Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 12:03:49
Subject: Re:Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Araqiel
London, UK
|
Aipoch wrote:It's just poor business practice on their part. Anyone who's taken even an introductory economics course can confirm that there's at least two ways to go about things: Charge a lot for your product and have fewer people buy it, or charge less for your product and have more people buy it. If GW is convinced that, by some miracle of the cosmos, their company is the only company whose product has a set number of people who will buy it regardless of the cost, then by all means they're doing a great job.
Sadly it seems that a lot of people (myself included) are willing to put up with it, afterall, I've been a hobbyist, starting with WFB for almost 30 years now, the other games that are available are of interest, but I don't get that warm fuzzy feeling when they bring out new product.....
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 12:12:49
Subject: Re:Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Araqiel
London, UK
|
Peregrine wrote:So, for the people who seem to have some standard for what price increases are acceptable, beyond "can I afford this?" (for example, "more than inflation"), I have some questions:
1) What percentage of total sales is a justified amount of profit for a company? At what point do you feel that they are obligated to accept that they have enough profit and lower prices to help the customer?
2) What is an acceptable reason, if any, for raising prices beyond the general trend of inflation? For example, is it justified to raise prices to hire a better codex author, or is a company obligated to limit their price increases to the level of inflation and just take a loss in profits to pay for those things?
3) How do you determine, in an objective sense, what price is justified for a model? For example, how can you say not just that a model is too expensive in your opinion and not appealing, but that its price represents some kind of unfairness by the company selling it?
4) How much is a company allowed to raise prices for a higher-quality product? For example, how much is GW allowed to increase the price when moving from a paperback codex to a hardcover one of higher quality?
5) At what point do you feel obligated (possibly based on the previous four factors) to refuse to buy a product that you want and can afford, simply because it passes your threshold for "overpriced"?
Some interesting questions here, don't forget though that GW's current model practice is multipart plastic which once you get past the development and mould costs have a nominal price to produce.
For the other stuff they are using a resin medium in silicon moulds. Once again, on the scale they are looking at the actual costs are minimal and the production process is very low cost. Design a model in zbrush (or equivalent), print it using a 3d printer, make either a wax or silicon mould (wax gives better definition I am told) and start pouring.
On that topic I have just engaged the excellent [/url]http://mastercrafted.co. uk[url]/ to make me some custom shoulder pads for my Nurgle CSM's (yes its a blatant plug) and they have managed to produce a custom design in 2 days for £20.00 and will produce the shoulder pads for £7.00 for ten pieces? They are effectively a cottage industry and are able to offer a comparable product, custom designed in days. They will also be available to buy through the website if anyone is looking for some Swarm shoulder pads?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/01/10 12:14:41
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 12:34:32
Subject: Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer
Somewhere in south-central England.
|
Flashman wrote: Imperial Monkey wrote:Out of interest, since part of the issue for many is the bad designs, would folks say that the last really good (all round releases, ie. all models bar one/maybe two) release would be IG or DE? Personally I thought Gaurd were excellent and then it went downhill a bit (I can't remember which was more recent though, guard or DE - which was also excellent).
Necrons for me (except for Flayed Ones).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
In so far as bipedal rat men are an original concept, yes.
Published 1976.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 12:46:15
Subject: Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Veteran Wolf Guard Squad Leader
|
Shotgun wrote:For me it was when it became apparent that the codicies were going hard back. I hd been wavering upto that point, but when it became apparent that I would need to shell out 40 -50 bucks -just to find out- what new models I would be needing to buy...that is when GW died for me. Ain't no way I was going to stay same or married when I figured it was going to cost me 50-200 bucks just to bring an army up to snuff, even taking into consideration the vast mounds of metal I had already aquired.
My hobby is fine though. Switched to WWII historicals mostly. Nice thing about that is that a 15mm PzIVH will always be a 15mm PzIVH no matter the rules system. There are no PzIVH with alternate plasma gatling guns being created for any historical system out there.
I even had a buddy offer to give me a pdf of the 40K rulebook he had aquired. I couldn't even get motivated for that.
I will say that, next to gold, my 40K "investment" has increased nicely. There are several models I have sold second and third hand that cost much much less at the time of original purchase.
They need to have a softback option for all the new codicies coming out. The hardcore players that want more fluff can shell out an extra 20 and those who want to play can just have rules and small background
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 13:14:28
Subject: Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Mighty Vampire Count
|
Agreed - its seems to work with Warmachine / Hordes doing both?
|
I AM A MARINE PLAYER
"Unimaginably ancient xenos artefact somewhere on the planet, hive fleet poised above our heads, hidden 'stealer broods making an early start....and now a bloody Chaos cult crawling out of the woodwork just in case we were bored. Welcome to my world, Ciaphas."
