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.

You can't deny Reaper a spot at the 28mm model big boy table. Even ignoring the plastics they are releasing, their metal models are far less than GW's metal or resin models despite the price of raw white metal.

Just because GW decided to open a crap ton of stores and have massive overhead doesn't mean I should have to pay for it. I can't think of another gaming company that has stores for only their own product.

agustin wrote:
It's also good to remember that some Warhammer factions started off as being historical based. Empire is 16th century Germans. Brettonia is 100 Years War. Araby is 15th century Ottomans. Kislev is Grand Duchy of Lithuania mashed in with some Mideival Russians and Ukranians. Then they simply added in Tolkein lik fantasy races, Moorcock's chaos idea and a few others. Are Skaven their only real original idea?

I'm not sure whether it's true or not, but have read a few times in the past that the Skaven were inspired by the anthropomorphic rodents in the Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser stories by Fritz Lieber. (Which I recommend, for those who've not read them.)

 Dawnbringer wrote:

Stranger83 wrote:

the fact is - and it's the only fact I've made on multiple occasions, i've never claimed anything else despite what you are saying I said, is that you get more actual models from GW for your money than you get from any other - that is a fact and any claim that you don't.

Except for Mantic, which you've disregarded, because it doesn't fit your theory.

And there is also Reaper with their new line of plastic bones guys. Admittedly the range is currently rather small, but is set to expand quite a bit in the new year.

Err we going to keep ignoring Dream Forge Games? Because I defy you to find me a GW kit that for the same price provides 20 infantrymen, all the possible options they can take, a ton of cool bits, and the option to purchase an accessory sprue with even MORE awesomeness to the point of bits that allow you to model a guy leaping over a wall without spending a couple hours with a craft knife and greenstuff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Magos Explorator wrote:

agustin wrote:
It's also good to remember that some Warhammer factions started off as being historical based. Empire is 16th century Germans. Brettonia is 100 Years War. Araby is 15th century Ottomans. Kislev is Grand Duchy of Lithuania mashed in with some Mideival Russians and Ukranians. Then they simply added in Tolkein lik fantasy races, Moorcock's chaos idea and a few others. Are Skaven their only real original idea?

I'm not sure whether it's true or not, but have read a few times in the past that the Skaven were inspired by the anthropomorphic rodents in the Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser stories by Fritz Lieber. (Which I recommend, for those who've not read them.)

Maybe Brian Jacques Redwall series as well?

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

Maybe Brian Jacques Redwall series as well?

First Skaven and first Redwall book came out at almost exactly the same time, so I'd guess not, but you never know.

 plastictrees wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

Maybe Brian Jacques Redwall series as well?

First Skaven and first Redwall book came out at almost exactly the same time, so I'd guess not, but you never know.

Yeah, Redwall was one of my first guesses as well. Bloodbowl Skaven came out while Redwall was being written, and the WHFB addition of Skaven was right around the same time it was published.

'Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH' came out over ten years before hand, and its film (The Secret of NIMH) about 3 years before the Bloodbowl team.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

 Dawnbringer wrote:

Stranger83 wrote:

the fact is - and it's the only fact I've made on multiple occasions, i've never claimed anything else despite what you are saying I said, is that you get more actual models from GW for your money than you get from any other - that is a fact and any claim that you don't.

Except for Mantic, which you've disregarded, because it doesn't fit your theory.

And there is also Reaper with their new line of plastic bones guys. Admittedly the range is currently rather small, but is set to expand quite a bit in the new year.

Err we going to keep ignoring Dream Forge Games?

Fair enough, I just haven't brought them up because I didn't think they were at market yet, and figured that would be enought for 83 to disregard them.

They'll be on the market next month, hopefully.

 Breotan wrote:
They'll be on the market next month, hopefully.

Curse ships....

the giant slow container shipping kind that is.

 Breotan wrote:
According to BoLS, here are the prices for the new DA stuff coming in January:

Codex: Dark Angels (English) 104pp Colour Hardback $49.50
Ravenwing Dark Talon 1 Mini $75.00
Land Speeder Vengeance 1 Mini $65.00
Deathwing Command Squad 5 Minis $60.00
Ravenwing Command Squad 3 Minis $50.00
Dark Angels Battleforce 8 Minis $110.00

That's right. $75.00 for that flier and $50.00 for three bikes. Oh, and don't forget that awesome DA Battleforce with eight whole models.

