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.

Eilif wrote:
Stranger 83,
You've backed yourself into a corner where the only way you can win your argument that the best place to spend your £10 is GW is to ONLY compare GW price-per-miniature to two of the most expensive miniature makers out there. And those are games who don't require nearly as many miniatures as GW games.

You've formed an argument based on discounting the dozens of other miniature wargaming options whose price per-figure AND price per army are drastically cheaper than any of the "Big 3". And you've discounted them soley because they don't fit into your point of view.

Give it up man. You've LOST!

But my point is still the same, if GW are not the most expensive why do people not compalin about the more expensive companies pricing people out of the market? Again, the fact that there are other companies cheaper than GW doesn;t make them the most expensive. By all means complain that you find GW too expensive, but if you do the, on the stand point of the fully hobby (i.e. not just the game) then you should find the compaines more expensive than them to all be too expensive and complain about them just as much.

And for price per model IS important when you inclde both "Build" and "Paint" into the hobby, which I was told by the thread OP is what was meant by "The Hobby"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 keezus wrote:

Stranger83 wrote:
I’m also not sure what you are basing your maths on – you show that you can get 10 infinaty models for $80 and are comparing that to 50 GW models, which doesn’t seem fair to me.
quote]

I think you are overly fixated on model/$ in a vacuum.

In my original example, you've completly ignored my argument that the number of models needed to enable standard play with other players needs to be relevant. If 40k (for example) needs on average, 50 models to hit 1500 points, and Infinity needs 10 models, it means that the Infinity player is getting full use (i.e. play) out of his/her models after $80 investment where as at that point the 40k player might have 2 troops and an HQ at that point, and twice the models of the Infinity player, but if they intend to play standard sized games - the 40k player needs to continue buying models. This is of course by game design.

Using your example of 50 models in each system:

50 models ~ 1500 points in 40k
- Standard game size: 1500-1850
- Play style(s) afforded by 1 1500 point army - one (This is by game design, as 40k units rely heavily on their own statistics to carry the day, and unit actions are limited by the targeting rules.)

50 models ~ 75 points in Warmahordes
- Standard game size: 35-50 points
- Play style(s) afforded by 1x 50 point model + 25 points in hot-swappable components - 10+ (This is by game design, as WM/H units rely heavily on unit to unit interactions and swapping out a unit creates different synergies)

50 models ~ ??? points in Infinity
- Play styles afforded by 50 models!!! is enormous as Infinity relies on MODEL TO MODEL interations and having 50 hot-swappable pieces creates hundreds of possible play styles!

Ergo - In your example, the other systems cost more money to get to the 50 point mark, but offer greater "HOBBY' value as they provide greater tactical options in game-play. This is again, by concious design by the various game system designers.

Keezus, you are looking at it for a gamer perspective. For someone who is a hobbiest that collects models first and plays games second (and believe me there are many out there- infact there are many hobbiests who collect models and never play) then the number of points that the army would be does not matter. Now I've shown that Infinity is the cheaper game, I've accepted that from the start - but this is about the hobby, which I was informed was "Build, paint,play" and therefore the number of stuff you get to "build and paint" for your cash is just as important as size of the army you get for it too.

Stranger83 wrote:
Yes, and I presume that the people who are diven away from GW for the price are also driven away from the more expensive ones too.

That is not necessarily true:

e.g. 1 - Baneblade Superheavy vs. Warmachine Colossal

The colossal is more expensive but a player might still spring for one, as you can use it in normal sized games and it adds a new dimension of gameplay to the WM/H system. The Baneblade on the other hand (Disclaimer: I own a Shadowsword) is more of a centerpiece that will see little to no gameplay at all and is basically just a fancy model kit... ergo, as far as Hobby goes, the Colossal provides more VALUE as you get the gameplay out of it as well. This perception of VALUE does a lot to sway customers.

e.g. 2 - The Hobbit: White Council vs. Chaos Helldrake

This seems like terrible value, as it contains models that may not see a lot of game play for a huge price. (Finecast too!). The Helldrake on the other hand, for Chaos players will see tons of game-play despite its high cost. Ergo, GW are likely selling many magnitudes more Helldrakes than White Councils.

