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.

With a lot of posts currently raging across dakka about GW, there is one topic that frequently gets referenced and cited and I just want to see if it bears any weight. Veterans are constantly highlighted as not being big buyers compared to newcomers who it seems a lot of people think are doing all the big buys from GW. I'll highlight myself. I've been into GW since 1983 and have amassed a fair few miniatures over the(my god!) decades. It was only with the introduction of Rogue Trader that the idea of collecting armies came about and I did. When it comes to minis I tend to buy big(well, until recently),now I'm exploring other manufacturers. I've just finished an Angels of Absolution army which has been on the go since Christmas, no vehicles for it though due to rising costs and I have some Dark Angels vehicles I 'll use for them.
The point is we veterans don't suddenly stop buying armies! Hell, when we finish one army we start casting about for another project(I've got 11 40k armies to back this up). So why do I always see the suggestion that veterans don't buy very much? Personally my own stand point is that this train of thought is a myth along with Little Timmy(an annoying little kid!).
Veterans in all sense of the word will always have more spending capability than newcomers and or young players yet we are seen as low spenders? We may not buy brand new GW stuff but we will buy and not only from one source.
Veterans, what do you think?

I don't think veterans spend less than newcomers. There are just more newcomers.

Let's say veterans spend £400 a year and newbies spend £250. Simple maths shows that if two in three customers are newbies, they contribute more revenue to GW than the veterans. (Made up example.)

I'm not sure I agree with your point about spending power. As a Veteran (I've been buying for almost 15 years) I would now say that my spending power is far less as an empolyed adult than it was as a teenager living off pocket money and a paper round. I earn far more now but between loosing a considerable amount of that income to bills, whilst as a 'child' being able to increase spending via Christmas/Birthdays etc. I now spend approx £200 per year! most of that is either ebay or forgeworld. As I rarely get the chance to play I now buy to paint. I do still colelct armies, but when I do I tend to go for a mass purchase (I spent probably £3-400 on my last one at once) that will last a considerable amount of time.

Having said that, I would no longer class wargaming as my main hooby, my other 'hobby' is a considerable drain on any disposable income. If I was a pure wargamer then I would say that my spending is probably about the same as that as a sensible young 'un. As a teenager my purchases on the whole were based around improving my armie, whilst my brothers were for whatever was 'new and exciting' acording to that all-knowing tome we call White Dwarf. As you can guess he spent 3-4 times what I did, and sad to say most of his purchases are still sat in a drawer unpainted.

I spend a steady amount of money on model purchases, but as a veteran (I kinda hate that term applied to miniature wargamers, but whatever) I am more savvy. I don't spend all my money at GW, I shop around and look at other things. So I spend more consistently now that I am fully employed and have the freedom to do so, but I am not giving all of that money to GW by any stretch.

As a Vet, I know I spend considerably less then new gamers. The simple reason, I have most of my stuff. Consider me compared to a new gamer who started in 2011. We will use 40K, because I recently started messing around with that.

For me: I already had in 2009, purchased most of my army. It was already assembled, I had a Codex, rule book, dice, tape, case from other armies. I played in Rd1 of a escalation league, did well, picked up a Demon Prince, but saved some on it because I placed in the escalation league. I Bought a Terminator box. So total my expenditure is around $70. I already had my paints, brushes, etc.

Since start in the escalation league. There is 1 fellow CSM player. He had the codex, but needed the rules to start learning as he came over from WFB. That's $50 right there, he needed marines, rhino's, etc, he bought the Army box, which is more expensive then when I paid for it $100+ there. Needed some demon's for lessers, he paid $40?, and it grows.

There are tons of examples like this. Its very difficult, to convince a vetern to start a brand new army. We are often established, know what we like, and build off what we have. We also have the resources to reach into the community to safe some cash by getting bits. Lastly, often we have armies to sell off to supplement our spending. We are not shy to ebay / barter town. We flat out, don't spend what new players do. We are also big on converting, personalizing, etc. That saves some cash. New and first time players, don't do these things. They buy boxes off shelves for higher prices then 2 years ago.

