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.

 MisterMoon wrote:
Besides the point, but yeah. If playing a competitively is really your thing, WMH is a better choice for a laundry list of reasons other than price.

Competitive is probably the wrong word. What I meant was points value recognized by the community as "standard sized games".

winterdyne wrote:
Compare like for like then. Perry hard plastic (styrene) wars of the roses infantry against warhammer empire free company, both sculpted by the Perry brothers. Very similar subject material.

One comes in at 40 men for £18 with no discount.
The other is 20 men for £20.50 and is one of the cheaper GW box sets at present.

I think he's got you there. The Perry models are smaller (requiring less material), but that is a negligible difference in cost. Plus, the Perry plastic box sets typically are multi part models that have sprues absolutely packed with extra bits.

They are 'true' 28s, as opposed to GW's particular proportions. In every other metric they're as close as its possible to be, down to being multi-option models.

 MisterMoon wrote:

I don't think you will see too many RPG gamers - especially D&D - moving to GW games in general, though largely it is because GW's design is at odds with D&D. That has always been the anchor for WHFB in the US. The artwork just doesn't mesh up with what most of them feel fantasy should look like.

What?! I have never heard a gamer say this. I know tons of folks who play DnD that don't play anything GW, and they say that table top war gaming just isn't there thing. What I have found is a great number who've never really played it, or tried it out. GW investing more into specialist games, and other avenues besides WH, 40k, LotR might bridge some into table top war gaming, but at the very least could help expand their basket of services, and customer base.

Need to talk to more gamers then. In the US, most old gamers grew up on the likes of Elmore, Caldwell, Parkinson and Easley - when you compare the way they do...well pretty much anything to the artistic style of GW, GW comes up lacking. Newer fantasy gamers grew up with the artwork of people like Walker, Crichtlow, Hildebrandt, Staples and others who cut their teeth in the d20 and Pathfinder game systems. Again, completely different artistic style. It is one of the reasons why games like those from PP are more popular in the US as opposed to WFB.

With a hobby that relies so much on the visuals - they matter. A Warhammer dwarf looks like a cartoon compared to a D&D dwarf. Same goes for things like orcs and the cone headed elves. It doesn't necessarily make one better than the other - rather it is a split which had occurred between the UK and the US when it comes to artistic style.

 keezus wrote:

 MisterMoon wrote:
Besides the point, but yeah. If playing a competitively is really your thing, WMH is a better choice for a laundry list of reasons other than price.

Competitive is probably the wrong word. What I meant was points value recognized by the community as "standard sized games".

All things being equal, don't you think this is almost always going to be the case for a skirmish level game like WMH when compared to a company/battalion level game like WH? At any level, most of the guys in my group will play whatever point level. If someone is new, and just has 750, they wouldn't have much of a problem finding a game. On an aside, lower point games in 40k are something I like.

 Rainbow Dash wrote:
WD does have rules but after they are sold out there is no way to get any of them again
good luck playing sisters or having rules for that flier
trolololo

GW is actually getting releasing a supplement with all the flyer rules.

The result? Butthurt and whinning fitting of a baby you just kicked in the behind.

 Bobthehero wrote:

 Rainbow Dash wrote:
WD does have rules but after they are sold out there is no way to get any of them again
good luck playing sisters or having rules for that flier
trolololo

GW is actually getting releasing a supplement with all the flyer rules.

The result? Butthurt and whinning fitting of a baby you just kicked in the behind.

I was gonna retract my statement and offer a "I was wrong my bad" but you had to add in that douchy second bit, people can never resist throwing around those words, all you missed was ragequitter

 Bobthehero wrote:

 Rainbow Dash wrote:
WD does have rules but after they are sold out there is no way to get any of them again
good luck playing sisters or having rules for that flier
trolololo

GW is actually getting releasing a supplement with all the flyer rules.

The result? Butthurt and whinning fitting of a baby you just kicked in the behind.

Yes but there is still an entire army out there without any legal way to get their rules.
And in the past when rules for something were in white dwarf they were put up ad PDFs on GWs site a while later. I think it is reasonable for someone to whine if something that used to be free is now being piled in with plenty of other things you may very well have no interest in and a $50 price tag is slapped on it.

