If they make too many, then they lose money from (a) having kits left and (b) scalpers buying less due to being burnt. As far as I can tell, they've been burnt pretty badly with things like Space Hulk, where the price dropped below retail on the re-re-release.
   
Made in us
Major




In a van down by the river

Herzlos wrote:
 Melissia wrote:

Basically, GW is working to make scalping appear in the first place-- why would they want to work against it when their apparent goal was to make it happen?

Exactly, the low supply model drives the impulse purchasing they seem to rely on "buy now whilst you still can!" and encourages scalping as it's a sure-fire way to make some money (I was at the last real games day, and they were encouraging everyone to buy loads of the LE models to sell on, even saying "Some guy bought a whole tray of them for eBay").

That they can sell out any limited run (except AoS books) in a short time is great for their business. It's easy, low risk money. If they make too many, then they lose money from (a) having kits left and (b) scalpers buying less due to being burnt. As far as I can tell, they've been burnt pretty badly with things like Space Hulk, where the price dropped below retail on the re-re-release.


This is quite true; GW is really the core of problem and could solve it comparatively easily by more accurately gauging market demand. They choose not to because they would rather not expend the efforts on market research (which to be fair isn't free) and instead crow about the number of releases that sold out within hours. Disinterested investors (i.e. - the people GW actually care about) hear "demand is high for our products" and leave the money alone; since they're disinterested they don't ask themselves "how much MORE money could have been made?" which is a missed opportunity and harder to see from a distance compared to concrete losses on products that stop moving. An activist investment firm might look into things and then very uncomfortable questions might be raised such as what StarBoard did to Darden Foods, but I doubt that such an investor is interested in a comparatively small fish like GW; there's likely not THAT much extra money being left on the table nor will it result in a huge surge in the stock price to make such efforts worthwhile.

So unless GW decides to stop leaving money on the table, which historically has been an huge weak point for the company, it will continue to produce the "scalper" market. A per-customer limit doesn't work in a world where email accounts and friends with shipping addresses are nearly-free and measures beyond that become insanely draconian for toy soldiers. As many have said this boils down to basic supply vs. demand; where there is demand someone will attempt to buy up the supply and raise the prices. The solution is to increase the supply to meet demand. If the scalpers are unable to corner the market, they are unable to raise the price. They tend to disappear at that point since there's no money to be made.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/01/24 12:53:19


 
   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka




n0t_u wrote:
Davor wrote:
n0t_u wrote:Who missed it the first time cause these guys bought a good chunk of a store's stock to sell for almost twice the price.


And wouldn't have happened in the first place if GW made enough product in the first place.

That said, just show GW the numbers that the money they could have made instead of the money going else where. So instead of worrying about scalpers, just worry show GW the money they could have had.

But then if that happened, GW would loose all that money on impulse buys. And that is why we have scalpers. Again, impulse buys.


I don't really know how I can show GW me spending my money elsewhere when they run out of something they decided would be limited edition. But, that's what happens.


Call Customer Support and tell them. I did that. I love it. They can't say anything but that we have the right to do. They don't even have an answer. I would call them and say "because you make this limited edition or limited release and is already sold out before orders are taken, I wanted to buy it, but now you didn't make enough, you don't have my money." Then the poor soul will say "but we have this and that" and I would have to reply "but I don't want this or that. I wanted IT. Since I can't have IT, my interest in the range is gone. If I am going to have to buy something else, I will buy your competitors stuff that I know I CAN GET and not be frustrated when a company turns me a way since they don't want my money."

They never have an answer for them not wanting my money on products I want. lol

Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.

Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?

Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong".  
   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






Or you could be more constructive about it?

   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




Scalpers are annoying, But that is about it. Its also up to GW how they want to handle there market. If they make Something limited it will hold value as a limited or a collectors item.

People will take the risk on the item and put down for more than one, and try to sell on. There is no way to go against this other than inform GW you do not like the limited market they create.

   
Made in us
Librarian with Freaky Familiar






Honestly all of these problems are things that exist in every market, and will never stop. It's how it works. If you want that limited model you show up early, he'll every limited release GW has I'm always waiting in front of the store a good 2 hours before its open so I can garuntee I get one.

That's what it takes if you really want it. I don't have a problem with people buying 3 or 4. That said, if you are the first and buy the whole stock, yeah your a dick but guess what, those are the Kinda people that get driven out of the hobby becuase no one wants to deal with them.