e.g. 3 - GW Manticore vs Raging Heroes Manticre

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Stranger83 wrote:
Keezus, you are looking at it for a gamer perspective. For someone who is a hobbiest that collects models first and plays games second (and believe me there are many out there- infact there are many hobbiests who collect models and never play) then the number of points that the army would be does not matter. Now I've shown that Infinity is the cheaper game, I've accepted that from the start - but this is about the hobby, which I was informed was "Build, paint,play" and therefore the number of stuff you get to "build and paint" for your cash is just as important as size of the army you get for it too.

I already covered this in my inital post... which noted that if customers were buying only to build-paint, they need not be limited to WARGAMING miniatures and models. Companies like Reaper make quality fantasy models at competitive prices, and Raging Heroes and Kingdom Death are putting out high quality display pieces that are specifically targetting modellers. There's no reason for a Helldrake to cost the money that it does when non-wargaming manufacturers are offering things like fully articulated, and engineered transforming model kits for about half the price.

I'll use a comparison I used earlier in the thread for emphasis.

I bought a Kromlech Rotten Butcher, which is slightly more expensive than a Workshop GUO but makes an ideal counts as. Its a bit larger and resin cast, so is a roughly comparable as a product being sold to the same consumers in the same market for a comparable purpose.

However I am happy that I have purchased a great model and have no regrets over spending the money.

The issue I have with the GUO is the quality of the model is not sufficiently high to justify the asking price, so thats why I haven't bought it.

I think thats the issue here, it's not that the prices of GW models is inherently higher than many other companies, it's that the price is disproportionate to the product on offer. If the Council consisted of 4 of the most epically sculpted, dynamically posed models ever tp grace a range, this conversation would be much shorter.

 keezus wrote:

Stranger83 wrote:
Yes, and I presume that the people who are diven away from GW for the price are also driven away from the more expensive ones too.

That is not necessarily true:

e.g. 1 - Baneblade Superheavy vs. Warmachine Colossal

The colossal is more expensive but a player might still spring for one, as you can use it in normal sized games and it adds a new dimension of gameplay to the WM/H system. The Baneblade on the other hand (Disclaimer: I own a Shadowsword) is more of a centerpiece that will see little to no gameplay at all and is basically just a fancy model kit... ergo, as far as Hobby goes, the Colossal provides more VALUE as you get the gameplay out of it as well. This perception of VALUE does a lot to sway customers.

e.g. 2 - The Hobbit: White Council vs. Chaos Helldrake

This seems like terrible value, as it contains models that may not see a lot of game play for a huge price. (Finecast too!). The Helldrake on the other hand, for Chaos players will see tons of game-play despite its high cost. Ergo, GW are likely selling many magnitudes more Helldrakes than White Councils.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Stranger83 wrote:
Keezus, you are looking at it for a gamer perspective. For someone who is a hobbiest that collects models first and plays games second (and believe me there are many out there- infact there are many hobbiests who collect models and never play) then the number of points that the army would be does not matter. Now I've shown that Infinity is the cheaper game, I've accepted that from the start - but this is about the hobby, which I was informed was "Build, paint,play" and therefore the number of stuff you get to "build and paint" for your cash is just as important as size of the army you get for it too.

I already covered this in my inital post... which noted that if customers were buying only to build-paint, they need not be limited to WARGAMING miniatures and models. Companies like Reaper make quality fantasy models at competitive prices, and Raging Heroes and Kingdom Death are putting out high quality display pieces that are specifically targetting modellers. There's no reason for a Helldrake to cost the money that it does when non-wargaming manufacturers are offering things like fully articulated, and engineered transforming model kits for about half the price.

Kingdom Death and Raging Heroes are both perfect examples, both charge more than GW as standard yet are still being bought in droves, yet neither comes with an offical game attached. Now since the question is "Are GW priceing people out of the hobby?" and not "are GW overpriced?" they how can we say that GW are priceing people out if there are 2 other companies selling so well? Yes both Raging Heroes and Kingdom death make much better minis, but again, the thread is about price alone


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 azreal13 wrote:
I'll use a comparison I used earlier in the thread for emphasis.

