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.

I'm looking forward to getting my copy of the game, just wish they would stop using Blanche's artwork...

Mick

So I was watching Pirates of the Caribbean today and yeah...I'm kinda thinking I want this now.

So I've pretty much done a complete 180 on this product...thinking nothing of it before I saw pictures to wanting to give it a spin a few days after I'd taken everything in.

Is anyone else in my boat?
(pun intended)

Hi all

Here is GW Dreadfleet product brochure
http://www.scribd.com/doc/65622016/Dread-Fleet-Product-Brief

notprop wrote:GW site is saying that 25% of web stock has been sold in 2 days.

This is either not bad going or clumsy sales techniques. YMDC!

Clumsy sales techniques. Given how front-loaded the costs of making plastic kits are, it's stupid to limit themselves to only a week's worth of sales. They will never get a repeat sale or a sale from word of mouth because by the time people have experienced the game themselves, it will be out of stock.

@ Spellscape- Nice find! I downloaded the pdf, it's easier to read that way. 2 Dreadfleet battle reports in the white dwarf, not that that's a surprise... but I'll definitely be picking that up.

insaniak wrote:Although obviously the 'limited edition' tag skews things somewhat. I suspect that a very large proportion of these will sell to people who will never play it. These will be the same people who buy all the 'Web Exclusive' models and whatever Limited Edition models they can get their hands on. Not because they like the models, or because they intend to use them, but simply because they're 'limited edition'...

Hey, it seems to draw a pretty correct portrait of myself ! I'm just like, though I don't know why... I'm currently considering buying the Special Edition Gears of War 3 XBOX 360, while my current one still works ! I cannot help it, sorry...

JOHIRA wrote:(ex: the Empire ship, with a GIANT HAMMERMAN on the prow for no good reason)

Smashing the enemy ships to bits, maybe?

Still, on topic, I am mildly excited about this... As I am not a huge fan of pirates, but I think the models are really original, so are definitely worth a shot... I think it is still good to see GW developing "new" things. Ok, it's not too far from Man'O'War, but obviously they wanted to take a somewhat different route than this game.

I also have a theory about the "limited edition" concept, though I don't have any marketing / sales background to back it up.

1. Developing a new game / concept / thing is expensive, and for a firm, means it is hazardous.

2. How do you reduce the risk? By making sure you'll sell enouh copies.

3. So you calculate the overall costs / investments / salaries needed for the project, then you determine how much you'll need to sell to get profit out of it. As I have no figures availabale, let's say 10,000.

4. Then is the catch :

You just release it, and HOPE for people to buy it... Depending on marketing, theme, execution, Dystopian Wars releases, etc... You estimate you will sell in between 5,000 and 20,000. Which leaves a huge risk in it ! You might sell a lot, but over a long period of time. OR you might sell not enough, thus proving to COST you more, not considering the "splash" damage (storage space for unsold products, etc...). The thing is, people will be less inclined to the "impulse buy" syndrome, and considering the cost, a lot would probably put it aside, waiting for another opportunity to buy it... which might never come

You brand it "Limited Edition", and decide for 12,000 copies. What happens ? Due to the symptom insaniak described in my first quote, YOU WILL SELL THEM ALL, and IN A SHORT TIME. So, you sold 12,000 copies ; that's possibly 8,000 less than if it had been "unlimited", but also 7,000 more than the bottom line, if things had gone wrong.

What do you think is the most reasonable for a firm that already has financial issues ?
A steady, confirmed (but short-spanned) influx of money, with no or little risk ; or an equally possible huge loss / huge gain gamble ?

As mentioned I do not have any figures / studies available to support my theory, but I just think it makes sense.

AlexHolker wrote:

notprop wrote:GW site is saying that 25% of web stock has been sold in 2 days.

This is either not bad going or clumsy sales techniques. YMDC!

Clumsy sales techniques. Given how front-loaded the costs of making plastic kits are, it's stupid to limit themselves to only a week's worth of sales. They will never get a repeat sale or a sale from word of mouth because by the time people have experienced the game themselves, it will be out of stock.

