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.

Now I thought the DE Chaos Marines were excellent - reminded me of the older Chaos Marines back from 1st edition when I first got into the game, and beautifully made sculpts. I was gutted when the rest of the Chaos range looked like it was something that could have been part of a new range from Tomix-toy, complete with little spring-loaded plastic missiles. The Dark Angels on the other hand are awful - more than anything they are just ... well, boring, which I think is the worst thing that you can say about any miniature design. There is nothing whatsoever that would make me want to choose those over miniatures I could have bought 15 years ago, and the attempts at additions (big wings, robes) just feel forced/contrived. To be honest I wouldn't want to buy them if they were half the price, so perhaps the price is meaningless in that situation.

Regarding the OP I don't think there is a 'magic number' - there is no wall of pricing that will suddenly stop people buying. All that will happen is that less and less people will be able to afford/willing to buy, leading to a gradual reduction in sales.

Kingsley wrote:

 Buzzsaw wrote:

In other words, the DFG guy looks like a good first step, especially relative to what Defiance or Wargames Factory can produce, but saying they've surpassed GW seems premature at best.

From the most recent DA release;


...

GW suffers from increasingly falling into self-parody: their proportions were always bad, they are now simply covering them over with a verdigris of... stuff. Skulls, horns, spikes, chains... they seem to have all the aesthetic sense of a mid-90's cover of Heavy Metal magazine.

I guess I don't understand your point or our æsthetic preferences differ. All those models look overwhelmingly better to me than any of the Eisenkern guys.

Fafnir wrote:Proportions

Well, there is no accounting for tastes, so if one is a fan of the encrusted look, that's one's prerogative.

But if we put that aside, surely I'm not alone in noting that GW's sculpts, especially their terminators, are terribly badly proportioned, yes?

I don't really get what people see in them. Sure, I had a Space Marine army when I was 12 (and if I was still 12 I may think these were awesome), but I think I'd be embarassed to have stuff like this in my collection now. They guy with the sword is a terrible model, so lacking in life, or motion, or anything... I think you could only ever paint him as a statue to get away with it.

Riquende wrote:
I don't really get what people see in them. Sure, I had a Space Marine army when I was 12 (and if I was still 12 I may think these were awesome), but I think I'd be embarassed to have stuff like this in my collection now. They guy with the sword is a terrible model, so lacking in life, or motion, or anything... I think you could only ever paint him as a statue to get away with it.

I don't mind his pose, but he's just got way too much going on. He's got so many little details that nothing actually stands out and it just looks unorganised and silly. That said, I don't dislike the Chaos models, because it fits Chaos to have a chaotic and overly busy look.

GW models these days are a bit hit and miss. Some I really like, others, they just look silly.

 Buzzsaw wrote:

Well, there is no accounting for tastes, so if one is a fan of the encrusted look, that's one's prerogative.

But if we put that aside, surely I'm not alone in noting that GW's sculpts, especially their terminators, are terribly badly proportioned, yes?

Oh, you're right. Terminators have extremely silly proportions. But I'll take characterful models with wonky proportions over bland ones with ideal proportions any day.

 Kingsley wrote:
Oh, you're right. Terminators have extremely silly proportions. But I'll take characterful models with wonky proportions over bland ones with ideal proportions any day.

I agree to a point. A point which GW often oversteps.

 Kingsley wrote:

 Buzzsaw wrote:

Well, there is no accounting for tastes, so if one is a fan of the encrusted look, that's one's prerogative.

But if we put that aside, surely I'm not alone in noting that GW's sculpts, especially their terminators, are terribly badly proportioned, yes?

Oh, you're right. Terminators have extremely silly proportions. But I'll take characterful models with wonky proportions over bland ones with ideal proportions any day.

Alas that GW makes silly proportioned minis with bland character! Just ribbing you, someone has to like durian after all.

In all fairness, I do see your point. For me whatever virtues the majority of GW's lines have are overwhelmed by the technical incompetence and utter disregard for scale/proportion. Looking at most releases I feel like I'm seeing Gumby covered with the bric-a-brack of 40,000 years.

 Aerethan wrote:

As for book price increases, the Bretonnian army book was $20 when it released. It is currently 100% the same book and costs $33.

Damn near every other book on the planet goes down in price as it gets older until it becomes a collectible/antique.

