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.

winterdyne wrote:

Farseer Mael Dannan wrote:Granted I am not bad enough to ask for another when when the replacements came with the same issues, at that point you just make due. But still, I ended up with x2 the amount of pieces than original and they were always cool about attempting to solve my problems.

WTF? Dude, seriously, you get problems twice in a row, and you think 'hey, OK...'? No wonder GW keep peddling this gak.

It's not like the issue wasn't solvable on my own? They weren't just sending me new pieces, they were sending me whole new boxes. Yea it sucks, it's obviously something they were having issues with. Nothing a $3 metal head can't solve. You know, I play their game and don't really want it going away.....I don't want to bankrupt them.

But yea, I do feel that it should be fixed. Maybe I should have continued to pester them, but I personally (and working in a service industry myself) felt that it was probably enough.

ÆΞØИ wrote:Here are my Dark Eldar girls Finecast.

Starting from the top.

-The Hair Pin.
Its not a snap or a break off. Resin does not snap leaving that thin piece hanging around. Thus, its miscast.

-The collar.
Knowing what its supposed to look like, I can tell you that is supposed to be solid. Not like something that was lacking moth balls.

-The braided hair.
They arnt supposed to be craters. And I mentioned crater because I know people will say "they are holes!"
No, holes only require filling, the hair carter require sculpting because hair isnt flat.

-The abdominal armor plate.
I have seen tons of issues with Lahmians all with problems for the plate, but yous is different.
Yours have the buttons but the plates are a mess ( where others are plates are fine but buttons are a mess )

- The poison vial.
Yours is broken, as in its missing a chunk of the middle part.

- The foot.
Someone Ran her foot over with an Space Marine Bike






Automatically Appended Next Post:

Farseer Mael Dannan wrote:

winterdyne wrote:

Farseer Mael Dannan wrote:Granted I am not bad enough to ask for another when when the replacements came with the same issues, at that point you just make due. But still, I ended up with x2 the amount of pieces than original and they were always cool about attempting to solve my problems.

WTF? Dude, seriously, you get problems twice in a row, and you think 'hey, OK...'? No wonder GW keep peddling this gak.

It's not like the issue wasn't solvable on my own? They weren't just sending me new pieces, they were sending me whole new boxes. Yea it sucks, it's obviously something they were having issues with. Nothing a $3 metal head can't solve. You know, I play their game and don't really want it going away.....I don't want to bankrupt them.

But yea, I do feel that it should be fixed. Maybe I should have continued to pester them, but I personally (and working in a service industry myself) felt that it was probably enough.

There is a common myth most of Finecast buyers have in common, let me solve that for you. Please.

GW is a company, they replace items for you because they must. You can be happy and think they do it because they are kind hearted, but that is not the case.
GW have little control with shipping cost ( they can have deals, but its still expensive ) They want you to keep your miscasts because:
a) It cost too much for them to ask for it back, especially when they have NO GUARANTEE that future replacements wont have problems ( more money wasted for GW for shipping )

b) It costs them literally $2 to give you "free" replacements.

So lets look at this.

Scenario A. They send you replacements ( $1 for model, $6 for shipping ) , let you keep old ones to keep you happy.

Scenario B. They send you replacements, ( $1 for model, $6 for shipping , $6 for you to ship back the failed cast ), you are not happy because of hassle AND GW is also behind by $6 extra.

An Unhappy customer will be more picky than a satisfied customer. When a customer would be content with solution A , they certainly wont be with solution B.

In other words GW will have to face an increased chance of further repeats of replacement ( and extra shipping fees ).

Which do you think is more worthwhile for a company everyone?

I didn't mean to sound like I was having a go or anything - reading back my post it definitely comes across that way. Sorry.

This said, I'd really prefer it if the spin-cast resin they're using right now was fixed. Especially with Forgeworld now sharing the same casting facility. I *really* wanted that Skinwolf, and it doesn't look like I'll get a good one any time soon. :-(

LunaHound wrote:

ÆΞØИ wrote:Here are my Dark Eldar girls Finecast.

Starting from the top.

-The Hair Pin.
Its not a snap or a break off. Resin does not snap leaving that thin piece hanging around. Thus, its miscast.

