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.

Mothboi666 wrote:
like how is that possible it is blatant profiteering

Not by any conventional definition of "profiteering".

Surely profiteering would be me somehow managing to secure all possible first market supplies of the Assault Marines, and then selling them on at a mark up?

Let's move past the semantics here, as he was probably just meaning that the prices were ridiculously high compared to other kits with more in them, yeah?

So after our 40k day yesterday people were excitedly talking about what they might want to add to their armies next. Some were looking up rules and talking about how cool things are. Others were showing images of sprues on the net and asking everyone's opinions about painting ideas.

No one was really talkng prices at all beyond whether it was worth it to buy something like a Triarch Stalker separate or get a Start Collecting Necrons. And going by GW's financial results, that's probably pretty true beyond our one little group.

Actually now that I think about it, it was the opposite issue. People were talking about not wanting to buy miniatures until the miniatures they already bought were painted.

So we have a situation where the prices are such that the customers can afford to collect not just what actually sees the table but enough to build a backlog of unpainted miniatures.

That would have been true of me as well before I started playing other games. Further of course it’s true of current customers. I’ll just say that group could be larger if the prices weren’t high and always and forever increasing with every release.

I have enough bare plastic to make probably 10k of 40k/WFB miniatures. Some of the new prices coupled with the price of just continually buying new books though finally was enough to put me off buying GW stuff for the foreseeable future.

Saying “these guys here don’t care about the price” doesn’t mean they’re not significantly higher than they ought to be.

 Chamberlain wrote:

So we have a situation where the prices are such that the customers can afford to collect not just what actually sees the table but enough to build a backlog of unpainted miniatures.

That's generally my take on the issue. GW minis are expensive relative to the miniatures wargaming market, but it's still a relatively inexpensive hobby. I work with people who drop thousands of dollars on a snowmobile/quad bike/jet ski, another who restored a Mustang spending just shy of 20 grand over several years, and we're all making lower middle class incomes. A 40K army that costs even $1000 CAD (note you can do a lot cheaper) to build is relative chump change.

Affordability =\= value.

If someone wanted £10 for a cup of coffee, I could afford it, I just wouldn't see value in it.

Just like one squad of 40K models is affordable to me, I just see much reduced value when I can afford a whole playable faction for another game. (Or even an entire game in some cases.)

It's well established that value is a moving target, but let's not conflate it with affordability.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Affordability =\= value.

I don't think anybody's making that argument. GW is still cheap enough that lots people don't care that other games offer 'better value', because GW has the more popular IP, and it's way easier to find opponents.

 John Prins wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Affordability =\= value.

I don't think anybody's making that argument. GW is still cheap enough that lots people don't care that other games offer 'better value', because GW has the more popular IP, and it's way easier to find opponents.

Those people should swap their location over to Australia or New Zealand once in a while.

 Azreal13 wrote:
It's well established that value is a moving target, but let's not conflate it with affordability.

Seems like value is such a moving target that it's basically irrelevant. You may object to a perceived conflation of affordability and value, but that's not really what anyone is saying.

There's no interpretation or argumentation about what's a better value or whatever. It's just part of the real world that the prices are such that people still build up back logs. No need to bring value in at all.

People talk and talk about how prices are what kept GW in their state of decline year in, year out, but now they've reversed their decline without changing their prices (except in a couple of areas: boxed games with lots of miniatures in them and start collecting boxes) I think it's safe to say that GW's pricing wasn't the main problem.

Their pricing was never insane. And still isn't.

"If only the ignorant fools knew what amazing value was available from other companies!!" and similar sentiments were just the projection of my own preferences onto others. The confusion of my own subjective sense of value with what other people should think was just an exercise in patting myself on the back for being one of the few who "really gets it."

Been there, done that, got over myself.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 John Prins wrote:
I don't think anybody's making that argument. GW is still cheap enough that lots people don't care that other games offer 'better value', because GW has the more popular IP, and it's way easier to find opponents.

GW's kits also actually offer something. The material. The excellent sculpting. A particular size. A specific art style. A build experience. And resistance to accidental damage.

