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.

nkelsch wrote:

Actually I was pointing out your industry is directly impacted by copyright infringement and someone not playing by the rules can take food directly out of your families mouth... If you felt it was mirroring anything within your oganization or buisness practices, that is on you.

Then maybe you should not have quoted me when you wrote that, doing so makes it seem as the comment was directed at me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

You do realize that the cost of producing a model is not just the raw material cost, right? And that if GW sold their products for "mere pennies" they'd be bankrupt within a week?

Yes I am fully aware of all the costs involved, the design of the original, the forging of the moulds which in the case of plastics can run into hundreds of thousands if not millions of pounds, the packaging, transportation, marketing, upkeep of the facilities and Games Workshops own stores, and so on, still with all that factored in with the volume that GW produce they are still massively over priced for what they are, mas produced injection moulded plastic, which as mediums goes is dirt cheap.

Mike712 wrote:
Yes I am fully aware of all the costs involved, the design of the original, the forging of the moulds which in the case of plastics can run into hundreds of thousands if not millions of pounds, the packaging, transportation, marketing, upkeep of the facilities and Games Workshops own stores, and so on, still with all that factored in with the volume that GW produce they are still massively over priced for what they are, mas produced injection moulded plastic, which as mediums go is dirt cheap.

Where exactly do you get your standards for what a "fair" price is and where the "overpriced" line is? And why does the medium matter when the raw material costs are only a small part of the final cost of the item?

 Peregrine wrote:

Mike712 wrote:
Yes I am fully aware of all the costs involved, the design of the original, the forging of the moulds which in the case of plastics can run into hundreds of thousands if not millions of pounds, the packaging, transportation, marketing, upkeep of the facilities and Games Workshops own stores, and so on, still with all that factored in with the volume that GW produce they are still massively over priced for what they are, mas produced injection moulded plastic, which as mediums go is dirt cheap.

Where exactly do you get your standards for what a "fair" price is and where the "overpriced" line is? And why does the medium matter when the raw material costs are only a small part of the final cost of the item?

It's nothing to do with the raw materials, the process as a whole at the scale at which GW carries out their business is inexpensive.

To get an idea of what is a fair price you have to compare it to similar product. In comparison to other forms of model kit/toy GW kits are overpriced and have been increasing in price at a rate far exceeding inflation year on year, if you're going to argue that GW products are good value, well I don't know...seriously

Yes I am fully aware of all the costs involved, the design of the original, the forging of the moulds which in the case of plastics can run into hundreds of thousands if not millions of pounds, the packaging, transportation, marketing, upkeep of the facilities and Games Workshops own stores, and so on, still with all that factored in with the volume that GW produce they are still massively over priced for what they are, mas produced injection moulded plastic, which as mediums goes is dirt cheap.

Remember though, the designers/sculptors/concept artists are hourly wage earners so the cost of making the sculpts and concepts is spread out over a large period of time (between 3-5 months) and they are also working on more than one project at a time.

The silicone molds used for metal casting cost between $30-$40 each and can last for over a decade. I don't have costs for Finecast molds, but I was told they use a similar process to molds made for metal casting so the cost would be comparable. Even less per figure since the weapons and arms are sprued together with the body so you have less molds to make than when they were sold in metal separately.

The steel/aluminium tools used for plastic injection molding are also made by hourly staff with CNC machines so the cost of those is far less than what you would think. I was told by several managerial level staff at GW Lenton that the steel/aluminium tools cost a few thousand to make for squad size sprues and the tools usually have 2 sprues cut into them. Larger sprues like the Mumakil etc do cost more, but nowhere near the hundreds of thousands of dollars you guys think they cost. GW used to have them made out-of-house by another company, back then they were expensive. But not anymore.

A while back there was a spreadsheet posted with some of the Direct Sales codes that had some of the costs listed. Those match up with what I have in my old spreadsheets so you can get an idea of how little it really costs GW to produce a single sprue or component. I'm sure the cost of Finecast is less, but the labor involve din producing Finecast is more than metal, but the individual cost of components should be about the same (give or take a few cents).