I think it's going to vary considerably based on what type of veteran we're talking about. Some are mainly into gaming and only get the bare minimum they need to have a competitive army, while others are more of a collector (like myself). I know that the average new gamer only spends a tiny fraction of what i do and most of them fall out of the hobby in a year or two. I've been collecting for over a dozen years and have spent thousands of dollars every one of those years. Some times it's mainly on GW product, sometimes that money goes to other manufacturers (mostly terrain makers).

I think the real issue is that GW should be making some effort to appeal to it's entire customer base, not one segment.

Overall, you make far more out of a beginner, as they need everything, having nothing,

Whilst more experienced gamers might make a big splurge a couple of times a year, that is no business plan. As such, your beginner also provides a more stable income.

And contrary to popular (uninformed, pure opinion) belief, the training GW gives to it's staff is about ensuring the customer gets what the need, rather than just what they want. The stores are naturally geared toward recruitment, as this is what keeps things going. Plus, again your beginner needs a of support. Experienced gamers, well, not so much. That's the advantage of experience.

Ok then lets have a look at how differnt companies work and see which is more cost effective shall we?

Company A.
Provides a range of well written games that appeal to a wide range of gamers.
Because the games have such strong appeal , the gamers find it easy to get thier freinds to play too!
The customer base for Company A grows at a steady rate due to the company determining a suitable customer base and marketing thier products at them.(Gamers.)
Due to the ever incressing volumes of sales, Company A gets to invest in new technology and grows from strength to strenght.

Company B.
Provides a range of products that are suitable for gamers to use.
BUT Company B can not be bothered with the gamers expectations.It much easier to sell the product to 'kiddies'.
The game rules are written to appeal to new customers , to make the new releases sound 'kewl'.
Unfortunatley the new customers quit after a very short period of time, due to lack of game play in the rules.And the more experianced gamers use other companies products written for them.

So the turn over in new customers is far greater, and causes a drop in sales.
To overcome the drop insale Company B increases the retail prices regularly, which reduces the available customers that could afford to start buying Company B product.
And as the constant price rises , reduce the customer base exponentionaly.
Soon Company B price them selves out of the market completely.....

Games companies grow thier market by providing great gameplay.(Well defined elegant and intuitive rules sets.)

Minature companies grow thier market by providing high quality minatures at compatative prices.

GW plc SHOULD be targeting gamers and minature collectors of ALL ages and ability.
Not just 'kiddies'.

(PS. Company A is GW up to 1998, Company B is GW plc 1998 onwards... )

Mmmmmm......uninformed opinion dressed up as fact....delicious!

Particularly the 'new customers quit'. ORLY?

New customers do tend to "quit"(in many cases they just stop buying/playing) but not for the rules reasons.

It's usually because something 'new and shiny' grabs their attention.

GW's current practice makes more sense in light of the "What the customer needs" vs "What the customer wants" mantra.

A new customer is dependent on the staffer to TELL them what they need - i.e. "You'll also want to get this hobby glue, paints, brushes, tools etc." Veterans can't/won't be dictated to in the same way as their needs are less and as MrMystery already pointed out - they have the experience.

I'd be truly interested in hearing from FLGS operators whether the new blood or "veteran" gamers provide better cash flow for their stores.

Yes and no though.....right idea, wrong reasons.

There is precisely sod all point in selling someone a model kit, and not checking that they have the glue and tools. I think we've all made a purchase, and get home to find the glue is lost or used up.

Ditto selling a NooB a bunch of disparate kits. Far better that you explain the various army builds etc, and the options which go with it. Can come across as forceful selling if it's done wrong, but the training is geared towards doing it right. Ultimately, if anyone wants to by said disparate kids, then that's what they buy. You've informed them, the decision remains theirs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kanluwen wrote:New customers do tend to "quit"(in many cases they just stop buying/playing) but not for the rules reasons.

It's usually because something 'new and shiny' grabs their attention.

Again, the sales strategy (which last time I worked there, was very much working!) is about keeping that attention. Really stupidly simple stuff, like strategic events, custom events, and you know, inviting the customer back. Keep them rabid, and they're yours! This is a relatively modern thing though.