-The collar.
Knowing what its supposed to look like, I can tell you that is supposed to be solid. Not like something that was lacking moth balls.

-The braided hair.
They arnt supposed to be craters. And I mentioned crater because I know people will say "they are holes!"
No, holes only require filling, the hair carter require sculpting because hair isnt flat.

-The abdominal armor plate.
I have seen tons of issues with Lahmians all with problems for the plate, but yous is different.
Yours have the buttons but the plates are a mess ( where others are plates are fine but buttons are a mess )

- The poison vial.
Yours is broken, as in its missing a chunk of the middle part.

- The foot.
Someone Ran her foot over with an Space Marine Bike






Automatically Appended Next Post:

Farseer Mael Dannan wrote:

winterdyne wrote:

Farseer Mael Dannan wrote:Granted I am not bad enough to ask for another when when the replacements came with the same issues, at that point you just make due. But still, I ended up with x2 the amount of pieces than original and they were always cool about attempting to solve my problems.

WTF? Dude, seriously, you get problems twice in a row, and you think 'hey, OK...'? No wonder GW keep peddling this gak.

It's not like the issue wasn't solvable on my own? They weren't just sending me new pieces, they were sending me whole new boxes. Yea it sucks, it's obviously something they were having issues with. Nothing a $3 metal head can't solve. You know, I play their game and don't really want it going away.....I don't want to bankrupt them.

But yea, I do feel that it should be fixed. Maybe I should have continued to pester them, but I personally (and working in a service industry myself) felt that it was probably enough.

There is a common myth most of Finecast buyers have in common, let me solve that for you. Please.

GW is a company, they replace items for you because they must. You can be happy and think they do it because they are kind hearted, but that is not the case.
GW have little control with shipping cost ( they can have deals, but its still expensive ) They want you to keep your miscasts because:
a) It cost too much for them to ask for it back, especially when they have NO GUARANTEE that future replacements wont have problems ( more money wasted for GW for shipping )

b) It costs them literally $2 to give you "free" replacements.

So lets look at this.

Scenario A. They send you replacements ( $1 for model, $6 for shipping ) , let you keep old ones to keep you happy.

Scenario B. They send you replacements, ( $1 for model, $6 for shipping , $6 for you to ship back the failed cast ), you are not happy because of hassle AND GW is also behind by $6 extra.

An Unhappy customer will be more picky than a satisfied customer. When a customer would be content with solution A , they certainly wont be with solution B.

In other words GW will have to face an increased chance of further repeats of replacement ( and extra shipping fees ).

Which do you think is more worthwhile for a company everyone?

I understand that there are multiple reasons why they just send me a new one, and not request the old one back. They could be way worse about this, and make me send pictures to them to prove that I am having miscasts. That is something that they are indeed doing to benefit me is taking my word. But yea, I know they aren't being Mr. Nice Guy. I just don't know how many replacements is too much. What if it took me until the 6th replacement to get a working piece? I know that would be justified, but I almost don't want to go through that much hassle. I'm always willing to ask for the first, and MAYBE a 2nd replacement if it's an individual blister pack. IDK, guess I'm just easy.

Squigsquasher wrote:...How so?

Well, because it's just not correct!

Kanluwen, yes some of the Infinity models are excruciating to put together; I think those Dakini Tacbots are probably the worst, along with the Odalisque who needs a breast reduction before she can fire her rifle. But, I'm sure you would agree the actual quality of there casting (in fact, along with 99.8% of GW metal stuff) is pretty good, which was the issue here.

Granted I am not bad enough to ask for another when when the replacements came with the same issues, at that point you just make due. But still, I ended up with x2 the amount of pieces than original and they were always cool about attempting to solve my problems.

You should keep asking for a replacement until you receive one that is up to scratch. If enough people do it, and the QC is improved as a result, then it will make things better for everyone.

Farseer Mael Dannan wrote:I just don't know how many replacements is too much. What if it took me until the 6th replacement to get a working piece? I know that would be justified, but I almost don't want to go through that much hassle. I'm always willing to ask for the first, and MAYBE a 2nd replacement if it's an individual blister pack. IDK, guess I'm just easy.