I heavily rely on Dark Angels figures for my DYI chapter but I'm wondering if GW has finally hit that magical point where I simply can't justify the cost of their product. I have more disposable income than a lot of people out there so I expect that many of you have already hit this wall. If so, when did it happen for you? If you haven't hit it yet, how is your hobby future looking?

Myself? I find that I am migrating over to Malifaux these days, that and spending obscene amounts of money on kickstarters (damn you McVey, Poots, and the rest). Some small purchases and some specific Forge World purchases are still in the cards, but I'll certainly not be starting up any new armies with GW. I used to buy every codex when it came out. Now I only buy the onces I actually use. Once the annual price increase hits this coming summer, my GW portion of the hobby will likely be reduced to painting. Shame, really.

Yeah, I hit that point myself. I would have paid $50 happily for the Chaos codex, but there's nothing in there that's must have. And I'd have to buy $100 worth of parts, just to scratch build a unit of Posessed to improve upon the GW designs.

GW just doesn't make enough to keep me in, and the prices on the new DA stuff are just as bad.

GW raises prices far higher than inflation would allow, and they're doing it to "juice" the company's share price in order to sell off the company.

Sorry, but I'm not having it.

--Chris
www.chrisvalera.com

So, for the people who seem to have some standard for what price increases are acceptable, beyond "can I afford this?" (for example, "more than inflation"), I have some questions:

1) What percentage of total sales is a justified amount of profit for a company? At what point do you feel that they are obligated to accept that they have enough profit and lower prices to help the customer?

2) What is an acceptable reason, if any, for raising prices beyond the general trend of inflation? For example, is it justified to raise prices to hire a better codex author, or is a company obligated to limit their price increases to the level of inflation and just take a loss in profits to pay for those things?

3) How do you determine, in an objective sense, what price is justified for a model? For example, how can you say not just that a model is too expensive in your opinion and not appealing, but that its price represents some kind of unfairness by the company selling it?

4) How much is a company allowed to raise prices for a higher-quality product? For example, how much is GW allowed to increase the price when moving from a paperback codex to a hardcover one of higher quality?

5) At what point do you feel obligated (possibly based on the previous four factors) to refuse to buy a product that you want and can afford, simply because it passes your threshold for "overpriced"?

 Peregrine wrote:
So, for the people who seem to have some standard for what price increases are acceptable, beyond "can I afford this?" (for example, "more than inflation"), I have some questions:

1) What percentage of total sales is a justified amount of profit for a company? At what point do you feel that they are obligated to accept that they have enough profit and lower prices to help the customer?

2) What is an acceptable reason, if any, for raising prices beyond the general trend of inflation? For example, is it justified to raise prices to hire a better codex author, or is a company obligated to limit their price increases to the level of inflation and just take a loss in profits to pay for those things?

3) How do you determine, in an objective sense, what price is justified for a model? For example, how can you say not just that a model is too expensive in your opinion and not appealing, but that its price represents some kind of unfairness by the company selling it?

4) How much is a company allowed to raise prices for a higher-quality product? For example, how much is GW allowed to increase the price when moving from a paperback codex to a hardcover one of higher quality?

5) At what point do you feel obligated (possibly based on the previous four factors) to refuse to buy a product that you want and can afford, simply because it passes your threshold for "overpriced"?

I'd say it comes down to cost per figure. At three bucks a figure, it hurts. At four, it hurts a lot. At five or six, it's ludicrous, like the cost of a character figure back in 97-98. At six or seven, like the new Chaos Posessed, it's just poor value.

It used to be you could justify the cost with a 20% discount, like okay, with the discount, this is about what it used to cost back in the day.

But it's gone so far beyond that (characters that cost $17-25+) it's absurd.

Everything I collect has to be custom-converted, to the point where I have to buy boxes and bits, the price is ludicrous, the Chaos Posessed rules aren't very good in the new (fifty dollar) rulebook, and I just end up not buying anything.

--Chris
www.chrisvalera.com

For me it was around about the time they brought out finecast, hiked up prices and gave the finger to everyone in the southern hemisphere. There was a lot of bitterness at that time, and a lot of people responding to the bitterness by saying things like "If you don't like it, you don't have to buy it". And they where damn right I don't have to buy it. So I stopped buying it. I don't buy anything from GW any more. I haven't bought so much as a pot of paint from them in 2-3 years.

Its a bit sad actually, because I still like the models. I would have been totally down with collecting a Grey Knights army. I would have bought Dark Vengeance in a heartbeat too, and I probably would have continued to expand on the Chaos and DA armies in the box. But every time I have been tempted to buy something, all I have to do is look at the price and my blood boils a little with anger.