If anyone cares to hear more, please PM me as I'm not sure it's entirely cool to go gibbering about in an open forum.

Mr Mystery wrote:Ditto selling a NooB a bunch of disparate kits. Far better that you explain the various army builds etc, and the options which go with it. Can come across as forceful selling if it's done wrong, but the training is geared towards doing it right. Ultimately, if anyone wants to by said disparate kids, then that's what they buy. You've informed them, the decision remains theirs.

I agree that the ultimate goal is to provide good customer service. Educating the customer on the game structure, factions and force org is good customer service. Suggesting first time purchases is good customer service. The suggestion of tactica - if solicited, is good customer service. I only find it interesting that the mantra centers around "help the customer with what they need" rather than "find out what the customer needs".

The problem with the "help the customer with what they need" is that usually it turns into "help the customer with what you think they need". To use your example: Unsolicited tactica basically amounts "You should" arguement from the seller - despite intent. I've seen good CSRs fall into this trap where they are making earnest recommendations (out of enthusiasm) that basically amount to "you should *action* because *I feel very strongly about it*". While this CAN generate sales, this is DICTATING to the customer what they need as opposed to finding out what they need and then helping them with it. The problem with getting entrenched into the mode of TELLING the customer what they need is that it invariably breeds CONTEMPT for the customer - as this action implies a certain superiority over the customer. In my experience - sometimes, not conforming with a enthusiastic recommendation will result in the CSR trying to persuade the customer to their point of view - or in the worst case scenario - ridicule them for holding a contrary opinion.

Anyhow - I think that the usual staffer has their heart in the right place, but IMHO, there is something seriously wrong at the core of "what the customer need." vs "find out what the customer needs" (i.e. want).

Hi Mr Mystery.
Here is the facts from the GW plc finacial statments.
From 1995 to 1998 GW plc DOUBLED turn over!(When they had a wide range of games to suit a wide range of gamers , and LOTS of game support in WD ,B&M stores etc.)
(With an average of 12% increse in prices.)

From 1998 to present day, IF thier sales volumes had remained STATIC.
GW plc would have turned over £218 million pounds this year.
(With an average 135% increase in retail prices.)
The fact GW plc has only turned over £126 million , shows how effective Mr Kirby has been with his'...selling toy soldiers to kiddies ' directive.
A gross drop in sales volumes of 44% over the last decade!

And the GW plc corperate managment have been quoted as saying
'... over 8O% of customers leave ,before they have been in the GW hobby for 18 months'.AND '1/3rd of customers NEVER play any of the games.'
Both of these reasons have ben used to justify NOT spending money on 'game development' and GW plcs focus on 'kiddies and collectors'.

My opinions of the lack luster -diffuse performance of GW plc corperate managment are based on facts supllied by GW plc in official documents.

You have every right to belive that GW plc are doing the right thing.

And I have every right to look at the finacial statments and realise they are doing lots of thing wrong!

keezus wrote:

Mr Mystery wrote:Ditto selling a NooB a bunch of disparate kits. Far better that you explain the various army builds etc, and the options which go with it. Can come across as forceful selling if it's done wrong, but the training is geared towards doing it right. Ultimately, if anyone wants to by said disparate kids, then that's what they buy. You've informed them, the decision remains theirs.

I agree that the ultimate goal is to provide good customer service. Educating the customer on the game structure, factions and force org is good customer service. Suggesting first time purchases is good customer service. The suggestion of tactica - if solicited, is good customer service. I only find it interesting that the mantra centers around "help the customer with what they need" rather than "find out what the customer needs".

The problem with the "help the customer with what they need" is that usually it turns into "help the customer with what you think they need". To use your example: Unsolicited tactica basically amounts "You should" arguement from the seller - despite intent. I've seen good CSRs fall into this trap where they are making earnest recommendations (out of enthusiasm) that basically amount to "you should *action* because *I feel very strongly about it*". While this CAN generate sales, this is DICTATING to the customer what they need as opposed to finding out what they need and then helping them with it. The problem with getting entrenched into the mode of TELLING the customer what they need is that it invariably breeds CONTEMPT for the customer - as this action implies a certain superiority over the customer. In my experience - sometimes, not conforming with a enthusiastic recommendation will result in the CSR trying to persuade the customer to their point of view - or in the worst case scenario - ridicule them for holding a contrary opinion.