Yeah, that annoys the gak out of me. It doesn't make any sense and I don't understand why they're doing it at all.

The problem is that there is just no history to this game - so most folks I know are very reluctant to put a large sum of money down for something they're not even sure they'd like. Space Hulk had history behind it - and they even stressed it was a refinement of existing Space Hulk rules. The premise was always the same for it.

This? No history at all. People would want to wait to see if it's any good - especially since those ships really aren't interchangeable elsewhere. At least with Space Hulk, if it was a bust for you there was Space Marine and Tyranid players who could use what you had (or you yourself could use them similarly.) Heck, the Space Hulk Terminators are practically a Deathwing Army in themselves (Master, Librarian, 2 5 man squads, objective. Throw in a Dreadnought or Land Raider and you're golden!).

And they have not limited themselves to one week of sales just one production run.

The idea is that they do not need repeat sales or word of mouth.

Sell it as quickly as possible and count the money in.

Although in a sense they will be doing this again assuming that the continue to make one BFG ("Big Fething Game") box every year. For all of the deriding of GW management that goes on here I'm sure all can recognise that they will like the idea of a pre-Christmas cash grab every year.

AlexHolker wrote:

notprop wrote:GW site is saying that 25% of web stock has been sold in 2 days.

This is either not bad going or clumsy sales techniques. YMDC!

Clumsy sales techniques. Given how front-loaded the costs of making plastic kits are, it's stupid to limit themselves to only a week's worth of sales. They will never get a repeat sale or a sale from word of mouth because by the time people have experienced the game themselves, it will be out of stock.

Word of mouth has gotten 'round that James Cameron's Avatar is a decent enough movie. Went to the cinema yesterday.. but they're not showing it anymore. Given how front-loaded the costs of making a movie like this is, it's kinda stupid of the studio to limit themselves to only a couple of weeks worth of ticket sales. They will never get a repeat sale of a sale from word of mouth because by the time people have experienced the movie and could recommend it, it will no longer be in theaters.

More seriously, the more expensive and "front-loaded" the costs of production are for GW, the more they'll be forced to re-coup it with "blockbuster-style" sales over shorter and shorter periods. Noone cares about those few odd hundred stragglers in two months or six months time. By that time, they're pushing Necrons, or Bretonnians, or 40K 6th Edition, or The Hobbit Miniature Game. Plastic moulds might be quite pricy, but shelf-space, ads and, not least, short-lived internet-hype to generate decent turn-over are far more fickle and expensive still.

Spellscape wrote:Hi all

Here is GW Dreadfleet product brochure
http://www.scribd.com/doc/65622016/Dread-Fleet-Product-Brief

So, did you guys check out the PDF at this link? It's really good!

Zweischneid wrote:... it's kinda stupid of the studio to limit themselves to only a couple of weeks worth of ticket sales.

Good thing they get to follow it up with DVD and streaming download sales from now to eternity then, isn't it?

RiTides wrote:

Spellscape wrote:Hi all

Here is GW Dreadfleet product brochure
http://www.scribd.com/doc/65622016/Dread-Fleet-Product-Brief

So, did you guys check out the PDF at this link? It's really good!

Stupid bloody work computer wont show the stupid bloody PDF!

Any chance of a kind soul posting direct link or attaching it here?

insaniak wrote:

Zweischneid wrote:... it's kinda stupid of the studio to limit themselves to only a couple of weeks worth of ticket sales.

Good thing they get to follow it up with DVD and streaming download sales from now to eternity then, isn't it?

Have you been to a Blockbuster Video Rental recently? Or a store selling DvDs? They stock the newest releases sky-high, rent or sell them for a big premium and than make room for next-weeks release. Online places like Netflix don't do it differently. They even flank it these days with ads for "DvD-releases" (seen the ads of XY NOW on DVD!?) Yes, admittedly, it's a second bump to get some cash on the production, but it follows the "blockbuster-logic" of sales just as much as the initial theatrical release.