Inquisitor Amberley Vail, Ordo Xenos
"I will admit that some Primachs like Russ or Horus could have a chance against an unarmed 12 year old novice but, a full Battle Sister??!! One to one? In close combat? Perhaps three Primarchs fighting together... but just one Primarch?" da001
www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/528517.page
A Bloody Road - my Warhammer Fantasy Fiction |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 13:41:24
Subject: Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Yes, with the only difference being the cover. Hard and soft cover contain the exact same information.
I think model for model cost comparison is pointless. What matters is the standard size army which is played by your gaming group. This points value will determine how many models you need and thus how much it will cost. GW from my experience takes anywhere from 2 to 5 times as many models for a standard game than other gaming companies. This means GW can be half the cost as other gaming companies, yet still cost the same or more to field an actual army.
- When I started playing in 2nd edition my army was about 30 models
- When 3rd edition came out, I had to buy about 50 models to make the army competitive and make it so I could field full troop choices. 25 of the previous models were not useful due to rule changes.
- Along comes 4th edition and I have to buy about 20 more models with another 5 dropping to the bench due to rule changes.
- 5th edition and the soon there after 5th edition CSM codex caused me to quit the game until the next edition.
- 6th edition comes out and I was considering restarting, but the rules are still bad. Even if I did come back, I would need to swap about 10 models.
In the end, I purchased 100 models (more actually) so I could field 50 competitive models. On the flip side, my PP army is still competitive with all it's models, with about 50 or less total models.
|
CSM Undivided
CSM Khorne |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 13:56:25
Subject: Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Calculating Commissar
|
Peregrine wrote:
GW raises prices far higher than inflation would allow, and they're doing it to "juice" the company's share price in order to sell off the company.
Sorry, but I'm not having it.
Then you are the kind of person I'm asking those questions. Why does GW's motivation for raising prices matter so much? Why do you care about more than just the current price on the box?
Because people dislike feeling like they are being ripped off. If an item for sale costs significantly more than it did some time before, with no good reason, people will feel like they are being gouged. Like when boxes dropped in price by a couple of $ but halved in content, or when they went to a cheaper material and put up prices.
There's maybe nothing rational about it, but consistent increases well above inflation with no justification just gets customers offside, because they'll start to feel like their being ripped off.
Or plastic scenery price increases of 30-100% a month before scenery became must have. The only justification for that is "because customers need it", and that breeds resentment.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 13:59:25
Subject: Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Major
London
|
Herzlos wrote: Peregrine wrote:
GW raises prices far higher than inflation would allow, and they're doing it to "juice" the company's share price in order to sell off the company.
Sorry, but I'm not having it.
Then you are the kind of person I'm asking those questions. Why does GW's motivation for raising prices matter so much? Why do you care about more than just the current price on the box?
Because people dislike feeling like they are being ripped off. If an item for sale costs significantly more than it did some time before, with no good reason, people will feel like they are being gouged. Like when boxes dropped in price by a couple of $ but halved in content, or when they went to a cheaper material and put up prices.
There's maybe nothing rational about it, but consistent increases well above inflation with no justification just gets customers offside, because they'll start to feel like their being ripped off.
Or plastic scenery price increases of 30-100% a month before scenery became must have. The only justification for that is "because customers need it", and that breeds resentment.
This is why I stopped buying GW. I knew they were ripping me off and decided to put my money elsewhere. Sold off a load of spare armies I had and pared it back to the bare minimum I wanted to keep.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 14:05:08
Subject: Re:Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
ExNoctemNacimur wrote:Stranger83 wrote:
Now we are going round in circles - Again, stating companies who are cheaper than GW doesn't make them the most expensive - if GW are "pricing people out of the hobby" why are we not up in arms about the more expensive ones?
Privateer Press models, in the LGS, are as expensive or more expensive than GW ones.
But, you need far fewer models.
This is why people aren't up in arms. As far as I can tell, only GW tries to make mass combat fantasy/sci-fi games in a 28mm scale.
True, and from a game perspective they are cheaper, but if you just want a cheap wargame to play may I suggest Risk. There is more to the hobby than simply playing a game, and you get more “hobby stuff” for the money from GW than the other “big 3”.
I’ve said multiple times that for a game GW is more expensive, I’ve never once claimed that they are – and if the hobby is purely about games for you then yes, GW are more expensive, if the hobby is the full miniature experience however then GW gets you more “bang for your buck”
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Barfolomew wrote:
Yes, with the only difference being the cover. Hard and soft cover contain the exact same information.