Anyhow - I think that the usual staffer has their heart in the right place, but IMHO, there is something seriously wrong at the core of "what the customer need." vs "find out what the customer needs" (i.e. want).

Yarr, think we need to discuss this further over PM matey, as what you've described is what the are aiming for. Talk to the customer about their Hobby, not your hobby, and oddly, not the hobby etc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lanrak wrote:Hi Mr Mystery.
Here is the facts from the GW plc finacial statments.
From 1995 to 1998 GW plc DOUBLED turn over!(When they had a wide range of games to suit a wide range of gamers , and LOTS of game support in WD ,B&M stores etc.)
(With an average of 12% increse in prices.)

From 1998 to present day, IF thier sales volumes had remained STATIC.
GW plc would have turned over £218 million pounds this year.
(With an average 135% increase in retail prices.)
The fact GW plc has only turned over £126 million , shows how effective Mr Kirby has been with his'...selling toy soldiers to kiddies ' directive.
A gross drop in sales volumes of 44% over the last decade!

And the GW plc corperate managment have been quoted as saying
'... over 8O% of customers leave ,before they have been in the GW hobby for 18 months'.AND '1/3rd of customers NEVER play any of the games.'
Both of these reasons have ben used to justify NOT spending money on 'game development' and GW plcs focus on 'kiddies and collectors'.

My opinions of the lack luster -diffuse performance of GW plc corperate managment are based on facts supllied by GW plc in official documents.

You have every right to belive that GW plc are doing the right thing.

And I have every right to look at the finacial statments and realise they are doing lots of thing wrong!

Trying to find the earlier reports, but it seems my Google-Fu (well, Bing-fu, but don't tell anybody) won't find anything pre-2000, when they reported a return to growth.

The shop staff aren't really the issue though- I think it's more a strategic and management level problem. Shop staff are generally pretty good at customer service I find, even if you do get the odd zealot trying to push random stuff a bit too hard.

I LOVE READING GW DEBATES!

and no, im not being sarcastic

@MrMystery: If that is the intent, I don't think further discussion on customer service is needed, as our definition on that subject is in alignment.

Nonetheless - steering this back to the original topic - when dealing with a beginner - one who has not formed any impression of "their hobby" - I find that any "help" always shifts back to steering the customer's purchases (projecting the CSR's hobby onto the customer) - based on the CSR's experience - as at this point, because frankly - the customer does not know any better.

In your opinion - is this a problem? Should the CSR advise on product information alone, or proactively steer the customer towards the usual: Starter box, battleforce, squad box, codex, paint kit (depending on budget). The practical part of me says the latter. I understand that stores are required to hit certain targets. Considering how often I see the starters (quantifiable metric of "hobby growth") marketed to newcomers (kids especially) - would you consider sales goals to be at odds with the stated goal of 'customer's needs"?

Both of these issues are more prevalent with newcomers - as a CSR is able to connect with a veteran on the basis of "their hobby". They also have little need of the starter kits and are very resistant to having their purchases "steered".

Slipstream wrote:With a lot of posts currently raging across dakka about GW, there is one topic that frequently gets referenced and cited and I just want to see if it bears any weight. Veterans are constantly highlighted as not being big buyers compared to newcomers who it seems a lot of people think are doing all the big buys from GW. I'll highlight myself. I've been into GW since 1983 and have amassed a fair few miniatures over the(my god!) decades. It was only with the introduction of Rogue Trader that the idea of collecting armies came about and I did. When it comes to minis I tend to buy big(well, until recently),now I'm exploring other manufacturers. I've just finished an Angels of Absolution army which has been on the go since Christmas, no vehicles for it though due to rising costs and I have some Dark Angels vehicles I 'll use for them.
The point is we veterans don't suddenly stop buying armies! Hell, when we finish one army we start casting about for another project(I've got 11 40k armies to back this up). So why do I always see the suggestion that veterans don't buy very much? Personally my own stand point is that this train of thought is a myth along with Little Timmy(an annoying little kid!).
Veterans in all sense of the word will always have more spending capability than newcomers and or young players yet we are seen as low spenders? We may not buy brand new GW stuff but we will buy and not only from one source.
Veterans, what do you think?

