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.

They buy from Dark Sphere's 25% off prices or better, add their 15%ish margin and sell to ROW at 10% off RRP?

My issue with all of this is the total lack of "control" wayland has. What's stopping GW from simply adding another line in the "agreement" (I dont see how its an agreement when its basically forced) and stopping this loophole tomorrow?

It's obvious GW cares very little about its "Relationships" . I mean Im sure the former UK local game stores thought they had good relationships with GW up until they were crushed under their boot then paved over to make way for the GW retail stores. There is a reason the northeast has none of these stores, at least in pittsburgh we fought to prevent them ever coming here

Where ever GW stores go only pestilence, death and sorrow follow!

rich1231 wrote:

Orlanth wrote:When Weyland opens up direct trade beyond Europe GW is in its right to cease trading with them. Such an act is entirely within their 'profile'. Weyland must have seen this.

Therefore either the sale to 'RoW' is to be done by a third party, or a third party will be needed to stock Weyland Games. Weyland is opting for the latter which will require active ongoing deception. The DTI might have something to say about that.

What Weyland Games and GW are doing in itself is perfectly legal, I'm not so sure about the third party, as they will need to conceal business records in order to remain veiled.

Please reconsider your post. As we have already stated, what we are doing is fully and completely legal and abides by all trade terms and conditions of sale we purchase stock under.

And the name is Wayland


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sorry for extra post.. just want to post this as its also posted on another fora.

Guys and girls, a few times we have seen mention of why don't GW just cut us off or that we must be doing something untoward to achieve our solution.

I can assure you as already stated we are not breaching any terms or conditions of sale. And what we are doing is also legal in every way that we can test.

We are well aware of the commercial risks. However, we have traditionally had a great relationship with GW and I know deep down they are aware and appreciate our efforts to get their product "out there" to a wider audience. Of course, there are a whole host of legal issues involved in the major market player discontinuing supply which I am sure GW are aware of. However, that aside, we at Wayland genuinely believe there to be a commercial solution which we can agree with GW which is good for them, good for us and good for all our customers wherever they may live!

Rich I understand its legal
But its also legal for them to stop supplying you and preventing you from selling their product as well if they deem it fit
After their little exercise with the embargo do you really think theyd somehow be above not supplying a company, as useful as you are( so were the other global retailers) because they know your not playing the game they want you to play?

Again its not the legality thats the issue, its GW who will just cut you off completely if they find out because they don't want money going into you guys
They've already proven they're not above such tactics
But rest assured I will definitely looking into RoW and how its going and making purchases if it remains available. Of this your guranteed

Kirasu - it is an agreement because you are not FORCED to buy stock at below retail -you can buy at retail prices if you wish.

I still dont see how it fits the "spirit" of the agreement either - the spirit has been well defined by GW, and UK courts do have great lassitude in determining "spirit", especially in B2B contracts.

That is pretty much forced still.. Sure you can buy at retail prices but then you're out of business. Its like if food was suddenly 4000x the cost.. No, you dont *have* to buy it but then you starve

What im saying is that because for all intents and purposes of RUNNING a business you must accept whatever gibberish GW throws at you.. Therefore GW can simply change a line in the agreement and you must accept it, or go out of business hence the precarious nature of trying to bypass rules that can be changed overnight. What's stopping GW from changing the agreement again AND locking wayland out to make them an example to the world of what happens when you dont do what you're told?

Yes wayland sells a lot of miniatures, but are those sales going to vanish if they do? Probably not and GW knows this. People will buy elsewhere and a small percentage perhaps wont buy anything. From a strategic viewpoint Wayland holds very little leverage and has everything to lose. Like I said before, this only makes sense if they were going to go out of business because domestic sales cant keep them afloat

Kirasu, my guess is that you are not a european competition law expert.

Nope, but Id enjoy Gw's customers taking them to court just to see what would happen. Laws are very easily circumvented and ignored. Unless you're willing to take them to court and pay the money required to win then it matters little.

I wish wayland all the luck in the world to fighting the evil empire that is GW, but if your revenue is derived from someone else *allowing* you to sell their stuff.. then its possibly a bad idea to piss them off

If they can pull it off, go for it.. but I cant imagine GW not going after them a sledgehammer. By the time a court case is decided the company may be out of business anyway so what purpose does that serve? I could be wrong, but if the opinion of someones internal lawyers was 100% correct then there would never be any lawsuits right? Since everyone shares the same opinion on what is legal obviously!