I bought a Kromlech Rotten Butcher, which is slightly more expensive than a Workshop GUO but makes an ideal counts as. Its a bit larger and resin cast, so is a roughly comparable as a product being sold to the same consumers in the same market for a comparable purpose.

However I am happy that I have purchased a great model and have no regrets over spending the money.

The issue I have with the GUO is the quality of the model is not sufficiently high to justify the asking price, so thats why I haven't bought it.

I think thats the issue here, it's not that the prices of GW models is inherently higher than many other companies, it's that the price is disproportionate to the product on offer. If the Council consisted of 4 of the most epically sculpted, dynamically posed models ever tp grace a range, this conversation would be much shorter.

this exactly, if people are prepared to pay for other other companies models then the issue is not that GW are so expensive, it's that they are so expensive for what you get, they 2 are very different arguments.

GW's prices are getting crazy, they are really shooting themselves in the foot, especially as many for the GW shops here in the UK are stopping gaming nights when gamers going to the gaming nights are probably their main source of income.

Also have you guys seen the new Space Marine bundles they released where you don't get a discount?

You hit the nail on the head. GW is expensive for what you get. Ergo, for some, the price has become untennable.

 keezus wrote:
You hit the nail on the head. GW is expensive for what you get. Ergo, for some, the price has become untennable.

Yes, but this is not the same as GW pricing you out of the hobby - it's not that they are so expensive that you can't afford their stuff, it's that you feel the other stuff is better value for money. The 2 are different things.

How is it not? If it were cheaper (or the game system was better), it'd offer better value for money, and those who left might still be customers.

I have had a thought... as you all know GW have been making these bundles where you don't get any savings. I'm thinking that when GW raise the prices once again, they will keep the bundles the same price as they are now so then they will look like a 'good value' compared to the prices of everything else, essentially scamming unwary people.

 keezus wrote:
How is it not? If it were cheaper (or the game system was better), it'd offer better value for money, and those who left might still be customers.

Because being priced out means that you can no longer afford to buy something you want. It''s not the same as choosing to buy something else because you think it's better value for money.

For example, I am priced out of owning a supercar, however I am not priced out of owning a ford - I don't own a Ford because for the money I would have to spend on a Ford I could get a better quality car (in my opinion) elsewhere. The two are not the same thing.

Stranger83 wrote:
Because being priced out means that you can no longer afford to buy something you want. It''s not the same as choosing to buy something else because you think it's better value for money.

For example, I am priced out of owning a supercar, however I am not priced out of owning a ford - I don't own a Ford because for the money I would have to spend on a Ford I could get a better quality car (in my opinion) elsewhere. The two are not the same thing.

Right... except in this case, GW is making Fords but pricing them like Super Cars. Super Car buyers aren't going to buy Fords at Super Car prices, and people that want Fords can't afford Super Cars.

-edit- actually.. it's more like super car bodies on Ford platforms. So there are still people that will buy these for the look, but they are part of a decreasing population.

Stranger83 wrote:


Kingdom Death and Raging Heroes are both perfect examples, both charge more than GW as standard yet are still being bought in droves, yet neither comes with an offical game attached. Now since the question is "Are GW priceing people out of the hobby?" and not "are GW overpriced?" they how can we say that GW are priceing people out if there are 2 other companies selling so well? Yes both Raging Heroes and Kingdom death make much better minis, but again, the thread is about price alone

Actually, the argument still applies. Keep in mind that GW markets itself as a gateway to the young and novice. Both Raging Heroes and Kingdom Death are for more seasoned veterans of the hobby with a much higher degree of skill.

Stranger83 wrote:
Keezus, you are looking at it for a gamer perspective. For someone who is a hobbiest that collects models first and plays games second (and believe me there are many out there- infact there are many hobbiests who collect models and never play) then the number of points that the army would be does not matter. Now I've shown that Infinity is the cheaper game, I've accepted that from the start - but this is about the hobby, which I was informed was "Build, paint,play" and therefore the number of stuff you get to "build and paint" for your cash is just as important as size of the army you get for it too.