I think model for model cost comparison is pointless. What matters is the standard size army which is played by your gaming group. This points value will determine how many models you need and thus how much it will cost. GW from my experience takes anywhere from 2 to 5 times as many models for a standard game than other gaming companies. This means GW can be half the cost as other gaming companies, yet still cost the same or more to field an actual army.
- When I started playing in 2nd edition my army was about 30 models
- When 3rd edition came out, I had to buy about 50 models to make the army competitive and make it so I could field full troop choices. 25 of the previous models were not useful due to rule changes.
- Along comes 4th edition and I have to buy about 20 more models with another 5 dropping to the bench due to rule changes.
- 5th edition and the soon there after 5th edition CSM codex caused me to quit the game until the next edition.
- 6th edition comes out and I was considering restarting, but the rules are still bad. Even if I did come back, I would need to swap about 10 models.
In the end, I purchased 100 models (more actually) so I could field 50 competitive models. On the flip side, my PP army is still competitive with all it's models, with about 50 or less total models.
Again, this is why your definition of “the hobby” matters – and when I questioned it I was told that it refered to the whole miniature experience, including the collecting, painting and converting of minis. Yes, on a game only basis GW are more expensive – but on a Hobby basis (as per how it was defined in this thread) the GW are the cheapear because, on a model by model basis they are cheaper. From the way “The Hobby” is defined in the thread the Model to Model cost is just as relevant as the “cost of a full army”.
Now not everyone will care about the mini experience, and that is fine – there is nothing wrong with being a gamer – but this thread is about “The Hobby” of which the game is only a small part
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/01/10 14:27:28
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 14:13:49
Subject: Re:Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Brigadier General
|
Being "completely new to this thread"..
You apparently didn't check the context of my post and as such much of you'e fact checking is either false or misleading. Quality of miniatures was stated by the member I replied to as NOT being a factor, merely price, and he did not specify sci-fi and fantasy until after he was backed into a corner with evidence provided by myself and others about less expensive figure manufacturers. So trying to shoot down parts of my list based on quality (Mantic, EM4, WGF) or historicals (Victrix) is not applicable.
As for the others...
Perry Miniatures: First google result for "Perry Miniatures" is this http://www.perry-miniatures.com/ Have a look at the high quality historical models. Sculpted by GW sculptors and sold for much less than GW figs!
EM4- Even though your quality comment isn't germaine, I should point out that it looks like you deliberately went to the worst models on the site.
4A miniatures- Not a great site, but many of the figs are unpainted, and at around 4 bucks each for metal are drastically cheaper.
Reaper- Can't navigate the website, Really? Are you 3 years old? Go here: http://www.reapermini.com/miniatures, click on any of the tabs and see metal miniatures that average 20-50% cheaper than similarly sized GW minis and Bones ( resiplasic) minis that are drastically cheaper than finecast and a even cheaper than similarly sized GW plastics.
Ral Partha- Look closer at "Iron Wind Metals" the US manufacturere/distributor. Average price for a man-sized metal model is $4.25. That's far cheaper than GW.
You can have you're opinions about quality and applicability, and you should feel free to share them. However that's not "fact checking" when my responses were completely in line with what was being responded to.
BryllCream wrote:Completely new to this thread but I felt like doing some fact checking.
Google couldn't find any trace of this.
Eilif wrote:
Okay these just look like pure crap:
One dude selling pre-painted models on a website...
Website is un-navigatable so can't comment.
Actually very high quality...except more expensive than GW (at least, the models seem to be). So that's a myth - busted.
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2013/01/10 14:17:44
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 14:15:36
Subject: Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Twisted Trueborn with Blaster
|
oni wrote:Priced out? No.
Fed up with seeing the community and player base suffer as a result of them? Yes!
Agreed.
|
I represent the Surrey Spartans gaming group. Check us out and feel free to come along for a game! https://www.facebook.com/groups/425689674233804/
Tzeentch Daemons 2000pts
Kabal of the Sundering Strike 2500pts
Eldar Corsairs 750pts
400pts Corregidor/Nomads
300pts Yu Jing
200pts+ each of Imperial and Rebel fleets for X-Wing
A Terran Alliance and Dindrenzi Fleet for Firestorm Armada
A Necromunda Goliath gang and Spyrer gang |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 14:33:30
Subject: Re:Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Tea-Kettle of Blood
|
So for you the "full miniature experience" for you is assembling and painting the same plastic guys 30 times in a row? That is what gives you your "more bang for your buck"!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 14:37:23
Subject: Re:Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Eilif wrote:Being "completely new to this thread"..