No, I totally understand because I feel the same way.

Infact, I feel sorry for them having to do it so many times.

Yet, the fair part of me tells me that if I ( and others ) just let things "slide" all the time then GW will never realize the magnitude of their product's flaws.

Farseer Mael Dannan wrote:

LunaHound wrote:

ÆΞØИ wrote:Here are my Dark Eldar girls Finecast.

Starting from the top.

-The Hair Pin.
Its not a snap or a break off. Resin does not snap leaving that thin piece hanging around. Thus, its miscast.

-The collar.
Knowing what its supposed to look like, I can tell you that is supposed to be solid. Not like something that was lacking moth balls.

-The braided hair.
They arnt supposed to be craters. And I mentioned crater because I know people will say "they are holes!"
No, holes only require filling, the hair carter require sculpting because hair isnt flat.

-The abdominal armor plate.
I have seen tons of issues with Lahmians all with problems for the plate, but yous is different.
Yours have the buttons but the plates are a mess ( where others are plates are fine but buttons are a mess )

- The poison vial.
Yours is broken, as in its missing a chunk of the middle part.

- The foot.
Someone Ran her foot over with an Space Marine Bike






Automatically Appended Next Post:

Farseer Mael Dannan wrote:

winterdyne wrote:

Farseer Mael Dannan wrote:Granted I am not bad enough to ask for another when when the replacements came with the same issues, at that point you just make due. But still, I ended up with x2 the amount of pieces than original and they were always cool about attempting to solve my problems.

WTF? Dude, seriously, you get problems twice in a row, and you think 'hey, OK...'? No wonder GW keep peddling this gak.

It's not like the issue wasn't solvable on my own? They weren't just sending me new pieces, they were sending me whole new boxes. Yea it sucks, it's obviously something they were having issues with. Nothing a $3 metal head can't solve. You know, I play their game and don't really want it going away.....I don't want to bankrupt them.

But yea, I do feel that it should be fixed. Maybe I should have continued to pester them, but I personally (and working in a service industry myself) felt that it was probably enough.

There is a common myth most of Finecast buyers have in common, let me solve that for you. Please.

GW is a company, they replace items for you because they must. You can be happy and think they do it because they are kind hearted, but that is not the case.
GW have little control with shipping cost ( they can have deals, but its still expensive ) They want you to keep your miscasts because:
a) It cost too much for them to ask for it back, especially when they have NO GUARANTEE that future replacements wont have problems ( more money wasted for GW for shipping )

b) It costs them literally $2 to give you "free" replacements.

So lets look at this.

Scenario A. They send you replacements ( $1 for model, $6 for shipping ) , let you keep old ones to keep you happy.

Scenario B. They send you replacements, ( $1 for model, $6 for shipping , $6 for you to ship back the failed cast ), you are not happy because of hassle AND GW is also behind by $6 extra.

An Unhappy customer will be more picky than a satisfied customer. When a customer would be content with solution A , they certainly wont be with solution B.

In other words GW will have to face an increased chance of further repeats of replacement ( and extra shipping fees ).

Which do you think is more worthwhile for a company everyone?

I understand that there are multiple reasons why they just send me a new one, and not request the old one back. They could be way worse about this, and make me send pictures to them to prove that I am having miscasts. That is something that they are indeed doing to benefit me is taking my word. But yea, I know they aren't being Mr. Nice Guy. I just don't know how many replacements is too much. What if it took me until the 6th replacement to get a working piece? I know that would be justified, but I almost don't want to go through that much hassle. I'm always willing to ask for the first, and MAYBE a 2nd replacement if it's an individual blister pack. IDK, guess I'm just easy.

You are certainly entitled to being satisfied. The problem that many people have with that attitude, is that GW will likely never feel the need to improve their casting and quality control as long as the majority of their consumers accept it as it is.

Pacific wrote:Kanluwen, yes some of the Infinity models are excruciating to put together; I think those Dakini Tacbots are probably the worst, along with the Odalisque who needs a breast reduction before she can fire her rifle. But, I'm sure you would agree the actual quality of there casting (in fact, along with 99.8% of GW metal stuff) is pretty good, which was the issue here.