The problem though is that most people who collect and never game are in fact going to be spending significantly more per figure from GW than elsewhere - as they will likely be more interested in character figures as opposed to unit boxes.

The only thing that keeps prices down per figure on a 100 figure army for GW are their relatively (compared to metal) cheap plastics. If you are a collector - you will probably not want to collect and paint 80 some odd Cadian infantry. Instead, you will want models that have a lot of character to allow more painting styles as opposed to the drudgery of painting dozens of the same figure.

In that regard, GW is at least twice as expensive as anyone else, with many figures being much more than that. In that regard, the Build-Paint aspect of the hobby is less with GW. Although there is more building and painting to make a playable army...for those who are not interested in the Gaming aspect of miniatures - it isn't really a selling point that the troops costs are a little bit lower for GW, as in most cases they will only be picking up a single box of troops to convert and paint as opposed to a half dozen of those troops which are needed for a playable army.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/150/497907.page#5135618

If you were to take your same dollar amount to any company other than GW, you would get a larger variety of figures to paint than you would from GW with the exception of some limited run boutique companies (who are priced higher than GW - but not by all that much in most cases).

So...You take each system and compare the value for each type of hobbyist.

Miniature Painters and Modelers? No - you do not get good bang for the buck. There is an advantage to GW though in that a large selection of plastic figures are available and plastic is the preferred medium for a lot of converters.

Gamers? No - you do not get good bang for the buck. Entry costs for new armies and keeping up with rules changes is quite costly. There is an advantage with 40K though in that it is more popular in most areas than other games.

People who like to roll dice? GW has an edge here, as the rules were largely designed for smaller games and still require more dice rolls per turn than most other game systems. Although you could well enough scale other games up to comparable sizes - they generally are not.

this exactly, if people are prepared to pay for other other companies models then the issue is not that GW are so expensive, it's that they are so expensive for what you get, they 2 are very different arguments.

See the link above. They are both expensive and expensive for what you get. Two different arguments with the same end result. Troops, they are a little cheaper. Characters, they are a lot more expensive. Monsters and the like they are comparable or horrible depending on the material in question.

 keezus wrote:

Stranger83 wrote:
Because being priced out means that you can no longer afford to buy something you want. It''s not the same as choosing to buy something else because you think it's better value for money.

For example, I am priced out of owning a supercar, however I am not priced out of owning a ford - I don't own a Ford because for the money I would have to spend on a Ford I could get a better quality car (in my opinion) elsewhere. The two are not the same thing.

Right... except in this case, GW is making Fords but pricing them like Super Cars. Super Car buyers aren't going to buy Fords at Super Car prices, and people that want Fords can't afford Super Cars.

And this is where my point about GW not being the most expensive comes in - for your example if GW are charging like supercars then so ares PP/infinity/raging heroes/kingdom death and any other company that costs more than GW. Now if you are all able to buy GW stuff (or the supercar) but decided that they want something that you precieve to be better for the money you spend. you people havn't been "priced out" of GW stuff - you have just deciding to buy something else.

Stranger83 wrote:
And this is where my point about GW not being the most expensive comes in - for your example if GW are charging like supercars then everyone who buys PP/infinity/raging heroes/kingdom death and any other company that costs more than GW are all able to buy GW stuff - they just decided that they want something that they precieve to be better for the money they spend. these people havn't bee "priced out" of GW stuff - they are just deciding to buy something else.

So by your logic, if I were to sell cubic zirconiums as diamonds, at diamond prices, and people who want to buy diamonds pass me by to buy actual diamonds from another company - I haven't priced myself out of the market... I'm only providing poor value.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree.

Now that I think of it, since the AUS dollar is almost the same as the American is, perhaps GW realises that they can keep increasing the prices to the same as the AUS prices?

For example, a Land raider costs:
$110 AUS
$ 74.25 USD

So since $1 AUS = $1.05 USD, GW knows that since people are still buying the $110.00 Land raider in AUS with the same money, they can increase the USD prices to from $74.25 to $110.00 and people will still buy it.