It's a similar dynamic wherever you look. A cheap independent/art-movie can affort to run a slow-circus through the festivals and build word of mouth. A multi-million-dollar action flick needs a quick return. You're average Janet from Ohio wrote a novel book can work on a long-perspective to re-coup its costs on small runs. A multi-million-dollar author like Mrs. Harry Potter can only be profitable if you work a hype.

The point is, there is an inverse relationship between a big up-front investment and the window of time needed to recoup it. And this applies to mini-gaming (and GW) too. The more "expensive" they get (plastic instead of pewter to old metal-prices; full-colour hard copy instead of b&w saddle-stich; lots of ads, videos, etc..), the more they will need to work a hype to make it worth their while. The "long tail" of stragglers matters less and less. They just don't weight into the equation enough.

cincydooley wrote:

12thRonin wrote:And ignoring PP's daily blog posts that show things going on along with a couple previews of new releases every week.

Dude. They hardly update daily. You're smoking some dank if you actually think that.

What I think is irrelevant to what I see them do. Or you know, you could actually look. The insider is updated daily during the week and there is usually at least a couple new releases posted every week.

You can download it from http://www.scribd.com/doc/65622016/Dread-Fleet-Product-Brief using DOWNLOAD button at the bottom of page

Nowt but a page of errors for me, did I mention the stupid bloody work computer?

Zweischneid wrote:Have you been to a Blockbuster Video Rental recently? Or a store selling DvDs? They stock the newest releases sky-high, rent or sell them for a big premium and than make room for next-weeks release. Online places like Netflix don't do it differently. They even flank it these days with ads for "DvD-releases" (seen the ads of XY NOW on DVD!?) Yes, admittedly, it's a second bump to get some cash on the production, but it follows the "blockbuster-logic" of sales just as much as the initial theatrical release.

You missed the point, somewhat.

You were trying to use the fact that cinemas only play movies for a few weeks to illustrate a problem with the claim that producing a game for a limited time was a short sighted idea.

My counter point was that movies are in no way the same kettle of squig. Dreadfleet will be available for a few weeks or months, and then it will be gone. GW will make no more money from it, unless they decide to re-release it somewhere down the track.

The studio that made Avatar, on the other hand, made money from it at the cinema. They then make more money from DVD sales... and will continue to do so for as long as DVDs are sold. And as long after that as Blu Rays are sold. And as long after that as flash drive movies are sold. And for as long as websites offer pay-per-view downloads. And that's not even mentioning all of the spin-off licencing. Movies are not a one-shot deal. The initial cinema exposure is just the initial pay-cheque.

insaniak wrote:

Zweischneid wrote:Have you been to a Blockbuster Video Rental recently? Or a store selling DvDs? They stock the newest releases sky-high, rent or sell them for a big premium and than make room for next-weeks release. Online places like Netflix don't do it differently. They even flank it these days with ads for "DvD-releases" (seen the ads of XY NOW on DVD!?) Yes, admittedly, it's a second bump to get some cash on the production, but it follows the "blockbuster-logic" of sales just as much as the initial theatrical release.

You missed the point, somewhat.

I think you missed the point somewhat as well. Yes, there are differences between GW and a movie studio. But both (increasingly) rely on a short-term, massive sale ("hype") to recoup their costs. A billion-dollar movie like Avatar can not turn from profitable to non-profitable from a trickle of DvD-sales a year on. It's "too big" for that. It needs to be "profitable" (e.g. return it's investment) fast. If some added pocket-money flows in still a year later, fine, but it's not relevant to the calculation of the studio. They calculate on a fairly short-term plan. Costs of production + costs of marketing + costs of screening + interests to loans vs. expected income in the first few weeks = profit or bust. Everything after that is too small and too late to matter.

The same applies to GW production (and marketing, etc..) costs. A cheap little pewter mould can re-coup its costs over the long run. A plastic mould 100-times as expensive needs to bring in the profit in 1/100th the time; or the interests on your investment will eat you up.

Agreed
Maybe anyone remembers 3 movies from 80's - they had great movie run
If I remember correctly they was called Star Wars :-)

Sidstyler wrote:Yeah, that annoys the gak out of me. It doesn't make any sense and I don't understand why they're doing it at all.

