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.

@frozenwastes

The "negative customer experiences" I described are only unavoidable because the hypothetical disappointed customer feels absolutely entitled to the space that they are not actually entitled to. It is like how there is an unavoidable negative customer experience in store for anyone who walks in expecting a free Space Marine squad because they were given a SM to paint for free the last time they came in.

If someone comes in expecting table space and they can't get it then how can the WH store manager make that a positive experience? She could suggest an alternate time, or whatever number of other things. What if those approaches don't make the customer happy? Is she supposed to kick off the people playing to accommodate the customer that just came in? But then those customers will have a negative customer experience. It's almost as if it is not possible to make every person happy in every single circumstance, right?

So how is it possible that there are some GW customers who as you say do come away with good experiences? Possibly because they themselves are reasonable and respectful people, in addition to GW having reasonable, respectful staff.

Managing table use is simply not a regional-level issue. Because it depends entirely on details about who comes in, when they come in, what they have, etc, etc, all these details unique to that specific store, it is properly a store-level issue.

 Manchu wrote:
@frozenwastes

The "negative customer experiences" I described are only unavoidable because the disappointed customer feels absolutely entitled to the space that they are not actually entitled to. It is like how there is an unavoidable negative customer experience in store for anyone who walks in expecting a free Space Marine squad because they were given a SM to paint for free the last time they came in.

If someone comes in expecting table space and they can't get it then how can the WH store manager make that a positive experience? She could suggest an alternate time, or whatever number of other things. What if those approaches don't make the customer happy? Is she supposed to kick off the people playing to accommodate the customer that just came in? But then those customers will have a negative customer experience. It's almost as if it is not possible to make every person happy in every single circumstance, right?

So how is it possible that there are some GW customers who as you say do come away with good experiences? Possibly because they themselves are reasonable and respectful people, in addition to GW having reasonable, respectful staff.

Managing table use is simply not a regional-level issue. Because it depends entirely on details about who comes in, when they come in, what they have, etc, etc, all these details unique to that specific store, it is properly a store-level issue.

I will have to agree here with Manchu. A huge part of sales is being able to qualify a customer, which basically means is it worth trying to convert this person into a sale and retain them. This is simply not something that can be done at a regional level, these are on the spot sales decisions. Now regional should definitely set some guidelines for this. Such as it's necessary for the manager to run X number of events, or the manager must make each day an X day. The manager then would make such decisions based on his/her own community.

Now having said that there is a lot of fancy tech out there that can assist those decisions. Facial recognition software through cameras, door counters that can tell if it's an employee or not, lots of spy level gak honestly.

 Manchu wrote:
You used not cussing out the clerk as an example of the upper limit of courtesy owed to someone who is not part of your "community of friends."

Stop making straw man arguments to insult me. Nowhere did I say that the ONE EXAMPLE was the upper limit, or any kind of comprehensive list of things you're not allowed to do. In fact, I explicitly said that it was ONE EXAMPLE. Obviously there's more to being a decent customer than that, so stop acting like I'm claiming that anything short of swearing at the clerk is acceptable behavior.

And, in any case, I have clarified my position over and over again, so there's no excuse for continuing to insist that I meant something else.

There is no necessary conflict between the actual reason GW equips WH stores with tables and the GW policy of delegating discretionary authority to WH store managers regarding how the tables are used specifically. The notion that there is such a conflict is based on the erroneous and absurd assumption that there are tables in the WH store because GW owes anyone who has purchased its products at any time and through any sales channel space to use those products. The tables are equipment for holistic demonstration of the "GW Hobby" to new customers. GW leverages its existing customers to create a living retail display, managed by a GW employee. This is why, in (potential) contrast to a LGS, there are not many tables and why there are limitations on what can be played, by whom, when, and with what stuff. If you cannot process this fact, you might as well just recuse yourself from the discussion - especially since you admit to not spending any time at GW stores anyhow.

Again, this argument ignores the fact that GW, implicitly or explicitly, uses access to those tables as a marketing tool. They tell the customer "if you buy this game you'll be able to play it here", to make sure that the customer knows they aren't buying into something that will just collect dust at home because they have nowhere to use it. In fact, given the low-traffic locations and virtually nonexistent new customer presence in the GW stores I've been in, I'd argue that the primary goal of their gaming space is to support that promise. The "living retail display" part is marginal at best because no new customers are coming in. In all the hours I've spent in those stores I don't think I saw a single sale made to someone who wasn't already interested in one of GW's games, and the only demo game was the GW employee trying to convince a 40k player to try a WHFB demo.

Again, the WH store manager is not working to get you to buy any GW product, at any time, through any sales channel.