These are real qualities that GW kits have and people are willing enough to pay for them in quantities that build up back logs. It may be true that some alternatives will have some of these qualities, but as soon as we go down that road we start getting into subjective value assessments. How much is it worth to someone that something is in GW cartoon style rather than a photo realistic one? A positive amount for some, a negative for others.

 Chamberlain wrote:
22So we have a situation where the prices are such that the customers can afford to collect not just what actually sees the table but enough to build a backlog of unpainted miniatures.1

This is not a new thing for 40k or hobbies in general.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Chamberlain wrote:
22So we have a situation where the prices are such that the customers can afford to collect not just what actually sees the table but enough to build a backlog of unpainted miniatures.1

This is not a new thing for 40k or hobbies in general.

Either it IS in that poster's neck of the woods, OR a yes man's gotta yes...

It's been true for as long as GW has operated. It has nothing to do with being a yes man or a new situation. It's just a fact that prices are such that GW's customers can afford not only the miniatures they paint and play with, but their back log as well.

Are they expensive? Absolutely. Are there some that give people sticker shock? For sure. Are they insane or too high or anything like that? Doesn't look like it.

When I saw the $45 Primaris characters, my reaction was "too high, no thanks!" but that doesn't mean my individual reaction says anything about what GW's prices should or should not be or whether or not they could, in any objective sense, be called insane.

Fortunately I can step out of my own shoes a bit and look at the real world and see what people other than me are up to.

 Chamberlain wrote:
I

When I saw the $45 Primaris characters, my reaction was "too high, no thanks!" but that doesn't mean my individual reaction says anything about what GW's prices should or should not be or whether or not they could, in any objective sense, be called insane.

But considering you can pick up a 5 man command squad for the same money, a unit that I'd imagine is like the Captain is a 1 maybe 2 of in a army kind of suggests GW does try it on a bit from time to time knowing, as others have pointed out, people will pay it

I'm curious to see what happens once the Codex cycle is complete if the warm 'n' fuzzys 8th has engendered in the faithful starts to wane

The only price I'm disappointed in at the moment would be the Witch Elf/Sisters of Slaughter box for AoS.

It was pricey when it came out - £35 for 10.

We then move a few years to the present day. An era where we've seen deliberate re-packs of some AoS units, where the content was doubled for a comparatively modest increase in price (Liberators spring to mind. Went from 5 to 10 in the box).

I was hoping something similar would happen with Witch Elf/Sisters of Slaughter.

But no. £35 they remain.

I'm not surprised at all about the witch elves not coming down in price. In the AOS thread I said I felt strongly they'd stay the same price as well.

It's just they've tweaked other sets in the AoS range - so seemed quite possible these lasses would follow suit. In terms of GW's pricing, they really do stand out as a 'surely they mean £25?'

These days I find it preferable to have a large backlog of Mantic, Dropfleet or Medge. GW is pricing me out of backlogging, by which I mean I have been selling off my old minis at rock bottom prices so I don't feel the urge to finish out projects by buying new minis.

@Bob - it's OKto sell GW at market prices - I've done pretty well this way, although it's taken a while.

 John Prins wrote:

That's generally my take on the issue. GW minis are expensive relative to the miniatures wargaming market, but it's still a relatively inexpensive hobby. I work with people who drop thousands of dollars on a snowmobile/quad bike/jet ski, another who restored a Mustang spending just shy of 20 grand over several years, and we're all making lower middle class incomes. A 40K army that costs even $1000 CAD (note you can do a lot cheaper) to build is relative chump change.

I've spent more money on cycling, firearms, and fitness related expenses than wargaming. Hobbies are expensive. I'm in lower middle class income in my 20s. This is with a 1000 spent on terrain, a forgeworld 30k army, and ten thousand points of various 40k armies.

It's extremely expensive for the younger audiences and the poor college student with a meal plan. Career without kids? Not too expensive to drop 100/mo on models. Going shooting, going to the mechanic to true your wheels before a century ride, monthly gym membership and supplements, all of these cost well over $100 if I do them once a month.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
These days I find it preferable to have a large backlog of Mantic, Dropfleet or Medge. GW is pricing me out of backlogging, by which I mean I have been selling off my old minis at rock bottom prices so I don't feel the urge to finish out projects by buying new minis.