But why do you give a monkey's about whether not they're making as much money out of it as they could? You don't know what the profit level is on a one-off product like this, so it's rather pointless getting all self-righteous about issues of principle. It is what it is - a limited run, self-contained pirate game that either floats your boat or doesn't.

Zweischneid wrote:I think you missed the point somewhat as well. Yes, there are differences between GW and a movie studio. But both (increasingly) rely on a short-term, massive sale ("hype") to recoup their costs.

Sure. Except the movie studios do it because leaving a movie at the cinema for too long just winds up costing them money, as they're using up screens that could be used more productively for the next movie.

Movies limit their own lifespan, as people will only go to the cinema so many times to see the same movie. So you make your initial influx of cash, and then you move onto to secondary income streams.

Boardgames (just like DVDs) will potentially keep selling for as long as you leave them on the shelf. GW have chosen not to do that in this case, where movie studios do. They're apples and oranges.

A billion-dollar movie like Avatar can not turn from profitable to non-profitable from a trickle of DvD-sales a year on.

It was more in the region of $250 to $500 million. And:
"Avatar has beaten The Dark Knight to become the fastest-selling home entertainment release of all time in the US. It sold 6.7m copies in four days – 4m on DVD and 2.7m on Blu-ray – racking up $130m (£84.1m) for studio 20th Century Fox."

In 4 days? I'm not sure I'd call that a trickle, personally.

The same applies to GW production (and marketing, etc..) costs. A cheap little pewter mould can re-coup its costs over the long run. A plastic mould 100-times as expensive needs to bring in the profit in 1/100th the time; or the interests on your investment will eat you up.

That still doesn't make the decision to limit production of the game the only viable choice. By that logic, every plastic kit GW produce would be sold as a limited edition.

insaniak wrote:

Boardgames (just like DVDs) will potentially keep selling for as long as you leave them on the shelf. GW have chosen not to do that in this case, where movie studios do. They're apples and oranges.

No. No longer. Those Boardgames (and DVD) oranges are increasingly becoming more and more like apples. That was the entire point.

insaniak wrote:"Avatar has beaten The Dark Knight to become the fastest-selling home entertainment release of all time in the US. It sold 6.7m copies in four days – 4m on DVD and 2.7m on Blu-ray – racking up $130m (£84.1m) for studio 20th Century Fox."

In 4 days? I'm not sure I'd call that a trickle, personally.

You are making my point. DVD-sales have, over the past couple of years, likewise increasingly become a "blockbuster-style" business. They stock truck-loads of DVDs on the initial release, put up ads on the wall, on TV (AVATAR RESEASED on DVD May 5th! DONT MISS IT), etc.. . And after the first few days, they clear the shelf-space for next weeks hype. DVDs (like Boardgames and movies in theatre) end up costing more money than they make if they sit on the shelf for too long (even if it's the non-public shelf in the warehouse of an online-seller). They turn large volumes initially, than move on to the next big thing.

That still doesn't make the decision to limit production of the game the only viable choice. By that logic, every plastic kit GW produce would be sold as a limited edition.

In five or ten-years time, I would fully expect that they will if they continue the current trend of moving continously upwards in production quality/costs (though some would get "repeat-hypes/bumps" such as .. say.. the Landraider-kit which can go through multiple "hypes" with different Space Marine releases).

The Sisters of Battle stuff shows plainly that it is not very attractive for them to have "old stuff" around that people "expect" to be updated at some point, sort of an "entitlement" to eternal support. At some point, I fully expect at least the "lesser armies" in 40K and WFB too to become "limited releases" (buy now or bust) that stand alongside the bigger stuff like Space Marines.

Zweischneid wrote:... And after the first few days, they clear the shelf-space for next weeks hype.

But they don't stop selling last week's hype. They just move their focus, and let the last great thing continue to bubble along in its own time in the background.

Which was pretty much the entire point here.

insaniak wrote:

Zweischneid wrote:... And after the first few days, they clear the shelf-space for next weeks hype.