And this position by GW is utter lunacy. The money is getting to GW no matter what sales channel it goes through. If the GW employee convinces you to buy a $50 kit in-store GW makes a $50 sale. If the GW employee gives you some ideas, you spend some time thinking about it, and order it in the middle of the week at home for delivery to the store so you can pick it up when you're in for your weekend game GW makes the exact same $50 sale. If you pre-order a new $50 kit by coming into the store and using the store's computer to buy from the GW website GW makes the exact same sale as if you pre-order the $50 kit from home. The employee's job should be to get you to give your money to GW, regardless of which GW cash register you place that $50 in before it is deposited into GW's bank accounts.

Of course it gets even worse when you realize how often GW does limited-edition stuff. Even if a customer wants to go into the store and give the employee credit for the sale it's virtually impossible to do that when things are selling out as soon as they're released.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:
If someone comes in expecting table space and they can't get it then how can the WH store manager make that a positive experience? She could suggest an alternate time, or whatever number of other things. What if those approaches don't make the customer happy? Is she supposed to kick off the people playing to accommodate the customer that just came in? But then those customers will have a negative customer experience. It's almost as if it is not possible to make every person happy in every single circumstance, right?

Why are you assuming that denial of gaming space only happens because all of the tables are full? Obviously if a person comes in and all of the tables are currently in use the employee is not going to kick another customer out to make room, no matter how much money either person has spent in the store. But that's not all of it. The employee at the closest GW store declared that I'm not allowed to play my FW army* in his store, period, even when the tables were empty. Why? Because my purchases didn't count towards his sales quota, and he didn't want other people to see FW models and be tempted by them instead of letting him milk the cash cow for his own sales quota. Even if the FW sales would make significant money for GW (those models are expensive, after all) they wouldn't count towards his sales. And that's a clear case of putting his own interests ahead of the company he is supposed to be working for.

*His "helpful" suggestion was that I buy a whole new army from him. no.

If I had to get really real here, GW simply should not have stores in my opinion. I understand that they have them as way of getting new players in. However, I think WoTC does this so much better than most any company. FNM is essentially an ultimatum for the store to move magic product. The bigger your FNM the more promos you get, the more product you can order etc etc. Perhaps GW can implement a system like this. Giving out free promos cost considerably less overhead than an entire physical location. Heck Gamesworkshop stuff has a great margin for the LGS anyway, much better than Magic which by contrast usually has the worst. Most LGS are gonna want to sell lots of it anyway if they are smart.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@Peregrine if that happened as you said it did, then you should contact a regional office if you can. I doubt GW wants a manager refusing entry to someone who has spent tons on FW. I can not see completely denying someone for having FW models as one of GW's policies.

 DrNo172000 wrote:
If I had to get really real here, GW simply should not have stores in my opinion.

This is accurate. The problem seems to be that GW doesn't understand the US market. They treat it like the UK market, where travel times are short and independent stores are rare. But in the US if you live anywhere near a GW store you're probably within reasonable driving distance of a superior independent store, so why waste money on a GW store? You have to pay the rent and other expenses but, unlike the independent store, you can't supplement the store's income with MTG/board games/etc. GW would be better off closing all of their own stores and taking advantage of the existing independent stores to sell their products.

@Peregrine if that happened as you said it did, then you should contact a regional office if you can. I doubt GW wants a manager refusing entry to someone who has spent tons on FW. I can not see completely denying someone for having FW models as one of GW's policies.

I contacted GW, and left negative google/facebook/etc reviews about it. The employee's response was apparently to ban me from the store entirely, which is an amusing "YOU CAN'T FIRE ME I QUIT" situation. And AFAIK the "no FW armies" rule is still in effect.

(To be fair, the employee at the other store said I was welcome to bring my army in and play, they're just ~75 miles away in a city I only visit occasionally so I haven't had a good opportunity.)

 Manchu wrote:

If someone comes in expecting table space and they can't get it then how can the WH store manager make that a positive experience? She could suggest an alternate time, or whatever number of other things. What if those approaches don't make the customer happy? Is she supposed to kick off the people playing to accommodate the customer that just came in? But then those customers will have a negative customer experience. It's almost as if it is not possible to make every person happy in every single circumstance, right?

So you don't do any of that crap and you have a clear policy that everyone knows up front and you don't ever single people out for exclusion.

People live with limits and restrictions all the time in life. They just react bad to being singled out or a sense that things aren't fair. So you make it clear and up front and you be as fair as possible. If there is a que for a table, you don't bump people based on how much commission you make off of them. If you want to make tables available only to certain customers, you be up front about how the table space can be accessed.

But this notion that people only feel bad about being bumped out of the line because of a violated sense of entitlement is just nonsense. Expectations of fairness are not entitlement.

Another type of business that has to deal with these issues are sports bars. Some times there are conflicting games scheduled that people want to see on the TVs in sports bars. How are those resolved? Maybe certain screens would be put on certain channels. Maybe a quick show of hands or a "make some noise for the hockey game! Now for the basketball!" check. But what if what goes on the screens was up to the bartender based on who tips them the most? Then people are going to be pissed. And it's not because they were "entitled" to watch what they wanted but because a fair system was abrogated in favor of the financial interest of a single individual.