The other costs like marketing, package design etc are spread out over several departments so they have their own way of tracking and paying for their costs.

This, I call it Exhibit B
For anyone still claiming pirates using GW, FW molds to yield flawless counterfeits? I shall put an end to that silly argument.
Anyone please feel free to deduce the significance of this new picture.

Mike712 wrote:
To get an idea of what is a fair price you have to compare it to similar product. In comparison to other forms of model kit/toy GW kits are overpriced and have been increasing in price at a rate far exceeding inflation year on year, if you're going to argue that GW products are good value, well I don't know...seriously

Except for one little problem here: GW's models aren't really much different in price per model than other 28mm games. The only people who are selling stuff significantly cheaper are either the dedicated "cheap model" companies that produce an inferior product, or small-scale companies with a handful of models and all of the work done by a single person as a hobby.

 Peregrine wrote:

Mike712 wrote:
To get an idea of what is a fair price you have to compare it to similar product. In comparison to other forms of model kit/toy GW kits are overpriced and have been increasing in price at a rate far exceeding inflation year on year, if you're going to argue that GW products are good value, well I don't know...seriously

Except for one little problem here: GW's models aren't really much different in price per model than other 28mm games. The only people who are selling stuff significantly cheaper are either the dedicated "cheap model" companies that produce an inferior product, or small-scale companies with a handful of models and all of the work done by a single person as a hobby.

http://www.perry-miniatures.com/product_info.php?cPath=22_62&products_id=1393

36 models for $29US, made by GW sculptors, in plastic. That is $.80 per model. GW's average 10 man box is $24.75, 3x the cost of Perry Minis. They are hardly inferior.

Also, you can't compare price per model against other games. Warmahordes requires far fewer models to play the game for example.

So really you have to look at the cost to play the game, in which case GW is the most expensive by a large margin.

There are plenty of other companies that make perfectly fine looking models for much less than GW. The difference is that those companies don't make brick and mortar stores with ludicrous rent in areas that don't need them. The price for all those GW stores is tacked on to the retail price I guarantee. GW survived just fine without having their own stores down the street from LGS's. And honestly, any place that doesn't already have an LGS in it probably can't support such a niche store, let alone one that ONLY sells GW product.

Let's not pretend that GW is doing everything in their power to promote healthy competition or heaven forbid promote wargaming as a hobby in general. They pretend that no one else makes models, and they price like there is no competition, which is a rather head in the sand approach to business that will eventually fail terribly.

EDIT: so Perry Miniatures has an army deal on those ACW models:

D1 Union Army Deal 20 x boxes of plastic Infantry, 4 x boxes of plastic Cavalry, 6 x metal artillery packs, 3 high command metal mounted figures ( 720 Infantry, 51 Cavalry 24 artillerymen and 6 guns)
£300 or $482 USD. Show me a GW army that will yield 800 models for under $500.

 Aerethan wrote:
36 models for $29US, made by GW sculptors, in plastic. That is $.80 per model. GW's average 10 man box is $24.75, 3x the cost of Perry Minis. They are hardly inferior.

Do the historical models also come with the extra options that GW kits usually include?

Also, you can't compare price per model against other games. Warmahordes requires far fewer models to play the game for example.

Why not? The question here isn't overall price to play, it's whether particular models are overpriced, and whether that overpricing is severe enough to ethically justify IP theft. And the only thing that matters for that is price-per-model for roughly equivalent models.

Let's not pretend that GW is doing everything in their power to promote healthy competition or heaven forbid promote wargaming as a hobby in general. They pretend that no one else makes models, and they price like there is no competition, which is a rather head in the sand approach to business that will eventually fail terribly.

What does that have to do with anything? The wisdom of GW's business plan has nothing at all to do with whether or not their products are "overpriced" in some objective sense.