Wouldn't that be deflecting the issue Pacific? bringing other company?

Main issue most people have about finecast is, its a replacement over the metal, which many felt ended up worse.

If the Infinity model you mentioned are in resin, then yes I totally think you should and can make the comparison.

Legion of Damnation wrote:

carlos13th wrote:I want to pick up the Sammel master of raven wing model but I don't trust the finecast model to be a decent quality. Has anyone bought this model?

I bought it a few weeks ago. The jet bike had 2 small air bubbles that took 30 seconds to fill in with LGS. The cloak had one that was filled in by primer.

I personally have had mixed experiences - one or two dodgy ones and the rest near perfect. It's the luck of the draw my friends, the luck of the draw.

I wish my metal Sammel had been that good. There was some serious GS work needed to fill the gaps from getting the bike parts to line up, not to mention the pinning for a chunk of pewter like that.

I'm sensing that all three threads have now converged. My opinion doesn't mean anything but shouldn't they be merged or at least shouldn't two be closed with the remaining re-titled "THE Dakka Finecast Thread: The Good and The Bad"?

coyotius wrote:I'm sensing that all three threads have now converged. My opinion doesn't mean anything but shouldn't they be merged or at least shouldn't two be closed with the remaining re-titled "THE Dakka Finecast Thread: The Good and The Bad"?

But having a fair thread of both good and the bad is detrimental to the purpose of this thread. Which the purpose of this thread is to instill confidence in GW finecast.

I'm just getting confused as to which thread I've commented in already...not really but just saying. I know what you mean though.

Pacific wrote:
Kanluwen, yes some of the Infinity models are excruciating to put together; I think those Dakini Tacbots are probably the worst, along with the Odalisque who needs a breast reduction before she can fire her rifle. But, I'm sure you would agree the actual quality of there casting (in fact, along with 99.8% of GW metal stuff) is pretty good, which was the issue here.

Did you see the post I was replying to?

Kilkrazy wrote:I know that GW's quality control on metal was sometimes lacking, but that's no reason to tarnish all of model soldier manufacturers with the same brush.

One only need look at Infinity castings to know that metal can achieve amazing detail and quality when done right.

My reply was, as I said, not to belittle Corvus Belli. The problem simply is that even the best quality metal castings could have issues--and quality control can not always mitigate that. There comes a point where QC is going to end up being "it's good enough", rather than "it's flawless".

The Dakinis are a perfect example of this.
The detail can be flawless...but the models are still going to be an irritating exercise in "WHY IN THE WORLD WILL IT NOT FIT!", requiring careful filing and sculpt work.

Or, as in my case, simply leaving the parts off.

Now, if you think that's trying to start a flame war--please know that's not my intention. There were metal models in GW's range which had the same issues, there were models in PP's range which had the same issues, etc.

Metal can't always ensure a "perfect" fit.

Ok,......

Lets get this thread back on topic. I personally do not feel as if Finecast has improved.

I can only use my personal experiences though (not judging this off of the internetz or other such 3rd party knowledge)

I have purchased 3 models in Finecast models so far.

1. Draigo - great model only a few small bubbles and none where it would really matter. (purchased Dec 11)

2. Librarian in Termi armour, this one was bad enough to have to be replaced, the shoulder pad was so messed up as to be un-salvageable (purchased Feb 12)

3. Inq Coteaz - Body and eagle were great. Hand that holds the eagle had three small bubbles on the underside and the one on the palm had a huge bubble. (purchased Apr 12)

So if I look at it in chronological order I would have to say no it has not improved.

Now that all being said I still love the way Finecast feels in the hand and how nice it is to paint. I really cant wait for GW to get it right.


edited for spelling and grammar mistakes....

darefsky wrote:Ok,......

Lets get this thread back on topic. I personally do not feel as if Finecast has improved.

I can prove to this thread that finecast has not improved, in 1 sentence.

25th Anniversary model

/thread

I've bought 8 Finecasts, 1 was a bust. Had I paid better attention I would have noticed the model was grainy and bent, so really that one is my fault. I mean, the back of the packages are open so you can see the whole model. I think Finecast is fantastic.