@Peregrine

It may be ONE EXAMPLE but it is the ONE EXAMPLE you chose to illustrate the difference between what courtesy is owed to the WH store manager as opposed to among "a community of friends." I have no responsibility for you making absurd arguments and choosing examples to support them that are weak and reflect poorly on your character. I have no responsibility for your insistence on sticking with poor arguments and embarrassing examples.

You already established that you cannot demonstrate that GW even implicitly uses access to tables at WH stores as a marketing incentive. If you can now establish as much, by all means post the evidence. Otherwise, this "implicit" promise remains something you invented.

What's lunacy is insisting that apparently overlapping sales channels all serve the same customers/purpose because a sale is a sale is a sale. As a matter of record, WH stores exist to demonstrate the GW Hobby. The notion that "a sale is a sale is a sale" is nonsense. Certain sales are worth more than others, and not just in terms of dollars but also relative to the channel.

Your description of your local WH store does not match up with GW stated strategy regarding the stores. In fact, it sounds more like a LGS. Therefore, I don't think it is a good example from which to draw global points.

Similarly, I am aware of your particular experience - that's why I brought it up earlier. You indicated none of this was personal but now you're bringing it up again. Fine. Consistent with what I have already posted ITT, I think it is wrong/dumb for a WH store manager to say you can never under any circumstances play with your DKoK army on the tables in his store solely because they are FW models - and especially that he directly told you that he didn't want others to be tempted by FW products (unless that is just your own interpretation). But I am not talking about idiosyncratic "bad calls" - much less trying to defend them. That's why I said I thought it was wrong for a WH store manager to ask people playing a game to step aside in favor of some kind of "VIP customer," however you want to define that.

I also am not here to defend GW's failure to anticipate customer demand and allocate stock. At our store, a customer was at the store pre-ordering Shadow War: Armageddon. When the WH store manager clicked the Check Out button, the box had already sold out. Embarrassed by the company's failure, she decided to reserve one of the stores measly three copies for this customer. She was not even told that it would be limited. It was a feth up, plain and simple.

@frozenwastes

Even upfront, clear policies can result in negative customer experiences. To kind of riff on Peregrine's story, how about a clear, upfront policy to the effect of "no FW armies ever"?

 Peregrine wrote:

 DrNo172000 wrote:
If I had to get really real here, GW simply should not have stores in my opinion.

This is accurate. The problem seems to be that GW doesn't understand the US market. They treat it like the UK market, where travel times are short and independent stores are rare. But in the US if you live anywhere near a GW store you're probably within reasonable driving distance of a superior independent store, so why waste money on a GW store? You have to pay the rent and other expenses but, unlike the independent store, you can't supplement the store's income with MTG/board games/etc. GW would be better off closing all of their own stores and taking advantage of the existing independent stores to sell their products.

@Peregrine if that happened as you said it did, then you should contact a regional office if you can. I doubt GW wants a manager refusing entry to someone who has spent tons on FW. I can not see completely denying someone for having FW models as one of GW's policies.

I contacted GW, and left negative google/facebook/etc reviews about it. The employee's response was apparently to ban me from the store entirely, which is an amusing "YOU CAN'T FIRE ME I QUIT" situation. And AFAIK the "no FW armies" rule is still in effect.

(To be fair, the employee at the other store said I was welcome to bring my army in and play, they're just ~75 miles away in a city I only visit occasionally so I haven't had a good opportunity.)

The reason I mentioned a regional office is you can usually get a better response from a direct supervisor then a customer service center sadly.

On the US market, the US market is also heavily online. I'd put money down that is the way most people shop for their hobby goods. Many believe it's certainly the reason for the explosion in the hobby industry recently.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:

I also am not here to defend GW's failure to anticipate customer demand and allocate stock. At our store, a customer was at the store pre-ordering Shadow War: Armageddon. When the WH store manager clicked the Check Out button, the box had already sold out. Embarrassed by the company's failure, she decided to reserve one of the stores measly three copies for this customer. She was not even told that it would be limited. It was a feth up, plain and simple.

That is a perfect example of a on the spot sales call that simply can not be made by someone not in the trenches. Your sales staff is the backbone of your brand.

I'm done arguing about your attempts to straw man what I said. If it wasn't clear when I said it I've since clarified it multiple times, and there's no excuse for continuing to insist that you have the "real" meaning of it. It's just disappointing that a moderator is allowed to continue to make thinly-veiled attacks on my character, and this isn't considered a rule #1 violation. You've openly accused me of "puffery", told me that things reflect poorly on my character, etc, that is not ok.

You already established that you cannot demonstrate that GW even implicitly uses access to tables at WH stores as a marketing incentive. If you can now establish as much, by all means post the evidence. Otherwise, this "implicit" promise remains something you invented.