 Squigsquasher wrote:

You are missing the point. The sculptors and model designers of GW and FW put a lot of effort into making those models. Recasters are making money off of someone else's hard work, and drawing money away from the people who put all that effort into making those models.

Suppose you were a painter. You spent weeks painting beautiful landscape pictures. And then some bastard comes along, copies the picture, and sells it, making money off of your effort. And then because his prices are cheaper, you don't get any money for the painting that you had made. You would be angry. After all, you would deserve the money for your hard work, not some thief.

And that is exactly the case here. Recasting is theft. Theft is illegal and detestable. By buying recasts you are stealing money from the sculptors who deserve said money, and giving it to filthy criminals. So before you click the buy button, think about the blood sweat and tears that went into making the original model, before you give your money to some sweaty Chinese copycat.

You are living in a dream-world. The sculptors aren't getting a cut of the proceeds of every model they designed in perpetuity for every copy of that model sold. They get their (no doubt miserly) salary, and the profits go to shareholders and executive bonuses.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Aerethan wrote:
36 models for $29US, made by GW sculptors, in plastic. That is $.80 per model. GW's average 10 man box is $24.75, 3x the cost of Perry Minis. They are hardly inferior.

Do the historical models also come with the extra options that GW kits usually include?

Also, you can't compare price per model against other games. Warmahordes requires far fewer models to play the game for example.

Why not? The question here isn't overall price to play, it's whether particular models are overpriced, and whether that overpricing is severe enough to ethically justify IP theft. And the only thing that matters for that is price-per-model for roughly equivalent models.

Let's not pretend that GW is doing everything in their power to promote healthy competition or heaven forbid promote wargaming as a hobby in general. They pretend that no one else makes models, and they price like there is no competition, which is a rather head in the sand approach to business that will eventually fail terribly.

What does that have to do with anything? The wisdom of GW's business plan has nothing at all to do with whether or not their products are "overpriced" in some objective sense.

Ok, we'll go with objective arguments against the prices.

In 2000, a 19 man box of Empire soldiers was $25. It was a full multi piece kit that allowed tons of customization. In 2002~ that price rose to $30, with the statement that the increase was to offset profit losses on metals. The next year metal models increased anyway. In 2006~ that price then went to $35 for the exact same box, giving the same excuse as before. Then 2007 happened, and the Empire was redone. The old box was done away with, and a new boxed set structure was put into place. 10 models, at $22. Those models which are far less customizable and have all manner of God awful skulls and crap all over them as well as monkey faces and a lack of shoes. So subjectively an inferior product at an objectively higher price. So in 7 years the models went down in quality and went up 70% in price. And that was before the economy crapped out. So what happened when people could afford less in discretionary spending? GW instituted company wide price increases annually. Now that same box is $24.75 and since it wasn't raised this year, it will certainly be raised next year.

So since GW isn't exactly offering some staggeringly huge improvement in quality, but they are charging more, we can objectively say that they are over priced, especially when you look at Finecast quality versus the price increases those models saw for the EXACT same sculpt.

Forgeworld is a premium price specialty kit making division of GW. At the very least it's certainly worth noting that they can't seem to compete on casting quality with a Chinese knock off company.

Just think about that. Would any other company settle for quality worse than Chinese knock offs? Why does Forgeworld?

As for legalities, it's important to remember that China is still technically a communist country and any and all property rights are only extended so far as they are government exceptions to the official policy of abolition of property. China can sign all the international treaties about IP as needed to appease their customer nations, but that doesn't actually mean anything inside their own borders. They'll make a show of cooperating some times, but that's about it.

The US can sue China all they like, but China could simply sell, rather than buy, US treasuries to pay any damages and the damage to the purchasing power of the US dollar would be far, far greater than any cost to China in an international trade court case.

China will protect China. All the shows China puts on of closing counterfeit operations are only done on those brands that are produced in China by approved businesses with enough clout to get it done. That's not GW.