You apparently didn't check the context of my post and as such much of you'e fact checking is either false or misleading. Quality of miniatures was stated by the member I replied to as NOT being a factor, merely price, and he did not specify sci-fi and fantasy until after he was backed into a corner with evidence provided by myself and others about less expensive figure manufacturers. So trying to shoot down parts of my list based on quality (Mantic, EM4, WGF) or historicals (Victrix) is not applicable.
Yes, I didn’t articulate my point very well, but I still maintain that there is a difference between the people who hobby for historical and the people who hobby for Sci-Fi/Fantasy. And GW are in competition with the latter, not the former. Even if you play both 1 set will, usually be your “preferred” type of game, for example I mainly play/paint historicals but do sometime dable in Sci-fi/Fantasy
Here is an interesting experiment, the next time you go to a gaming club/store/event (where there is likely to be people playing both historical and sci-fi) take a look around at the people without looking at the board and see if you can guess who is going to be playing an historical game and who a Scifi/Fantasy. I’d put money on you being right at least 80% of the time.
Of cause, I’ve admitted that my wording about “one of the cheapest” was a poor choice of words, and “cheapest of the big 4 in their segment of the market” was probably how I should have worded it.
Automatically Appended Next Post: PhantomViper wrote:
So for you the "full miniature experience" for you is assembling and painting the same plastic guys 30 times in a row? That is what gives you your "more bang for your buck"!
I havn't moved the goal post, go back to (I think) page 13 and you'll see that my very first post was "What constitutes the hobby?" And the reply is exactly what I put, that the hoby is everything, not just the game. Everything I've posted since then has been about "the hobby" and not about "the game" - I've made the distinction on multiple occasions.
Would I assemble 30 identical guys all at once in a row – no I wouldn’t,. I wouldn’t even do ten – but I might do 2/3 then do something else and come back to it later. The advantage of GW is I can afford to buy that second box at the same time.
Also, GW stuff in their boxes actually tend to have a reasonable amout of variations (at least their newer stuff that I've bought do)
Automatically Appended Next Post: Infact, I’ll post it here:
Stranger83 wrote:OK, here is another question – what do you consider “the hobby” to be?
If it is purely the gaming aspect then yes GW are the most expensive since you need to buy more stuff than any other game to play, but by that logic pretty much all wargames are more expensive than Monopoly which is also a game that is played between real life people.
To me "the hobby" also includes the collecting, building, converting and painting of the miniatures – indeed as I’ve got older this has become the “main” part of the hobby to me and gaming actually comes second – if you factor all that in you can get a lot more stuff to build/convert/paint with £100 from GW than you can with £100 from anyone else.
So to say “the hobby” is more expensive under GW really depends on what you consider “the hobby” to be about.
And the reply
Breotan wrote:Stranger83 wrote:OK, here is another question – what do you consider “the hobby” to be?
In the context of this discussion, "the hobby" is GW centric. GW often uses that phrase as exclusively theirs along with "Build. Paint. Play." and I made this thread within that context. This includes kitbashing and converting GW product.
Since then everything I;ve said is about “the hobby” as it’s defined to me, which is not “the game” – thus I havn’t changed goalposts at all
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/01/10 14:46:06
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 15:05:17
Subject: Re:Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Backfire wrote:agustin wrote: When you want more revenue for each items in real terms. If you only ever increase prices with inflation, you aren't actually changing your prices in real terms. For Calgar's sake, stop this nonsense about "general trend of inflation". It has absolutely no bearing whatsoever for an individual company. Or even consumer, some would argue. It's just an artificially determined average. You need to read the sentence I wrote again and think about it. If you only increase prices in line with the average amount of price increase for everything, you are not actually raising your prices in real terms. It absolutely has an impact on individual companies as companies that don't keep pace with inflation will have their margins shrink as rising costs eat into their bottom lines and you have to outpace inflation if you want a real price increase. I'm guessing you don't run a business. If you do, I'd highly suggest you pay more attention to changes in your costs when determining your prices. Any accountant will give you the same advice.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/01/10 15:14:16
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 16:42:54
Subject: Re:Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
agustin wrote:Backfire wrote:agustin wrote: When you want more revenue for each items in real terms. If you only ever increase prices with inflation, you aren't actually changing your prices in real terms. For Calgar's sake, stop this nonsense about "general trend of inflation". It has absolutely no bearing whatsoever for an individual company. Or even consumer, some would argue. It's just an artificially determined average. You need to read the sentence I wrote again and think about it. If you only increase prices in line with the average amount of price increase for everything, you are not actually raising your prices in real terms. It absolutely has an impact on individual companies as companies that don't keep pace with inflation will have their margins shrink as rising costs eat into their bottom lines and you have to outpace inflation if you want a real price increase. I'm guessing you don't run a business. If you do, I'd highly suggest you pay more attention to changes in your costs when determining your prices. Any accountant will give you the same advice. No, it's you who doesn't get it but let me explain. Cost changes which a company experiences do not necessarily (in fact, almost never) follow "general trend of inflation" as cost of wages, materials etc do not each slavishly follow the CPI which, I repeat, is an average. For example, things like cell phones and computers have generally got cheaper over time, despite inflation. By contrast, some other things (like say, fuel) have got much more expensive than CPI indicates. For example, in my country, producers are planning a 30% price hike on price of milk. In comparison, average inflation is perhaps 4%. So what effect this price hike - well beyond "normal inflation" - has on industries? For a company manufacturing say, cars, very little. They will have to increase prices a bit to cover increased salaries they have to pay to workers so they can afford milk, but that's probably it. By contrast, a company making dairy products like ice cream, immediately faces inflation much greater than calculated consumer price index and they are forced to rise their prices considerably. So as you see, "general trend of inflation" is completely useless metric in determining how much a price of some individual item should change over the years.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/01/10 16:43:21
Mr Vetock, give back my Multi-tracker! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 16:52:21
Subject: Re:Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Brigadier General
|
Stranger83 wrote:Eilif wrote:Being "completely new to this thread"..