I can't prove it, because I don't have recordings of in-store conversations. And the thing about implicit promises is that they don't have explicit proof to show. But even your "living retail display" argument confirms the implicit promise, because GW is encouraging games as a "look what you get when you buy GW products" display. Being part of what is being demonstrated requires access to GW's in-store tables, and the "living retail display" would be much less compelling if it instead showed someone playing alone at home because there is no in-store gaming.

Certain sales are worth more than others, and not just in terms of dollars but also relative to the channel.

Nonsense. Sales channels have no inherent value, they're only relevant as a means to an end: getting that money into the corporate bank accounts. This is why GW's approach is so insane, they treat their various sales channels as competition for each other instead of multiple complementary approaches to the problem of getting the customer's money into GW's hands. A sale going through the GW website instead of the GW store's cash register is not a loss for GW.

and especially that he directly told you that he didn't want others to be tempted by FW products (unless that is just your own interpretation)

Nope, no interpretation. He directly told me "I can't have this in here because I can't sell those models if someone is interested in them".

 Peregrine wrote:

Nonsense. Sales channels have no inherent value, they're only relevant as a means to an end: getting that money into the corporate bank accounts. This is why GW's approach is so insane, they treat their various sales channels as competition for each other instead of multiple complementary approaches to the problem of getting the customer's money into GW's hands. A sale going through the GW website instead of the GW store's cash register is not a loss for GW.

Not quite, different channels will have different cost associated with them. It is not incredulous to assume that GW makes a greater margin on goods sold through their site, then goods sold in store, and lastly goods sold through distribution (this most likely providing the smallest margin). There are of course intangibles as well, what valuation does GW put on a face to face sales person getting a new customer? I suppose this would be based on the cost of the employee as that would factor into the cost of customer acquisition in this specific instance. And what value does each customer provide? How much is each customer worth to GW? Apparently as it stands GW believes that the value provided by new customers as brought in by a physical location is enough to have those locations so long as the location continues to convert and retain customers.

@Peregrine

You can try to bait me for being a mod or you can complain about "thinly-veiled personal attacks" - but you can't do both without being a hypocrite. You started posting ITT specifically to contradict me, arguing that business is not about relationships. It was an absurd attack and you defended it with an awful example. If you have nothing more to say about it, by all means don't.

Implicit promises can be demonstrated. You are confusing "implicit" with "made up." But you actually already know this, as you keep insinuating that someone directly told you that you get gaming space at the store in exchange for buying the product.

The point of diversifying sales channels is broadening market access. Having direct sales in your own retail location also implies a lot more control over brand management. The point of policies like not crediting stores for online orders is to reinforce the purpose of the store channel, selling to new customers. The channels are in competition with regard to some customers - many of those customers are also being competed over by the LGS channel and the online retail channel. Those customers are not the primary demographic meant to be served by the WH store.

@DrNo17200

I don't disagree that FNM is a great model for MtG. I don't think it is at all suitable for the GW brands. GW sells "a hobby," rather than a game. MtG is a much, much simpler product with a far lower (apparent) barrier to entry. WotC leverages FNM to force the LGS to do fairly simple things relative to what GW would need to force the LGS to do. Honestly, this topic is distinct enough to merit its own thread - anyone who wants to talk about a FNM-style solution for GW should feel free to start a new thread on it.

 DrNo172000 wrote:
Not quite, different channels will have different cost associated with them. It is not incredulous to assume that GW makes a greater margin on goods sold through their site, then goods sold in store, and lastly goods sold through distribution (this most likely providing the smallest margin). There are of course intangibles as well, what valuation does GW put on a face to face sales person getting a new customer? I suppose this would be based on the cost of the employee as that would factor into the cost of customer acquisition in this specific instance. And what value does each customer provide? How much is each customer worth to GW? Apparently as it stands GW believes that the value provided by new customers as brought in by a physical location is enough to have those locations so long as the location continues to convert and retain customers.

I can't imagine that any of these things are significant in this context. We're literally talking about the difference between a customer using the store's computer to buy an item for delivery to the store, and a customer that is regularly in that store making an order from home for delivery to that store. Everything about the sale is the same except which computer the order is made from, but the online sale is treated as competition for the store. And so you get the ridiculous situation of the store employee begging people on the store's facebook page to come in and use the store's computer to make their online orders so that it will count as a sale for the store.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:
The point of diversifying sales channels is broadening market access. It also implies a lot more control over brand management. The point of policies like not crediting stores for online orders is to reinforce the purpose of the store channel, selling to new customers. The channels are in competition with regard to some customers - many of those customers are also being competed over by the LGS channel. Those customers are not the primary demographic meant to be served by the WH store.

None of that makes any sense. You're putting more value on the sales channel being used for the "right" purpose than on the net profit to GW for their sales channels combined. All that matters in the end is how much net profit GW makes, and a sale through a different channel is not a loss for GW. Tracking sales through a particular channel is potentially useful as market research/analysis, nothing more.

 Hanabi wrote:
Wait....my site to store order doesn't count for the store's sales?