 Peregrine wrote:

Do the historical models also come with the extra options that GW kits usually include?

Not napoleonics, because it seems people don't want them as they'd rather they were easier to put together (though the Perry's often have multiple head options, sometimes as many as 4) However just go take a look at their WotR stuff for options. Also not every GW kit has a bunch of options, just look at the Bretonnian kits.

 frozenwastes wrote:
.

Also, it's illegal in China for foreigners to own capital property, including business assets like IP. If you want to own a factory in China, you technically have to partner with a Chinese national and under local law the Chinese national has a 100% stake in the enterprise and is simply your supplier. So how do you handle the application of an international treaty about intellectual property inside a country that both forbids foreign ownership of the business asset itself, and only recognizes any sort of property rights at all as temporary exceptions to communist property abolition?

As someone who works for a company that owns a factory in shenyang, china, this isn't true -_- I think you're thinking of malaysia, where they used to require you to have a local citizen be the majority shareholder.

i always wonder about the people that keep saying that gw puts out a superior product and that's why they can charge as much...

maybe i'm just a jaded not so old gamer, i started in 98 where boxes were $15-20 for 16-20 multi pose miniatures. I can understand inflation and 'cost of materials' but every year even if its the same box sitting in the warehouse still gets a price increase you are telling me that's the way it's supposed to be?

it's the same people who blame knock offs and the second hand market for the price increase. it is not like you can say the customer service has increased, less RTT's, GT's and Gamesdays actually worth going to.

There is a market for this stuff sure, but at the same time there are a bunch of gamers in the dark that have no idea what;s going on. I remember walking into a gw store and saying that i got my oop minis from bartertown/ebay and received a bunch of dazzled looks that such a thing existed.

Like i said before maybe i'm just an jaded gamer but i just never really could understand what is up with people who play gw games having that whole 'beaten wife syndrome'.

Sining wrote:
As someone who works for a company that owns a factory in shenyang, china, this isn't true -_- I think you're thinking of malaysia, where they used to require you to have a local citizen be the majority shareholder.

Hi Sining, can you tell dakka abit about what you know about the chinese counterfeit garage kit makers, and other pvc figures?
like how common it is, whether its easy for them, and how long they have been doing these kind of things.

Thanks :']

 Dawnbringer wrote:
Not napoleonics, because it seems people don't want them as they'd rather they were easier to put together (though the Perry's often have multiple head options, sometimes as many as 4) However just go take a look at their WotR stuff for options. Also not every GW kit has a bunch of options, just look at the Bretonnian kits.

And this is why historical miniatures are cheaper. It's a lot easier and cheaper to make simple single-pose models than the kind of complex kits GW produces. There's less time sculpting additional parts, ensuring that all of your infantry kits are compatible with each other, designing and producing the additional molds, etc. And then of course once you've designed the kit now each of your boxes includes more sprues to hold the extra option parts. So it's not entirely fair to just compare a box of historical miniatures to a tactical squad and add up the cost per X models.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Dawnbringer wrote:
Not napoleonics, because it seems people don't want them as they'd rather they were easier to put together (though the Perry's often have multiple head options, sometimes as many as 4) However just go take a look at their WotR stuff for options. Also not every GW kit has a bunch of options, just look at the Bretonnian kits.

And this is why historical miniatures are cheaper. It's a lot easier and cheaper to make simple single-pose models than the kind of complex kits GW produces. There's less time sculpting additional parts, ensuring that all of your infantry kits are compatible with each other, designing and producing the additional molds, etc. And then of course once you've designed the kit now each of your boxes includes more sprues to hold the extra option parts. So it's not entirely fair to just compare a box of historical miniatures to a tactical squad and add up the cost per X models.

Again, Empire troops. Single pose, all parts fit on the standard pose so there isn't any complex design consideration. The only complex GW kit I've ever seen was maybe Minotaurs since the weapons have to be exact in order to rank up, and perhaps 5th edition Chaos Warriors.