You apparently didn't check the context of my post and as such much of you'e fact checking is either false or misleading. Quality of miniatures was stated by the member I replied to as NOT being a factor, merely price, and he did not specify sci-fi and fantasy until after he was backed into a corner with evidence provided by myself and others about less expensive figure manufacturers. So trying to shoot down parts of my list based on quality (Mantic, EM4, WGF) or historicals (Victrix) is not applicable.
Yes, I didn’t articulate my point very well, but I still maintain that there is a difference between the people who hobby for historical and the people who hobby for Sci-Fi/Fantasy. And GW are in competition with the latter, not the former. Even if you play both 1 set will, usually be your “preferred” type of game, for example I mainly play/paint historicals but do sometime dable in Sci-fi/Fantasy
Here is an interesting experiment, the next time you go to a gaming club/store/event (where there is likely to be people playing both historical and sci-fi) take a look around at the people without looking at the board and see if you can guess who is going to be playing an historical game and who a Scifi/Fantasy. I’d put money on you being right at least 80% of the time.
I'm still not quite sure what you mean by this. Please explain.
The only trend I've seen at conventions is that Historical players seem somewhat older and with a higher propensity toward beards. I'm not sure what that has to do with your point.
I also reject your assertion that GW is in competition with only one segment of the population. I've met a lot of gamers who have been brought into historical gaming by such accessible games as Flames of War, Hail Caesar, and Bolt Action.
There was a time where historical gaming was an intimidating realm of complex rules with low production values and old folks.However, that is changing rapidly as popular level rulesets with high production values, tournament capable rules and affordable plastic miniatures are on the grow. Sure they are not a threat to GW, but they are actively targeting the same gamers, in many cases successfully.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 16:59:18
Subject: Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Tail-spinning Tomb Blade Pilot
|
I'm not gonna read everything in this thread but from what I have been skimming it seems like either A) there is a general lack of knowledge on inflation and what it does to prices. B) people just gripping to grip(aka gw haters)
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 17:00:36
Subject: Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Consigned to the Grim Darkness
|
Breotan wrote:According to BoLS, here are the prices for the new DA stuff coming in January:
Codex: Dark Angels (English) 104pp Colour Hardback $49.50
Ravenwing Dark Talon 1 Mini $75.00
Land Speeder Vengeance 1 Mini $65.00
Deathwing Command Squad 5 Minis $60.00
Ravenwing Command Squad 3 Minis $50.00
Dark Angels Battleforce 8 Minis $110.00
That's right. $75.00 for that flier and $50.00 for three bikes. Oh, and don't forget that awesome DA Battleforce with eight whole models.
I heavily rely on Dark Angels figures for my DYI chapter but I'm wondering if GW has finally hit that magical point where I simply can't justify the cost of their product. I have more disposable income than a lot of people out there so I expect that many of you have already hit this wall. If so, when did it happen for you? If you haven't hit it yet, how is your hobby future looking?
Myself? I find that I am migrating over to Malifaux these days, that and spending obscene amounts of money on kickstarters (damn you McVey, Poots, and the rest). Some small purchases and some specific Forge World purchases are still in the cards, but I'll certainly not be starting up any new armies with GW. I used to buy every codex when it came out. Now I only buy the onces I actually use. Once the annual price increase hits this coming summer, my GW portion of the hobby will likely be reduced to painting. Shame, really.