I call BS on that. Can you point me to a book currently in print production that costs less today than it did 5 years ago? What about 10 or 20? Even paperback books have gone up 30%+ in just the past 2 or 3 years just from reprinting.

Now, you can buy used books for cheaper than a brand new one... Just like you can buy a used codex for less than a brand new one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Aipoch wrote:
It's just poor business practice on their part. Anyone who's taken even an introductory economics course can confirm that there's at least two ways to go about things: Charge a lot for your product and have fewer people buy it, or charge less for your product and have more people buy it. If GW is convinced that, by some miracle of the cosmos, their company is the only company whose product has a set number of people who will buy it regardless of the cost, then by all means they're doing a great job.

The main driver of pricing an item is its perceived value weighed against the number of people who will buy at a given price point.

Contrary to your statement, it's not a simple bell curve. More often than not, you can take something, anything and attempt to sell it for $1. However, the perceived value of that item will be negligible and you won't sell many. You can then turn around and put $10 price tag on it and people will start thinking it's worth more and you'll sell more. The trick is to continue raising the prices until the price exceeds the perceived value by an amount large enough to reduce sales.

Or at least, that's what a lot of people thought a few years ago. In recent times, companies have learned that you don't stop there. Instead you need to keep going in order to maximize profits from a given quantity produced. So the company takes a look at production counts vs revenue. For example, if they produce 1000 units and bring in $50/unit then their revenue is $50,000. If they product 750 units and bring in $75/unit then their revenue is $56,250. If they produce 500 units at $90, then their revenue is $45,000. Obviously the pricing sweet spot then is somewhere between $75 and $90. Of course, once you have market dominance then your perceived value is already high as people believe your crack must be better than the next guys simply because they know people buying it. It's a little more complicated than this as you have to also consider production costs; however, at the quantities GW sells a production quantity difference of 30 or 40% isn't going to change per unit costs by very much.

It generally takes years to figure out those numbers. Worse, they change to some extent depending upon external economic conditions. So, you may be able to sell 750 units at $75 this year, but if the economy crashes you might only sell 400 at that rate. Adding to the complexity is that each sector is impacted differently with hobby spending is one area that doesn't follow the norm very closely. In our case, the people who can generally afford to pay $50 for 5 little plastic men today will probably still afford it at $60 or even $80...

With that said, each price increase makes it a bit easier for other companies to start taking a bite out of GW's market dominance. There are several ways to attack a market leader but they all boil down to making a product with a higher perceived value. In this market there are several ways of doing that all based around quality/price/quantity. Quality is a bit nebulous as it somewhat depends on the buyer; price and quantity though are much more easily controlled. Point is they just need to lower one of those points to increase value to the customer. It might be producing at the same (or better) quality, keeping the same price but delivering a game that requires fewer miniatures to play. Another might be the same/better quality, slightly lower price, same quantity.

Regardless, it's a tricky thing for competitors. If they price too much lower than the market leader then perceived value will kill them. In the meantime GW, as the market leader, can respond by trying to raise quality (Finecast - whatever else you might think, it has destroyed the perceived value of metal models) or to change the game requiring new types of models other games don't use (Flyers) or by lowering model count (Grey Knights).

In any event, if GW loses market dominance then radical changes will come to the industry. Whether good or bad, it will be radical.

tldr; don't hold your breath about prices going lower. They won't.

eh if GW made models that looked like they were from Heavy Metal magazine I would like them a lot more then I do lol
(fun fact, a white dwarf of eons past had the cover artwork to the movie, on its cover)
though GW seems to have a fear of women, methinks they have a Top Gun approach to manliness lol

clively wrote:

 Aerethan wrote:

As for book price increases, the Bretonnian army book was $20 when it released. It is currently 100% the same book and costs $33.

Damn near every other book on the planet goes down in price as it gets older until it becomes a collectible/antique.

I call BS on that. Can you point me to a book currently in print production that costs less today than it did 5 years ago? What about 10 or 20? Even paperback books have gone up 30%+ in just the past 2 or 3 years just from reprinting.

Now, you can buy used books for cheaper than a brand new one... Just like you can buy a used codex for less than a brand new one.

http://www.amazon.com/Twilight-The-Saga-Book/dp/0316038377/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1357610214&sr=8-2&keywords=twilight

You were saying? Still in print, sells for less than MSRP brand fething new.

I call BS on that. Can you point me to a book currently in print production that costs less today than it did 5 years ago? What about 10 or 20? Even paperback books have gone up 30%+ in just the past 2 or 3 years just from reprinting.