There is literally no wrong way to assemble Empire troops, or almost any WFB infantry provided you understand where anatomy belongs. And GW has been steering away from unit integration when they started doing things like odd armatures and mono pose bodies. Bretonnian troops can't have Empire parts swapped out easily, and that was deliberate on GW's part. The heads have flat bases instead of round, the arms cut off at the elbow instead of the shoulder, scale is often quite variable across other armies.

And how many new boxes these days have an options sprue? That used to be standard, and since 2002ish it's been everything possible on a single sprue that is then folded in half and stuck in a box. 1 sprue per box. And they charge more for it.

Tell you what, GW should release an accessories sprue for every army, and charge separately for it. Box sets should come with only the basic bare ass unit and it's command. No fancy scrolls or skulls, no extra swords to put on their waists. And you know what? They'd sell a metric feth ton of them.

If you are going to white knight, at least do it with facts.

 Aerethan wrote:
Again, Empire troops. Single pose, all parts fit on the standard pose so there isn't any complex design consideration. The only complex GW kit I've ever seen was maybe Minotaurs since the weapons have to be exact in order to rank up, and perhaps 5th edition Chaos Warriors.

Honestly, I don't care about fantasy so I'm not going to bother arguing that point. The models all look stupid and I wouldn't buy them even if they were free, so I'm not really gong to dispute that they're overpriced.

And how many new boxes these days have an options sprue? That used to be standard, and since 2002ish it's been everything possible on a single sprue that is then folded in half and stuck in a box. 1 sprue per box. And they charge more for it.

Except whatever the arrangement of the sprue/sprues those options still take up sprue space that could have gone to including more basic models and improving the cost per model. And of course those parts still take all the extra design work no matter where on the sprue they go, which still increases the cost.

Tell you what, GW should release an accessories sprue for every army, and charge separately for it. Box sets should come with only the basic bare ass unit and it's command. No fancy scrolls or skulls, no extra swords to put on their waists. And you know what? They'd sell a metric feth ton of them.

Now try that in 40k where every unit has lots of options and the general opinion that kits should come with MORE options included.

Also they may come with lots of 'options' but I regularly read complaints that they don't include the options people actually want. All the popular weapons are in short supply in boxes which is the very reason that people look to third party producers to get the bits that they wish GW had put in the box instead of the heap of unwanted alternative parts. It's not like this isn't GW's fault, they design the kits and write the rules so there's little excuse for the two not dovetailing.

This isn't really a comment on recasting but on 3rd party manufacturers. GW have created a market because they just don't pack their kits with the stuff they write the army lists for. They have a megre selection of 'bitz' on their site which are vastly overpriced and of dubious quality to make up for the absence of the most desired options in their plastic kits. Between that and just not bothering to release models for their own rule sets for years on end, it's no wonder gamers shop else where. It's just to play the games that GW sold them in the first place!

After a weekend of searching and entering countless related words into search engines, I have to believe that this is not a massive problem and must only be a very small operation that this company is running.

Some posters on here make out it is going to backrupt gw and fw, until reading this post I didnt know about these sites, but now I do, I still cant find all these apparent recasters.

I think gw do a pretty good job keeping people inline for copyrights, better than most anyway, but this is not going to hurt them finacially until these sites are easily and common place on the net.

 leroy233 wrote:
I think gw do a pretty good job keeping people inline for copyrights, better than most anyway...

The Chapterhouse lawsuit would tend to indicate otherwise.

Sining wrote:
As someone who works for a company that owns a factory in shenyang, china, this isn't true -_- I think you're thinking of malaysia, where they used to require you to have a local citizen be the majority shareholder.