.....Whelp, guess what I'm never doing again.

You can however order online in store.
That works

 Manchu wrote:
@frozenwastes

Even upfront, clear policies can result in negative customer experiences. To kind of riff on Peregrine's story, how about a clear, upfront policy to the effect of "no FW armies ever"?

To some, that's better than not knowing and then finding out when you go to participate in an event. You can actually use that rule to make purchasing decisions.

As I said, people are okay living with limitations, they do it all the time. The types of negative experiences that need to be avoided at all costs are the ones where the long term relationship between the customer and the larger company is damaged. And that comes from a sense of unfairness. Especially if it is done on an individual basis.

That said, it would be a stupid rule because it places the interests of the company as a whole and their retail locations at odds with one another. We know from GW's recent financial reports that they are very pleased by their high Forgeworld sales volumes, so a policy like that might not be the best move.

GW's approach to retailing is stupid. They should find a way not to be in competition between sales channels. Then all this crap just goes away.

@Peregrine

The experience of ordering via the webstore in WH store is not the same experience as ordering from the webstore remotely. Maybe you have never seen it done, but in the former case you generally are being waited on by a GW employee, talking with them about your order, getting advice, maybe adding more stuff to the cart, maybe avoiding buying something "you don't need" because the GW employee is there by your side.

Diversifying sales channels is something companies do to increase net profit. Matching sales channels to actual sales is an important part of this process. DrNo17200 can probably explain this better than me but it is analogous to customer qualification. It may even be part of qualifying the customer, just at a high (strategic) level.

@fwlr and Hanabi

Yep, if you order online in the store, such that you end up checking out at that store's register, that sale will be credited to the store. You can even have the item delivered to your house, the sale will still be credited to that store.

@frozenwastes

Yes everyone here seems to agree that would be a terrible policy. I brought it up because it being terrible is not outweighed or even significantly mitigated by it hypothetically being clear and up-front. Furthermore, whether a policy is clear and up-front is a distinct issue from what level of organization should set the policy. I am not really against policies being clear and up-front, to the extent that this doesn't hamper the discretion only a ground-level employee can exercise on a case-by-case basis.

 Peregrine wrote:
Tracking sales through a particular channel is potentially useful as market research/analysis, nothing more.

You can do more than that. You can make return on capital based decisions.

Which is actually at the crux of the problem. GW is doing analysis on the sales targets of individual stores and not making any connection with sales through other channels. And then making the livelihood of their retail employees dependent on competing with the other sales channels GW offers. All while encouraging a link between the online store and their retail locations through store pickup.

And then store managers are putting their own interests over the larger company while people like Manchu justify it by writing off anyone who it negatively effects as feeling they are owed something they are not. and denigrating them as "entitled."

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:
Yes everyone here seems to agree that would be a terrible policy. I brought it up because it being terrible is not outweighed or even significantly mitigated by it hypothetically being clear and up-front.

Presentation can help, but just because it can't make a bad policy good doesn't mean it can't make a medium or good policy more widely accepted and pleasing to the customer. It is probably a logical error to assume that because something doesn't work well with situation A that it has no utility in situation B.

Furthermore, whether a policy is clear and up-front is a distinct issue from what level of organization should set the policy. I am not really against policies being clear and up-front, to the extent that this doesn't hamper the discretion only a ground-level employee can exercise on a case-by-case basis.

If it varies by location to location and case by case then it might not be sufficiently up front. Avoid negative surprise. Like someone ordering from Forgeworld and then discovering they can't bring them to a local event run by the same company that sells them Forgeworld. Avoid that kind of negative surprise. Companies should want their customers to only experience positive surprise.

 Manchu wrote:
The experience of ordering via the webstore in WH store is not the same experience as ordering from the webstore remotely. Maybe you have never seen it done, but in the former case you generally are being waited on by a GW employee, talking with them about your order, getting advice, maybe adding more stuff to the cart, maybe avoiding buying something "you don't need" because the GW employee is there by your side.

Again, we're talking about people that are already having those interactions with the store employee. If you're making an order on the GW website for delivery to a local GW store it's almost certainly because you're regularly at that GW store and getting all that sales support from the employee, you just happened to have an idea for buying something while you weren't at the store and want it to be there when you arrive next time. So really, this "COME IN TO MY STORE PLEASE DEAR GOD DON'T BUY AT HOME" approach is bad for GW as a company, because asking the customer to wait until they come into the store risks letting them decide that they don't really want the thing after all. It's another case of the store employee putting their own personal benefit ahead of the company they're supposed to be working for, and being encouraged to do so by idiotic sales analysis policies.

Diversifying sales channels is something companies do to increase net profit. Matching sales channels to actual sales is an important part of this process. DrNo17200 can probably explain this better than me but it is analogous to customer qualification. It may even be part of qualifying the customer, just at a high (strategic) level.