 Sean_OBrien wrote:

Stranger83 wrote:
Keezus, you are looking at it for a gamer perspective. For someone who is a hobbiest that collects models first and plays games second (and believe me there are many out there- infact there are many hobbiests who collect models and never play) then the number of points that the army would be does not matter. Now I've shown that Infinity is the cheaper game, I've accepted that from the start - but this is about the hobby, which I was informed was "Build, paint,play" and therefore the number of stuff you get to "build and paint" for your cash is just as important as size of the army you get for it too.

The problem though is that most people who collect and never game are in fact going to be spending significantly more per figure from GW than elsewhere - as they will likely be more interested in character figures as opposed to unit boxes.

The only thing that keeps prices down per figure on a 100 figure army for GW are their relatively (compared to metal) cheap plastics. If you are a collector - you will probably not want to collect and paint 80 some odd Cadian infantry. Instead, you will want models that have a lot of character to allow more painting styles as opposed to the drudgery of painting dozens of the same figure.

In that regard, GW is at least twice as expensive as anyone else, with many figures being much more than that. In that regard, the Build-Paint aspect of the hobby is less with GW. Although there is more building and painting to make a playable army...for those who are not interested in the Gaming aspect of miniatures - it isn't really a selling point that the troops costs are a little bit lower for GW, as in most cases they will only be picking up a single box of troops to convert and paint as opposed to a half dozen of those troops which are needed for a playable army.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/150/497907.page#5135618

If you were to take your same dollar amount to any company other than GW, you would get a larger variety of figures to paint than you would from GW with the exception of some limited run boutique companies (who are priced higher than GW - but not by all that much in most cases).

So...You take each system and compare the value for each type of hobbyist.

Miniature Painters and Modelers? No - you do not get good bang for the buck. There is an advantage to GW though in that a large selection of plastic figures are available and plastic is the preferred medium for a lot of converters.

Gamers? No - you do not get good bang for the buck. Entry costs for new armies and keeping up with rules changes is quite costly. There is an advantage with 40K though in that it is more popular in most areas than other games.

People who like to roll dice? GW has an edge here, as the rules were largely designed for smaller games and still require more dice rolls per turn than most other game systems. Although you could well enough scale other games up to comparable sizes - they generally are not.

this exactly, if people are prepared to pay for other other companies models then the issue is not that GW are so expensive, it's that they are so expensive for what you get, they 2 are very different arguments.

See the link above. They are both expensive and expensive for what you get. Two different arguments with the same end result. Troops, they are a little cheaper. Characters, they are a lot more expensive. Monsters and the like they are comparable or horrible depending on the material in question.

Actually if you are building and paitning an entire unit/regiment then a similar style is preferable. For instance I have a full regiment of British troops from WW2 (granted using models from a couple of different companies) that I have never painted, I got these so that I could recreate my Grandads regiment for him for his 85th Birthday, he was very touched. People only in it for the models (or mainly in it ffor the models) don;t have some kind of hatred for unit models.

And yes, the end result of being priced out of GW stuff and choosing to not buy GW stuff because they are overpriced is the same (i.e you don;t buy GW stuff) But the thread is about are you priced out, noy have you stoppe buying for any reason at all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 keezus wrote:

Stranger83 wrote:
And this is where my point about GW not being the most expensive comes in - for your example if GW are charging like supercars then everyone who buys PP/infinity/raging heroes/kingdom death and any other company that costs more than GW are all able to buy GW stuff - they just decided that they want something that they precieve to be better for the money they spend. these people havn't bee "priced out" of GW stuff - they are just deciding to buy something else.

So by your logic, if I were to sell cubic zirconiums as diamonds, at diamond prices, and people who want to buy diamonds pass me by to buy actual diamonds from another company - I haven't priced myself out of the market... I'm only providing poor value.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree.

Ah no, again different things, GW priceing themselves out of the market is not the same as a customer being priced out of buying their stuff. Yes GW have priced themselves out of the market for anyone who thinks that they are overpriced for what you get, but you are not priced out of buying GW, you are just choosing not to.