Yeah it sucks but hey, it's kinda the way it works.

To many unpainted models to count. 
   
Made in gb
[SWAP SHOP MOD]
Killer Klaivex







Davor wrote:
n0t_u wrote:
Davor wrote:
n0t_u wrote:Who missed it the first time cause these guys bought a good chunk of a store's stock to sell for almost twice the price.


And wouldn't have happened in the first place if GW made enough product in the first place.

That said, just show GW the numbers that the money they could have made instead of the money going else where. So instead of worrying about scalpers, just worry show GW the money they could have had.

But then if that happened, GW would loose all that money on impulse buys. And that is why we have scalpers. Again, impulse buys.


I don't really know how I can show GW me spending my money elsewhere when they run out of something they decided would be limited edition. But, that's what happens.


Call Customer Support and tell them. I did that. I love it. They can't say anything but that we have the right to do. They don't even have an answer. I would call them and say "because you make this limited edition or limited release and is already sold out before orders are taken, I wanted to buy it, but now you didn't make enough, you don't have my money." Then the poor soul will say "but we have this and that" and I would have to reply "but I don't want this or that. I wanted IT. Since I can't have IT, my interest in the range is gone. If I am going to have to buy something else, I will buy your competitors stuff that I know I CAN GET and not be frustrated when a company turns me a way since they don't want my money."

They never have an answer for them not wanting my money on products I want. lol


You sound like a barrel of laughs. You ever worked customer service?


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






Los Angeles

 Ketara wrote:
Davor wrote:
n0t_u wrote:
Davor wrote:
n0t_u wrote:Who missed it the first time cause these guys bought a good chunk of a store's stock to sell for almost twice the price.


And wouldn't have happened in the first place if GW made enough product in the first place.

That said, just show GW the numbers that the money they could have made instead of the money going else where. So instead of worrying about scalpers, just worry show GW the money they could have had.

But then if that happened, GW would loose all that money on impulse buys. And that is why we have scalpers. Again, impulse buys.


I don't really know how I can show GW me spending my money elsewhere when they run out of something they decided would be limited edition. But, that's what happens.


Call Customer Support and tell them. I did that. I love it. They can't say anything but that we have the right to do. They don't even have an answer. I would call them and say "because you make this limited edition or limited release and is already sold out before orders are taken, I wanted to buy it, but now you didn't make enough, you don't have my money." Then the poor soul will say "but we have this and that" and I would have to reply "but I don't want this or that. I wanted IT. Since I can't have IT, my interest in the range is gone. If I am going to have to buy something else, I will buy your competitors stuff that I know I CAN GET and not be frustrated when a company turns me a way since they don't want my money."

They never have an answer for them not wanting my money on products I want. lol


You sound like a barrel of laughs. You ever worked customer service?


What is wrong with Davos' hypothetical? That is one of the most effective ways to voice displeasure with a company, especially one like GW that supposedly doesn't value feedback via e-mails.

I didn't see Davos advocating for being a monster to the customer service representative, which would be uncalled for, but letting the representative know in clear terms that their company's policies are costing them sales might work.

Sure, the rep could just roll their eyes and read boiler plate platitudes until the disappointed customer hangs up, but there is also a chance the call is recorded or otherwise passed up the chain for review. Done enough times maybe something would change. Or maybe not, but calling the company is sure more proactive than yelling about scalpers on the internet.

   
Made in gb
[SWAP SHOP MOD]
Killer Klaivex







When someone says 'They never have an answer for them not wanting my money on products I want. lol'? It sounds like they're more interested in trying to put one over the poor sod on the other end of the line than they are giving feedback.
Not to mention that I can guarantee that they do indeed have an answer for the customer in question, namely that they become an ex-customer (though I doubt they'll voice it down the phone).
I mean seriously, it's one thing to send in an email saying, 'I wanted the product but can't get it, that's a spot of my cash you've lost, please produce more in future'. That's fine.

To transplant Davors speech to another company though, it's like me dialling up vic at Vic miniatures and saying:-

'Yeah, you know that Female Commissar you made as an exclusive for Adepticon? '
'Well, I want to buy one.'
'What do you mean you can't sell me one?! The hundred you put up on the webstore as a special have sold out!? '
'Well Vic, I'm afraid I don't want any of your other officer models. I want that one.'
'Since you didn't make enough, you can't have my money! If I can't buy it, my interest in your range is gone! '
'No, I'm going to go and spend my money elsewhere!!! What do you have to say to that, eh?'
'Good day to you!'.