Good man. I no longer play Kings of War, but the prices were solid. Dropfleet is priced nicely as well coming from a huge fan of DZC.

 Azreal13 wrote:
If someone wanted £10 for a cup of coffee, I could afford it, I just wouldn't see value in it.

Sure, but if you had a choice between £1 for a cup of coffee or £1.50 for a cup of coffee you probably wouldn't care about the price. You'd just buy whichever one was closer, or you liked the taste of better, etc. That £0.50 difference wouldn't be enough to motivate you to change your behavior, or even pay attention to it. And for many of us GW is in the same position. The cost for miniatures of any kind is so low that differences in price don't really matter.

 Stevefamine wrote:

 John Prins wrote:

That's generally my take on the issue. GW minis are expensive relative to the miniatures wargaming market, but it's still a relatively inexpensive hobby. I work with people who drop thousands of dollars on a snowmobile/quad bike/jet ski, another who restored a Mustang spending just shy of 20 grand over several years, and we're all making lower middle class incomes. A 40K army that costs even $1000 CAD (note you can do a lot cheaper) to build is relative chump change.

I've spent more money on cycling, firearms, and fitness related expenses than wargaming. Hobbies are expensive. I'm in lower middle class income in my 20s. This is with a 1000 spent on terrain, a forgeworld 30k army, and ten thousand points of various 40k armies.

It's extremely expensive for the younger audiences and the poor college student with a meal plan. Career without kids? Not too expensive to drop 100/mo on models. Going shooting, going to the mechanic to true your wheels before a century ride, monthly gym membership and supplements, all of these cost well over $100 if I do them once a month.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
These days I find it preferable to have a large backlog of Mantic, Dropfleet or Medge. GW is pricing me out of backlogging, by which I mean I have been selling off my old minis at rock bottom prices so I don't feel the urge to finish out projects by buying new minis.

Good man. I no longer play Kings of War, but the prices were solid. Dropfleet is priced nicely as well coming from a huge fan of DZC.

One thing I've noticed as I've gotten older is how much "value" (admittedly a subjective term) I get out of my miniatures. While the prices are expensive relative to the wargaming market, I've found that I get more time and enjoyment out of every dollar I spent on 40k. For example, I own several fire arms, which given the costs of them, addons, and ammunition, they've likely cost me more than 10 years of 40k. AND for the costs, I find myself spending more time with my models. Weekends spent playing games, evenings painting, hours throughout the day obsessing over what my next project is.

TLDR: I just seem to get more mileage out of 40k I guess.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
If someone wanted £10 for a cup of coffee, I could afford it, I just wouldn't see value in it.

Sure, but if you had a choice between £1 for a cup of coffee or £1.50 for a cup of coffee you probably wouldn't care about the price. You'd just buy whichever one was closer, or you liked the taste of better, etc. That £0.50 difference wouldn't be enough to motivate you to change your behavior, or even pay attention to it. And for many of us GW is in the same position. The cost for miniatures of any kind is so low that differences in price don't really matter.

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-NZ/Primaris-Space-Marines-Captain

Except nearly £40 isn't £1 vs £1.50 is it?

It's "shall I buy a takeaway coffee or buy a fething bean to cup machine!"

Besides, what you're saying is you'd be prepared to spend a small amount extra if you saw the value (better taste, convenient location) which is not the point I was making. The point I was making is just because somebody can afford to pay for something, it doesn't mean they'll do so if they don't see the value. Feel free to mentally substitute the prices and commodity in the example to something that allows you to better follow that.

 Azreal13 wrote:
https://www.games-workshop.com/en-NZ/Primaris-Space-Marines-Captain

Except nearly £40 isn't £1 vs £1.50 is it?

It's "shall I buy a takeaway coffee or buy a fething bean to cup machine!"

