GW Prohibits Sale of Bits - New US Terms of Trade

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.

**ausYenLoWang**

mikhaila wrote:

If the intention it just to stop shops direct-ordering on behalf of shops that they can't, it'd be caught under the "no reselling" part of the conditions i.e. sales are to end users only, not other customers. So I don't buy that line of reasoning.

The other thing is that even though this rule is in place but "probably" won't be used, it makes things difficult for shops that order in well over that limit regularly, as their business relies on GW letting them away with an obvious breach of policy. Whilst GW may not care, they may use it as an excuse to hurt a store they feel is doing too well or when they feel strategic advantage (like they are opening up a GW store in town). It means there's always the risk that that revenue stream will be taken off them at any notice, so even taking pre-orders becomes risky as you might suddenly be unable to get the stock.[

Catching a store re-selling direct product is always going to be difficult. Having the filtre of 500.00 a month helps that. Its the same reason I have a sign saying "We reserve the right to limit sales on certain products". People look at it and get confused. But there are times when having one customer scoop up all your stock on one item is bad for business. The sign is there for when we need it, so is the rule of 500.00 from GW.

As to a 'breach of policy', it isn't. The policy is GW's. It can be amended or changed at anytime. Any store dealing with GW easily knows where they stand. You have a sales rep to talk to you, and have a relationship with them. Its part of doing business. You know whether or not you can exceed that limit.

And frankly, there are probably less than half a dozen stores in the US that are going to exceed that 500.00 limit on a regular basis. This limit affects online sales mostly, not brick and mortar sales.

Besides Miniwargaming, who has anyone heard actually complain about this rule and claim that it cost them business? Large brick and mortar stores that can sell more than 500.00 in direct orders aren't affected. Their sales rep knows their sales numbers, and knows the store. The orders get placed. I haven't ever worried about selling too many GW models.

Larger stores are also generally higher level stockists. The terms of the stockist program give benefits that non stockists don't get. (Old news, been that way for decades in one form or another.) One aspect of that is yours sales rep having a lot of leeway in how much of a limited product you get. I was quite happy selling over a hundred copies of Space Hulk.

This is really a non-issue. The main problem for miniwargaming is that they are now affected by the North American trade policies, which didn't affect them when it was "US trade policies".

so if the policy is old hat, i have to ask the question, what would you do if GW opened a store nearby and your friendly rep went, sorry 500$ limit enforced, none of this none of that, all those rules that we werent enforcing well now that your close and direct competition, well now we will? because as much as they dont HAVE to do it, the moment head office want to they will.... and i imagine it would squeeze pretty tight, because GW hates competition...

**mikhaila**

ausYenLoWang wrote:
mikhaila wrote:

If the intention it just to stop shops direct-ordering on behalf of shops that they can't, it'd be caught under the "no reselling" part of the conditions i.e. sales are to end users only, not other customers. So I don't buy that line of reasoning.

The other thing is that even though this rule is in place but "probably" won't be used, it makes things difficult for shops that order in well over that limit regularly, as their business relies on GW letting them away with an obvious breach of policy. Whilst GW may not care, they may use it as an excuse to hurt a store they feel is doing too well or when they feel strategic advantage (like they are opening up a GW store in town). It means there's always the risk that that revenue stream will be taken off them at any notice, so even taking pre-orders becomes risky as you might suddenly be unable to get the stock.[

Catching a store re-selling direct product is always going to be difficult. Having the filtre of 500.00 a month helps that. Its the same reason I have a sign saying "We reserve the right to limit sales on certain products". People look at it and get confused. But there are times when having one customer scoop up all your stock on one item is bad for business. The sign is there for when we need it, so is the rule of 500.00 from GW.

As to a 'breach of policy', it isn't. The policy is GW's. It can be amended or changed at anytime. Any store dealing with GW easily knows where they stand. You have a sales rep to talk to you, and have a relationship with them. Its part of doing business. You know whether or not you can exceed that limit.