He's obviously making decisions based on research and review that he conducted in determining this course of action. Kirasu you're treating it as if Wayland is "business as normal" with GW, but they're obviously doing something different to make this work. I don't think anyone outside the EU should be making any ascertions about how this will playout legally.

Kirasu - no, if you business is 100% reliant on a single source, then you havea crappy business model.

To compare miniatures, where there are plenty of competing brands, to "food", which has no competition (apart from good whiskey, of course ), is inane.

What GW are doing (using TM law to restrict export of goods outside the EEA) is tried and tested case law.

I think the implication of what rich1231 said is that they're approaching it more from an unfair competition side of EU law. Something to the degree that GW isn't making this decision out of preserving sales regions, so much as it is to constrain what is otherwise fair competition.

The EU cannot regulate outside of the EEA, and has already stated that you are perfectly, 100% legally entitled to restrict the export or import of your trademarked goods to or from the EU. See levis vs tescos for a start.
So thats a "no" on two counts there.

What that has to do with competition law is beyond me. I'm just trying to interpret what he's said. Maybe you're a lawyer and have a stronger sense of whats going on, but given what he's said you should at least be able to focus in on the area of law thats governing their point of view.

I'm of the belief they're simply buying their RoW stock from a wholesale distributor to allow them to get around having to contractually follow GW's rules on that merchandise.

Because the use of imports and exports law to control where products get sent has already been tested in court?>

It isnt a case of "unfair competition", as the Australian market is not solely GW

rich1231 wrote:

Orlanth wrote:When Weyland opens up direct trade beyond Europe GW is in its right to cease trading with them. Such an act is entirely within their 'profile'. Weyland must have seen this.

Therefore either the sale to 'RoW' is to be done by a third party, or a third party will be needed to stock Weyland Games. Weyland is opting for the latter which will require active ongoing deception. The DTI might have something to say about that.

What Weyland Games and GW are doing in itself is perfectly legal, I'm not so sure about the third party, as they will need to conceal business records in order to remain veiled.

Please reconsider your post. As we have already stated, what we are doing is fully and completely legal and abides by all trade terms and conditions of sale we purchase stock under.

And the name is Wayland

There is nothing to reconsider, the post you quoted states that what you (and GW) is doing is within the law. Highlighted.

Weyland is opting for the latter which will require active ongoing deception.

That would imply practice that is not within the spirit of terms and conditions of the agreement.

Asuron wrote:
But its also legal for them to stop supplying you and preventing you from selling their product as well if they deem it fit

+1 any company has a right to stop trading unless you are trading within a fixed term of contract.

If Wayland has a signed contract (and GW doesn't have the right in the contract to change the terms) then Gw can do nothing if Wayland beaches the Rest of World sales policy. As GW is making such policies it must have power to enforce them somehow, either through new distribution contracts available at an end of period cycle or a clause that allows GW to change resale terms.

If Wayland has a distributors/retailers contract GW is within their rights to not renew it. If GW has power in ther contract to chasnge resale terms and Wayland fails to comply with the new terms thwen GW may consider its contract with Wayland breached if sales beyond prescribed limits continue after the date of change.

If there is no specific sales contract then GW can simply choose to stop seling to Wayland as and when it wants to (which will be as soon as they realise Wayland is still selling south of the Med.)

If GW has no right to change resale terms in a contract everyone would be doing what Wayland are doing, and/or GW will be seen to be making totally unenforcable threats.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:

Weyland is opting for the latter which will require active ongoing deception.

That would imply practice that is not within the spirit of terms and conditions of the agreement.

By the third party. Wayland has protested innocence, which is not necessary as there was no accusation to begin with. But GW will try to stop selling to them, Wayland must have a way around that, which is legal for them but may well go beyond the bounds of transparent business practice for those who supply Wayland. Rich1231 has rightly protested Waylands own innocence but issued no comment on his future suppliers, which are looking increasingly likely not to be Games Workshop longterm.

Wayland Games intends to directly openly breach GW's sales limits. There has to be some sort of consequence for that or everyone would be ignoring GW's new rules as corporate histrionics, after all they are unpopular enough.