 Rainbow Dash wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:

 Rainbow Dash wrote:
WD does have rules but after they are sold out there is no way to get any of them again
good luck playing sisters or having rules for that flier
trolololo

GW is actually getting releasing a supplement with all the flyer rules.

The result? Butthurt and whinning fitting of a baby you just kicked in the behind.

I was gonna retract my statement and offer a "I was wrong my bad" but you had to add in that douchy second bit, people can never resist throwing around those words, all you missed was ragequitter

The amount of whinning is ridiculous, while I think the whole White-Dwarf thing is utter bullgak, the reaction we get in the news thread aren't better.

 Bobthehero wrote:

 Rainbow Dash wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:

 Rainbow Dash wrote:
WD does have rules but after they are sold out there is no way to get any of them again
good luck playing sisters or having rules for that flier
trolololo

GW is actually getting releasing a supplement with all the flyer rules.

The result? Butthurt and whinning fitting of a baby you just kicked in the behind.

I was gonna retract my statement and offer a "I was wrong my bad" but you had to add in that douchy second bit, people can never resist throwing around those words, all you missed was ragequitter

The amount of whinning is ridiculous, while I think the whole White-Dwarf thing is utter bullgak, the reaction we get in the news thread aren't better.

well its not your job to decide if people are allowed to whine or if they indeed are, and certainly no one wants to hear you yammer at them when you think they are (or even if they are)
not your place, I'll say what I please about white dwarf

And I'll say whatever I want 'bout your reaction, just saying

And so it's been made personal, handbags at dawn chaps?

It's a comment for another thread, but any 'whining' about not being able to get the flier rules legitimately up to this point is completely justified I feel. Good that GW are finally rectifying it, hopefully the Sisters will follow suit and then people won't feel the need to complain hey?

And I don't see why anyone making such a complaint is suddenly likened to someone being sodomized? Or am I going OTT and is it just nappy rash (the result of wiping your behind with said WD?)

let's keep it civil please folks.

Thanks.

 jonolikespie wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:

 Rainbow Dash wrote:
WD does have rules but after they are sold out there is no way to get any of them again
good luck playing sisters or having rules for that flier
trolololo

GW is actually getting releasing a supplement with all the flyer rules.

The result? Butthurt and whinning fitting of a baby you just kicked in the behind.

Yes but there is still an entire army out there without any legal way to get their rules.

To be fair it was either a white dwarf codex or nothing. Sisters of Battle have essentially been scrapped by GW. I do think it's dickish of them to not just put the rules into a pdf, hell it'd take someone in the office a couple of days to do.

 MisterMoon wrote:

 keezus wrote:

 MisterMoon wrote:
Besides the point, but yeah. If playing a competitively is really your thing, WMH is a better choice for a laundry list of reasons other than price.

Competitive is probably the wrong word. What I meant was points value recognized by the community as "standard sized games".

All things being equal, don't you think this is almost always going to be the case for a skirmish level game like WMH when compared to a company/battalion level game like WH? At any level, most of the guys in my group will play whatever point level. If someone is new, and just has 750, they wouldn't have much of a problem finding a game. On an aside, lower point games in 40k are something I like.

You are of course, correct that a skirmish level game will generally cost less than a company level game. This is why any argument that spending on the skirmish level game can eventually reach (or surpass) spending on a company level game (while technically true) doesn't add anything to the discussion. Its essentially the same as saying you can spend as much playing Soccer as much as you spend playing American Football, despite the fact that they are different systems with different requirements (and costs). The only thing they have in common is that both are "ball sports". The fact that it is possible to play American football without pads and other protective equipment doesn't change the fact that equipment is be considered the norm for organized play, just like how a company sized game can be played at smaller sizes doesn't change the fact that the smaller sizes are not considered the norm (or balanced) for organized play.

 loki old fart wrote:

 mattyrm wrote:
Just so your all aware, we don't actually drink warm beer.