There's no real magic number that will price EVERYONE out of the hobby, but the number of buyers certainly is decreasing.
|
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 17:24:10
Subject: Re:Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Eilif wrote:Stranger83 wrote:Eilif wrote:Being "completely new to this thread"..
You apparently didn't check the context of my post and as such much of you'e fact checking is either false or misleading. Quality of miniatures was stated by the member I replied to as NOT being a factor, merely price, and he did not specify sci-fi and fantasy until after he was backed into a corner with evidence provided by myself and others about less expensive figure manufacturers. So trying to shoot down parts of my list based on quality (Mantic, EM4, WGF) or historicals (Victrix) is not applicable.
Yes, I didn’t articulate my point very well, but I still maintain that there is a difference between the people who hobby for historical and the people who hobby for Sci-Fi/Fantasy. And GW are in competition with the latter, not the former. Even if you play both 1 set will, usually be your “preferred” type of game, for example I mainly play/paint historicals but do sometime dable in Sci-fi/Fantasy
Here is an interesting experiment, the next time you go to a gaming club/store/event (where there is likely to be people playing both historical and sci-fi) take a look around at the people without looking at the board and see if you can guess who is going to be playing an historical game and who a Scifi/Fantasy. I’d put money on you being right at least 80% of the time.
I'm still not quite sure what you mean by this. Please explain.
The only trend I've seen at conventions is that Historical players seem somewhat older and with a higher propensity toward beards. I'm not sure what that has to do with your point.
I also reject your assertion that GW is in competition with only one segment of the population. I've met a lot of gamers who have been brought into historical gaming by such accessible games as Flames of War, Hail Caesar, and Bolt Action.
There was a time where historical gaming was an intimidating realm of complex rules with low production values and old folks.However, that is changing rapidly as popular level rulesets with high production values, tournament capable rules and affordable plastic miniatures are on the grow. Sure they are not a threat to GW, but they are actively targeting the same gamers, in many cases successfully.
Actually the point about the experiment was just a general observation that I've made in the past - as I tend to only play my friends these days (again, gaming is no longer my main aim in buying models, it's more the hobby side of it for me) and don't often visit a store these days (as they tend to only stock a small range of companies and I get better choice online) I couldn't say how it has changed, if it has then great.
The point however is that Historical and fantasy/Sci-fi are different games that operate at different price branches - yes both are wargames but genrally you are drawn to one type or the other. To give a non wargame example, My other major hobby is archery, of which I personally prefer to use a composite bow. Now if I used a long bow the actions are still (largely) the same, and so is the end goal (i.e. to shot an arrow at a target) but it is a very different experiance and if you do speak to any archers (and I would recommend it to anyone - it's great fun) then you will find them split on weather a composite or longbow is the better choice. Thats not to say that we don't use the other every now and then but my "go to" bow is the compasite.
Now to continue the analogy, Composite bows are around 400% more than a long bow of a similar quality would be - is it then fair to say "Oh, you make Composite bows that are in the middle of the price range of your competitors who make composite bows, but all these companies makes long bows that I can get 400% cheaper so I'm going to say you are overpriced" Some people may well think that it is a fair analogy, personally I don't. People who play historicals first may dabble in Fantasy/Sci-fi but my experaince (and that is all that I have to go on afterall) is that they tend to see themselves are historical gamers first and formost, and GW therefore is not targetting them so won't price itself accordingly to the competition on that side of wargaming.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 17:36:55
Subject: Re:Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Backfire wrote: Cost changes which a company experiences do not necessarily (in fact, almost never) follow "general trend of inflation" as cost of wages, materials etc do not each slavishly follow the CPI which, I repeat, is an average. And what happens when something differs from an average? It's exceptional. GW prices increases are exceptional when compared to an average increase of prices across a variety of areas. That's why the metric is useful. It shows you when you need to look at other factors. For GW, that factor is maximum revenue generation in terms of number of goods sold times their price. So as you see, "general trend of inflation" is completely useless metric in determining how much a price of some individual item should change over the years. Who said GW prices should line up with inflation? Not me. I said the opposite. That the price increases MUST outpace inflation or their attempt to maximize revenue in real terms won't work. The post you quoted from was one where I explicitly said they should price their products at whatever they believe should give them maximum revenue. You are conflating my position with that held by others. ...
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/01/10 17:44:26
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 17:47:44
Subject: Re:Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Lieutenant Colonel
|
While the topic has turned to target demoghrapics...
GW plc is NOT in competition with any other war game company out there.
GW plc is NOT a war games company.
GW plc are '..in the buisness of selling toy soldier to children...'
And so if the minatures are worth the price to you personaly, you are part of GW plc target demoghrapic.