Doesn't sound like a pleasant way of approaching some poor schlub working a phone line, does it?

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/01/24 19:00:48



 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






Los Angeles

 Ketara wrote:
When someone says 'They never have an answer for them not wanting my money on products I want. lol'? It sounds like they're more interested in trying to put one over the poor sod on the other end of the line than they are giving feedback.
Not to mention that I can guarantee that they do indeed have an answer for the customer in question, namely that they become an ex-customer (though I doubt they'll voice it down the phone).
I mean seriously, it's one thing to send in an email saying, 'I wanted the product but can't get it, that's a spot of my cash you've lost, please produce more in future'. That's fine.

To transplant Davors speech to another company though, it's like me dialling up vic at Vic miniatures and saying:-

'Yeah, you know that Female Commissar you made as an exclusive for Adepticon?
Well, I want to buy one.
What do you mean you can't sell me one?! The hundred you put up on the webstore as a special have sold out!?
Well Vic, I'm afraid I don't want any of your other officer models. I want that one.
Since you didn't make enough, you can't have my money! If I can't buy it, my interest in your range is gone!
I'm going to go and spend my money elsewhere!!!
Good day to you!'.


Correct me if I am wrong, but hasn't the notion of e-mailing GW and expecting a result been gakked on across Dakka for years? The common knowledge being that GW doesn't respond to e-mails in a serious manner, and that if you want to voice your concerns you write a letter or call because that demonstrates to GW that the customer is serious about their complaint and not just momentarily "venting".

Also, subbing Vic's Miniatures for GW in your example doesn't really do much for your argument in my opinion, and actually, kinda hurts it.

There was an outcry over Vic's Adepticon exclusives, and Vic was good enough to make sure that some models were available for sale outside of the convention. So... feedback works?



 Ketara wrote:
Doesn't sound like a pleasant way of approaching some poor schlub working a phone line, does it?


Yeah, granted, someone answering phones for a company has a gak job. Hearing customer complaints IS their job, though. So, again, I don't see how Davos' hypothetical is a problem. You could delete some of the exclamation points you added and keep those same sentences calm, and collected and convey the pertinent information to the company rep. You seem to be inferring a level of animosity that doesn't have to be present to achieve the results Davos is advocating.

We've ventured into the realm of internet hyperbole. Both on your part and Davos' part, perhaps, but that doesn't change the fact that a call or letter is a valid means of voicing displeasure with a company.

The point is you can tell a company why their exclusive policy is turning you away as a customer (without being an ass about it) and maybe that will affect change.
   
Made in gb
[SWAP SHOP MOD]
Killer Klaivex







 DarkTraveler777 wrote:

Correct me if I am wrong, but hasn't the notion of e-mailing GW and expecting a result been gakked on across Dakka for years? The common knowledge being that GW doesn't respond to e-mails in a serious manner, and that if you want to voice your concerns you write a letter or call because that demonstrates to GW that the customer is serious about their complaint and not just momentarily "venting".


Whether they pay attention to your email or not is up to them. If the goal is to make your opinion heard, the email achieves the same thing. Whether they choose to pay attention to either is a different matter.

Also, subbing Vic's Miniatures for GW in your example doesn't really do much for your argument in my opinion, and actually, kinda hurts it.

There was an outcry over Vic's Adepticon exclusives, and Vic was good enough to make sure that some models were available for sale outside of the convention. So... feedback works?


Sure. Point out where I said giving feedback was a bad idea, and it might have something to do with something I said.



Yeah, granted, someone answering phones for a company has a gak job. Hearing customer complaints IS their job, though. So, again, I don't see how Davos' hypothetical is a problem. You could delete some of the exclamation points you added and keep those same sentences calm, and collected and convey the pertinent information to the company rep. You seem to be inferring a level of animosity that doesn't have to be present to achieve the results Davos is advocating.


No? I'll be blunt, the ''They never have an answer for them not wanting my money on products I want. lol' imparts the level of glee in the supposed discomfort/wordlessness of the person on the other end of the phone that tells you what sort of context the conversation is happening in. The only other way it could potentially be read is as someone who was frustrated ('They never have an answer' implying that a solution was desired), but the 'lol' puts paid to that interpretation of the sentence.