And that's not just me by the way.. It's literally ever.

The closest you will get is cellar temperature.. And considering this country is fething freezing, it's closer to fridge than room temperature!

Here here.
Ice cold, so it frosts the glass. And not that scraped up donkey p_ss, you foreigners call beer

Beer is what the cretins drink. Proper gentlemen enjoy a good liquor such as Scotch.

 keezus wrote:

 MisterMoon wrote:

 keezus wrote:

 MisterMoon wrote:
Besides the point, but yeah. If playing a competitively is really your thing, WMH is a better choice for a laundry list of reasons other than price.

Competitive is probably the wrong word. What I meant was points value recognized by the community as "standard sized games".

All things being equal, don't you think this is almost always going to be the case for a skirmish level game like WMH when compared to a company/battalion level game like WH? At any level, most of the guys in my group will play whatever point level. If someone is new, and just has 750, they wouldn't have much of a problem finding a game. On an aside, lower point games in 40k are something I like.

You are of course, correct that a skirmish level game will generally cost less than a company level game. This is why any argument that spending on the skirmish level game can eventually reach (or surpass) spending on a company level game (while technically true) doesn't add anything to the discussion. Its essentially the same as saying you can spend as much playing Soccer as much as you spend playing American Football, despite the fact that they are different systems with different requirements (and costs). The only thing they have in common is that both are "ball sports". The fact that it is possible to play American football without pads and other protective equipment doesn't change the fact that equipment is be considered the norm for organized play, just like how a company sized game can be played at smaller sizes doesn't change the fact that the smaller sizes are not considered the norm (or balanced) for organized play.

This more or less puts my broader point in context. If you are a person who wants to play American Football, the cost of pads etc probably won't turn your to soccer. WH/40K and WMH are different games. It never fails, about once a month I hear a WMH fan boy say something during my 40k game about WMH, and this example is precisely what I think about. I have a small set of Hordes, but I can't even imagine it supplanting 40k/WH

 Mad4Minis wrote:

 loki old fart wrote:

 mattyrm wrote:
Just so your all aware, we don't actually drink warm beer.

And that's not just me by the way.. It's literally ever.

The closest you will get is cellar temperature.. And considering this country is fething freezing, it's closer to fridge than room temperature!

Here here.
Ice cold, so it frosts the glass. And not that scraped up donkey p_ss, you foreigners call beer

Beer is what the cretins drink. Proper gentlemen enjoy a good liquor such as Scotch.

You are honestly trying to use 'Gentlemen' and 'Scotch' in the same sentence?!

Now, good Irish Whiskey on the other hand... We may not be Gentlemen, but we know how to distill a proper spirit!

The Auld Grump, this message posted for humor value, as neither the Scots nor the Irish are proper 'Gentlemen', thank the gods above and below!

 MisterMoon wrote:
This more or less puts my broader point in context. If you are a person who wants to play American Football, the cost of pads etc probably won't turn your to soccer. WH/40K and WMH are different games. It never fails, about once a month I hear a WMH fan boy say something during my 40k game about WMH, and this example is precisely what I think about. I have a small set of Hordes, but I can't even imagine it supplanting 40k/WH

While everyone is entitled to their own opinions - with regards to your last statement - industry sector leaders get supplanted all the time:

Kodak
Nokia
Dell
GM

Almost all of the above retreats from dominance were due to the companies failure to adapt with to changes within their sector and changing customer expectations. Sometimes a company can reinvent itself and re-establish itself as a dominant brand like Apple. GW on the other hand (other than developing improved production technology) is strongly resisting change and instead seems to be further and further entrenched in maintaining its existing business model, while narrowing their customer base. IBM did this when HP, Compaq and Dell were beginning to challenge them for the business desktop market and they never recovered that market share before eventually abandoning that arm of the company.

 keezus wrote:

 MisterMoon wrote:
This more or less puts my broader point in context. If you are a person who wants to play American Football, the cost of pads etc probably won't turn your to soccer. WH/40K and WMH are different games. It never fails, about once a month I hear a WMH fan boy say something during my 40k game about WMH, and this example is precisely what I think about. I have a small set of Hordes, but I can't even imagine it supplanting 40k/WH