I think that I once gave GW over 10-500.00 a purchase over the space of years, now? !@#$ em.

Whoever came out with that swill that Veterens DON'T spend money is full of gak. I would STILL be buying up to the tune of 10- 500.00 a month if they would just stop being !@#ing stupid and SELL a game, instead of play footsie with me as a customer.

New players don't generally KNOW what they want. It isn't until they play a few games, learn the game and actually read through the game that they have an incling of what they need to collect an army and play it effectivly.

As a VET? You have a general IDEA on what you want, know what you need, and if it doesn't work, you go out and replace it with the thing that does work. WHY? because after you get bitten by the bug, you just KNOW what you want to do.

NEW GUY? He just knows he wants in on the shineys, not that they actually suck in terms of general game play and army make up. Saw one poor fool drop a few hundred on a hodgepodge of a batch of stuff and had to pull him off of the register before the sale, discussed it with him,and he didn't not only end up buying a solid couple of units a tank, and some heavys, he actually ended up buying MORE then the couple of boxes of one unit, a few fantasy units and some other stuff from a few more races that didn't even fit together in the same game.
I've seen the phenomina more then once, in a couple of different places, so in that account, new guys arn't being done justice in the initial "Hard Sell" by GW's resident assclowns.

Initially, it goes to the player. It doesn't just mean"VET" or "NEWB". Its about knowledge, interaction within groups, and how older players and newer ones interact,and how they dissiminate information on the various units.

If a unit sucks, it doesn't sell. (Unless the one buying it doesn't know any better and someone takes a minute to talk about what the buyer actually is trying to accomplish.)

Then the new guy has something to work with and can go back and make some decision making and come up with what they want to help thier armies out.

As for Little Timmy? Oh, he exists alright...

He's alive and well and selling GWs love drippings from his parents on Feebey because he didn't have a solid explanation of what he was getting, getting into, and getting shafted by, by a company that doesn't give a rats about customers, New and Vet alike.

If they would change that,and stop trying to be the be all end all and just sell a good solid game, they would do themselves a solid by keeping people interested, instead of just treating anyone that comes into the shop and tries to get in on it as a shill.

Sorry to paste this in again, but it suits this thread as well...

Like with all theories… we try to explain ONE that describes everything for everybody.

And to illustrate our theory, we draw conclusions from the two extreme ends… only.

When I first got introduced to GW in Australia during the mid-1980s, there were over 200 locals listed in UKWD (for Australia) as selling the product, numerous wargaming clubs, and thousands of veteran wargamers (having grown up with Airfix et al, Micro Armour et al, Battle Tech et al, and others through D&D et al).

With not one GW staff member, let alone a shop, in sight.

We, the veterans introduced our friends, our family, our children, and a few strangers to the GW world.

We, the veterans, created and built the GW following in Australia.

We, the veterans, created the thriving market in Australia.

GW saw the money, and moved in with their shops… now numbering 34, while the original 200+ were reduced to 42, because, while GW were building their retail empire, around 160 shops closed down… their reward from GW “helping and investing” in the local GW gaming world.

Although there are now around 140 locals listed in WD… that’s only 100 new shops, because they cannot compete with GW retail strategy (selling at GWUK factory cost not GWAU wholesale cost).

The United States is a similar story, however, the UK is not… the UK always had a GW shop and/or factory presence to influence the market and therefore sales.

It is true that the enticement of noobs, at the GW shop or even through the locals or at the clubs, is good tactics to create a never ending supply (loose description) of future customers.

But, if these players become veterans who could introduce the game to others, pyramid style expansion, and they are treated like the current veterans are treated… well, the numbers show the way of the future for GW plc… reduced sales volume (the profits mean nothing on the customers level, because they only increase with the price rises, and not even proportionally).