It isn't even that I can't afford their stuff. I buy stuff from Soda pop which is just as expensive, and it doesn't bother me at all. But when I give money to Soda pop I'm never reminded of Tom Kirby's fat face going "Hmm why should plastic minis cost less than metal?" as he guzzles champaign at another shareholders meeting.

I have heard people say that they feel exploited by Games Workshop, and after some reflection I think it is true. Games Workshop do exploit people, they exploit their stupidity. They have marketing meetings where they go "People will be stupid enough to pay that yeah?" and they are always right. People know this, which is why they are so upset about the prices, they literally feel insulted. The prices have gone gone so far beyond a joke now, that It couldn't be any more obvious if GW published an open challenge in White Dwarf saying "We're so confident that you suckers are dumb enough to pay anything, we modelled our business on it ".

How would people respond? "Screw you GW! I'm not stupid! I'm just gonna buy one or ten more of these overpriced vehicles to finish my army, and maybe some more paint and glue that I could get anywhere else for half price, and a few bits for my Games Day entry... but then I'm though with you!! Until Christmas when the new codex comes out. but that's it... I'll teach you to call me a sucker!".

 Peregrine wrote:
So, for the people who seem to have some standard for what price increases are acceptable, beyond "can I afford this?" (for example, "more than inflation"), I have some questions:

1) What percentage of total sales is a justified amount of profit for a company? At what point do you feel that they are obligated to accept that they have enough profit and lower prices to help the customer?

2) What is an acceptable reason, if any, for raising prices beyond the general trend of inflation? For example, is it justified to raise prices to hire a better codex author, or is a company obligated to limit their price increases to the level of inflation and just take a loss in profits to pay for those things?

3) How do you determine, in an objective sense, what price is justified for a model? For example, how can you say not just that a model is too expensive in your opinion and not appealing, but that its price represents some kind of unfairness by the company selling it?

4) How much is a company allowed to raise prices for a higher-quality product? For example, how much is GW allowed to increase the price when moving from a paperback codex to a hardcover one of higher quality?

5) At what point do you feel obligated (possibly based on the previous four factors) to refuse to buy a product that you want and can afford, simply because it passes your threshold for "overpriced"?

1) Not relevant to me. I have no idea what their costs are, how much they had to pay sculpters to make the masters, how much it cost them to make the moulds, how much they plan to sell to recoup those costs, how much they pay for shipping, how much they pay for store rent, how much they have to pay their various workers. Don't know, don't care. I do, however, care about regional pricing and find it unacceptable to pay twice as much in Oz for the same product... so I do import a lot of my things because of that.

2) Lots of reasons, and again they are better known to the company than me so it hardly is for me to comment on. As for what actually affects me, better service, better models which I perceive to have more value, better literature which I perceive to have more value (rules and the like).

3) There is no objective sense. If I want a model and I have the money, if the money is not excessive relative to my other hobbies and the joy and entertainment I expect to get out of it. All very subjective points. There's no "this is the point where the price is no longer justified". If I feel competitors put out a better product for a better price and clearly have similar overheads (hard to determine) then it may not be justified, but I cannot comment accurately on their overheads and profits and how they choose to market themselves. To me, if a company wants to spend half their money on advertising which in turn drives up prices, that's justified for them. It may, however, mean I no longer wish to purchase their products at those prices.

4) The way you worded it, it's a loaded question, they are "allowed" to do whatever they want, it's their product. As long as they aren't breaking any trade practices acts or consumer protection laws, they are "allowed" to do whatever they want. If you mean specifically "What will I accept?" as opposed to what are they "allowed" to do....

Depends on the product. For codices, really, honestly, I could not give a flying fruit bat about hard cover and being colour. They are allowed to do those things and raise the price appropriately, but I'm not remotely happy about it and I no longer buy army books and codices "for the hell of it" like I used to (previously I'd often buy the books even for armies I don't own just to read, often second hand, but if they're much more expensive thanks to colour/hardback, bugger it, I'm not paying that much just to read a book). As for the miniatures themselves, again, a hard call. For rank and file models, I'm not willing to pay a lot for better quality models. I would obviously like better quality models, but for the same price. However, for characters/monsters/centerpiece models, I am most definitely willing to pay more for better quality, since I spend more of my time on the model (if I'm spending 30 hours on a model I want it to be a nice model). How much more? Depends on the model, depends how many of those models I intend to buy, it depends on the improvement in quality. I don't care too much about the more expensive LOTR eagles because the simple fact is I never would have bought the old eagles because they didn't look good enough, these new ones, I might (well, I WILL buy them as long as I can find time to paint them).