While everyone is entitled to their own opinions - with regards to your last statement - industry sector leaders get supplanted all the time:

Kodak
Nokia
Dell
GM

Almost all of the above retreats from dominance were due to the companies failure to adapt with to changes within their sector and changing customer expectations. Sometimes a company can reinvent itself and re-establish itself as a dominant brand like Apple. GW on the other hand (other than developing improved production technology) is strongly resisting change and instead seems to be further and further entrenched in maintaining its existing business model, while narrowing their customer base. IBM did this when HP, Compaq and Dell were beginning to challenge them for the business desktop market and they never recovered that market share before eventually abandoning that arm of the company.

Well GW certainly isn't immune to consequences of the marketplace. However, with your analogy I think it goes without saying that all of those companies rely on high tech and constant innovation, and they choose not to, or chose poorly. Choosing not to turn WH or 40k into a skirmish game doesn't seem to have the same lock-step analogy, and it's also not very fair since the demands in high tech are far greater than those of a miniature gaming company. Customer expectations aren't as fluid, in this industry, and as a matter of fact probably have a defined speed limit on change and innovation. So barring some paradigm shift in gamers demanding only skirmish style games I think GW is safe from this conversation.

I also am not noticing this narrowed customer base you speak of with GW. There's always been another game that you could avidly play other than a GW game since the 80s. If anything it's WMH who has dominated THIS area, but to say it's at GW's cost, I haven't noticed that. Now how GW handles their structure, ie; forum support, tournament support etc could very well lead to their downfall hypothetically speaking, but I doubt it, and besides this thread is only questioning their price.

GW might benefit from a cheaper starter kit to help with entry price, but without a P&L in front of me, I can't say if that would be a good business move or not. But, best case scenario, I don't see costs coming down in any real way. GW can change the rules, they can change a bunch of other things to make their value more broadly attractive in the marketplace, but at the end of the day, it's likely still going to be the same cost. Again, the thread says will GW price people out of the hobby of playing GW products. Again, I don't think so. While I think their book prices are asinine, and they could stand to make good starter kits for all armies, but nothing about their overall price structure suggests they will price people away to any great extent.

I'm excited for the models to begin hitting a new high: all of the Cadian models being rebranded as 'Ollanius Pius Clone' models, and the Cadian box being $100.

This thread is way too long, peeps still buy it, just less, they will go out of business before there is nobody who wants to buy theyre stuff.

 MisterMoon wrote:
Well GW certainly isn't immune to consequences of the marketplace. However, with your analogy I think it goes without saying that all of those companies rely on high tech and constant innovation, and they choose not to, or chose poorly. Choosing not to turn WH or 40k into a skirmish game doesn't seem to have the same lock-step analogy, and it's also not very fair since the demands in high tech are far greater than those of a miniature gaming company.

You are reading intent into my statement that -frankly- is not there. I'm speaking in generalities, and not trying to compare GW to WMH as some shining beacon of what to aspire to. GW is exhibiting poor adaptability to the changing face of the marketplace (regardless of what products they make). Examples include:

Failure to properly manage their web presence (examples include - shut down of their official forums, lawsuits against fan sites etc)
Failure to properly manage their product presence (no attendance at outside trade shows, diminished games days, rumour clamp down)
Bizzaro pricing discrepancies across regions in the age of e-Commerce and ensuing embargo.
Death of the event circuit.

 MisterMoon wrote:
Customer expectations aren't as fluid, in this industry, and as a matter of fact probably have a defined speed limit on change and innovation. So barring some paradigm shift in gamers demanding only skirmish style games I think GW is safe from this conversation.

Again... you're reading intent into my statements that are not there.

 MisterMoon wrote:
I also am not noticing this narrowed customer base you speak of with GW. There's always been another game that you could avidly play other than a GW game since the 80s. If anything it's WMH who has dominated THIS area, but to say it's at GW's cost, I haven't noticed that. Now how GW handles their structure, ie; forum support, tournament support etc could very well lead to their downfall hypothetically speaking, but I doubt it, and besides this thread is only questioning their price.