+1 any company has a right to stop trading unless you are trading within a fixed term of contract.

Guess you have never read one, I have read an australian "terms of trade" they are agreement they are not fixed time contracts, they also have a line saying that GW can change the terms of the agreement at any time. Any time there is a change they send you out a new one to sign, if you dont sign it then they wont supply you at trade

filbert wrote:

AesSedai wrote:

Filbert wrote:

I have had an order waiting with them for two weeks now and nary a squeak - still processing apparently

You too? By the way, where did you get that info? I have been really patient with them and will continue to be patient but I wonder how long it'll take?

It's on their front page, under the heading 'Citadel Finecast Delays'

http://www.maelstromgames.co.uk/

To be honest, I swore I wouldn't order from them again; last time I shopped with them my order took ~2 weeks or so but I thought I would give them another shot. Not sure when stuff will ship this time - all it says is 'processing'. According to their shipping FAQ:

Maelstrom FAQ wrote:Orders placed before noon will be processed and (stock willing) sent out the same day; orders placed after noon will be processed and sent the day after. Quite obviously, we do not send items on weekends (we would like some time off!), so if you place your order between noon on Friday and before noon on Monday morning, it will be processed on Monday.

However, it is inevitable that some items could be out of stock when you place your order. In such cases we will order your item from the relevant manufacturer on the same day, which will usually take 2-3 working days to fulfil - so beware bank holidays!

I waited 3 weeks for my Maesltrom order. Half a year ago they'd be on a plane in under 10 days.

Asuron wrote:

rich1231 wrote:

Orlanth wrote:When Weyland opens up direct trade beyond Europe GW is in its right to cease trading with them. Such an act is entirely within their 'profile'. Weyland must have seen this.

Therefore either the sale to 'RoW' is to be done by a third party, or a third party will be needed to stock Weyland Games. Weyland is opting for the latter which will require active ongoing deception. The DTI might have something to say about that.

What Weyland Games and GW are doing in itself is perfectly legal, I'm not so sure about the third party, as they will need to conceal business records in order to remain veiled.

Please reconsider your post. As we have already stated, what we are doing is fully and completely legal and abides by all trade terms and conditions of sale we purchase stock under.

And the name is Wayland


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sorry for extra post.. just want to post this as its also posted on another fora.

Guys and girls, a few times we have seen mention of why don't GW just cut us off or that we must be doing something untoward to achieve our solution.

I can assure you as already stated we are not breaching any terms or conditions of sale. And what we are doing is also legal in every way that we can test.

We are well aware of the commercial risks. However, we have traditionally had a great relationship with GW and I know deep down they are aware and appreciate our efforts to get their product "out there" to a wider audience. Of course, there are a whole host of legal issues involved in the major market player discontinuing supply which I am sure GW are aware of. However, that aside, we at Wayland genuinely believe there to be a commercial solution which we can agree with GW which is good for them, good for us and good for all our customers wherever they may live!

Rich I understand its legal
But its also legal for them to stop supplying you and preventing you from selling their product as well if they deem it fit
After their little exercise with the embargo do you really think theyd somehow be above not supplying a company, as useful as you are( so were the other global retailers) because they know your not playing the game they want you to play?

Again its not the legality thats the issue, its GW who will just cut you off completely if they find out because they don't want money going into you guys
They've already proven they're not above such tactics
But rest assured I will definitely looking into RoW and how its going and making purchases if it remains available. Of this your guranteed

Legally possible sure, feasible i dont quite think so. GW`s sales numbers are getting worse (you can check it on last/this year annual report, from 2005 to present) i would even dare say they are at an all time low or close to it (since 2005 they have lost around 20-25% of their sales), i dont think its quite possible to cut 1 of their biggest retailers off, at least not at present time.

xxvaderxx wrote:
Legally possible sure, feasible i dont quite think so. GW`s sales numbers are getting worse (you can check it on last/this year annual report, from 2005 to present) i would even dare say they are at an all time low or close to it (since 2005 they have lost around 20-25% of their sales), i dont think its quite possible to cut 1 of their biggest retailers off, at least not at present time.