Sorry, you're right. I was thinking of older laws in the wrong country.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Aerethan wrote:
Again, Empire troops. Single pose, all parts fit on the standard pose so there isn't any complex design consideration. The only complex GW kit I've ever seen was maybe Minotaurs since the weapons have to be exact in order to rank up, and perhaps 5th edition Chaos Warriors.

Honestly, I don't care about fantasy so I'm not going to bother arguing that point. The models all look stupid and I wouldn't buy them even if they were free, so I'm not really gong to dispute that they're overpriced.

And how many new boxes these days have an options sprue? That used to be standard, and since 2002ish it's been everything possible on a single sprue that is then folded in half and stuck in a box. 1 sprue per box. And they charge more for it.

Except whatever the arrangement of the sprue/sprues those options still take up sprue space that could have gone to including more basic models and improving the cost per model. And of course those parts still take all the extra design work no matter where on the sprue they go, which still increases the cost.

Tell you what, GW should release an accessories sprue for every army, and charge separately for it. Box sets should come with only the basic bare ass unit and it's command. No fancy scrolls or skulls, no extra swords to put on their waists. And you know what? They'd sell a metric feth ton of them.

Now try that in 40k where every unit has lots of options and the general opinion that kits should come with MORE options included.

O.o


Where did you get your information?


Entirly wrong, but I'd really like to double check your "facts".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 leroy233 wrote:
After a weekend of searching and entering countless related words into search engines, I have to believe that this is not a massive problem and must only be a very small operation that this company is running.

Some posters on here make out it is going to backrupt gw and fw, until reading this post I didnt know about these sites, but now I do, I still cant find all these apparent recasters.

I think gw do a pretty good job keeping people inline for copyrights, better than most anyway, but this is not going to hurt them finacially until these sites are easily and common place on the net.

It's not really as big a deal as people are making it and going all hyper over.

The only thing that they really don't like is that they have to work for something that they touted as "Thiers", yet gave up entirly when they stopped being a game company and started being a "Collectable miniatures" company.

Finecrap hasn't done them any favors, in that regard, either.

The only thing that GW has going for it is a good legal team that is good at threatening any run of the mill fan into submission, and when it comes down to it, they have more money to try to drag out anything of legal proceedings. They have after all put a copywrite on "The Hobby" and have put one in for C and D along with the G and W.

 Grot 6 wrote:
Entirly wrong, but I'd really like to double check your "facts".

Feel free to explain how it's wrong.

Where shall we begin...

"Except for one little problem here: GW's models aren't really much different in price per model than other 28mm games. The only people who are selling stuff significantly cheaper are either the dedicated "cheap model" companies that produce an inferior product, or small-scale companies with a handful of models and all of the work done by a single person as a hobby."

I could get all deep about it, but this is a pretty bold statement to start with. Finecast is pennies to make, yet they sell it at metals prices. Periods, and full stop.
Mom and pop companies are giving you metals, and to say that finecast is an improvement? Who exactly is the cheapskate here? That crap comes in barrels, two ply resin/ plastic? Who knows... but it is not all that hard to see that GW May have had a quality product at one point, yet they decided... for altruistic reasons of course that they were going to go out and give that product away, now. free of charge, I guess?

"And this is why historical miniatures are cheaper. It's a lot easier and cheaper to make simple single-pose models than the kind of complex kits GW produces. There's less time sculpting additional parts, ensuring that all of your infantry kits are compatible with each other, designing and producing the additional molds, etc. And then of course once you've designed the kit now each of your boxes includes more sprues to hold the extra option parts. So it's not entirely fair to just compare a box of historical miniatures to a tactical squad and add up the cost per X models."

These figures are made in the exact same way. "Complex" has nothing to do with it. It would be fine if you were comparing something from like, 20 or so years ago, but both sets of figures are sprue based, designed, and cast in a machine. There is not difference in the casting of either of the products.

As to the options? Seriously? Are you talking about GW's real kits, of when they gave you a full range of 16-26 figures, or the cheapskate "Hey, lets charge the same 30$ for a ten man squad" crap that they have reduced themselves to? They now charge you three times as much for a small sprue of "Options" as you loosly put them. A 2.00 sprue for 8.00-10.00.