By narrow I mean they are targetting new (young) players only, and removing support structures to maintain existing player base while also placing barriers via costing artifically limits their potential customers to a small segment of the gaming popullace and then their company doctrine has no provisions to maintain them once they become customers. I feel you are placing overly strong emphasis on your personal experience. It's easy for me to say that the NHL strike had no effect on hockey game attendance as I live in Canada, a hockey mad nation. It would be ignorant of me to assume that weak hockey markets such as Nashville or Pheonix are enjoying the same return to normal viewership. At my FLGS, 40k is on life support, Fantasy hasn't shown signs of life in years. YMMV.

 MisterMoon wrote:
GW might benefit from a cheaper starter kit to help with entry price, but without a P&L in front of me, I can't say if that would be a good business move or not. But, best case scenario, I don't see costs coming down in any real way. GW can change the rules, they can change a bunch of other things to make their value more broadly attractive in the marketplace, but at the end of the day, it's likely still going to be the same cost. Again, the thread says will GW price people out of the hobby of playing GW products. Again, I don't think so. While I think their book prices are asinine, and they could stand to make good starter kits for all armies, but nothing about their overall price structure suggests they will price people away to any great extent.

GW fixing the rules would be a great start and I think it would bring back a lot of the more gaming orientated veterans. IMHO, kits like DV and LOTR show that GW CAN price their kits lower, but choose not to. Whether this is based on the idea that their target customer is a "one and done" type proposition, we'll never know. WMH gets significant sales from established players building more than one army. I feel that GW ruleset (and prices) do not encourage this more than one army approach anymore as their pricing bands have placed product outside of "impulse buy" zone (for me anyways).

]By narrow I mean they are targeting new (young) players only, and removing support structures to maintain existing player base while also placing barriers via costing artificially limits their potential customers to a small segment of the gaming popullace and then their company doctrine has no provisions to maintain them once they become customers. I feel you are placing overly strong emphasis on your personal experience. It's easy for me to say that the NHL strike had no effect on hockey game attendance as I live in Canada, a hockey mad nation. It would be ignorant of me to assume that weak hockey markets such as Nashville or Pheonix are enjoying the same return to normal viewership. At my FLGS, 40k is on life support, Fantasy hasn't shown signs of life in years. YMMV.

Targeting just young players? Removing support structures to keep existing players? I'm not seeing this... I've always thought this was a game best left for the 16 and up crowd, but if a younger player is smart enough, I don't see any reason to get them into it as well. That said, I don't see where GW is marketing to a younger audience exclusively. Usually when a game or toy company wants to target kids, they put kids in their advertisements, or something. to that effect, and I'm not seeing that effort from GW. Also, if you feel like I'm basing my ideas on my own personal experience, you can relax, of course I am. And what do you mean by placing a barrier via costing? Their miniatures are the same cost as WMH, it's just you need more of them. I thought we were past this. As for your store/club/gaming scene, I can always find a game of 40k, and WH, other games its a crap shoot.

GW fixing the rules would be a great start and I think it would bring back a lot of the more gaming orientated veterans.

I consider myself a gaming orientated veteran. Most of the folks I game with have 5 years and up experience... Again no shortage of finding those here...

IMHO, kits like DV and LOTR show that GW CAN price their kits lower, but choose not to.

I think sacrificing some profit on starter sets is done across the board in gaming. I don't see anything wrong with it, and don't shame them for not spreading out the saving across their whole line. It makes good business sense.

Whether this is based on the idea that their target customer is a "one and done" type proposition, we'll never know.

I certainly don't think this is the case. I'm seeing some new folks buy DV, and follow it up with more models within weeks all the time.

WMH gets significant sales from established players building more than one army.

So does GW

I feel that GW ruleset (and prices) do not encourage this more than one army approach anymore as their pricing bands have placed product outside of "impulse buy" zone (for me anyways).

Yeah, not sure what to make of this one... Like I said, I don't know anyone besides maybe noobs who's got just one WH/40k army...