And frankly, there are probably less than half a dozen stores in the US that are going to exceed that 500.00 limit on a regular basis. This limit affects online sales mostly, not brick and mortar sales.

Besides Miniwargaming, who has anyone heard actually complain about this rule and claim that it cost them business? Large brick and mortar stores that can sell more than 500.00 in direct orders aren't affected. Their sales rep knows their sales numbers, and knows the store. The orders get placed. I haven't ever worried about selling too many GW models.

Larger stores are also generally higher level stockists. The terms of the stockist program give benefits that non stockists don't get. (Old news, been that way for decades in one form or another.) One aspect of that is yours sales rep having a lot of leeway in how much of a limited product you get. I was quite happy selling over a hundred copies of Space Hulk.

This is really a non-issue. The main problem for miniwargaming is that they are now affected by the North American trade policies, which didn't affect them when it was "US trade policies".

so if the policy is old hat, i have to ask the question, what would you do if GW opened a store nearby and your friendly rep went, sorry 500$ limit enforced, none of this none of that, all those rules that we werent enforcing well now that your close and direct competition, well now we will? because as much as they dont HAVE to do it, the moment head office want to they will.... and i imagine it would squeeze pretty tight, because GW hates competition...

Well, I've had GW stores near me for about 2 decades, so not really worried. They open and close and move them in the Philly metro, and yet my stores are still around after 25 years. I've visited them often, worked with them a bit, bought one of the locations they closed, and hired some of their ex managers and employees.

And not too worried about it.
1) They make more money off my stores than they do off of their own stores.
2) I have far better GW stores than GW does. 12 tables vs 2. More painted miniatures on display, more events, weekly painting classes, etc. I've studied their stores for years and worked with them. The answer to a GW store opening across the street is to kick their ass at their own business model, let them train up a nice crowd of new players, and then let the players decide where they want to spend their money. I carry far more cool stuff than a GW store can, since I don't have their restrictions. I can also introduce all those new players they create to other games.
3) Trade Sales is not Retail. They are separate parts of the company. My sales rep doesn't have any connection to GW retail and is more worried about what I order than what they sell.
4) GW is motivated by money. A GW store will not be profitable if it opens up near me.

Your right, GW does hate competition. I'm not competition, I sell their stuff and make them money, and promote their games the way they do in their own stores. Scratch that, make it, 'in their own bunkers'.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
And just so we are all on the same page, that 500.00 is at wholesale, not retail. So roughly 800.00 in special orders per month.

**Grugknuckle**

I'm just speculating but ...

It seems to me that GW is really looking to cut out the retailer completely. Once they have opened up 800 new stores in the US - which Kirby has claimed is his plan - what would stop them from just cancelling trade accounts all together? Or even amending the trade agreement to something like a franchise?

**spaceelf**

I wonder if GW is imposing the ban in relation to the CH lawsuit. They may want to show that selling bits, even from their own kits, is costing them business.

**Ravenous D**

Grugknuckle wrote:
I'm just speculating but ...

It seems to me that GW is really looking to cut out the retailer completely. Once they have opened up 800 new stores in the US - which Kirby has claimed is his plan - what would stop them from just cancelling trade accounts all together? Or even amending the trade agreement to something like a franchise?

That would go tits up faster then a goldfish in bleach.

Especially with all the stores converting to have no game space what so ever. Forcing people out of stores and telling them to find their own means just adds another barrier between customers and GWs ivory tower.

**Shotgun**

Yet GW has shown that barriers between customers and the ivory tower is not currently a concern. Direct only sales is a prime example as it is forcing the customer to figure out what supplier they have to go to obtain a given model.

I can see GW starting by pushing more and more to direct only so it gets to the point where the FLGS decides its not worth the bother to stock GW. IF the FLGS goes out of business due to not carrying GW, well GW can say they didn't drive them out, it was the store's decision.