This will lead to higher prices, which will generate fewer sales volume, which will lead to higher prices to keep the same (more or less) profit as previous years, which will generate fewer sales volume…. Get the drift here?

At a certain point… soon… the income will be less than the outgoings.

This will lead to closure of GW shops… they are already aiming for one man shops, what’s cheaper than that?

GW has only one choice to remain on top – change to a modern business plan for the future… introduce fair prices across the globe, use the internet (no, really USE it), mix print with epub productions, really really support the existing customers, and listen to the vets.

No, you can’t please everybody all the time, however, you can do things right… which will make more sales volume, hence more profits… and if the price rises now and again, GW will be supported with pleasure.

And, for reference, I still buy WD... my first one was #124.

I have bought into three GW systems, spending over A$25,000 in almost 25years. I do not overly gripe at the price or the rules... I believe I have a large stake in GW position in Australia... I should be of some importance to them, like many others... but not so.

Like religion (I believe in god, just not the business of religion)... I believe in Warhammer 40K, just not the current GW business.

Mik

Kilkrazy wrote:I don't think veterans spend less than newcomers. There are just more newcomers.

Let's say veterans spend £400 a year and newbies spend £250. Simple maths shows that if two in three customers are newbies, they contribute more revenue to GW than the veterans. (Made up example.)

While your (made up) example might be completely accurate, the generally accepted "truth" in business is that it costs less to keep an existing customer than it does to get a new on.

For example, in GW's case, their main reason for having their extensive network of GW retail stores is to generate new business. Existing (veteran) GW players would most likely continue playing GW games and buying GW minis regardless of whether or not there were a local GW store. So, GW spends a tremendous amount of money, in the form of GW Stores, to attract new customers. Meanwhile, the veteran gamers would purchase from online retailers and LGS if the GW stores didn't exist.

Well put lord Castellan

I seee this debate a lot. What exactly would you, veteran gamer, want differently?

I don't know if id consider myself a veteran gamer yet(only played since 03), but id want FREE MODELS! just kidding

Frazzled.
Generaly gamers want well defined concise rules that deliver the maximum game play with the minumum of fuss.
As Rick priestly put it '...good rule sets are written with clarity, brevity and wit...'

This is true for a new player who wants to learn the rules ASAP so they can enjoy playing the game.
And the veteran gamer who is still exploreing the tactical chalanges years later.

If the rules achive the game play in the most straightforward way, they are easier to balance and expand.
And it makes it easier for veterans to work with the game developers to grow the gaming experiance as they go along...(If I could refer you to the SGs fan support as an example.)

Simply put, write rules focusing on game play, rather than marketing the latest new releases.

As this targets gamers of all ages and experiance,which delivers loing term interest and growth of the customer base.

I don't think there is a vets vs newcomer situation in existance.

Yes the focus on joiners (and rightly so) but I think the large ranges that they offer per army and FW output cover all bases. Is this enough, I'm not sure though?

Frazzled wrote:I seee this debate a lot. What exactly would you, veteran gamer, want differently?

I think most gamers just want GW to pretend to respect them, like what PP does. Write a sob story about rising material costs when prices go up, that kind of thing.

Frazzled wrote:I seee this debate a lot. What exactly would you, veteran gamer, want differently?

No GW stores and cheaper prices for one thing.

Frazzled wrote:I seee this debate a lot. What exactly would you, veteran gamer, want differently?

Not nessesarily differently, but consistancy.

Gamers want consistant and inter related content.

I buy a army of space marines or any other one for that matter, I'm already dumping in 500 bucks. I don't need some pinhead to come back six months later and INTENTIONALLY trump that with a super killy high speed shooy shoot that basicly nullifys the army in question.

As for rules? Its ok to put rules out in a pdf, or a addentum format that can come out every six months... You know, like a... Compendium.

Veterns want a solid, well written and proofread rulebook,with.. rules. Want to put out a fluff filled book with 10 pages of rules? fine, then put those rules in the back of the book in a Appendix, and highlight special rules with a solid explination. And it doesn't even need to be said to "D6 a issue, its about having fun."

Other then that? A game with the ability to grow, and on a stable platform that can handle the expansion.