If they appear to NOT be value for money , you are no longer part of GW plc's target demoghrapic.
As gamers are catered for far better by other companies products.
I assume GW plc is pinning all their hopes on a small cadre of die hard fans paying any amount they charge...
As GW plc turn over is NOT keeping up with the rate of their price rises.They are loosing sales volumes.
So this practice is not sustainable long term.
I hope GW plc have a better long term buisness plan than raise prices to make up falling sales volumes.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 17:49:34
Subject: Re:Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
The Daemon Possessing Fulgrim's Body
|
Peregrine wrote:So, for the people who seem to have some standard for what price increases are acceptable, beyond "can I afford this?" (for example, "more than inflation"), I have some questions
1) What percentage of total sales is a justified amount of profit for a company? At what point do you feel that they are obligated to accept that they have enough profit and lower prices to help the customer?
As much as humanly possible, 1000s of percent if you can get away with it, this is a capitalist world in the main, and a non public sector organisation should always do as much as possible to make as much as possible. This is of course completely irrelevant to the discussion as the thread is about how much people are prepared to pay, not how much the company should charge.
2) What is an acceptable reason, if any, for raising prices beyond the general trend of inflation? For example, is it justified to raise prices to hire a better codex author, or is a company obligated to limit their price increases to the level of inflation and just take a loss in profits to pay for those things?
To take your example, they could hire the best rules writer on the planet and provide him with a bevy of nubile, scantily clad slaves to hand engrave rules onto gold leaf, and that still wouldn't make a massive impact on production costs when broken down per unit. A company has a responsibility to keep its costs under control, if they start to dictate the retail price must be higher than what a customer is generally happy to pay, that company has a problem.
To answer your question, anything that improves quality or useability, or long term will facilitate lower costs or better value, and theoretically increase sales, However, companies will often make a loss in some years as a result of investment in equipment, property etc. without mindlessly shovelling those costs onto their customer, in order to be more efficient and therefore more profitable long term (which is a concept that seems to elude GW,) as most organisations are aware that unnecessary or disproportionate price rises can damage their relationship with their customer base.
3) How do you determine, in an objective sense, what price is justified for a model? For example, how can you say not just that a model is too expensive in your opinion and not appealing, but that its price represents some kind of unfairness by the company selling it?
That's simple, my desire to own a model must outweigh the cost. I have just happily shelled out nearly 40GBP on Kromlech's Rotten Butcher as a GUO for my demons, because it is, in my opinion, a better model than the pile of hammered green stuff that GW is offering as the official model for a similar price. Therefore, as I perceive the official model to be of lesser quality, it is also overpriced.
The fact is, it's impossible to be objective in this context, as we are, in a basic sense, dealing with art (miniatures are a form of sculpture after all) and therefore it is inherently subjective. One can, however, argue that any GW kit is inherently overpriced the first time it has been through a price rise that increases it's price above inflation, as with the odd exception, the production costs that allowed the original price to be profitable will likely only have gone up themselves in line with inflation.
[4) How much is a company allowed to raise prices for a higher-quality product? For example, how much is GW allowed to increase the price when moving from a paperback codex to a hardcover one of higher quality?
It's allowed to raise them as much as it likes, I don't have to buy it. The issue we have with the current situation is that there seems to be a hardcore or a percentage of desperately ill informed consumers that eat up whatever GW do. In dog training parlance they are rewarding bad behaviour and therefore not motivating them to change their currently successful ways to something that would be more acceptable to those of us posting in this thread. Until even those people reach their limit, or those of us who have a different perspective find a way of reaching them, we're boned.
Your example is somewhat flawed though, as the assumption that hardback is higher quality in this instance is a little subjective, I've seen multiple comments on the reduced portability of hardback, while they are likely more durable, that isn't necessarily what the consumer wants, so that doesn't make them inherently "better"
5) At what point do you feel obligated (possibly based on the previous four factors) to refuse to buy a product that you want and can afford, simply because it passes your threshold for "overpriced"?
That will never happen, as long as the desire for the product is higher than the cost. However as the prices get higher, the quality must increase proportionately, and that simply isn't happening, in fact, almost the reverse IMO.
|
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Ask me about
Barnstaple Slayers Club |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 19:07:46
Subject: Re:Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Human Auxiliary to the Empire
|
The prices ar ethe reason I've been debating on actually getting into 40k. I would like to start a Tau army, but I don't really have the funds to keep up with it.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 19:20:30
Subject: Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Badass "Sister Sin"
|
Tau are actually one of the most affordable armies to start right now. Just find someone who is selling off their old tau and buy secondhand.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 19:32:28
Subject: Re:Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Speedy Swiftclaw Biker
|
I've not spent anything with them in 2 years. I've got loads of stuff from years ago when I was a kid, and I've bought some other newer stuff off mates recently - I've bought some second hand codexes too. I got a box of three rhino's for 20 quid (I know this old cliche - but I bloody did!) when I was a boy.