Now, you can buy used books for cheaper than a brand new one... Just like you can buy a used codex for less than a brand new one.

Decent point however explain this to me.

Paizio Core Rule book. Hard Cover. Color illustrated 576 pages. Around 50 bucks and you can get it cheaper.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1601251505/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_1/187-4904018-6877538?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_r=167RZRZW3C0RTKY8XNWY&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_i=1601254490

Warhammer 40K Rule Book. Hard Cover. Color illustrated. 432 pages. Around 72 Bucks at Amazon.
http://www.amazon.com/Warhammer-40000-Rulebook-6th/dp/1907964797/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1357616992&sr=1-1&keywords=warhammer+40k+rulebook+6th+edition.

Print material is just that, regardless of the content in it. Both are quality products. Both are hard bound and illustrated and yet one has 100+ more pages of printed material than the other and costs a great deal less.

Guess who sells more copies?

The average person who are in the GW hobby are being priced out of it. Only the hardcore are still in it and they will pay regardless.

clively wrote:

Spoiler:

The main driver of pricing an item is its perceived value weighed against the number of people who will buy at a given price point.

Contrary to your statement, it's not a simple bell curve. More often than not, you can take something, anything and attempt to sell it for $1. However, the perceived value of that item will be negligible and you won't sell many. You can then turn around and put $10 price tag on it and people will start thinking it's worth more and you'll sell more. The trick is to continue raising the prices until the price exceeds the perceived value by an amount large enough to reduce sales.

Or at least, that's what a lot of people thought a few years ago. In recent times, companies have learned that you don't stop there. Instead you need to keep going in order to maximize profits from a given quantity produced. So the company takes a look at production counts vs revenue. For example, if they produce 1000 units and bring in $50/unit then their revenue is $50,000. If they product 750 units and bring in $75/unit then their revenue is $56,250. If they produce 500 units at $90, then their revenue is $45,000. Obviously the pricing sweet spot then is somewhere between $75 and $90. Of course, once you have market dominance then your perceived value is already high as people believe your crack must be better than the next guys simply because they know people buying it. It's a little more complicated than this as you have to also consider production costs; however, at the quantities GW sells a production quantity difference of 30 or 40% isn't going to change per unit costs by very much.

It generally takes years to figure out those numbers. Worse, they change to some extent depending upon external economic conditions. So, you may be able to sell 750 units at $75 this year, but if the economy crashes you might only sell 400 at that rate. Adding to the complexity is that each sector is impacted differently with hobby spending is one area that doesn't follow the norm very closely. In our case, the people who can generally afford to pay $50 for 5 little plastic men today will probably still afford it at $60 or even $80...

With that said, each price increase makes it a bit easier for other companies to start taking a bite out of GW's market dominance. There are several ways to attack a market leader but they all boil down to making a product with a higher perceived value. In this market there are several ways of doing that all based around quality/price/quantity. Quality is a bit nebulous as it somewhat depends on the buyer; price and quantity though are much more easily controlled. Point is they just need to lower one of those points to increase value to the customer. It might be producing at the same (or better) quality, keeping the same price but delivering a game that requires fewer miniatures to play. Another might be the same/better quality, slightly lower price, same quantity.

Regardless, it's a tricky thing for competitors. If they price too much lower than the market leader then perceived value will kill them. In the meantime GW, as the market leader, can respond by trying to raise quality (Finecast - whatever else you might think, it has destroyed the perceived value of metal models) or to change the game requiring new types of models other games don't use (Flyers) or by lowering model count (Grey Knights).

In any event, if GW loses market dominance then radical changes will come to the industry. Whether good or bad, it will be radical.

tldr; don't hold your breath about prices going lower. They won't.

Great post. Though it's the last bty that is probably the bottom line. Not only has GW priced themselves into luxury goods, they are now reliant on those high prices to convince people that they are the highest quality product. If GW really feels the pinch, they could stop or slow price raises, and they may introduce new products at a slightly lower price point (very unlikely) but I don't think you will ever see them lowering prices across the board. That would be tantamount to saying:
"We were wrong", something GW seems loathe to do.
"Our product isn't worth quite as much as we thought", which would be be a literal statement of fact and a blow to their image as "the best ".

They'll cite a new revolutionary casting material they invented and lower prices! Oh wait...