Shrug. It's $35. I just paid $850 for airplane rentals this past weekend. Whether that captain is $35 or $25 or even $5 makes no real difference in my budget choices. I suppose in some abstract sense it has a high price per model, but a $35 purchase that will cover my painting for the next week or two is just too small a number to bother caring about. Whether I buy the $35 space marine or the $15 X-Wing ship is going to be decided by whether I'd prefer to paint a starship or an infantry model, price isn't going to come into that decision at all.

(Now, I'm not actually going to buy the model because I have zero interest in space marines, but if there's a single 28mm infantry model that I want that costs $35 I'm clicking "buy" without worrying about the price. Hell, I've probably paid more than $35 for single OOP FW infantry models without thinking about it because, again, $35 is below the point where it's worth caring about the price.)

Once more...

The numbers aren't important.

It is irrelevant how much you paid for your plane, or how trivial that amount of money is to you in your privileged little bubble.

Whether something has value to someone has no connection to whether the person paying can afford it.

Literally every time I do a grocery shop I reject items that cost more because the premium doesn't justify itself to me or my needs, it has nothing to do with spending £3 on shampoo over £1.50 (or whatever.)

Affordability =\= value.

 Azreal13 wrote:
It is irrelevant how much you paid for your plane, or how trivial that amount of money is to you in your privileged little bubble.

It absolutely is relevant, because how much other things in your life cost defines how much you care about certain prices. My budget planning, at least in terms of optional expenses, is defined by how much my flying hobby costs. Whether or not the weather clears up for the upcoming weekend has a much bigger effect on my financial situation than any plausible miniatures purchase I can make this weekend. GW could double their prices and this would still be true. So, when the miniatures purchase is a negligible component of my overall spending, why should I care about differences in price there?

And, as I've said before, flying is just my personal budget limiter. Other people have other hobbies that exceed miniatures spending by safe margins and have mentioned them here.

Whether something has value to someone has no connection to whether the person paying can afford it.

Of course it does. Affordability is a huge component of value, because affordability determines how much attention you have to pay to price. If you're poor and struggling to cover the necessary expenses price is a huge factor, if you're a billionaire you don't even look at the price tag when you tell your assistant to go fetch whatever it is that you want. For the billionaire value is determined by other factors: aesthetics, time investment, etc. In my case the dollar cost of miniatures is almost irrelevant, and value is defined by time. The space marine has zero value to me because I don't want to invest my time into it. No matter what the price tag is, $5 or $50, I can afford to buy primaris captains faster than I can paint or use them. But I can't magically create more painting time.

Literally every time I do a grocery shop I reject items that cost more because the premium doesn't justify itself to me or my needs, it has nothing to do with spending £3 on shampoo over £1.50 (or whatever.)

You must pay a lot more attention to such things than most people.

Speaking to @Nosferatu71 without quoting a wall of text: tl;dr Getting older and more appreciation/enjoyment from models

A Space Marine Predator Tank kit at age 14 was worth the world to me. I could finally play a solid game with my Battle of Macragge Ultramarines. $40 was a big deal. I glued it together as fast as possible and sprayed painted it blue! After hanging out with a few girls, that tank gained dust for 2 years until I got back into Warhammer 40,000. That same Space Marine Predator Tank kit at age 17? It's the first model I spent hours and hours painting.

At age 26, this Forgeworld Hierodule has been 15 hours of fun and I'm still not finished. My 30k Black legion/Luna Wolves army? Easily 100 hours of painting/building and dozens of games ahead... which makes it affordable. New Age of Sigmar Army? I know for a fact I'll get hours and hours out of it before it hits the painting stage. A $1500 bicycle. I ride around 3k miles a year. Well worth it.

One point I want to make is - don't accumulate a backlog. You're not having fun with that unpainted XYZ army and thats why you dont have money for a roof repair on your house. Picking up a box or two and some paints is perfectly fine.

 Peregrine wrote:

Spoiler:

 Azreal13 wrote:
It is irrelevant how much you paid for your plane, or how trivial that amount of money is to you in your privileged little bubble.