**mikhaila**

Just to point out the obvious:

1) 800 stores is a silly number. That's 40 a year for 20 years. They barely expand at 1/10th of that rate.

2) Its something to say to make the stock look desirable. "We will conquer the US market".

3) Brits have sucked at taking over the US market. Failed in 1776 and 1812. Mildly successful with the Beatles.

4) GW have tried to "expand into the US market" 3 times before. They expand for a few years, then contract and change the plan.

5) US Trade sales is very Profitable for GW. GW loves money. Stores take a large investment and aren't always profitable. I'm sure you can all follow the logic from there.

**Flashman**

mikhaila wrote:
3) Brits have sucked at taking over the US market. Failed in 1776 and 1812. Mildly successful with the Beatles.

Harry Potter, Simon Cowell, the World Wide Web

**liturgies of blood**

mikhaila wrote:
3) Brits have sucked at taking over the US market. Failed in 1776 and 1812.

Really? You going to get your gun and start taking pot shots at the local GW store to ensure they don't take your country over?

**pretre**

liturgies of blood wrote:
mikhaila wrote:
3) Brits have sucked at taking over the US market. Failed in 1776 and 1812.

Really? You going to get your gun and start taking pot shots at the local GW store to ensure they don't take your country over?

liturgies, if you are serious, click the spoiler. Otherwise, nevermind.

Spoiler:

Of all the folks on here with experience with trade sales, I would trust mikhaila on this the most. GW is not about to try to eliminate all FLGS from the US anytime soon.

**kronk**

Flashman wrote:
mikhaila wrote:
3) Brits have sucked at taking over the US market. Failed in 1776 and 1812. Mildly successful with the Beatles.

Harry Potter, Simon Cowell, the World Wide Web

linsey dawn mckenzie

**liturgies of blood**

Jokes? Oh yeah, I get jokes!

**insaniak**

mikhaila wrote:
As to a 'breach of policy', it isn't. The policy is GW's. It can be amended or changed at anytime. Any store dealing with GW easily knows where they stand. You have a sales rep to talk to you, and have a relationship with them. Its part of doing business. You know whether or not you can exceed that limit.

Just like you know whether or not there's a new book coming out, and whether or not you're going to be able to order it...?

**silent25**

mikhaila wrote:
Just to point out the obvious:

3) Brits have sucked at taking over the US market. Failed in 1776 and 1812. Mildly successful with the Beatles.

Just reminds me of another British company that is dealing with a major market failure right now:
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-fresh-easy-woes-20130321,0,197757.story

Tesco lost $2 Billion US on their attempt to enter the US market with the Fresh and Easy chain. I actually shopped at the stores and like some of the stuff, but were a bit too out of the way for me.

**pretre**

insaniak wrote:
mikhaila wrote:
As to a 'breach of policy', it isn't. The policy is GW's. It can be amended or changed at anytime. Any store dealing with GW easily knows where they stand. You have a sales rep to talk to you, and have a relationship with them. Its part of doing business. You know whether or not you can exceed that limit.

Just like you know whether or not there's a new book coming out, and whether or not you're going to be able to order it...?

Oooh, too soon.

**AllSeeingSkink**

mikhaila wrote:

And frankly, there are probably less than half a dozen stores in the US that are going to exceed that 500.00 limit on a regular basis. This limit affects online sales mostly, not brick and mortar sales.

I'm not sure if I believe that given the discussions I've had with the owner of my FLGS and what I believe are considered direct only items. He's told me in the past that he did close to that amount on metal models that are what I believe would now be considered direct only ("did", he doesn't carry much GW stuff anymore other than traded goods) and he is far from a large store.

**Veriamp**

mikhaila wrote:
Just to point out the obvious:

3) Brits have sucked at taking over the US market. Failed in 1776 and 1812. Mildly successful with the Beatles.