5) There is no point. There is no magic threshold. If I have the money and I perceive value, I'm not adverse to buying it. If I don't perceive the value or don't have the money, I won't buy it. It's a sliding scale dependant on the models, the quality of the game rules, what my friends are playing, how cool (or not) the models are, what I ate for breakfast that day, how much money I have in my account, when I got my most recent pay cheque and how large it was, what I intend to eat for lunch, whether the salesperson happens to be an attractive woman or a fat dude... it's a very liquid factor. I'm quite cautious with my money in day to day living (and am also single), which leaves me more money to spend on my hobbies like my car, my PC and my miniatures. As such, I don't place hard limits on my spending. If I see an awesome car I want, I might spend $20,000 on it, that doesn't mean my budget for a car is $20,000 or that I intend to spend $20,000, I might limit myself to $2,000 if I don't see any cars I perceive as having value to me in the gap between $2,000 and $20,000. I'm very fluid in my spending depending on lots of factors, the same applies to my miniatures.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
4) The way you worded it, it's a loaded question, they are "allowed" to do whatever they want, it's their product. As long as they aren't breaking any trade practices acts or consumer protection laws, they are "allowed" to do whatever they want. If you mean specifically "What will I accept?" as opposed to what are they "allowed" to do....

You're probably not the kind of person I'm asking then. What I'm talking about is the people who go beyond "I don't feel like spending that much, so I won't", and act like GW is somehow immoral/greedy/whatever for charging those prices and has an obligation to lower them to a more desirable level. I just never see any kind of explanation for that position, beyond "I don't like paying that much" which is a ridiculous way of looking at it.

 Peregrine wrote:

1) What percentage of total sales is a justified amount of profit for a company?

You mean justifiable, right? If so, any percentage they can get legally (and for some, ethically).

At what point do you feel that they are obligated to accept that they have enough profit and lower prices to help the customer?

When there's an ethical issue. Not really present in wargaming. The genetic patent company charging thousands for a genetic test that could help prevent cancer fatalities when the actual cost is around $100? That's unethical. I don't see an analogous situation in wargaming.

2) What is an acceptable reason, if any, for raising prices beyond the general trend of inflation?

When you want more revenue for each items in real terms. If you only ever increase prices with inflation, you aren't actually changing your prices in real terms.

3) How do you determine, in an objective sense, what price is justified for a model?

Same way you do in any market: comparables and alternatives. Whether you're buying a house, investing in a stock, choosing a video game console, a smart phone or a new computer. Compare it to other similar products and look at what else you could buy with the money instead.

4) How much is a company allowed to raise prices for a higher-quality product?

As much as they want to the point where enough people buy it to make it profitable for the company.

5) At what point do you feel obligated (possibly based on the previous four factors) to refuse to buy a product that you want and can afford, simply because it passes your threshold for "overpriced"?

When the comparables and alternatives dictate it to be so. I don't buy a house that's out of line with the rest of the market. I don't buy a stock that is out of line with the rest of the market. There's no obligation involved.

Now notice the topic title for this thread. It has nothing to do with morality, ethics, obligation, being allowed or acceptable, etc. It's about the real effects of GW's decision. Each price hike means they sell a little less product, but at a bit higher of a price. When you sell things you try to make price multiplied by volume sold to equal the highest possible number. Price x Number sold = revenue. If you put up Price and Number Sold doesn't drop that much, revenue goes up. But once it gets too high, Number Sold drops and revenue doesn't go up. GW may have passed by that point already, where each price increase is not giving the highest revenue possible. I'm not so sure. I think they still have a bit of room. Especially in the UK and the EU and to a lesser degree the US. There's not really much room left in Canadian and Australian prices though.

I think we can have GW prices at parity with Forge World prices and their marketing system will keep things going for them. The customer and player base will be greatly reduced, but their revenue in terms of price multipled by the number of items sold will be okay for GW to keep paying bonuses and dividends to Kirby and friends until they retire as rich, rich men. if it causes a problem after that? Someone else's problem.

 chris_valera wrote:
At five or six, it's ludicrous, like the cost of a character figure back in 97-98. At six or seven, like the new Chaos Posessed, it's just poor value.

See, this is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. Why does it matter what something used to cost 10-15 years ago? Why don't you evaluate a purchase based on what exists now?