Kanluwen wrote:
My reply was, as I said, not to belittle Corvus Belli. The problem simply is that even the best quality metal castings could have issues--and quality control can not always mitigate that. There comes a point where QC is going to end up being "it's good enough", rather than "it's flawless".
.

Well you could argue in that case that it's a problem with the original design concept (which is obviously the case with the Dakini tacbots), rather than a problem in it's mass production for the market place - I agree completely with you here, obviously no matter how good that reproduction of the original is, the original obviously wasn't up to scratch.

The difference being that presumably all of the Finecast originals are perfect - damage to the moulds themselves or poor QC meaning that the customer is receiving a substandard product.

LunaHound wrote:b) It costs them literally $2 to give you "free" replacements.

Not exactly. Let's say it costs them $2 to make a new model and to ship it to you. If that model didn't have to be shipped to you for $2, they could have sold it for $22 minimum. That's a $24 net loss, as it costs them $2 to make the model and ship it to someone, $20 lost profit on that one model, and then $2 to make a new model to try to sell (Or possibly have to ship out again).

When it comes to business, you can't think of it as how much it costs you to do something, you have to think of it as how much you could have made by doing something else.

Slarg232 wrote:

LunaHound wrote:b) It costs them literally $2 to give you "free" replacements.

Not exactly. Let's say it costs them $2 to make a new model and to ship it to you. If that model didn't have to be shipped to you for $2, they could have sold it for $22 minimum. That's a $24 net loss, as it costs them $2 to make the model and ship it to someone, $20 lost profit on that one model, and then $2 to make a new model to try to sell (Or possibly have to ship out again).

When it comes to business, you can't think of it as how much it costs you to do something, you have to think of it as how much you could have made by doing something else.

No, because your theory only works if that $24 model can be sold to infinite amount of buyers, but since we know its not, there is a ceiling / limit.

Pacific wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
My reply was, as I said, not to belittle Corvus Belli. The problem simply is that even the best quality metal castings could have issues--and quality control can not always mitigate that. There comes a point where QC is going to end up being "it's good enough", rather than "it's flawless".
.

Well you could argue in that case that it's a problem with the original design concept (which is obviously the case with the Dakini tacbots), rather than a problem in it's mass production for the market place - I agree completely with you here, obviously no matter how good that reproduction of the original is, the original obviously wasn't up to scratch.

Well, part of the problem is (at least from my understanding) that pewter will shrink as the model is cooled. So what should be a "perfect fit" won't be.

But yeah. Copying something which isn't flawless originally will result in a flawed copy.

The difference being that presumably all of the Finecast originals are perfect - damage to the moulds themselves or poor QC meaning that the customer is receiving a substandard product.

I think that's not necessarily the case, but there clearly is a QC issue.

This post pointlessly adds nothing but gasoline to the discussion. Thanks but no thanks. MT11

LunaHound wrote:

Slarg232 wrote:

LunaHound wrote:b) It costs them literally $2 to give you "free" replacements.

Not exactly. Let's say it costs them $2 to make a new model and to ship it to you. If that model didn't have to be shipped to you for $2, they could have sold it for $22 minimum. That's a $24 net loss, as it costs them $2 to make the model and ship it to someone, $20 lost profit on that one model, and then $2 to make a new model to try to sell (Or possibly have to ship out again).

When it comes to business, you can't think of it as how much it costs you to do something, you have to think of it as how much you could have made by doing something else.

No, because your theory only works if that $24 model can be sold to infinite amount of buyers, but since we know its not, there is a ceiling / limit.

No, that's not the case at all.

I make Lemonaide, and I charge $5.00 per Pitcher. It costs me $3.00 to make the Pitcher. So for every Pitcher I sell, I make $2.00. I sell you a Pitcher for $5.00, it has gone sour, but I promise to replace Sour Lemonaide free of Charge. So in order to make your $5.00, I have to spend $3.00 to make a Pitcher to sell you the first time, $3.00 to make a replacement Pitcher, and I lose out on the $5.00 I could have made by just selling the second pitcher.