 VanHammer wrote:
Now that I think of it, since the AUS dollar is almost the same as the American is, perhaps GW realises that they can keep increasing the prices to the same as the AUS prices?

For example, a Land raider costs:
$110 AUS
$ 74.25 USD

So since $1 AUS = $1.05 USD, GW knows that since people are still buying the $110.00 Land raider in AUS with the same money, they can increase the USD prices to from $74.25 to $110.00 and people will still buy it.

As stupid as GW can be, I think they would be idiotic to base pricing info off Aussie sales figures. From what I have heard and been told, Aus sales have absolutely tanked since the embargo (not surprising really).

What about the Canadian prices then?
The Canadian dollar is also worth more than the american yet Canadians still pay more for the same products from GW.

 VanHammer wrote:
What about the Canadian prices then?
The Canadian dollar is also worth more than the american yet Canadians still pay more for the same products from GW.

Possibly. Ultimately, GW will keep hiking prices up to the point that the market will bear it. If people are still buying stuff in sufficient enough quantities, then that strategy is working for them.

 VanHammer wrote:
What about the Canadian prices then?
The Canadian dollar is also worth more than the american yet Canadians still pay more for the same products from GW.

Yeah, regional pricing is terrible, talk about a way to piss off your customers.

Stranger83 wrote:
Yes, and I presume that the people who are diven away from GW for the price are also driven away from the more expensive ones too.

Is this a valid assumption? What about higher per model costs but lower per army cost games? Do you really think every single person does a per figure cost analysis and decides soley on the result of that? People keep bringing up that the total cost for a game is lower on many miniature games than for 40k (and especially for WFB). I think they bring this up with good reason. Perceived value is also an important factor that might lead someone to purchase something that costs more than GW but is seen as a better alternative. I can think of lots of reasons where people will be driven away from GW by their prices but then buy miniatures that are more expensive on a per figure basis but offer something GW does not.

Stranger83 wrote:Yes, but this is not the same as GW pricing you out of the hobby - it's not that they are so expensive that you can't afford their stuff, it's that you feel the other stuff is better value for money. The 2 are different things.

Priced out of the hobby does NOT mean you can't afford it. It means you won't buy it because of the price. It says nothing about what you can afford. Some people priced out of GW's games have hobbies like snow boarding and skiing that cost way, way more. They can afford it. They just don't see the value.

For the remainder of this thread can we agree that "priced out" means anyone not purchasing because of the price, regardless of what they can afford or not?

And even if we agree that priced out does mean that people can't afford it, what's the point of the distinction? GW is pricing their goods at a higher and higher rate each year and more and more people aren't buying. What does it matter if some of them are priced out by your definiton and the rest just don't see the value anymore? End result is that they're not buying the quantity they used to.

@Filbert: Canada enjoys a 20% markup over US MSRP. Our discounters basically sell product to us at US MSRP. Buying from US discounters is akin to 50% discount.

 filbert wrote:

 VanHammer wrote:
What about the Canadian prices then?
The Canadian dollar is also worth more than the american yet Canadians still pay more for the same products from GW.

Possibly. Ultimately, GW will keep hiking prices up to the point that the market will bear it. If people are still buying stuff in sufficient enough quantities, then that strategy is working for them.

This.

Though I'm really not sure how well this is working for GW. I have a friend in Toronto that runs a game store there and he's always complaining about losing sales to US ebay sellers and Miniature Market on GW stuff.

But this will be hidden from the share holders as they no longer report Canada separately from USA. Sales to Canada come from the same production center in the USA.

agustin wrote:

Stranger83 wrote:
Yes, and I presume that the people who are diven away from GW for the price are also driven away from the more expensive ones too.

Is this a valid assumption? What about higher per model costs but lower per army cost games? Do you really think every single person does a per figure cost analysis and decides soley on the result of that? People keep bringing up that the total cost for a game is lower on many miniature games than for 40k (and especially for WFB). I think they bring this up with good reason. Perceived value is also an important factor that might lead someone to purchase something that costs more than GW but is seen as a better alternative. I can think of lots of reasons where people will be driven away from GW by their prices but then buy miniatures that are more expensive on a per figure basis but offer something GW does not.