On the subject of perceived value of the printed material, I suspect that Games Workshop will more and more find their stuff getting pirated. I'm not saying that's right, but you can look at examples in the music industry and movie industry to see how a market will inflate prices until people can no longer afford to pay the prices, and will perhaps break laws they wouldn't have if the product was reasonably priced in the first place.

Eg; I can remember when CD's first came out. (showing my age?) you could pick up pretty new albums for around £7.99
Now it costs pennies to print a CD per unit if you are shifting volume, so the costs haven't changed much. Over time, the price was inflated, until it got to the point some new releases were £15-£20. This wasn't because production costs increased - a bit of metal foil encased in clear plastic is not expensive. So a lot of people who used to be happy to pay, started torrenting/copying to minidisc etc. Once the music industry realised that they had left the door open and the horse had bolted, they brought the prices back down again to try and recapture sales, but they had blown it. The movie industry is similar - they bring out a format that no-one can copy, and the prices go up to silly levels. Someone cracks the format, and the prices fall. They bring out a new format, and we start all over again...

Games Workshop are getting to the price point for printed material, that people will start torrenting them in droves if they aren't already - most people I know either have, or have access to a tablet type device, which I suspect is going to cause GW a big dent in profits over the next few years. Again, I'm not saying that's right, it's just a fact of life. The higher the cost of something, the more worthwhile it is for pirates to copy/counterfeit it.

The problem is though that the average person can't pirate a Tactical Marine.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
The problem is though that the average person can't pirate a Tactical Marine.

That's why he was talking about printed material. However, as a miniature analogy, it explains the rise in recasters (esp of FW stuff).

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
The problem is though that the average person can't pirate a Tactical Marine.

Give that a year or two lol. The 3D printing market is moving at an incredible pace nowadays.

Yeah. I hope so, then GW can shove their expensive models up their own donkey-caves.

I doubt most teenagers have the money to buy a 3D printer and supplies to avoid their parents paying for legal models.

Out of interest, since part of the issue for many is the bad designs, would folks say that the last really good (all round releases, ie. all models bar one/maybe two) release would be IG or DE? Personally I thought Gaurd were excellent and then it went downhill a bit (I can't remember which was more recent though, guard or DE - which was also excellent).

 Imperial Monkey wrote:
Out of interest, since part of the issue for many is the bad designs, would folks say that the last really good (all round releases, ie. all models bar one/maybe two) release would be IG or DE? Personally I thought Gaurd were excellent and then it went downhill a bit (I can't remember which was more recent though, guard or DE - which was also excellent).

The most recent of those two was DE, which also marks my divorce of 40K curiously enough. DE was when Failcrap was released and after DE came GK(? correct me if I'm wrong), that started IMO the since running trend of boring, over-busy or generally toy-like new models.

There have been "busy" models since the first edition metal Terminators.

I don't know how much worse it has got as a general rule.

 Imperial Monkey wrote:
Out of interest, since part of the issue for many is the bad designs, would folks say that the last really good (all round releases, ie. all models bar one/maybe two) release would be IG or DE? Personally I thought Gaurd were excellent and then it went downhill a bit (I can't remember which was more recent though, guard or DE - which was also excellent).

The IG release was unfortunately in many ways a sad event as well. It was really good at selling chimeras and guardsmen and meltagun bits, but everything got more expensive, reorganized the 20man IG boxes to significantly more expensive 10man boxes, took the vehicle upgrade sprue out of tank kits and started charging $15 for it, and when they re-did the Chimera and Basilisk kits, they managed to make the Chimera turret look even worse and made no effort to make a multi-kit including Griffons, Medusa and Collossus guns, nor Hydra flak tanks.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
There have been "busy" models since the first edition metal Terminators.

I don't know how much worse it has got as a general rule.

True, there have always been some busy models, but it's gotten much more pronounced.

Compare _____ of today vs those from RT/2nd edition,

Grey Knight Terminators
Blood Angel Death Company
SM Vets
CSM charachters
SM Dreadnaughts.
etc, etc.

More skulls, more ribbons, more filigree. Some folks like it some don't. Some say it reflects bigger figs and better technology, some think it's excess for the sake of selling new products. Whatever conclusions you draw from the increase in detail and ornamentation it's pretty hard to deny that it has happened.

I've got a GK terminator captain (not sure what his name is..) in my hand and it's more greebled than anything the old days. It's also a hell of alot bigger...