Just to be clear in 1812 the U.S tried to take over our market first and we kicked you out haha.

**mikhaila**

Veriamp wrote:
mikhaila wrote:
Just to point out the obvious:

3) Brits have sucked at taking over the US market. Failed in 1776 and 1812. Mildly successful with the Beatles.

Just to be clear in 1812 the U.S tried to take over our market first and we kicked you out haha.

And sent burna boyz to the whitehouse. Damn thing hasn't worked right since.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

insaniak wrote:
mikhaila wrote:
As to a 'breach of policy', it isn't. The policy is GW's. It can be amended or changed at anytime. Any store dealing with GW easily knows where they stand. You have a sales rep to talk to you, and have a relationship with them. Its part of doing business. You know whether or not you can exceed that limit.

Just like you know whether or not there's a new book coming out, and whether or not you're going to be able to order it...?

Who needs GW for that. Got Dakka.

**poda_t**

mikhaila wrote:
Veriamp wrote:
mikhaila wrote:
Just to point out the obvious:

3) Brits have sucked at taking over the US market. Failed in 1776 and 1812. Mildly successful with the Beatles.

Just to be clear in 1812 the U.S tried to take over our market first and we kicked you out haha.

And sent burna boyz to the whitehouse. Damn thing hasn't worked right since.

and to be double clear, the only reason the british did that is because they were lazy, and really didn't want to prosecute a fight, so they just went and burnt down the whitehouse because it was the closest thing they could get at, not because it was actually worth anything beyond a warning to the rest of the coast.... it wasn't a strategic fight, just an incredibly lazy one.

speaking of lazy: I recently watched MWG's video again, and it's clear that matt was having a hard time reigning himself under control, and he had a valid point about GW trying to sweep all bad PR under the rug. I'm waiting with rapt attention for the price rise when the fireworks go off again and the looneys come out to set fire to their red shirts....

**Matney X**

poda_t wrote:

speaking of lazy: I recently watched MWG's video again, and it's clear that matt was having a hard time reigning himself under control, and he had a valid point about GW trying to sweep all bad PR under the rug. I'm waiting with rapt attention for the price rise when the fireworks go off again and the looneys come out to set fire to their red shirts....

Is that in this thread, or should I be looking elsewhere?

**Ravenous D**

poda_t wrote:

speaking of lazy: I recently watched MWG's video again, and it's clear that matt was having a hard time reigning himself under control, and he had a valid point about GW trying to sweep all bad PR under the rug. I'm waiting with rapt attention for the price rise when the fireworks go off again and the looneys come out to set fire to their red shirts....

I noticed that too, he nearly lets a f-bomb and a R-tard out a few times.

Really what Im enjoying/loathing is the white knights and GW employees reasoning. Its as if GW really cannot possibly do any wrong. I kind of want to meet one in person and see the dead soulless gaze they have.

**Sarge**

Silly question that may have been answered previously, forgive me for not wanting to read 30 pages. Wouldn't such a clause violate the right of first sale? At least in the US. Supposedly it means that once you purchase something you can do with it as you like baring a violation of copyright or something. I believe the Supreme Court just settled a case on this relating to text books. Obviously, not directly analogous.

**pretre**

Simple answer: Not really.
Long Answer: 30 page thread.

Middle Answer: They aren't really the same thing.

**Alfndrate**

Sarge wrote:
Silly question that may have been answered previously, forgive me for not wanting to read 30 pages. Wouldn't such a clause violate the right of first sale? At least in the US. Supposedly it means that once you purchase something you can do with it as you like baring a violation of copyright or something. I believe the Supreme Court just settled a case on this relating to text books. Obviously, not directly analogous.

It's been discussed in this thread already, and no it wouldn't because you as the consumer are not affected by this

**Bossk_Hogg**

Orktavius wrote:
PhantomViper wrote:
Orktavius wrote:
The direct only argument for the most part is total BS...it's a damn smokescreen that people like to throw about as if all those products are hot selling merchandise that the hobby community wants a non-stop stock of at every store. Nearly EVERYTHING on the direct order list is old metal models, single characters or slow selling stock.