Yes, of course diversifying sales channels is important. As is understanding which sales channels are making the most money, whether directly or indirectly. The problem is when GW treats a sale through the "wrong" sales channel as a loss instead of a gain, when in the end a sale is still a sale. And it's even worse when they do it through excessively simplified analysis approaches, completely ignoring the positive indirect effect of the presence of a GW store on GW sales in that area.

@frozenwastes

Allowing for in-store pick up is smart. It brings a customer into a store when he might not otherwise come in. Until recently, the sole reason I had to go into a WH store was to pick up an online order that did not qualify for free shipping directly to my home. I went there and bought something, even despite me not being the primary demographic for the WH store. Once a customer is invested enough to be making spontaneous webstore orders from home, they are starting to transition out of that demographic.

And entitlement is the correct explanation for being sore over not getting what you want.

Again, it doesn't matter if that anti-FW policy is "sufficiently up front." No amount of upfrontedness is going to make a real difference. But here again, we are just wrongly assuming this non-existent implicit promise underlying the entitlement.

@Peregrine

No, it is not "almost certainly" the case that someone wants to pick up an item at store X because they were sold that item at store X. In my own example, I never went to a WH store but for the advantage of not paying for S&H on a small order I wanted to make. Nothing about that sale or any sale like that has anything to do with the efforts of that store. Now, getting me to that store is as mentioned above a pretty smart move.

There is no instance of GW treating a sale as a loss.

If on the off hand chance someone from the retail branch of GW above the level of a store manager sees this thread, I hope they begin to see the quandary they are putting their retail personnel in. That their sales channels are not working together as beneficially as possible. To the point where some of GW's best and most dedicated customers (those that purchase Forge World products at a much higher price) are having negative experiences.

The faster they can figure out what works in each region and reign back the autonomy of their managers and make sure all purchases through the online store, black library or Forgeworld are not getting their customers denigrated or excluded at store run events the better.

Imagine if the sales channels worked together and retail employees had clear policies to follow that are backed up by hard sales data.

Might be worth looking into.

Certainly don't dismiss any negative customer experience as being the result of entitlement. That would be pretty much the worst possible position. That's how you might lose a regular purchaser from Forgeworld, BL or your online store. Or maybe even lose a customer permanently. Negative surprise can destroy your relationship with customers.

I will try my best Manchu, but my training mostly lies with on the floor sales not higher level marketing which is what a multi-channel strategy falls under as far as i know. It is correct that a multi-channel approach is intended to increase market coverage. Now I firmly am in the camp that some channel conflict is a good thing. Because some channel conflict means that you have sufficient market coverage where as no conflict means that you probably don't. There is such a thing as border wars, and that can be destructive. Here's a snippet from a marketing strategy essay

"These occur when multiple members of the channel network compete for the same sale in the same account. A limited number of border wars should be expected and are, in fact, one indication that you have good market coverage. A soft market creates the environment for increased border wars as channels get more aggressive to deliver revenue. Generally, channels will begin to react to channel conflict when incidence of border wars exceeds 10% to 20% of that channel's total business with a manufacturer's products."

So the question is does GW's policy of having stuff bought online and sent to store not count as a sale for that store causing destructive channel conflict? Well the direct sales team (store employees) are certainly competing for the exact same sale that ultimately ends up as revenue on GW's general ledger. So it's very possible.

However, I don't think that the policy warrants change. Instead I would point to the redundancy in GW's pricing model. It cost me the same to buy online as it does in store and buying online is more convenient. This redundancy lowers value for the customer in terms of in store purchases. Rather I would think that offering a loyalty program for in store customers would be the way to go.

And low and behold GW has started their Inner Circle program. Check out this rule from their current Inner Circle competition

"7. All participating Games Workshop/ Warhammer stores will be running ‘Gathering of Storm’ events. Entrants will receive additional points for attending these events. Information regarding the dates and times of these events will be circulated by your local store’s manager once the contest is underway. You will work on your contest entry during these events."

So I would say that GW probably is trying to alleviate channel conflict via providing benefits to customers who go into the store. Now this is a soft approach (as opposed to giving points or store credit for purchases) as it relies on the sales staff to close the sale once the customer is in the store, which in my opinion isn't that difficult. People are emotional and irrational beings and love shiny stuff. The overflowing shelves in my house attest.

This is my rather rudimentary analysis of GW's channel conflict. I hope this suffices Manchu.

@frozenwastes

Someone at GW above the level of store manager already knows about the anti-FW policy at that one WH store Peregrine went to - because Peregrine (rightfully) got in touch with GW to complain about it. Don't assume managers have discretion because HQ is blind to outcomes like this.

Over the past few years, GW has been a lot better about mainstreaming FW. But until the day when FW can be ordered through the GW webstore - including as an in-store purchase - it will remain a sideline boutique with an extremely limited customer base.

In other words, the problem there is not that WH store managers have discretion over table use.