"Do the historical models also come with the extra options that GW kits usually include?"

uh... Yes. Sometimes more, all depending on the game.

How about Dust? How about Warlords new gig? Westwinds, maybe? Oh, and remember, metals?

"Why not? The question here isn't overall price to play, it's whether particular models are overpriced, and whether that overpricing is severe enough to ethically justify IP theft. And the only thing that matters for that is price-per-model for roughly equivalent models."

Eye of the beholder, I guess. I just can't sdee your point that you use Ethics in this conversation, seeing as how far the apple has fallen from the tree.

How much was that finecrap "Insert name of character here" figure? as opposed to how much, and of the quality that they once were?

How many times should be acceptable to continue to resend a figure back for replacement, based on bubbled, miscast, mistakes, or flaws? How much is that exactly "acceptable"?

And lets just look at that "IP" that your protecting like someones sisters cherry.

Aliens. Judge Dredd. Generic Space Man Vs Alien parasite. Skulls. The name Space marine. Flying Space ship. various models from Forgeworld. One looks like a British infantryman from the Boer War. One looks like a WW1 Hiney, one looks like a russian.

We have "Fantasy" stuff from days of yor, each and every one a concept from midevil, high and low fantasy, and historical context. Dungeons and Dragons, etc.etc.etc.

Basicly, a compnay that bills itself as "The Hobby." yet is in the business of fantasy and scifi figures. Some of which have been around as long as there has been the subject.



What does that have to do with anything? The wisdom of GW's business plan has nothing at all to do with whether or not their products are "overpriced" in some objective sense.

The subject revolves all around the question of "How much are you reasonably wiling to pay to play a miniatures game.
Would you rather have flawed models from a compnay, or some that don't look half bad from "Brand X" as we could call... whoever wants to make some figures or parts of figures to enhance the game/ reproduce the products with.

And again, explain yourself with this tidbit.

"Except for one little problem here: GW's models aren't really much different in price per model than other 28mm games. The only people who are selling stuff significantly cheaper are either the dedicated "cheap model" companies that produce an inferior product, or small-scale companies with a handful of models and all of the work done by a single person as a hobby."

Do you play any other games then GW?

When you posted this-
"Where exactly do you get your standards for what a "fair" price is and where the "overpriced" line is? And why does the medium matter when the raw material costs are only a small part of the final cost of the item?"

What exactly are YOU talking about? Ask yourself THIS question, from another prospective, and you come to a pretty quick conclusion as to why these products are even given the effort.
$100 for X
$50 for X


As I said, where did you get your information?

 Peregrine wrote:

 Dawnbringer wrote:
Not napoleonics, because it seems people don't want them as they'd rather they were easier to put together (though the Perry's often have multiple head options, sometimes as many as 4) However just go take a look at their WotR stuff for options. Also not every GW kit has a bunch of options, just look at the Bretonnian kits.

And this is why historical miniatures are cheaper. It's a lot easier and cheaper to make simple single-pose models than the kind of complex kits GW produces. There's less time sculpting additional parts, ensuring that all of your infantry kits are compatible with each other, designing and producing the additional molds, etc. And then of course once you've designed the kit now each of your boxes includes more sprues to hold the extra option parts. So it's not entirely fair to just compare a box of historical miniatures to a tactical squad and add up the cost per X models.

Did you go look at the Perry's War of the Roses sprues like I said? Even the Naps often have a complete second set of arms (esp the cavalry). Other sets to look at are Warlord's Bolt Action figures. The only reason GW's cost more is because people still buy them, either blissfully ignorant, or having deluded themselves into believing they are getting a superior product.

 Dawnbringer wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Dawnbringer wrote:
Not napoleonics, because it seems people don't want them as they'd rather they were easier to put together (though the Perry's often have multiple head options, sometimes as many as 4) However just go take a look at their WotR stuff for options. Also not every GW kit has a bunch of options, just look at the Bretonnian kits.