So the equation looks like this:

$3.00 Cost + $3.00 Cost + $5.00 Cost = $11.00 Cost, as it I had to make two pitchers and lose out on the amount of money I would have made from the second one.

BUT!

I DID make $5.00 from the first sale. So we subtract that $5.00 from our Cost, giving us a $6.00 Total Cost.

Now, take to effect I sell BOTH of them, and BOTH of them go to happy customers:

$3.00 Cost + $3.00 Cost - $5.00 Revanue - $5.00 Revanue: -$4.00 Cost. Can't have a double Negative, so we get $4.00 Total Revanue.

Math doesn't lie; replacing something means you lose out on the sales of the Replacement Part.

Slarg232 wrote:Math doesn't lie; replacing something means you lose out on the sales of the Replacement Part.

Like I said, your math only took into account that there IS someone there to make that immediate additional purchase making the amount infinite.
Because according to your formula, you can in theory sell as much as you produced which in real world, is impossible.
I'll wait for someone more eloquent to explain it.

LunaHound wrote:

Slarg232 wrote:Math doesn't lie; replacing something means you lose out on the sales of the Replacement Part.

Like I said, your math only took into account that there IS someone there to make that immediate additional purchase making the amount infinite.
Because according to your formula, you can in theory sell as much as you produced which in real world, is impossible.
I'll wait for someone more eloquent to explain it.

If it's a new product, like most of the Finecast stuff is, then yes, you do have a near infinite amount of demand, until the "New"ness/shinyness wears off.

Also, It's called Supply and Demand. You do not create 50 Supplies when people only are Demanding 40. You create 10, and then Demand makes you Supply 10 more, then 10 more, then 10 more. Once the 40 that are Demanded are up, you have to Supply (Create) new replacements. That costs money, and your not getting any back.

I do not make 100 Pitchers of lemonaide when my data shows I only sell 20 per day. I only Supply what is in Demand, 20. If someone has a Sour Lemonaide Pitcher, then I have to create a 21st, losing out on my money, and losing out on the potential of selling that Pitcher the next day.


And yes, once something is made, there IS an infinite Demand for it; look at how expensive Squats are now, or any SNES game. The Demand is always there, you just have to find someone to sell them to (An Older VC player wouldn't want to buy a new Finecast Model, but a brand spankin new Warhammer VC player would.)

All I've bought in Finecast have been three Hive Guard. Opened the first one, and aside from some tiny bubbles on the back edge of the carapace, the shoulder plates, and the bottoms of the feet, it was in great shape. The other two had the same problems but several times worse. In addition, many of the leg spikes were only half formed, bubbles on the head carapace, and one had a badly miscast talon. Luckily I was able to do some minor repairs and get by with a couple of more "organic and battle-damaged" models than I had intended, due to the general asthetic of Tyranids, but it certainly put me off from buying all the Necron SCs. If I had the same extent of issues on those models, they would be unuseable imo.

I REALLY want Finecast to work, as it's so much nicer of a medium to assemble/paint/transport/play with, but if I can expect a similar hit/miss rate, it's just not worth it to me.

Slarg232 wrote:

LunaHound wrote:

Slarg232 wrote:Math doesn't lie; replacing something means you lose out on the sales of the Replacement Part.

Like I said, your math only took into account that there IS someone there to make that immediate additional purchase making the amount infinite.
Because according to your formula, you can in theory sell as much as you produced which in real world, is impossible.
I'll wait for someone more eloquent to explain it.

If it's a new product, like most of the Finecast stuff is, then yes, you do have a near infinite amount of demand, until the "New"ness/shinyness wears off.

Also, It's called Supply and Demand. You do not create 50 Supplies when people only are Demanding 40. You create 10, and then Demand makes you Supply 10 more, then 10 more, then 10 more. Once the 40 that are Demanded are up, you have to Supply (Create) new replacements. That costs money, and your not getting any back.

I do not make 100 Pitchers of lemonaide when my data shows I only sell 20 per day. I only Supply what is in Demand, 20. If someone has a Sour Lemonaide Pitcher, then I have to create a 21st, losing out on my money, and losing out on the potential of selling that Pitcher the next day.