It absolutely is relevant, because how much other things in your life cost defines how much you care about certain prices. My budget planning, at least in terms of optional expenses, is defined by how much my flying hobby costs. Whether or not the weather clears up for the upcoming weekend has a much bigger effect on my financial situation than any plausible miniatures purchase I can make this weekend. GW could double their prices and this would still be true. So, when the miniatures purchase is a negligible component of my overall spending, why should I care about differences in price there?

And, as I've said before, flying is just my personal budget limiter. Other people have other hobbies that exceed miniatures spending by safe margins and have mentioned them here.

Whether something has value to someone has no connection to whether the person paying can afford it.

Of course it does. Affordability is a huge component of value, because affordability determines how much attention you have to pay to price. If you're poor and struggling to cover the necessary expenses price is a huge factor, if you're a billionaire you don't even look at the price tag when you tell your assistant to go fetch whatever it is that you want. For the billionaire value is determined by other factors: aesthetics, time investment, etc. In my case the dollar cost of miniatures is almost irrelevant, and value is defined by time. The space marine has zero value to me because I don't want to invest my time into it. No matter what the price tag is, $5 or $50, I can afford to buy primaris captains faster than I can paint or use them. But I can't magically create more painting time.

Literally every time I do a grocery shop I reject items that cost more because the premium doesn't justify itself to me or my needs, it has nothing to do with spending £3 on shampoo over £1.50 (or whatever.)

You must pay a lot more attention to such things than most people.

You're not this stupid, so I'm beginning to suspect I've wandered into a "Peregrine is bored and wants to make it all about him" situation, so I'm out.

 Turnip Jedi wrote:

But considering you can pick up a 5 man command squad for the same money, a unit that I'd imagine is like the Captain is a 1 maybe 2 of in a army kind of suggests GW does try it on a bit from time to time knowing, as others have pointed out, people will pay it

I'm curious to see what happens once the Codex cycle is complete if the warm 'n' fuzzys 8th has engendered in the faithful starts to wane

Both great points.

I do really wonder what happens when the new edition launch boost goes away.

Maybe then without the additional demand from that, price will show a greater impact and I will be wrong about it not having a negative effect on GW.

 Azreal13 wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Spoiler:

 Azreal13 wrote:
It is irrelevant how much you paid for your plane, or how trivial that amount of money is to you in your privileged little bubble.

It absolutely is relevant, because how much other things in your life cost defines how much you care about certain prices. My budget planning, at least in terms of optional expenses, is defined by how much my flying hobby costs. Whether or not the weather clears up for the upcoming weekend has a much bigger effect on my financial situation than any plausible miniatures purchase I can make this weekend. GW could double their prices and this would still be true. So, when the miniatures purchase is a negligible component of my overall spending, why should I care about differences in price there?

And, as I've said before, flying is just my personal budget limiter. Other people have other hobbies that exceed miniatures spending by safe margins and have mentioned them here.

Whether something has value to someone has no connection to whether the person paying can afford it.

Of course it does. Affordability is a huge component of value, because affordability determines how much attention you have to pay to price. If you're poor and struggling to cover the necessary expenses price is a huge factor, if you're a billionaire you don't even look at the price tag when you tell your assistant to go fetch whatever it is that you want. For the billionaire value is determined by other factors: aesthetics, time investment, etc. In my case the dollar cost of miniatures is almost irrelevant, and value is defined by time. The space marine has zero value to me because I don't want to invest my time into it. No matter what the price tag is, $5 or $50, I can afford to buy primaris captains faster than I can paint or use them. But I can't magically create more painting time.

Literally every time I do a grocery shop I reject items that cost more because the premium doesn't justify itself to me or my needs, it has nothing to do with spending £3 on shampoo over £1.50 (or whatever.)

You must pay a lot more attention to such things than most people.

You're not this stupid, so I'm beginning to suspect I've wandered into a "Peregrine is bored and wants to make it all about him" situation, so I'm out.

I was feeling the urge to also join in but just can't be bothered. It seems a while since the "I'm rich and GW stuff is cheap to me so screw you all" attitude appeared on dakka.
I find it hard to believe some people are still like that with a game mainly aimed at young teens. I know there's a lot of us older folk that still like our toy soldiers, but when that young generation are priced out, and the whales move on... what then?