Does anyone else notice that the only really expensive armies are the ones that aren't horde-related? For example, a box of tac marines is 40 dollars (this is with tax), but for a box of Cadians it's only 31-32.

 Deunstephe wrote:
Does anyone else notice that the only really expensive armies are the ones that aren't horde-related? For example, a box of tac marines is 40 dollars (this is with tax), but for a box of Cadians it's only 31-32.

used to have 20 in a box for 40
that and how many space marines vs cadians will you need?
10 orks aren't as expensive as 10 marines, but how many more are you gonna need? It's gonna add up much sooner

 Deunstephe wrote:
Does anyone else notice that the only really expensive armies are the ones that aren't horde-related? For example, a box of tac marines is 40 dollars (this is with tax), but for a box of Cadians it's only 31-32.

Its GWs pricing system.

Look at the wraithlord, its 2 small sprues and a base, thats it. but its $45..... correction $55.50 now (up $10.50 in 3 years) where as a marine box has 4 of the same size for less. So GW arent pricing it on weight, or exchange rates, or even number of projected units sold. I figure they use a form of voodoo to figure out the prices.

 MisterMoon wrote:
Targeting just young players? Removing support structures to keep existing players? I'm not seeing this...

GW's corporate literature plainly states that the younger crowd is GW's targetted audience. Current one-man-store policies of "intro games only" at the tables, and "paint lessons only" at the paint tables are geared entirely towards the new players at the expense of facilities that were once available for all customer use. GW management views veterans as geese who will continue laying golden eggs regardless of treatment. While this may be true in some circles as you've abundantly stated, I think that the feedback in this thread indicates that this is not true for all.

 MisterMoon wrote:
I've always thought this was a game best left for the 16 and up crowd, but if a younger player is smart enough, I don't see any reason to get them into it as well. That said, I don't see where GW is marketing to a younger audience exclusively. Usually when a game or toy company wants to target kids, they put kids in their advertisements, or something. to that effect, and I'm not seeing that effort from GW.

This is an interesting observation. What you say is true for mass market advertisments. GW's advertisements are exclusive to their own publications, and outside of some lisenced media, a new customer's first introduction to GW products is either through friends, their FLGS or local GW outlet. This model may have made sense 15 years ago, before the internet when GW was smaller, but the fact that they keep doing the same thing now boggles my mind. I'm not even sure if White Dwarf is still carried by the major bookselling brick and mortar chains anymore.

 MisterMoon wrote:
And what do you mean by placing a barrier via costing? Their miniatures are the same cost as WMH, it's just you need more of them. I thought we were past this. As for your store/club/gaming scene, I can always find a game of 40k, and WH, other games its a crap shoot.

You yourself said that the cost of GW rulebooks is bonkers. (Same priced) Models aside, you need rulebooks to play the game. Skirmish size game aside, Malifaux rules are free, Infinity's rules are free, WMH have quickstart rules and a rulebook that is 1/3 the cost of GW's BBT. None of GW's competitors require MANDATORY codexes. By your own admission, GW games rulebooks are overpriced, and as they are needed to play, constitute a pricing barrier.

 MisterMoon wrote:
Also, if you feel like I'm basing my ideas on my own personal experience, you can relax, of course I am.

True... however you could ease off the "My experience differs from yours, your arguement is invalid" statements a smidge though... example:

 MisterMoon wrote:
I consider myself a gaming orientated veteran. Most of the folks I game with have 5 years and up experience... Again no shortage of finding those here...

 MisterMoon wrote:
I think sacrificing some profit on starter sets is done across the board in gaming. I don't see anything wrong with it, and don't shame them for not spreading out the saving across their whole line. It makes good business sense.

I am not an economist, so I can't comment on the "business sense". Only that as a consumer, GW MSRP is psychologically too high for me to justify buying addons and upgrades. Therefore, instead of making "less profit" from me as a customer, they are making "zero profit" from me as a customer. Clearly, you (and your playing circle) is OK with these prices so there must be some merit to their approach.