And yes, once something is made, there IS an infinite Demand for it; look at how expensive Squats are now, or any SNES game. The Demand is always there, you just have to find someone to sell them to (An Older VC player wouldn't want to buy a new Finecast Model, but a brand spankin new Warhammer VC player would.)

There is no such thing as infinite demand to start with as it can only ever be finite obviously and (if I'm remembering my economics class right) it cannot exceed the aggregate demand level; the total demand for goods within that economy. Research helps to determine how much you should supply, like you've mentioned, not supplying enough can lose you a little bit of money or you can shift the prices to match the increased demand usually costing the company nothing. Keeping in mind that unlike the lemonade these are not perishable and thus if you make 100 and only sell 20 a day you will not in fact lose any income as the products will be sold over the next four days. Demand is always relevant to supply, the term you were looking for may have been inelastic demand which usually applies to necessities but in some cases premium goods can show signs of it as well (such as expensive cars for example I suppose).

Taking this pool of 100 again if you sell 20 and have to use 5 to replace defective products clearly you're missing out on the sale of 5 of them and will actually only have 15 to sell on the last day unless you produce more. For this reason it would make more sense to have a bit of a buffer when it comes to producing products. Mostly sell 20 a day? Try to aim to have 22 ready instead. Of course once again being a perishable it is not really comparable to the type of product GW is making, as you'd have the luxury of being able to make any excess needed on the spot.

LunaHound wrote:Because according to your formula, you can in theory sell as much as you produced which in real world, is impossible.

You have that backwards.You don't assume you'll sell as much as you produce. You produce as much as you think you can sell.

Assuming that the sales estimate you use for production is correct, every item you produce and give away for free is costing you that sale.


In practice it's a little more complicated than that, because shrinkage (items lost through damages, theft, misplaced parcels, etc) is also accounted for in production estimates... but the production is still a finite amount, and so each individual item is a potential sale.

insaniak wrote:

LunaHound wrote:Because according to your formula, you can in theory sell as much as you produced which in real world, is impossible.

You have that backwards.You don't assume you'll sell as much as you produce. You produce as much as you think you can sell.

Assuming that the sales estimate you use for production is correct, every item you produce and give away for free is costing you that sale.


In practice it's a little more complicated than that, because shrinkage (items lost through damages, theft, misplaced parcels, etc) is also accounted for in production estimates... but the production is still a finite amount, and so each individual item is a potential sale.

I think you quoted the wrong person insaniak, Im not the one that is saying its infinite. Note the 3 parts in red.

Slarg232 wrote:If it's a new product, like most of the Finecast stuff is, then yes, you do have a near infinite amount of demand, until the "New"ness/shinyness wears off.

insaniak wrote:Assuming that the sales estimate you use for production is correct, every item you produce and give away for free is costing you that sale.

Though this part, I agree with you.However, that is rarely the case, GW would be awfully foolish to not take into account to produce extras.

insaniak wrote:

LunaHound wrote:Because according to your formula, you can in theory sell as much as you produced which in real world, is impossible.

You have that backwards.You don't assume you'll sell as much as you produce. You produce as much as you think you can sell.

Assuming that the sales estimate you use for production is correct, every item you produce and give away for free is costing you that sale.

In practice it's a little more complicated than that, because shrinkage (items lost through damages, theft, misplaced parcels, etc) is also accounted for in production estimates... but the production is still a finite amount, and so each individual item is a potential sale.

There are also holding costs to maintain your products so they can be sold at a later date (warehouse costs, utilities, and other indirect costs). If you want to know why companies moved to a "just-in-time" inventory system, look at the auto manufacturing business in the late 80's when plants started to become automated and were running 20 hours a day because man we can make this part cheaper if we make 1,000,000 of them. Unfortunately, they never sold close to that many parts and they just kept paying to store all the parts in a warehouse. overall, the company will produce just enough to keep up with demand. That's why GW went direct only with the stuff they don't sell much of.

LunaHound wrote:I think you quoted the wrong person insaniak, Im not the one that is saying its infinite. Note the 3 parts in red.

No, I quoted the right person. I was not questioning the original statement, just your interpretation of it. You took what was said and turned it upside down.