GW can afford to stop selling to Wayland. The only actual losses from their point of view will be any sales from a Wayland brick and mortar store. So for example if Wayland sells x stock to European online customers, those same customers will buy x stock from another internet retailer a few minutes after they find they cannot buy from Wayland, this doesnt take into account those customers who are disillusioned because of Games Workshops policies, however Waylands sales status is ancillary to that. GW will not in itself be affected by the action of ceasing trading with Wayland unless Wayland has some form of contractual rights to the contrary.

rattman wrote:
Guess you have never read one, I have read an australian "terms of trade" they are agreement they are not fixed time contracts, they also have a line saying that GW can change the terms of the agreement at any time. Any time there is a change they send you out a new one to sign, if you dont sign it then they wont supply you at trade

Ok, interesting and thankyou. However UK 'terms of trade' are what are at issue here. I haven't seen one of those either, am having to cover all the bases as to how this can work out, and am still coming back to the conclusion that is Wayland don't do as GW demand, GW will stop supplying Wayland.

IM from New Zealand and I got this from Wayland this morning regarding an order I made around May 21st this year.
Im absolutely appalled by this.
Ive been waiting nearly a month for them to tell me this.
This was ordered well prior to the date change.
So much for there special stock and plans.

Message below

Hello


We are contacting you Regarding Recent Order No 110517-065314-6491

Unfortunately the Space Marine Thunderfire Cannon is no longer available from us.

We have refunded your order in full for you.

Please accept our apologies for the inconvenience caused here.

Regards
Craig


Ticket ID: KLRK-026330
Subject: Waylandgames Regarding Recent Order No 110517-065314-6491
Department: General
Priority: Low
Status: Closed

Better order direct from GW.

Is it a metal model and therefore was withdrawn for nifecats?
then caught up with the GW export farago?

Pain in the antipodes but possibly not entirely Wayland's fault.
Cripes, really £30 for that kit?

Kilkrazy wrote:Better order direct from GW.

Yeah, good news is it's probably a F ne Ca t Mo el by now.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Because the use of imports and exports law to control where products get sent has already been tested in court?>

It isnt a case of "unfair competition", as the Australian market is not solely GW

My point is that Wayland says they have a way to do this legally. That they want to be hush on their exact method to allow them an edge in the market and by inference keep GW from further changing rules. They have implied that they are relying on legal advice pertaining to EU competition law as a basis for that.

You can either assume they're lying about what little they've said or believe them. I tend to believe them since they haven't given me any reason to think they'd lie.

They are doing this. So its silly continue to say that "the just can't" because of "X" reason. Maybe they are breaking the law, but they have some legal basis, at least in their minds, for their particular posturing. That's what I'm interested in, but if you brush off their notion of why everything will be okay, than we can't really dig for information to try to understand Wayland's approach better.

Gaz,

I know its annoying however.. just to explain.

The Thunderfire cannon is a direct only item and is really clearly marked as such. They are items subject to availability.

At the moment we place our direct only orders with GW.. then then sit on some of them for a few days and sometimes they sit on them for 3 weeks or more. Then the ship what they have available which often (especially at the moment with metals being pulled randomly without us ever being informed) has some items removed. We then have to pass that news on to the customer.

We know its a pain to wait and then have bad news but with regards to Direct only we are totally at the whim of GW.

Aka - the post was suggesting you could use EU comp law to regulate GW controlling exports outside of the EEA, which (to the best of my knowledge) doesnt apply.

I still dont believe that this can fit with the "spirit" of the new agreement, given the publicly stated reasons for the change.

We need an expert in EU trade law to inform us whether it is legal for GW to restrict trade by preventing Wayland from exporting model kits.

Kilkrazy wrote:We need an expert in EU trade law to inform us whether it is legal for GW to restrict trade by preventing Wayland from exporting model kits.

It's a good point.

As far as I'm aware, it may well be, though this is based on distribution rights for films and that. Different territories have different contracts. No idea if this applies to retail gubbins, but it could be a kind of precedent?

What is stopping Wayland from having a "brick and mortar" site in the other GW sales zones? How complicated would it have to be? Not very. Add a couple of employees, lease a closet sized "store", and have orders sent directly to each site. Then orders could be sent from GW to a store and then shipped to each zone. Yes that would require a "risk" but if Wayland's sales increased from it than it was well worth it. By the way.....if that is what is happening, someone from Wayland PM me, please. I would love to work for you.