But they don't stop selling last week's hype. They just move their focus, and let the last great thing continue to bubble along in its own time in the background.

Which was pretty much the entire point here.

Yes they do. But it's so miniscule that it doesn't factor into the business model. That is pretty much the entire point. They could just as well do the DVD's as a (sufficiently large) limited release. The fraction of a percent that follows after the initial binge doesn't matter.. it's just there because (unlike GW shelf-space) it costs them next to nothing to keep it there. With the much higher running costs from GW to keep things "in stock", it makes more sense to cut the "long tail" of trickle-sales after the initial hype, similar to how theatres stop showing movies at some point because it would cost them more than it makes them (and hence we return to my initial analogy).

I'm guessing that DVD companies don't waste resources printing new copies of a release from 2005 to keep them on the shelves either. Remaining copies end up in the Walmart bargain bin or similar, once gone you buy them used on ebay or amazon or what ever. Takes time and dollars to switch production from a new release to make a limited run of an old release. And there is also the opportunity cost of not spooling up for the next week's new releases as you revisit the old.

Incidently 65,000 copies at £70 so thats £4,550,000 possible Turnover generated, potentially in less than a month.

If their usual product costs are used (i would imagine these to be too low for a one-off product like this) @ 27% they will generate over £3.3M of Gross profit. Even if that were slightly higher I wouls say its still £3M.

Thats why they are gambling on a pirate box game. Any option to turn that into a new line would probably only dilute that effect.

Note: done this in a rush on the way out the door but there are many other factors to consider and shouldn't be thought of as cast in stone.

There that should stoke the flames for a few hours!

12thRonin wrote:

cincydooley wrote:

12thRonin wrote:And ignoring PP's daily blog posts that show things going on along with a couple previews of new releases every week.

Dude. They hardly update daily. You're smoking some dank if you actually think that.

What I think is irrelevant to what I see them do. Or you know, you could actually look. The insider is updated daily during the week and there is usually at least a couple new releases posted every week.

This just isn't true. No 9/12. No 9/5-9/7. It's clear that starting in August they've made an effort to get more updates on the blog. For the majority of August, they were every other day. They're certainly getting better. The most recent blog post is more or less worthless and only shows a poorly painted miniature.

My point in all of this was that GW does online updating better than any other wargaming company. It wasn't to bash Privateer.

notprop wrote:And they have not limited themselves to one week of sales just one production run.

One production run so small that a single weekend of pre-orders has substantially cut into their stock.

The idea is that they do not need repeat sales or word of mouth.

Maybe they don't need repeat sales or word of mouth. For that matter, I don't need five million dollars. That doesn't mean I'd turn it down.

And everything Zweischneid says is wrong. Always, on every topic. This includes claims that a movie that was in cinemas for over two months didn't give enough time for word of mouth to get around.

Zweischneid wrote:

insaniak wrote:

Zweischneid wrote:... And after the first few days, they clear the shelf-space for next weeks hype.

But they don't stop selling last week's hype. They just move their focus, and let the last great thing continue to bubble along in its own time in the background.

Which was pretty much the entire point here.

Yes they do. But it's so miniscule that it doesn't factor into the business model. That is pretty much the entire point. They could just as well do the DVD's as a (sufficiently large) limited release. The fraction of a percent that follows after the initial binge doesn't matter.. it's just there because (unlike GW shelf-space) it costs them next to nothing to keep it there. With the much higher running costs from GW to keep things "in stock", it makes more sense to cut the "long tail" of trickle-sales after the initial hype, similar to how theatres stop showing movies at some point because it would cost them more than it makes them (and hence we return to my initial analogy).

A discontinued Item is different from a item that is not the flavor of the week but its still on sale. Also I dont know how you can establish posterior sales are irrelevant since all it takes is a new tv show or movie or game etc to pump that old movie back on sales...
For example imagine GW discontinues 40k and years later release ultramarine movie and a videogame... wanna bet the interest for the tabletop game rises? Imagine what happens if its no longer for sale.