And this is why historical miniatures are cheaper. It's a lot easier and cheaper to make simple single-pose models than the kind of complex kits GW produces. There's less time sculpting additional parts, ensuring that all of your infantry kits are compatible with each other, designing and producing the additional molds, etc. And then of course once you've designed the kit now each of your boxes includes more sprues to hold the extra option parts. So it's not entirely fair to just compare a box of historical miniatures to a tactical squad and add up the cost per X models.

Did you go look at the Perry's War of the Roses sprues like I said? Even the Naps often have a complete second set of arms (esp the cavalry). Other sets to look at are Warlord's Bolt Action figures. The only reason GW's cost more is because people still buy them, either blissfully ignorant, or having deluded themselves into believing they are getting a superior product.

Or they just like the models?

 Grot 6 wrote:
Where shall we begin...

"Except for one little problem here: GW's models aren't really much different in price per model than other 28mm games. The only people who are selling stuff significantly cheaper are either the dedicated "cheap model" companies that produce an inferior product, or small-scale companies with a handful of models and all of the work done by a single person as a hobby."

I could get all deep about it, but this is a pretty bold statement to start with. Finecast is pennies to make, yet they sell it at metals prices. Periods, and full stop.

Actually, their last financial report stated that Finecast actually costs more to manufacture than metal.

Repeat once again: leading brands cost more. Which bands have most expensive concert tickets and merchandise: it's the big bands, like Rolling Stones and Metallica. They COULD afford to sell their stuff at lower cost, but choose not to. Because they can.

Which has the most expensive phones? Apple. Which has most expensive cars? Mercedes. Which is most expensive energy drink? Red Bull. Which is most expensive bottled water? Evian.

Are any of those brands substantially better, in real-world terms, than their cheaper competitors? No.

 angel of ecstasy wrote:

 Dawnbringer wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Dawnbringer wrote:
Not napoleonics, because it seems people don't want them as they'd rather they were easier to put together (though the Perry's often have multiple head options, sometimes as many as 4) However just go take a look at their WotR stuff for options. Also not every GW kit has a bunch of options, just look at the Bretonnian kits.

And this is why historical miniatures are cheaper. It's a lot easier and cheaper to make simple single-pose models than the kind of complex kits GW produces. There's less time sculpting additional parts, ensuring that all of your infantry kits are compatible with each other, designing and producing the additional molds, etc. And then of course once you've designed the kit now each of your boxes includes more sprues to hold the extra option parts. So it's not entirely fair to just compare a box of historical miniatures to a tactical squad and add up the cost per X models.

Did you go look at the Perry's War of the Roses sprues like I said? Even the Naps often have a complete second set of arms (esp the cavalry). Other sets to look at are Warlord's Bolt Action figures. The only reason GW's cost more is because people still buy them, either blissfully ignorant, or having deluded themselves into believing they are getting a superior product.

Or they just like the models?

Basically this. I don't buy GW models because it's the cheapest option or the most uber high quality option (although the quality with most of their models is superb), I buy them because I like them. I like the 40K universe. If I wanted to play Haqqislam then I would buy Infinity products. But I don't. I want to play Tyranids. I support GW because I like their products, and I want them to continue to make products, which they cannot do if nobody buys said products.

This horsegak about "people being deluded and paying for GW's inferior products" is just that. Horsegak. If I want to buy an £18 box of Hormagaunts I will, in the same way that if I like Sainsbury's coronation chicken I will buy it. And nobody has the right to tell me otherwise.

Costly models are not illegal. Knockoff recast clones of said costly models are illegal. End of.

 Squigsquasher wrote:

Costly models are not illegal. Knockoff recast clones of said costly models are illegal. End of.

Continuing to say this doesn't make it correct. Buying them is not illegal.