Yeah, its almost like we didn't have a FLGS owner come out just last week saying that he sold thousands of dollars of direct only and that that measure hurt his business and his ability to supply his customers in a really big way...

Yup...that WEBSTORE called MINIWARGAMING.COM sure did sell $5000 worth of it OVER THE INTERNET. Thank you for proving my point as that is $5000 that could have gone to many different LOCAL independents and is the very reason why GW is changing their trade agreement. This isn't going after E-bay resellers, once you own your model you can do what you want with it and with it's bits. Who they are going after are companies like miniwargaming or the warstore or other online retailers

The warstore IS a physical store (and miniature market for that matter). They have several locations. Unlike your typical poorly run local gaming store full, they changed with the times, have an online presence, and offer a discount to compete. Any game store should have an online branch to get more than foot traffic through whatever strip center they're in.

**poda_t**

Bossk_Hogg wrote:
Orktavius wrote:
PhantomViper wrote:
Orktavius wrote:
The direct only argument for the most part is total BS...it's a damn smokescreen that people like to throw about as if all those products are hot selling merchandise that the hobby community wants a non-stop stock of at every store. Nearly EVERYTHING on the direct order list is old metal models, single characters or slow selling stock.

Yeah, its almost like we didn't have a FLGS owner come out just last week saying that he sold thousands of dollars of direct only and that that measure hurt his business and his ability to supply his customers in a really big way...

Yup...that WEBSTORE called MINIWARGAMING.COM sure did sell $5000 worth of it OVER THE INTERNET. Thank you for proving my point as that is $5000 that could have gone to many different LOCAL independents and is the very reason why GW is changing their trade agreement. This isn't going after E-bay resellers, once you own your model you can do what you want with it and with it's bits. Who they are going after are companies like miniwargaming or the warstore or other online retailers

The warstore IS a physical store (and miniature market for that matter). They have several locations. Unlike your typical poorly run local gaming store full, they changed with the times, have an online presence, and offer a discount to compete. Any game store should have an online branch to get more than foot traffic through whatever strip center they're in.

actually, I always forget to bring this up. Sentry box, while it doesn't have a webstore, puts their entire product catalogue on the web (unfriendly text format) and anyone from anywhere can call, hand over their credit card info, and wait for a box from them in the mail. I wonder how no selling out of country will impact them since they didn't have a fancy webstore like MWG or warstore, but I'm positive they did orders across the continent.

**Ravenous D**

GW has very little way of actually controlling it. They would need proof of sales.

Then there is middle man shippers. Its actually pretty cool. You place orders with their address, and once they have it its shipped to you. It doesnt even cost that much. And considering the difference in buying an army here and buying an army from the warstore is the difference of $250 dollars, its well worth the little you pay extra.

**PhantomViper**

Ravenous D wrote:
GW has very little way of actually controlling it. They would need proof of sales.

Then there is middle man shippers. Its actually pretty cool. You place orders with their address, and once they have it its shipped to you. It doesnt even cost that much. And considering the difference in buying an army here and buying an army from the warstore is the difference of $250 dollars, its well worth the little you pay extra.

Actually all that they would need was to pass as a bogus buyer from out of country, and as the CHS case as shown they are not above such tactics.

**Ravenous D**

Well thats the thing, the second it gets sent to the middle man shipper the store selling the goods is completely fine. They open the shipping box reseal it and then ship it again. Short of GW writing in "no selling to addresses known for shipping across borders." into the next trade agreement, even then, how the shiz are they supposed to know? Thats the entire point of the service.

**rigeld2**

That's not true. If GW suspects that the store with the trade agreement is shipping to a reseller (ie the middle man) they can pull the trade agreement even if no one at the store knows about it.