GW raises prices far higher than inflation would allow, and they're doing it to "juice" the company's share price in order to sell off the company.

Sorry, but I'm not having it.

Then you are the kind of person I'm asking those questions. Why does GW's motivation for raising prices matter so much? Why do you care about more than just the current price on the box?

 Smacks wrote:
The prices have gone gone so far beyond a joke now, that It couldn't be any more obvious if GW published an open challenge in White Dwarf saying "We're so confident that you suckers are dumb enough to pay anything, we modelled our business on it ".

How do you determine what is a "fair" price for a model, what is "overpriced", and what is "a joke"?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

agustin wrote:
Now notice the topic title for this thread. It has nothing to do with morality, ethics, obligation, being allowed or acceptable, etc. It's about the real effects of GW's decision.

Yeah, but I'm asking these questions because once again the thread has been hijacked by complaining that GW's price increases are somehow unethical, abusive, whatever you want to call it. And there doesn't seem to be any kind of reason behind it, just mindless outrage about how things cost money and corporations make profit.

 Aerethan wrote:
You can't deny Reaper a spot at the 28mm model big boy table. Even ignoring the plastics they are releasing, their metal models are far less than GW's metal or resin models despite the price of raw white metal.

Just because GW decided to open a crap ton of stores and have massive overhead doesn't mean I should have to pay for it. I can't think of another gaming company that has stores for only their own product.

/sigh here we go again, Yes GW metal/resin is one of the most expensive around, but the question isn't “Are GW overcharging for their miniatures?” The question is “Are GW pricing people out of the hobby” - To me that means that we should only look at price as that is all that in included in the question and – because Reaper currently use a better medium they are more expensive – are they worth the extra cost, yes I believe that they are – but the fact that they are worth the extra cost does not suddenly make them cheaper. Now once they start to release models in plastic then they will be cheaper, but since the majority are still metal at the moment then they currently are not.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:


Err we going to keep ignoring Dream Forge Games? Because I defy you to find me a GW kit that for the same price provides 20 infantrymen, all the possible options they can take, a ton of cool bits, and the option to purchase an accessory sprue with even MORE awesomeness to the point of bits that allow you to model a guy leaping over a wall without spending a couple hours with a craft knife and greenstuff.

No, we shouldn't ignore them, and I've already answered this in the larger post I made earlier that "One of the cheapest" wasn't what I meant to say and "cheaper than the other big 3" is what I should have said instead - I ad a very long day yesterday and my brain wasn't firing on full cylinders.

Let me put it this way, if you are starting the hobby brand new (and lets presume that you don't have a friend playing as then you would just play the game he plays). You go into a game shop and ask what game you should by. The store owner firstly asks you if you want an historical or sci-fi/fantasy game (they tend to attract different players, just like the 100m sprint and a marathon are both running sports but attract different people) and you say Sci-fi. Next he leads you over to the Sci-fi range and shows you the "starter packs" of the "big 4 games" based on that you see that with GW you get a lot more stuff for your money than any of the others. Now you're a clever person and you think "ah but what about on going costs" so you look at the cost of a box of ten men and again, you see that GW boxes are cheaper. Now based on that - i.e. knowing the price and nothing more (again, the question is are GW pricing out of the hobby, not are GW overcharging for what you get) which company would you say has "Priced you out?" I find it odd that people are saying the cheapest is all is all.

Now yes, the store manager should probably point out that you need twice as many stuff to play the game, but from the hobby perspective (i.e. painting/converting as well as gaming) you get more stuff for the cost of GW to the other "big 3" I'm certainly not saying that the GW Hobby is cheaper than anyone else, just that you get more stuff from GW than the other "big 3" companies trageting the same market. (Again, as far as I am aware PP, Malifaux and Corvus are the other "big3" but I am prepared to be corrected.) Again, there is more to a hobby than cost - you may prefer to work with metal/resin or prefer the design of the non GW stuff so you will pay more for it, but this thread is just about cost and nothing more.

Yes, there are plenty of other companies that are selling stuff cheaper than GW - and that is great, a lot of it I also think is better quality (and a lot I think is cheap because it is gak), I never meant to say that GW are the cheapest (despite saying that exact thing once in error and many times saying "one of the cheapest") just that if you are going to jumo up and down because GW are keeping people out of the hobby purely on cost alone then surely we should jump up and down on the other major 3 all of whom charge more (which - although a better quality product, is still more money)

Now that isn't to say that there are not cheaper out there, just that GW -- though being the most expensive game - are not the most expensive hobby.

agustin wrote:

When you want more revenue for each items in real terms. If you only ever increase prices with inflation, you aren't actually changing your prices in real terms.