 Buzzsaw wrote:

Kingsley wrote:

 Buzzsaw wrote:

In other words, the DFG guy looks like a good first step, especially relative to what Defiance or Wargames Factory can produce, but saying they've surpassed GW seems premature at best.

From the most recent DA release;


...

GW suffers from increasingly falling into self-parody: their proportions were always bad, they are now simply covering them over with a verdigris of... stuff. Skulls, horns, spikes, chains... they seem to have all the aesthetic sense of a mid-90's cover of Heavy Metal magazine.

I guess I don't understand your point or our æsthetic preferences differ. All those models look overwhelmingly better to me than any of the Eisenkern guys.

Fafnir wrote:Proportions

Well, there is no accounting for tastes, so if one is a fan of the encrusted look, that's one's prerogative.

But if we put that aside, surely I'm not alone in noting that GW's sculpts, especially their terminators, are terribly badly proportioned, yes?

I think both those pictures have some cool models in.

Sure some are a tad busy (3 targeting modules?!) but they look great in my book, I've been impressed with all their latest since the last space hulk blew me away.

Have you seen the state of the old ones?! Like the awful space wolves one they released into FC last year?

They sucked, these merely look a bit out of proportion, but I think it's a good look.

Superman isn't in proportion either! I like comic style poses and art, and I want my hero's to look that way, I certainly don't want them having anatomically correct bicep to waist ratios either!

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Imperial Monkey wrote:
Out of interest, since part of the issue for many is the bad designs, would folks say that the last really good (all round releases, ie. all models bar one/maybe two) release would be IG or DE? Personally I thought Gaurd were excellent and then it went downhill a bit (I can't remember which was more recent though, guard or DE - which was also excellent).

The IG release was unfortunately in many ways a sad event as well. It was really good at selling chimeras and guardsmen and meltagun bits, but everything got more expensive, reorganized the 20man IG boxes to significantly more expensive 10man boxes, took the vehicle upgrade sprue out of tank kits and started charging $15 for it, and when they re-did the Chimera and Basilisk kits, they managed to make the Chimera turret look even worse and made no effort to make a multi-kit including Griffons, Medusa and Collossus guns, nor Hydra flak tanks.

I was really referring solely to the sculpts. I mean they redesigned the leman russ, a seminal and lovely model and din't kill it completely as GW is often wont to do. I think the new Russ looks even better than the last rendition (even if the proportions have got worse...).

I think that the recent Kingdom Death KS shows there is a large number of people willing to pay GW prices and then some for figures and games. And some are willing to pay those prices just on sketches alone. GW may be pushing the price envelope, but resistance won't be as big a people think.

For all the people deriding GW, how many of you threw money at KD? In the KD thread, some big GW critics from this board threw out some eye popping numbers for vaporware.

If anything, the KD:KS will convince other companies that they are undercharging for figures.

The thing is, compare the sculpts of KD models to GW's models. Way higher quality. Looking at the KD models sitting on my desk right now, I can say for certain that they blow everything GW has ever done out of the water. Furthermore, the quality of the castings themselves is fantastic, far better than GW's finecast, or even Forgeworld's offerings.

I'm not adverse to paying premium prices. The thing is, when I do, I sure as hell better be getting premium. If other companies want to charge as much as KD does, they better be prepared to make the best figures in the entire industry, because that's what KD is doing right now.

 Fafnir wrote:
The thing is, compare the sculpts of KD models to GW's models. Way higher quality. Looking at the KD models sitting on my desk right now, I can say for certain that they blow everything GW has ever done out of the water. Furthermore, the quality of the castings themselves is fantastic, far better than GW's finecast, or even Forgeworld's offerings.

I'm not adverse to paying premium prices. The thing is, when I do, I sure as hell better be getting premium. If other companies want to charge as much as KD does, they better be prepared to make the best figures in the entire industry, because that's what KD is doing right now.

Not seeing any in person yet (ordered the resin Watcher) I'll have to take your word on that. Still my point remains that people are willing to pay those prices for figures. Also, will be interesting to compare GW plastic to KD plastic. While we agree that GW's resin casting is poor, their plastic molding is top notch. On other forums, Poots stated he was basing his pricing on "GW rates". That he was successful is unfortunately a validation of "GW rates".

If the casting comes even close to the quality of the resin models, hell, if it ends up being the same quality as GW's plastics, they'll still be a far better value. At least compared to GW's more recent, and absolutely silly, offerings.