You can choose to read it in some other way if you like, but that's how it read to me.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/01/24 19:31:25



 
   
Made in gb
Been Around the Block




Scalper fail??

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Brother-Corbulo-by-Lutz/dp/B01LVZ8S59/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1485286698&sr=8-1&keywords=corbulo

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/01/24 19:40:17


 
   
Made in ca
Fireknife Shas'el






Actually, I sort of understand why GW has such limited release numbers. It falls out like this:

1.) Warehouse space is expensive. People don't get this sometimes, but warehouse space is commercial space and it's expensive to rent. The larger a run of minis you do, the more space you need just to handle that run. Go to any Kickstarter to see how easily the producers are overwhelmed by the space requirements of a single run of their Kickstarter release.

2.) When people know something is a limited release, they're more likely to buy it NOW rather than later. If you don't buy it NOW, you might not get it at all. This stops people from going, "Eh, looks nice, but I have a backlog of 50 minis, I'll buy it once that's done." This ties into warehouse space - if a run sells out, you need less warehouse space because you don't have to hold it.

Basically, it's a balancing act between a set amount of guaranteed profits (limited release) and a potentially larger profit that might get eaten up by warehouse expenses if you over-produce.

Now, in theory, you could adjust your manufacturing based on pre-orders - i.e. produce as much as you get pre-order plus a set amount based on experience, but there are also things like lead times to printing, casting and packaging that makes this less efficient, cost wise. Having to do a 2nd or 3rd run of the same thing increases set-up costs and cuts into profits (a larger, single run is the most cost effective).

Now, more sales = more profits, but the way they've structured themselves, GW ALWAYS has new releases to sell out quickly, so their turn around on their money is exceptionally rapid, and that's a thing businesses care a LOT about. It's not just about how many absolute dollars you could make from a run, how fast you can get your return on investment is important, because no business likes having money sit in inventory - they often need money for things like paying staff and paying dividends to investors.

TL;DR: Artificial scarcity reduces GW's return on investment time and cuts down on warehouse expenses.


   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






Los Angeles

 Ketara wrote:
 DarkTraveler777 wrote:

Correct me if I am wrong, but hasn't the notion of e-mailing GW and expecting a result been gakked on across Dakka for years? The common knowledge being that GW doesn't respond to e-mails in a serious manner, and that if you want to voice your concerns you write a letter or call because that demonstrates to GW that the customer is serious about their complaint and not just momentarily "venting".


Whether they pay attention to your email or not is up to them. If the goal is to make your opinion heard, the email achieves the same thing. Whether they choose to pay attention to either is a different matter.


Oh, I see, so achieving an effective result isn't desired here. We are just spinning our wheels? Despite your dodge, e-mailing GW doesn't work. Don't go all alt-fact here and pretend that e-mailing GW hasn't been a known dead end for YEARS on Dakka. It ranks up there with online petitions in effectiveness.



 Ketara wrote:
Also, subbing Vic's Miniatures for GW in your example doesn't really do much for your argument in my opinion, and actually, kinda hurts it.

There was an outcry over Vic's Adepticon exclusives, and Vic was good enough to make sure that some models were available for sale outside of the convention. So... feedback works?


Sure. Point out where I said giving feedback was a bad idea, and it might have something to do with something I said.


Vic Miniatures is an example of public feedback changing a company's policy on exclusive releases. You were trying to use her as a foil to prove how rude Davos' hypoethetical conversation was, but you also shined a light on a company that changed its exclusive policy after vocal feedback from customers. That seems on point to me. Your advocating e-mailing (which again, has been shown to not work with GW) seems counter productive to dealing with the scalper/LE issue.



 Ketara wrote:
No? I'll be blunt, the ''They never have an answer for them not wanting my money on products I want. lol' imparts the level of glee in the supposed discomfort/wordlessness of the person on the other end of the phone that tells you what sort of context the conversation is happening in. The only other way it could potentially be read is as someone who was frustrated ('They never have an answer' implying that a solution was desired), but the 'lol' puts paid to that interpretation of the sentence.

You can choose to read it in some other way if you like, but that's how it read to me.


So your feathers are ruffled because of internet hyperbole. Gotcha. You know that the content of Davos' hypoethetical could be conveyed in a polite manner. That is the point. Contacting customer service is a good avenue for getting your opinion to be heard by a company, GW especially.