For Calgar's sake, stop this nonsense about "general trend of inflation". It has absolutely no bearing whatsoever for an individual company. Or even consumer, some would argue.

It's just an artificially determined average.

40k is my cheapest hobby. I can play and paint for less then a grand a year. pretty darn cheap. try restoring cars or kiteboarding. GW will never price me out.

Completely new to this thread but I felt like doing some fact checking.

Eilif wrote:

Mantic

vs



Yeah I'm not surprised they're cheaper.

Eilif wrote:

Perry

Google couldn't find any trace of this.

Eilif wrote:

Wargames Factory

Look like they're made of plastercene.

Eilif wrote:

Defiance Games

These look pretty cool actually, from what I can see. Couldn't speak for the price though - is $30.00 good? I assume it's cheaper than two cadian squads, I may consider getting some to model a blob squad and keep the Cadians to represent veterans.

Eilif wrote:

EM4

Okay these just look like pure crap:

Eilif wrote:

4 A miniatures

One dude selling pre-painted models on a website...

Eilif wrote:

Mega Miniatures

Look like 20 year old GW sculpts

Eilif wrote:

Reaper

Website is un-navigatable so can't comment.

Eilif wrote:

Ral Partha

Actually very high quality...except more expensive than GW (at least, the models seem to be). So that's a myth - busted.

Eilif wrote:

Warlord Games

Huzzah! High quality, and cheap! Historical, though.

Eilif wrote:

Victrix

Also high quality, also cheap. However, also historical.

Eilif wrote:

GW is near the top of the list for price per miniature.

Of the list of names that you provided, out of the ones who made fantasy models...GW were top of the list.

Now, I don't like GW's prices. But I think they're sustained by the poor quality of the competition, in my humble opinion.

 Peregrine wrote:
So, for the people who seem to have some standard for what price increases are acceptable, beyond "can I afford this?" (for example, "more than inflation"), I have some questions:

1) What percentage of total sales is a justified amount of profit for a company? At what point do you feel that they are obligated to accept that they have enough profit and lower prices to help the customer?

Whatever the market can withstand.

 Peregrine wrote:

2) What is an acceptable reason, if any, for raising prices beyond the general trend of inflation?

To increase profits.

 Peregrine wrote:

3) How do you determine, in an objective sense, what price is justified for a model?

However much you can charge.

 Peregrine wrote:

4) How much is a company allowed to raise prices for a higher-quality product?

See above.

 Peregrine wrote:

5) At what point do you feel obligated (possibly based on the previous four factors) to refuse to buy a product that you want and can afford, simply because it passes your threshold for "overpriced"?

Whenever I regard it to be too expensive. If I knew exactly how much people are willing to pay for any given product then I would be a very rich man.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Smacks wrote:
The prices have gone gone so far beyond a joke now, that It couldn't be any more obvious if GW published an open challenge in White Dwarf saying "We're so confident that you suckers are dumb enough to pay anything, we modelled our business on it ".

How do you determine what is a "fair" price for a model, what is "overpriced", and what is "a joke"?

Philosophers have struggled with concepts like fairness value and humour for centuries, and you expect me to explain them for you in such a why, that you won't be able to ask further pedantic questions?

A fair price is simply how much I am happy to pay, or reasonably expect to pay. This is mostly personal based on experience and judgement, but does factor it other peoples expectations and the market as a point of reference. "Overpriced" and "joke" seem self explanatory.

 skkipper wrote:
40k is my cheapest hobby. I can play and paint for less then a grand a year. pretty darn cheap. try restoring cars or kiteboarding. GW will never price me out.

It is not about cheapness it is about value. I could play and paint with green army men for less than $50 a year. Kite-boarders don't have that kind of alternative... I'm sure if they did they would take it.

Backfire wrote:

agustin wrote:

When you want more revenue for each items in real terms. If you only ever increase prices with inflation, you aren't actually changing your prices in real terms.

For Calgar's sake, stop this nonsense about "general trend of inflation". It has absolutely no bearing whatsoever for an individual company. Or even consumer, some would argue.

It's just an artificially determined average.

This indeed.

Inflation isn't some magic “catch all” where everything increases by that amount, it’s an average of the increased price of whatever is included in that index (incidently there are actually 2, and soon to be 3 different indexes in the UK). Some things go up by more that inflation, somethings go up by less than inflation, somethings even go down in price.