@DrNo17200

Thanks for that information - the concept of "border wars" (and why there should be some amount of border wars) is extremely useful. We can't know what degree of border wars are happening but we can say that there are some reasons they might be: growing customer base (for example, because of major licensed products), customers transitioning from new to existing customers, pricing policies, etc, etc. I don't see a significant border war brewing between the webstore and the WH store unless/until local market saturation is very high. And the obvious outcome there is, the WH store closes.

 Manchu wrote:

@DrNo17200

Thanks for that information - the concept of "border wars" (and why there should be some amount of border wars) is extremely useful. We can't know what degree of border wars are happening but we can say that there are some reasons they might be: growing customer base (for example, because of major licensed products), customers transitioning from new to existing customers, pricing policies, etc, etc. I don't see a significant border war brewing between the webstore and the WH store unless/until local market saturation is very high. And the obvious outcome there is, the WH store closes.

I'd go a step further and say that the new MAP of 15% off and the lifting of independent online sales is also a part of GW's multi-channel marketing strategy. This gives independent stores more of a leg up, allowing them to increase sales since they don't have the market reach generally that GW is going to have. Which in turn increases that amount of revenue that GW receives through it's distribution channel. It also potentially opens up Amazon which I'm sure I don't need to go into the benefits of having access to Amazon's reach.

Don't bank on that. GW of old famously shied away from big names. It may be apocryphal, but there's a story of them landing a meeting with Walmart, only to go in all guns blazing demanding that Walmart do or not do a long list of demands, before the Walmart execs gently applied boot to ass and showed the, the door.

Either way, historically, GW haven't dealt with volume retail. All bets are off in the Rountree era, so who knows?

Indeed, all bets are off:

https://www.revell-shop.de/en/Products/Warhammer-Build-Paint/

There was a time when GW products were sold at national chains in the US (specifically, bookstores). I expect the Vedros range is an attempt ro try that again.

 Manchu wrote:
Once a customer is invested enough to be making spontaneous webstore orders from home, they are starting to transition out of that demographic.

And that's a ridiculously narrow demographic. GW is already putting themselves at a huge disadvantage in the retail market by taking on rent and other expenses comparable to running an independent store, but with only GW products to provide revenue (IOW, no MTG cash cow to pay the bills). And you really think it's a good idea to focus on such a narrow customer base that "people who know enough about the game to buy online" are no longer a target?

No, it is not "almost certainly" the case that someone wants to pick up an item at store X because they were sold that item at store X. In my own example, I never went to a WH store but for the advantage of not paying for S&H on a small order I wanted to make. Nothing about that sale or any sale like that has anything to do with the efforts of that store. Now, getting me to that store is as mentioned above a pretty smart move.

Do you have no (good) independent stores in your area? Even if you want free shipping on something special-ordering it through an independent store usually means a discount over GW's full MSRP prices, and still not paying shipping. The only reason I could see to justify making that order through a GW store is if you're already going there for other reasons, and it's not worth making a special trip to some other independent store just for a 10% discount.

There is no instance of GW treating a sale as a loss.

That's exactly what they're doing, acting like a purchase made by a customer at home is a loss for the store. That's why you have GW employees begging people on facebook (IOW, people who are clearly customers at that store) to come in and use the store's computer to make their online orders.

Why do you think that some stores (mine included) do not allow any third party bits, even if it is just a single head or weapon swap? In my opinion, it makes the game seem more interesting and customizable and would attract more people to the game. GW sells just as many models because I still buy the box and then I buy an extra bit from elsewhere. In the old Third Edition Codex: Orks, they explicitly supported conversions with non-GW bits. I loved that about the game and still do. Taking a kit straight out of the box and painting it is just not as fulfilling as making something that is unique in the world: your own conversion. I know you can do conversions with 100% GW parts, but it's much more limited. For this reason, I am not allowed to game at my local store. I have my own table and terrain, but I would like to use games at the store to meet players that I get along with and could game with at home.

@Peregrine

The demographic of potential new customers is the opposite of "ridiculously narrow."

My WH store is significantly closer to me than the LGS. The LGS does not offer a discount on GW products on the front end (they do have a rewards program). Beyond such circumstaces, which are going to be different depending on where someone lives, GW's webstore is a significant sales advantage over the LGS. It's just easier to spend money in the moment (24 hours a day, wherever you are) than making a list, driving to the LGS when its open, and placing a special order, then returning whenever it comes in; especially if you aren't a regular at the LGS to begin with. I mean, GW put the dumb "no add to cart button" policy into place in the US and Canada because even the minor inconvenience of having to call up an online retailer gives their webstore an advantage.

Arguably, WH store managers focused on getting existing GW customers into the store to place digital orders are - as they say on the internet - doing it wrong. That said, no harm in letting customers with whom you have an established relationship know that you get the credit for orders they would otherwise place online. IME managers can create value for their customers by fostering an enjoyable in-store experience but for reasons we have already extensively discussed ITT the WH store is not set up to support that LGS experience (although every WH store nonetheless has "regulars"). Ultimately, the compensation structure rewards WH mangers successfully engaging new customers,which after all is why the store exists.