I saved up for them. Now I'm a grown man and I have to save up for one??!? AND IT HURTS. PHYSICALLY HURTS WHEN YOU PAY THOSE PRICES. You've metaphorically been kicked in the gut whilst having your pride questioned. You actually walk out feeling soiled. That's not a 'retail experience' I'm willing to partake of :p.
Infinity is a great game with really nice models. They're not that cheap, but they're cheaper than GW and I don't need loads of them to make a viable army. I'm happy to play that, buying new models for it as and when, and happy to keep playing 40k with what I do have. If I can pick things up cheap I will.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/01/10 19:33:07
Back in the day, we were epic Space Vikings with horns, and beer, and stupid mockney accents, and we didn't have any truck with this flying around like a pansy shizzle. We certainly didn't surround ourselves with mangy animals.
Now we're basically the Bestiality Chapter.
We also now ride chariots and employ daemonic dreadnoughts...also, we fly and teleport with abandon. With wolves. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 19:57:15
Subject: Re:Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Badass "Sister Sin"
|
Tehjonny wrote:I saved up for them. Now I'm a grown man and I have to save up for one??!? AND IT HURTS. PHYSICALLY HURTS WHEN YOU PAY THOSE PRICES.
You may want to see a doctor and a career counselor in that order.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 20:21:46
Subject: Re:Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
agustin wrote:Backfire wrote:
Cost changes which a company experiences do not necessarily (in fact, almost never) follow "general trend of inflation" as cost of wages, materials etc do not each slavishly follow the CPI which, I repeat, is an average.
And what happens when something differs from an average? It's exceptional.
GW prices increases are exceptional when compared to an average increase of prices across a variety of areas.
That's why the metric is useful. It shows you when you need to look at other factors. For GW, that factor is maximum revenue generation in terms of number of goods sold times their price.
No. An average value is just a median. It's an average calculated from set of values, and tells us nothing about prevalence of 'average value' in the set. In fact, often they are rare, or totally non-existing. Good luck, for example, finding a real life "average" family with 2.3 children.
I won't even go to all kinds of adjustions which they do when calculating average inflation. It's not straightforward because consumer products change or are discontinued over time, and have to be replaced with other items, which are often signifantly different (VHS -> DVD etc). Also, selection of sample items from which the prices are calculated is not an exact science.
Lots of people think that CPI as it is reported to public, is a crock and the numbers they produce are artificially low. Google "I can't eat an iPad" for an example. But that's another day, another issue.
agustin wrote:
So as you see, "general trend of inflation" is completely useless metric in determining how much a price of some individual item should change over the years.
Who said GW prices should line up with inflation? Not me. I said the opposite. That the price increases MUST outpace inflation or their attempt to maximize revenue in real terms won't work. The post you quoted from was one where I explicitly said they should price their products at whatever they believe should give them maximum revenue.
You are conflating my position with that held by others.
...
No I'm not. You keep repeating same mistake, assigning some meaning to "general inflation rate" which is quite irrelevant from perspective of single company which works in niche business. There is no reason why GW production costs would follow average consumer price index, and in all likelihood they don't, probably not even close - though I don't care to guess whether they are signifantly lower, or higher.
|
Mr Vetock, give back my Multi-tracker! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 20:30:31
Subject: Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Consigned to the Grim Darkness
|
Actually, an average value doesn't have to be a median.
But let's not get in to that discussion.
A value that is way off of the average is an outlier, which is by definition exceptional.
|
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 20:50:45
Subject: Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
I like all the scientific analysis of if GW's products are overpriced or not going on in this thread.
You really just need to think to yourself, is this fairly priced? That alone answers the question.
|
My Armies:
5,500pts
2,700pts
2,000pts
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/01/10 22:10:06
Subject: Has GW finally hit that magic number that will price people out of the hobby?
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
I instantly thought I had to share this with this thread:
I just received an e-mail about a product I sell, describing it as "pretty equivalent to GW terrain prices".
I can not afford to sell my products any cheaper, since I am already making minimum profit. (In the grand scheme of things, if you take into account the ammount of time I spend getting my product ready for the customer, I am losing money), but after all, it's a garage project I built for my own amusement.
It seems while the most prominent miniature companies have priced me out of "large battle" game systems and into "skirmish sized" game systems, I have been prized INTO their business xD
|
|
|
 |
 |
|