Now what I’m about to say here could be wrong – it’s been a long time since I learnt anything to do with science and it was always a subject that I struggled with, anyway. If, as I believe to be correct, Plastic is a by product of oil then it is logical that it should be tied into the cost of oil more than the cost of inflation. Since, based upon the cost of Petrol – gas to our American members - (also a derivative of oil), it looks like the cost of oil is increasing over the cost of inflation, as such GW costs are rising over the cost of inflation and so they are passing that cost onto us to maintain the same profit per model, they are not just pushing up prices to increase the profit per model. Now as I said, I’m certainly no science major and it’s possible what I said above isn’t true, or at least isn’t true any more, but it does show why something go up over inflation. In fact by its very nature 50% of the stuff we buy should increase by over the cost of inflation every year.

Incidentally, why do Americans call it gas? Particularly when it is very clearly a liquid?

Stranger83 wrote:

Incidentally, why do Americans call it gas? Particularly when it is very clearly a liquid?

It's short for gasoline...

 BryllCream wrote:

Stranger83 wrote:

Incidentally, why do Americans call it gas? Particularly when it is very clearly a liquid?

It's short for gasoline...

Ah, that makes sense then.

 Smacks wrote:
I have heard people say that they feel exploited by Games Workshop, and after some reflection I think it is true. Games Workshop do exploit people, they exploit their stupidity. They have marketing meetings where they go "People will be stupid enough to pay that yeah?" and they are always right. People know this, which is why they are so upset about the prices, they literally feel insulted. The prices have gone gone so far beyond a joke now, that It couldn't be any more obvious if GW published an open challenge in White Dwarf saying "We're so confident that you suckers are dumb enough to pay anything, we modelled our business on it ".

How would people respond? "Screw you GW! I'm not stupid! I'm just gonna buy one or ten more of these overpriced vehicles to finish my army, and maybe some more paint and glue that I could get anywhere else for half price, and a few bits for my Games Day entry... but then I'm though with you!! Until Christmas when the new codex comes out. but that's it... I'll teach you to call me a sucker!".

That's about the size of it. GW charge exactly what they can get away with, and the players let them get away with a lot. Like someone else said earlier, it'll be interesting to bookmark this thread and when the next GW price hike and the complaining rolls around in a few months, compare it to see who actually quit, and how many frogs decided to stay in the boiling water.

 Smacks wrote:
Philosophers have struggled with concepts like fairness value and humour for centuries, and you expect me to explain them for you in such a why, that you won't be able to ask further pedantic questions?

No, I want you to explain why you go beyond a simple "I don't want to pay for that" and post a long rant about how unfair GW's prices are and how greedy their CEO is. What I want to know is what your standard for "too much" is. Do you actually have any kind of objective standard, or do you just like to rant to express your frustration with not being able to afford something?

A fair price is simply how much I am happy to pay, or reasonably expect to pay.

Why do your preferences set a universal standard of fairness? Why is it unfair that GW has decided to sell at a higher price than you like, rather than just a value-neutral situation where you and GW decline to conduct further business with each other?

I could play and paint with green army men for less than $50 a year. Kite-boarders don't have that kind of alternative... I'm sure if they did they would take it.

If you're willing to play with green army men and don't care about the aesthetic value of the models. Not everyone shares your preference.

And the point about kiteboarding is that there are endless arguments over how "expensive" GW is, but the cost of the hobby compared to other hobbies is small regardless of whether a tactical squad costs $50 or $75. For example, if you're paying $5000+ a year to support your airplane hobby the price of GW kits is a non-issue since GW could double their prices and still not make a meaningful impact on your total hobby budget.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Smacks wrote:
Philosophers have struggled with concepts like fairness value and humour for centuries, and you expect me to explain them for you in such a why, that you won't be able to ask further pedantic questions?

No, I want you to explain why you go beyond a simple "I don't want to pay for that" and post a long rant about how unfair GW's prices are and how greedy their CEO is. What I want to know is what your standard for "too much" is. Do you actually have any kind of objective standard, or do you just like to rant to express your frustration with not being able to afford something?

I didn't post a long rant about GW prices being "unfair" I never used to word "unfair". I wrote about why I personally don't buy from them any more. And why I think so many other people feel betrayed by GW (which they clearly do, regardless of whether they have a right to).

And for your information I can afford Games Workshop, but I do not feel their product is worth what they ask for it.

A fair price is simply how much I am happy to pay, or reasonably expect to pay.