@Riddle of Steel

I don't know why the manager of your local WH store doesn't allow any third-party conversion bits - maybe that is the result of wanting to head off arguments about what percentage of the model needs to be GW. But you can probably understand that GW generally does not want non-GW items displayed in its retail space.

 Manchu wrote:
The demographic of potential new customers is the opposite of "ridiculously narrow."

It is when independent stores are targeting those same new customers, as well as existing customers and returning customers. And it's certainly narrow when you're talking about GW stores like the ones in my area, where the store is in a random low-traffic strip mall and the only potential new customers are people who already know about GW's games and want to start playing.

My WH store is significantly closer to me than the LGS. The LGS does not offer a discount on GW products on the front end (they do have a rewards program). Beyond such circumstaces, which are going to be different depending on where someone lives, GW's webstore is a significant sales advantage over the LGS. It's just easier to spend money in the moment (24 hours a day, wherever you are) than making a list, driving to the LGS when its open, and placing a special order, then returning whenever it comes in; especially if you aren't a regular at the LGS to begin with. I mean, GW put the dumb "no add to cart button" policy into place in the US and Canada because even the minor inconvenience of having to call up an online retailer gives their webstore an advantage.

That's unfortunate. Every independent store in my area offers at least a 10% discount, and will take orders by phone. It's cheaper and more convenient than making a trip out to the GW store, unless you're already going to the GW store. But, I'll concede that there are possible reasons to make orders for delivery to a store even if you're never interacting with the employee. I am not convinced, however, that they are any kind of majority, and it's still stupid to count none of them towards a store's sales numbers.

Arguably, WH store managers focused on getting existing GW customers into the store to place digital orders are - as they say on the internet - doing it wrong.

But then you have to ask why they're doing it wrong, and the answer is that GW's analysis approach is broken in a way that encourages the employee to do the wrong thing. If online orders to a store were counted properly then there would be no incentive to do the facebook begging.

@Peregrine

IME the LGS typically does a piss poor job of creating new GW customers. The WH store OTOH is very effective at this. This is because the WH store offers a better experience for "normies," whereas the LGS is more suited to established gamers. Diversified sales channels in action. Again, per GW's own statements, the WH stores exist to demonstrate the hobby. It is easy for guys like us to forget how overwhelming the obstacles to starting with miniatures gaming/the "GW Hobby" are. Strong brand cohesion makes barriers to entry seem less insurmountable. This is one reason why there are Citadel glues. I mean, most folks know they can buy plastic glue and super glue at a hardware store. But when it is right there already, sold in the context of "the right tool for the job," it helps.

If I lived closer to the LGS, I would no doubt take greater advantage of their backend discount scheme. But then there is the "webstore exclusive" (a.k.a. direct only) piece to consider. Yes, I know I can special order these items from a LGS. I wonder how many other people know that "webstore exclusive" doesn't literally mean you can only get that item directly through the webstore? And even in those cases, certain items go in and out of stock so fast, it's best to order them online as soon as you can, even if that means you can't get a discount or the local WH store manager will not get credit for the sale.

Regarding "FB begging," again it's a good thing that WH store managers are trying to get people in the store - all I meant was, staffers should not be (and no GW policy I know of encourages this) focusing on existing customers rather than new ones.

 Manchu wrote:
This is because the WH store offers a better experience for "normies," whereas the LGS is more suited to established gamers.

I don't see this, at all. The only difference between the GW stores and the independent stores is that the GW stores have a demo table set up at all times (which I have never seen used for anything). I see nothing about the GW store that would attract "normal" people more than the independent store, especially when the GW store is in a random strip mall where only typical gamers are likely to know that it exists. In fact, the independent store is probably more inviting to "normal" people because they tend to have shelves full of nice "normal" board games/comics/etc instead of just this one hardcore gaming hobby.

If I lived closer to the LGS, I would no doubt take greater advantage of their backend discount scheme. But then there is the "webstore exclusive" (a.k.a. direct only) piece to consider. Yes, I know I can special order these items from a LGS. I wonder how many other people know that "webstore exclusive" doesn't literally mean you can only get that item directly through the webstore? And even in those cases, certain items go in and out of stock so fast, it's best to order them online as soon as you can, even if that means you can't get a discount or the local WH store manager will not get credit for the sale.

Sure, but how many of those web-exclusive limited-supply items are cheap enough that you aren't already getting free shipping? I mean, if you wanted a copy of SWA you were already well over the free shipping threshold and could just let GW deliver it to your font door without having to make a trip out to the GW store (again, unless you are already going to the GW store frequently). The typical cheap order where getting free shipping isn't realistic tends to be something like needing a pot of paint or two for a project you're working on, in which case there's no need to worry about selling out or web-only statements.