Stranger83 wrote:Yes, but this is not the same as GW pricing you out of the hobby - it's not that they are so expensive that you can't afford their stuff, it's that you feel the other stuff is better value for money. The 2 are different things.

Priced out of the hobby does NOT mean you can't afford it. It means you won't buy it because of the price. It says nothing about what you can afford. Some people priced out of GW's games have hobbies like snow boarding and skiing that cost way, way more. They can afford it. They just don't see the value.

For the remainder of this thread can we agree that "priced out" means anyone not purchasing because of the price, regardless of what they can afford or not?

And even if we agree that priced out does mean that people can't afford it, what's the point of the distinction? GW is pricing their goods at a higher and higher rate each year and more and more people aren't buying. What does it matter if some of them are priced out by your definiton and the rest just don't see the value anymore? End result is that they're not buying the quantity they used to.

Fair enough, maybe "cannot afford" is the wrong choice of words again, "cannot afford from the budget they assign to the hobby" would have been better.

If we are going to agree that the "priced out" doesn't actually mean "priced out" but infact means I'm not prepared to pay their prices for stuff then yes there will be lots of people priced out of GW.

As for the point of the destinction. There isn;t one - but the thread itself puts a distinction in there - i.e. not "are people leaving GW because they think things are overpriced" it's "Are people leaveing GW because they are priced out" The answer to the first question is yes, the answer to the second is no.

"Priced out" is not a specific term you can point at for an objective definition. It has different usages in different circles (for example, in real estate, it only applies to sellers listing their houses above market comparables), so I don't understand why you are insisting on your specific definition for it. As if what you are saying is the definition of priced out.

Why not go with the broad and colloquial meaning that people just won't buy because of price?

Everyone else understood that priced out just meant people not buying because of price. You added this extra "because they can't afford it" criteria onto the thread that just wasn't there before you brought it up.

agustin wrote:
Why are you making the distinction if it is meaningless?

"Priced out" is not a specific term you can point at for an objective definition. It has different usages in different circles (for example, in real estate, it only applies to sellers listing their houses above market comparables), so I don't understand why you are insisting on your specific definition for it. As if what you are saying is the definition of priced out.

Why not go with the broad and colloquial meaning that people just won't buy because of price?

I'm making the distinction because the distinction is right there in the thread title. I'm answering the question that was asked, not the question that I want to have been asked.

Priced out from the point of view of the seller means that it is above market value (for example GW have priced themselves out of the market) as their models are too expensive for what you get Priced out from the point of view of the buyer means they cannot afford it with the budget they have. to use your real estate example, a house that is more expensive than others of the same type is priced out of the market, but a buyer looking to buy a house that is "correctly" priced for it's value but cannot afford it has been priced out of buying it. The question that is asked very specifically says pricing people out of the hobby, not pricing itself out of the market.

A quote from the OP:

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

Where are you getting this "can't afford it" business? It's an element YOU are adding to the thread title. The OP talked about justifying the cost of GW's product, not "can't afford it."

Is there actually a point of disagreement between you and anyone else in the thread at this point? I can't tell with how you're muddying the discussion by insisting on some meaningless distinction about the definition of "priced out."

To bring things back to the topic at hand, where do you think GW is going to go from here with their prices? What will be the effect?

@Stranger83:

Insufficient funds to purchase OR Chose not to purchase due to poor value.

Both lead to a non-sale for GW, directly linked to price.

Your defnition suggests that as long as GW keeps their prices under the discretionary hobby budget of their targetted demographic, the haven't priced themselves out of the hobby, even if they make no sales. This makes no sense.

@Stranger83 - if you could summarize what I'm supposed to have understood by reading your posts in this thread, I'd appreicate it. You made some claim about GW being among the cheapest miniature gaming hobby options and that if GW is too expensive for someone, then all others priced at the same price per model will also lose that sale. Is there something else?

I don't believe either of those two claims are true, but I don't want to deal with them further if they are not what you are saying.