I understand you have a dislike of how Davos phrased things, but you seem to purposely being obtuse over the effectiveness of directly contacting GW in order to defend your position of... politeness? Just stop pretending e-mailing is more effective than a phone call. It isn't. You and I both know that.

Something else to consider regarding the "they never have an answer" line. How many reps would know how to respond to that sort of complaint? I bet not many, and it likely does cause a bit of a furor in the CS department. Which is the point, surely on the customer's part. They want the company to take action, and if you hit a customer service representative with a problem that they can't answer properly that sort of thing often gets run up the chain and gets more notice from the higher ups.

   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka




 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
[What is wrong with Davos' hypothetical? That is one of the most effective ways to voice displeasure with a company, especially one like GW that supposedly doesn't value feedback via e-mails.

I didn't see Davos advocating for being a monster to the customer service representative, which would be uncalled for, but letting the representative know in clear terms that their company's policies are costing them sales might work.

Sure, the rep could just roll their eyes and read boiler plate platitudes until the disappointed customer hangs up, but there is also a chance the call is recorded or otherwise passed up the chain for review. Done enough times maybe something would change. Or maybe not, but calling the company is sure more proactive than yelling about scalpers on the internet.



I was very polite about it when I called. I guess I am old school so don't do the email thing but do the phone thing. Surprisingly the gentleman on the other end of the line really listened to what I had to say. The rep said there is nothing he can do but fully understands, and I said I fully understand, but I just wanted to say and if he could pass it up the line. He said he wolud and was very pleasant as well.

I know nothing came out of it, but at least I tried, doing it the old way.

Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.

Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?

Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong".  
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






Los Angeles

Davor wrote:
 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
[What is wrong with Davos' hypothetical? That is one of the most effective ways to voice displeasure with a company, especially one like GW that supposedly doesn't value feedback via e-mails.

I didn't see Davos advocating for being a monster to the customer service representative, which would be uncalled for, but letting the representative know in clear terms that their company's policies are costing them sales might work.

Sure, the rep could just roll their eyes and read boiler plate platitudes until the disappointed customer hangs up, but there is also a chance the call is recorded or otherwise passed up the chain for review. Done enough times maybe something would change. Or maybe not, but calling the company is sure more proactive than yelling about scalpers on the internet.



I was very polite about it when I called. I guess I am old school so don't do the email thing but do the phone thing. Surprisingly the gentleman on the other end of the line really listened to what I had to say. The rep said there is nothing he can do but fully understands, and I said I fully understand, but I just wanted to say and if he could pass it up the line. He said he wolud and was very pleasant as well.

I know nothing came out of it, but at least I tried, doing it the old way.


And that is exactly how the conversation should go. And I bet it did register with someone higher up.

GW seems much more open to engagement with their customer base over the last year, so all the more reason to reach out to them in meaningful ways in order to convey customer concerns.

   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






 Ketara wrote:
When someone says 'They never have an answer for them not wanting my money on products I want. lol'? It sounds like they're more interested in trying to put one over the poor sod on the other end of the line than they are giving feedback.
Not to mention that I can guarantee that they do indeed have an answer for the customer in question, namely that they become an ex-customer (though I doubt they'll voice it down the phone).
I mean seriously, it's one thing to send in an email saying, 'I wanted the product but can't get it, that's a spot of my cash you've lost, please produce more in future'. That's fine.

To transplant Davors speech to another company though, it's like me dialling up vic at Vic miniatures and saying:-

'Yeah, you know that Female Commissar you made as an exclusive for Adepticon? '
'Well, I want to buy one.'
'What do you mean you can't sell me one?! The hundred you put up on the webstore as a special have sold out!? '
'Well Vic, I'm afraid I don't want any of your other officer models. I want that one.'
'Since you didn't make enough, you can't have my money! If I can't buy it, my interest in your range is gone! '
'No, I'm going to go and spend my money elsewhere!!! What do you have to say to that, eh?'
'Good day to you!'.


Doesn't sound like a pleasant way of approaching some poor schlub working a phone line, does it?


It's also cowardly and childish.

That spod on the end of the phone? What say do you think they actually have in the matter? Do you honestly believe they can just order up a production run at the drop of a hat, or the call of someone being understandably disappointed but incredibly unreasonable? There are many ways to express dissatisfaction and frustration, and a great deal of them are actually quite constructive. That's what my email and letter writing campaign is trying to achieve.