Why do your preferences set a universal standard of fairness? Why is it unfair that GW has decided to sell at a higher price than you like, rather than just a value-neutral situation where you and GW decline to conduct further business with each other?

I like how you crop off where I say "this is mostly personal" and try to make out that I'm conceited enough to think my preference set a universal standard. Also you are getting into equivocation with the word "unfair" (your own word). I did not say that it was unfair that GW charge a higher price that I am "willing to pay". They are free to do what they like. But I am clearly not the only person who believe their prices are at odds with their customers expectations. You must also remember that many of their customers continue to buy from them even though they are annoyed about the prices. This implies that the customers would leave if they could get the same product somewhere else (many people did do this with paint). The reason you can't get the same product some place else is because GW has a monopoly on their IP, so customers are limited to Hobson's choice. If you want to talk about fairness I think there are probably a lot of aspects of copywrite law that are unfair and hurt competition, but that is likely beyond the scope of this topic.

I could play and paint with green army men for less than $50 a year. Kite-boarders don't have that kind of alternative... I'm sure if they did they would take it.

If you're willing to play with green army men and don't care about the aesthetic value of the models. Not everyone shares your preference.

And the point about kiteboarding is that there are endless arguments over how "expensive" GW is, but the cost of the hobby compared to other hobbies is small regardless of whether a tactical squad costs $50 or $75. For example, if you're paying $5000+ a year to support your airplane hobby the price of GW kits is a non-issue since GW could double their prices and still not make a meaningful impact on your total hobby budget.

There is however the matter of principle. If you are happy to pay double the price for GW then better you than me. I'll even be happy to sell you GW for that price if you like, since it won't make any difference to your hobby budget. I'll even donate 100% profits to Dakka cause I'm nice

 Smacks wrote:
And why I think so many other people feel betrayed by GW (which they clearly do, regardless of whether they have a right to).

And that's what I don't understand at all. "Betrayal" involves owing some kind of loyalty/promises/whatever in the first place. GW is just a business, they don't owe you affordable prices and raising them isn't a betrayal.

I like how you crop off where I say it is "this is mostly personal" and try to make out that I'm conceited enough to think my preference set a universal standard.

But you're talking about it like it IS a universal standard, you gave a nice long rant about GW's greedy CEO instead of just quietly deciding that you aren't going to buy any GW products right now.

If you want to talk about fairness I think there are probably a lot of aspects of copywrite law that are unfair and hurt competition, but that is likely beyond the scope of this topic.

How exactly is copyright law unfair in this case? Copyright law doesn't do anything at all to prevent people from creating wargames and competing with GW, as demonstrated by Warmachine/Infinity/etc. It just, for very good reasons, prevents you from copying GW's creations and exploiting all of their work to sell your own ripoff product.

There is however the matter of principle. If you are happy to pay double the price for GW then better you than me.

And again, I don't understand how it's a matter of principle. How do you establish a certain price limit as a principle? And, more importantly, WHY? Do you also feel the need to treat prices in other areas of your life as a matter of principle?

Stranger83 wrote:

Now we are going round in circles - Again, stating companies who are cheaper than GW doesn't make them the most expensive - if GW are "pricing people out of the hobby" why are we not up in arms about the more expensive ones?

Privateer Press models, in the LGS, are as expensive or more expensive than GW ones.

But, you need far fewer models.

This is why people aren't up in arms. As far as I can tell, only GW tries to make mass combat fantasy/sci-fi games in a 28mm scale.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kronk wrote:

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
What are Chapterhouse prices like?

Give them a look!

I've used their Tactical Marine shoulder pads on an Astral Claws Tactical squad and was very happy with that purchase.

They look rather fantastic.

Because some people have a sense of social morality and think it is wrong for you to buy something for 10p and sell it for £100. Many corporations do just this, and many people get rich from it, but that doesn't make it right. Though right and wrong are clearly arbitrary human concepts anyway. Why you feel you have to argue with everyone about their own personal interpretation is beyond me.

I said I don't like games workshops prices. A lot of other people don't like games workshops prices either. maybe if games workshop had prices that people liked, they would have more customers, and everyone would be happier. Maybe their management really is too blinded by greed to realise that.

Or maybe they are just doing the best for their company. I don't honestly know and neither do you, we can only speculate.

What i do know is that I am not interested in doing business with them any more. I see a lot of people in this topic who feel the same way. And a lot of people who are on more price hike away from quitting. If you're not one of those people then good for you, I hope you prop up the company and pay Kirby's mortgage for many years to come.