 MisterMoon wrote:
I certainly don't think this is the case. I'm seeing some new folks buy DV, and follow it up with more models within weeks all the time.

By "one" I meant one army.

 MisterMoon wrote:
Yeah, not sure what to make of this one... Like I said, I don't know anyone besides maybe noobs who's got just one WH/40k army...

By your admission you are a veteran gamer - and by your comments - your circle is veteran gamers. How many of these new armies were purchased in the last 5 years? The last 2? This year? How many noobs are buying second armies as opposed to quitting? These are all measures of whether the "magic number" in the OP have been reached.

-edit- formatting

 Ravenous D wrote:

 Deunstephe wrote:
Does anyone else notice that the only really expensive armies are the ones that aren't horde-related? For example, a box of tac marines is 40 dollars (this is with tax), but for a box of Cadians it's only 31-32.

Its GWs pricing system.

Look at the wraithlord, its 2 small sprues and a base, thats it. but its $45..... correction $55.50 now (up $10.50 in 3 years) where as a marine box has 4 of the same size for less. So GW arent pricing it on weight, or exchange rates, or even number of projected units sold. I figure they use a form of voodoo to figure out the prices.

It's just very strange to me since in 2008 everything that's 40 or more dollars was 10, but certain sets aren't. Like Tau and Necrons used to be 35 dollars for their basic warriors, and in 3-4 years have only gone up a dollar yet still remain the same, even though Necrons got an update.

Also, what happened to dedicated transports + troops? I know they used to sell Ork Trukks with 10 boyz and Tau devilfishes with 8 or 12 FW, why did GW remove those? They were amazing deals and people bought them up like crazy at my store.

 MisterMoon wrote:
Well GW certainly isn't immune to consequences of the marketplace. However, with your analogy I think it goes without saying that all of those companies rely on high tech and constant innovation, and they choose not to, or chose poorly. Choosing not to turn WH or 40k into a skirmish game doesn't seem to have the same lock-step analogy, and it's also not very fair since the demands in high tech are far greater than those of a miniature gaming company. Customer expectations aren't as fluid, in this industry, and as a matter of fact probably have a defined speed limit on change and innovation. So barring some paradigm shift in gamers demanding only skirmish style games I think GW is safe from this conversation.

I respectfully disagree with you here. I think gamers are even more elastic than those in the technology sector. In tech, people tend to stay with and defend their chosen technology (the mac/pc arguments are always the best) but with games they can change on a dime. If this wasn't the case, Warmahordes and Flames of War wouldn't enjoy the market share they have grown to. In addition, this industry already has proof that a market leader can be taken down by competitors. Remember TSR, the one time behemoth of this industry. Many said that they could never go down, not with the most valuable brand in hobbies, but they did.

Being that I worked for Kodak at one time in my life, I will say that the parallels between GWs behavior and Kodak's in its waning years are very similar. Management who believes their brand is so strong it is immune to losing customers. I remember a VP once saying they didn't consider digital cameras to even being a competitor, much less when they were attached to cell phones. Likewise, GW management is still of the belief that they are the only game in town and they are the only ones producing good models. Their pricing behavior is a clear indicator for this. Just think, who the heck in their right mind with any bit of sanity would release a $75 rulebook. I tell you who, someone who still believes there is no competition. It reeks of the same management behaviors at Kodak - and look where they are today.

They are in fact losing new customers today. I've have personally seen it quite a few times at my FLGS. However, Warmahordes, Flames of War and various skirmish games are catching those players. So if GW is preventing themselves from getting new customers now, who is going to buy their models tomorrow?

One last thing. In my current company we have quite a bit of research on different earnings levels of age brackets in the US today. The average 16-18 year old is earning $176/week in the US with a take home of slightly less than $150. Do you mean to tell me they think spending an entire weeks earnings on rulebooks is something they think is acceptable?

No, it is clear GW has lost there way. The recent pricing on the WoC releases shows just how bad it is getting and, most likely, is going to get with the next price increase. Plain and simple, they are not gaining that many new players now (due to their pricing barrier) and so are forced to milk their current customers for all they can to maintain their revenue.