It's like when people don't like my assessments at work. There's absolutlely no point getting out of your pram in my direction. I'm not the FCA, I'm not the FSCS. I don't make the rules - and I go where the evidence takes me. I get they're disappointed - sadly some of my assessments have the potential to ruin an individuals life (yes, I hate having to deliver those ones - but that's part and parcel of the job). But how much empathy do you think I'll have if you kick off at me, even when I didn't issue the assessment?

It may ultimately come to naught - but at least I'll have said my piece, yes?

   
Made in gb
[SWAP SHOP MOD]
Killer Klaivex







 DarkTraveler777 wrote:

Oh, I see, so achieving an effective result isn't desired here. We are just spinning our wheels? Despite your dodge.....[insert tedious back and forth]


Dodge? Mate, you seem far too invested in trying to get into an argument with me. I read a comment, and thought it sounded like the sort of one that as a customer service fellow, I would have hated dealing with, on account of the fact they seem more interested in putting one over you than anything else. And commented along those lines. You can think differently if you like, I couldn't give a smeg.

If you have that much time to waste, and that much of a desire to argue over something this pointless, the OT forum is down at the bottom of the main forum page with sundry suitable topics.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
There are many ways to express dissatisfaction and frustration, and a great deal of them are actually quite constructive. That's what my email and letter writing campaign is trying to achieve.


If you could scrape together a petition/group nlist with enough names for a limited release reserve service, that might do something? GW knows it gets guaranteed sales then, and you know you get the models. Couldn't hurt to see if you could approach them with something like that in mind, although you'd probably need a few hundred people to pull it off.

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2017/01/24 22:58:43



 
   
Made in gb
Major




London

I'm still not seeing what this crusade is trying to achieve? You want to stop GW selling to flippers, so that the "average gamer" can access models? How do you propose they police buyers? Background checks? And if its a "one per customer" and I want to buy a model each for two children as a xmas gift, would I not be allowed, so am robbing someone who wants one from getting one as one child would have to go without?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/01/25 09:10:26


 
   
Made in gb
[DCM]
Moustache-twirling Princeps





Gone-to-ground in the craters of Coventry

Questions listed about that item...

6000 pts - 4000 pts - Harlies: 1000 pts - 1000 ptsDS:70+S+G++MB+IPw40k86/f+D++A++/cWD64R+T(T)DM+
IG/AM force nearly-finished pieces: http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/images-38888-41159_Armies%20-%20Imperial%20Guard.html
"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing." - George Bernard Shaw (probably)
Clubs around Coventry, UK 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




There is nothing wrong with limiting limited ed items to 1 to 2 per person. However they will still be scalped just a bit more time consuming and annoying for the scalpers. It would behoove gw though to track the shipping address items are shipped to as well and prevent multiple copies. That would be a more annoying issue for scalpers.
   
Made in pt
Skillful Swordmaster




The Shadowlands of Nagarythe

Davor wrote:
I just wanted to say and if he could pass it up the line. He said he would and was very pleasant as well.


Snipped and highlighted for focus.

I severely doubt he did so. I really, really do. He will tell you that to give you the desired "customer experience" slot on his call (which is requested from his superiors if his call is selected for analysis) which is designed to make the customer feel as though you were listened to and taken into account. In the end, I doubt he even noted down what you said.

Do note that my cynicism is not directed at you, Davor, just at that specific procedure itself.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/01/26 11:45:32


"Let them that are happy talk of piety; we that would work our adversary must take no account of laws." http://back2basing.blogspot.pt/

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




The problem with limiting scalpers is gw really doesn't care. The idea is to sell the entire production run. How that occurs doesn't matter.

On the flip side gw has an entire supply/marketing team trying to figure out the exact amount needed to sell off thier entire stock without keeping inventory. Print on demand is the new gw policy. Certain limited stock doesn't sell fast enough such as The new 40k game mats. Some sell extremely fast bloofbowl winter pitch. It's a guessing game and the marketing team isn't really good at it. But if substantial enough demand exists they will create another production run as in the winter pitch.

However o don't see gw artificially limiting sales. At best they can limit to some thing like 5 to customer outside any retailer supply.
   
 
Forum Index » Dakka Discussions
Go to: