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.

I don't think that GWs pricing strategy helped, but I think you have to place the blame on the film itself.

It wasn't bad entertainment as such, but I don't think many would argue that it was the equal of the original trilogy.

Consequently, I don't think there was the same level of enthusiasm for the game this time around.

Even within GW's own advertising book (White Dwarf), The Hobbit has not received the same attention that LOTR got at this point in its lifecycle, 12 years ago. Back then WD had the upside-down segment of 20+ LOTR exclusive pages in WD. This latest issue, I don't think there was a single page?

Pricing is a major factor here. LOTR when it started was a cheaper alternative to 40k, giving you 24 Warriors of the Last Alliance models for $35 rather than 10 space marines for $40 (AUD). Compare that to the current 3 trolls for $140... It's no longer a cheaper viable alternative.

(On a related note: Oooh, Rivendell cavalry? shiny, would go well with my... WHAT? twice the price of the Angmar Warg Riders?)

One reason to rule them all - Price.

GW's greed and assumption that people will flock to buy their products at over inflated prices.

Manchu wrote:Let's talk about the starter set. I think that's a great, please pardon the pun, place to start.

Where did you think it came short as far as value? Just in terms of the price of miniatures compared against the product line, it wasn't bad. Was it more a matter of the actual units included?

Well I don't know the US prices, but I believe the Mines of Moria was $85AUD, Escape from Goblin Town is.... $205. I don't think it's terrible value for the amount of plastic you get compared to other GW lines (not necessarily awesome value, but similar arena), but you're paying a lot for a bunch of plastic terrain and just me personally I have little to no great desire to paint the ugly boil covered goblins and Mr. Scrotum Beard.

The scene in the movie didn't have nearly the sort of impact that the Mines of Moria had, the models don't look as nice and they cost too much. I would like to get Thorin's company, but I'm not paying that much for it. I wouldn't say I bought Mines of Moria on impulse, but the value definitely played a part of which The Hobbit has none.

The lack of marketing definitely hurt them as well. If they were expecting to sell it to randoms walking in to their shops and no one else, they were a bit silly.

Breotan wrote:GW put out their initial release and seems to almost have walked away from the product entirely. Then again, what are they supposed to make other than goblins? Well, I suppose they could do Dwarves vs. Orcs per the flashbacks. The Hobbit just doesn't translate very well into a tabletop wargame, I guess.

Oh, in case nobody mentioned it, the prices seem a little on the steep side.

Actually, GW haven't walked away from The Hobbit release. Just this past round of releases they released 2 new plastic boxed sets and 3 new character sculpts, overall since they've released the main game they've released 5 plastic boxed sets and half a dozen character models for "good" and, what, 2 or so boxed sets and a a few characters for evil as well.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Breotan wrote:GW put out their initial release and seems to almost have walked away from the product entirely. Then again, what are they supposed to make other than goblins? Well, I suppose they could do Dwarves vs. Orcs per the flashbacks. The Hobbit just doesn't translate very well into a tabletop wargame, I guess.

Oh, in case nobody mentioned it, the prices seem a little on the steep side.

Actually, GW haven't walked away from The Hobbit release. Just this past round of releases they released 2 new plastic boxed sets and 3 new character sculpts, overall since they've released the main game they've released 5 plastic boxed sets and half a dozen character models for "good" and, what, 2 or so boxed sets and a a few characters for evil as well.

But...

Someone who is active on a GW related forum didn't know it, that says a fair amount as to why you don't have clamoring from the masses regarding the products...even if you were to discount the price and subject matter. The tree has fallen in the forest, but no one has heard it.

As someone who had first person experience of working in GW during the release of LoTR, I have to say it was absolutely mental - this was back in the days of 4 staff working in one small store mind (how long ago that seems now!), and we working all day without breaks and the units of the games were flying off the shelf faster than we could put them out in some places.

Now of course this is many years later, but it was with some confusion (and I have to be honest, a little consternation) that going past the same store on the weekends in the run up to Xmas to see the same stuff sat on the shelf. Kids in the store yes, but most of them are hanging around the 40k or WFB stuff. I guess there could be any number of reasons for it (and TBH we will probably never know how well it sold - just from my impression, it could surely only have been a fraction of the heady days of the LoTR game releases)

The Obvious ones; prices and marketing. The former was too high, nothing like enough of the latter. I've heard it said that the original LoTR was sold at very little profit, which obviously lead to a lost opportunity as so many of the kids I saw coming into the store to buy a starter box never came into the store again (again though, this is just my impression). So I can understand GW wanting to make some money on the starter set and rulebook. That being said, if that price is too high (as was the case I think) then you stop those sales. And as for marketing? Well, its an oft discussed issue, personally I think there current methods are completely incomprehensible. Why plow millions into making and releasing these things, then not tell anyone about it?

 Pacific wrote:
Why plow millions into making and releasing these things, then not tell anyone about it?

We have a simple rule of thumb: no advertising. - Tom Kirby, Chairman's Preamble, 2003 FY Report

The starter set never appealed to me. The goblins, their king and their town, although an enjoyable scene, were only about five minutes of full movie time. I would've preferred a group of Wargs and Warg Riders led by the big one armed white Orc (name escapes me). The Warg Riders were a constant source of tension in the movie and seemed to have the dwarves number whenever they met. If it was Thorin and Co. vs. White Orc and Co., the scenario's in the book could've been more tense, more action packed and dare I say it.... cinematic. This starter set just seemed like Mines of Moria with pale goblins.

And speaking of the pale goblins, I hated the GW paint scheme of them the moment I saw them. A darker, dirtier shade would've matched the movie better.

So the starter set never grabbed my attention. Great sculpts of all parties involved in the set, but I had no desire to see about a dozen dudes wade through a horde of Goblins. I've done it before.

NELS1031 wrote:The goblins, their king and their town, although an enjoyable scene, were only about five minutes of full movie time. I would've preferred a group of Wargs and Warg Riders led by the big one armed white Orc (name escapes me).

To be fair, movie production was a mess, and toy manufacturers including GW were kept in the belief that the white orc character is killed early and his son is the main orc character. Also making three instead of two mvies was a late decision (see all those wood elf action miniatures). And the Moria escape is also only 10 minutes or so.

Pacific wrote:As someone who had first person experience of working in GW during the release of LoTR, I have to say it was absolutely mental - this was back in the days of 4 staff working in one small store mind (how long ago that seems now!), and we working all day without breaks and the units of the games were flying off the shelf faster than we could put them out in some places.

Not enough time for the staff left to say: "GW products are a niche market, right?

Or, as I said in another thread:
"Niche product" is marketing manager talk meaning "we massively lose customers and sales but that's okay and totally not our fault"

I did not know about the DeAgostino connection to the success of LotR, and it explains a lot.

Despite online social media "earned" channels, blah blah modern marketing... TV (and cinema) is still a massive driver of sales, but it probably only works for products that can fit into a mainstream consciousness.

The combo of DeAgostino TV and the film trilogy all over the normal press, made a fantasy wargame for a while into a mainstream product.

I don't think GW's other games would do as well through TV advertising. It is hard to make something like 40K look anything but weird to a mainstream audience, (for good reasons when you think about it.)

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I did not know about the DeAgostino connection to the success of LotR, and it explains a lot.

Despite online social media "earned" channels, blah blah modern marketing... TV (and cinema) is still a massive driver of sales, but it probably only works for products that can fit into a mainstream consciousness.

The combo of DeAgostino TV and the film trilogy all over the normal press, made a fantasy wargame for a while into a mainstream product.

I don't think GW's other games would do as well through TV advertising. It is hard to make something like 40K look anything but weird to a mainstream audience, (for good reasons when you think about it.)

Video games manage to do it every day though. While I don't know if you will find quite the same level of turnover as many games will - they still look weird to a lot of the mainstream audience (SimCity commercials for example come to mind).

Videogames have had enormous amounts of TV and cinema advertising for decades. Many of them being recreations of bits out of action movies, with fast moving visuals we all know from the cinema, and things like sports and driving which are mainstream already. Even my father plays flight sims and he is 84.

It is rather different to a game in which you push little plastic space men around a tabletop, shouting Waaagh and Blood for the Blood God.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Speaking as not an LotR or Hobbit player, I think some of the explanation is that The Hobbit film wasn't as good or popular as the LotR films.

Also, people who were into their Tolkien battles possibly had been satisfied by the LotR releases. What did The Hobbit game/rules offer that was different and interesting?

I liked The Hobbit movie better but I agree that that itch had already been scratched for folks wanting minis.

Plus new rules for a similar game/idea is very off-putting. And people saw GW's tactics and lack of follow-up with LOTR already.

I don't think TV advertising is right for GW but some adverts in certain magazines likely to be read by people interested in fantasy films and toys would be worthwhile. But alongside GW's anti advertising approach is their flat refusal to respond to any kind of media requests even to defend themselves from criticism over something like the Space Marine book. In fact their response to that was to shut down their Facebook page. Their 'fortress walls' is more if a bunker mentality.

They could sell themselves in a very positive way and at little cost, but they are determined not to engage with anyone. Perhaps they are just scared of being asked something awkward or made to look silly (but they're only a fancy toy shop so why would soneone be trying to trip them up?)or maybe they think they are being cool, elitist and niche, but that's a bit hard to reconcile with the fact you're a high street chain retailer.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:

They could sell themselves in a very positive way and at little cost, but they are determined not to engage with anyone. Perhaps they are just scared of being asked something awkward or made to look silly (but they're only a fancy toy shop so why would someone be trying to trip them up?)or maybe they think they are being cool, elitist and niche, but that's a bit hard to reconcile with the fact you're a high street chain retailer.

You were here when "Become Legendary NA" was posting job openings right?

Unhappy customers will take any chance they get to try to trip up representatives from the company they feel has "wronged" them personally.

I'm not talking about customers, it's long been policy that they refuse to engage professional journalists.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Videogames have had enormous amounts of TV and cinema advertising for decades. Many of them being recreations of bits out of action movies, with fast moving visuals we all know from the cinema, and things like sports and driving which are mainstream already. Even my father plays flight sims and he is 84.

It is rather different to a game in which you push little plastic space men around a tabletop, shouting Waaagh and Blood for the Blood God.

Maybe that is a easy bullet to dodge? I mean a good publicity agency can hide 40k or wfb bloody nature and concentrate on things like painting miniatures as a family activity... don't underestimate the capacity of advertisement when done with brains in the right platforms. There are clearly some conflicts between GW target demographic and their products... some things should probably be rated etc but thats not a problem that cannot be addressed.
Look at TV today you see crazy violent cartoons for children in primetime backed up with violent toys commercials that should be on teen channels and not children ones... etc Hell I have seen some freaking commercials for cleaning bathrooms etc in children channels! Those things if ingested by kids are fatal! But I digress.

GW could use that publicity tool like it did with Lotr... but looking at all these years I get the feeling that they consider strategic alliances like some kind of loosing control thing...

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
I'm not talking about customers, it's long been policy that they refuse to engage professional journalists.

Yeah, but in this age of blogs and Youtube interview channels--anyone can be a "journalist"!

Despite LOTR being by far my favourite miniature wargame, I haven't picked up the rulebook. Why? I'm expecting them to do what they did last time and release a rulebook for each movie and then a definitive one. Even if they only have the Unexpected Journey book, then I still won't buy it yet because I don't know if they will change it.

Also, none of the models fit into any of my armies.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
I'm not talking about customers, it's long been policy that they refuse to engage professional journalists.

Yeah, but in this age of blogs and Youtube interview channels--anyone can be a "journalist"!

And that alone is a good reason to not be silent about your own products!

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Videogames have had enormous amounts of TV and cinema advertising for decades. Many of them being recreations of bits out of action movies, with fast moving visuals we all know from the cinema, and things like sports and driving which are mainstream already. Even my father plays flight sims and he is 84.

It is rather different to a game in which you push little plastic space men around a tabletop, shouting Waaagh and Blood for the Blood God.

Really no more difficult than selling anything else. Target your audience and make the product fit.

While you are literally just pushing around plastic figures, you are doing more than that in the minds eye. For the Hobbit, take segments from the movie and morph them into the figures when the take the same pose, have those spin out of seen and after 3 or 4, cut to a scene with a few guys around the table of a game store (or family game night depending on your audience) reenacting the battle.

For 40K, they can use live action scenes (or more likely 3D animation) to show cut scenes of people taking commands from a radio. After a bit, flash out to show a guy at a table with miniatures that are obviously representative of the cut scenes.

They dont even need to be that direct either. MtG has done coomercials from their start...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7I71KnRG2Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZ7J1tLAMvo

 NAVARRO wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Videogames have had enormous amounts of TV and cinema advertising for decades. Many of them being recreations of bits out of action movies, with fast moving visuals we all know from the cinema, and things like sports and driving which are mainstream already. Even my father plays flight sims and he is 84.

It is rather different to a game in which you push little plastic space men around a tabletop, shouting Waaagh and Blood for the Blood God.

Maybe that is a easy bullet to dodge? I mean a good publicity agency can hide 40k or wfb bloody nature and concentrate on things like painting miniatures as a family activity... don't underestimate the capacity of advertisement when done with brains in the right platforms. There are clearly some conflicts between GW target demographic and their products... some things should probably be rated etc but thats not a problem that cannot be addressed.
Look at TV today you see crazy violent cartoons for children in primetime backed up with violent toys commercials that should be on teen channels and not children ones... etc Hell I have seen some freaking commercials for cleaning bathrooms etc in children channels! Those things if ingested by kids are fatal! But I digress.

GW could use that publicity tool like it did with Lotr... but looking at all these years I get the feeling that they consider strategic alliances like some kind of loosing control thing...

There is of course a positive story to be told around the satisfaction of collecting and building your own stuff, art and craft skills, social interaction and other good things.

As a family man I think Warhammer and 40K in particular might have an image problem that isn't found in lots of other miniature games. The presentation in 40K of the "Hero" faction as a hyper-violent, xenophobic fascist dictatorship probably could challenge the PR people to put a positive spin on things.

Despite the above, GW did very well in the era when they made a variety of games and sold them through more general outlets like Toys'R'Us, so clearly the problem isn't a major one.

 Manchu wrote:
FYI: This thread is not just about GW's Tolkien-based products but about GW's practices more generally as they relate to the Tolkien franchise (for example, does GW have any idea how to handle a license?), the late-2012 market for war game miniatures, and the long term market -- looking backward and forward -- for Tolkien-based miniature wargaming.

IIRC, GW's LotR:SBG and WotR games have never been too popular. I have never known anyone in person who played either. Is all this talk about their Hobbit franchise-refresh having disastrous sales a reaction to this low popularity persisting during the film release and Christmas season? If so, that sounds like a retailer mistake. Or was the Hobbit a failure even compared to lifetime sales for the line?

Does anyone have a more detailed picture of what's going on with the Hobbit than the usual one-liner assumptions that fit so well into the much-beloved past time of GW-trashing? From what I know about SBG and WotR, the rules were pretty good. And new minis look as good and in some cases (e.g., wargs) much better than existing models.

In three words?

Movie promotion product. No one gives a gak about it after about two weeks to a month after the next hit of the week takes numbah 1.

GW should have stuck to common sense and left the movie business alone. The game sucks assets away from thier main mission, and turned the company into a joke. Only thing missing is the gw lable on the action figures and funny gandolf hats with the spinners on them.

They need to part with this tick ASAP and focuis on thier own issues, instead of taking on the issues of Warner Bro's, or New Line's.

As a family man I think Warhammer and 40K in particular might have an image problem that isn't found in lots of other miniature games. The presentation in 40K of the "Hero" faction as a hyper-violent, xenophobic fascist dictatorship probably could challenge the PR people to put a positive spin on things.

I would agree with this sentiment and add the fact that pocket/birthday/Christmas money is better served going to other companies products. My lads and their friends get a lot more value for money out of console games, card based games and even books and magazines.

We all love LoTR mainly for the figures. when GW first released their products I was all over it, Painted up tons of figures for display and skirmish play. I had a look at the Hobbit, and was interested, then I picked up a blister containing Gollum and Bilbo - £20!

£20 for tiny resin figures and a 1/3 of the pack is some scenic component that won't get used! Not to mention £75 for Escape from Goblin Town. I'll pass, my lads will pass and my wife won't be picking up figures for me to paint for her. So GW just put off a veteran, little timmy (their target) and a passing fancy of a hobby widow.

I can also imagine that the lacklustre release of the film has hurt sales, not just of GW licensed gear either.

The release of the next instalment may see even less return for Licence holders and may see GW fall back on a price increase yet again to claw something back.,

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
I'm not talking about customers, it's long been policy that they refuse to engage professional journalists.

Yeah, but in this age of blogs and Youtube interview channels--anyone can be a "journalist"!

Why are your responses so deliberately obtuse? I'm talking about professional writers, why should some disgruntled bloggers lead to GW refusing to talk to business publications, the BBC, Guardian or Financial Times? I've seen them all comment that GW don't do interviews of any sort, so have written articles without their input. They're a toy company, not a religious cult.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
I'm not talking about customers, it's long been policy that they refuse to engage professional journalists.

Yeah, but in this age of blogs and Youtube interview channels--anyone can be a "journalist"!

Why are your responses so deliberately obtuse? I'm talking about professional writers, why should some disgruntled bloggers lead to GW refusing to talk to business publications, the BBC, Guardian or Financial Times? I've seen them all comment that GW don't do interviews of any sort, so have written articles without their input. They're a toy company, not a religious cult.

It's really not hard to see why it's far easier for them to have a blanket "no comment" policy than to continually respond to any kind of request for interviews.

Look at the whole thing going on right now with the revised trade terms in North America. MWG is "closing down" and it's currently being spun as though GW's revised trade terms are the biggest reason that this is happening. How could they respond without somehow making themselves look like "the bad guys", responsible for the closing of an independent retailer which is much beloved by a part of the community which closely follows GW's every move?

If GW were to do interviews, it would be no different than how EA is continually presented after any interviews they give. People pick and choose what they actually hear/read from these interviews.

When LotR was out, I could buy GW's LotR miniatures in every bookstore, toystore and DVD store within 50 miles of me.

Bookstores had a display next to the book sets.
Toys R Us had it right next to the action figures.
Suncoast had it right next to the DVD boxed sets.

Today, every bookstore near me is out of business. Movie stores do not exist and people buy DVDs at the grocery store or digitally. No sign of anything at the toy store.

When you have to go to a store you don't know exists or a website for a product you don't know exists, how can you buy it? At least before there was a TON of stumble upon traffic.

I know we see things from the POV of gamers, but LotR had lots of crossover into non-gamers and I met people who don't wargame but enjoyed painting models when they were kids take a crack at buying LotR models. It was all about putting it in people's faces and getting them to try something.

I am a HUGE LotR fan. I loved the Hobbit. Sure, it wasn't LotR, but you can't expect this. I actually considered buying the minis, but when I saw the price, I just laughed and forgot about it.

I mean, really.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
I'm not talking about customers, it's long been policy that they refuse to engage professional journalists.

Yeah, but in this age of blogs and Youtube interview channels--anyone can be a "journalist"!

Why are your responses so deliberately obtuse? I'm talking about professional writers, why should some disgruntled bloggers lead to GW refusing to talk to business publications, the BBC, Guardian or Financial Times? I've seen them all comment that GW don't do interviews of any sort, so have written articles without their input. They're a toy company, not a religious cult.

It's really not hard to see why it's far easier for them to have a blanket "no comment" policy than to continually respond to any kind of request for interviews.

Look at the whole thing going on right now with the revised trade terms in North America. MWG is "closing down" and it's currently being spun as though GW's revised trade terms are the biggest reason that this is happening. How could they respond without somehow making themselves look like "the bad guys", responsible for the closing of an independent retailer which is much beloved by a part of the community which closely follows GW's every move?

If GW were to do interviews, it would be no different than how EA is continually presented after any interviews they give. People pick and choose what they actually hear/read from these interviews.

The problem is, they end up in the asinine position of refusing comment to the BBC, you know, the biggest news network ON THE PLANET.

One thing I think is of some consequence however, is GW has a disconnect in their approach. They're undeniably UK-focused; they've got enormous market saturation in the UK, with stores being relatively commonplace, and public knowledge of the company and the game is higher than anywhere else in the world. However, they maintain that presence at a loss; the UK market is one of the strongest, but there's no way the starbucks-level saturation of GW stores is paying for itself. Meanwhile, with much lower saturation, the US provides equitable income, but even the US is of secondary focus to GW.

They don't advertise, because in the UK, they don't need to. They've probably got as much income from the British population as they can manage, so advertising won't significantly affect their bottom line. They instead rely on very expensive store saturation. In the US and other regions, however, they have, in general, really poor store saturation, with stores in poor locations with little traffic, and they don't advertise, and in some regions, arbitrarily charge significantly more.

GW's response is now the 1 man store, and Kirby's final solution of opening, what was it, 800 new stores? They clearly want a big share of the market, especially in the US (700 stores for them, and the US isn't charged more than the UK), but they refuse to recognize that store saturation is an extremely inefficient way of moving product and raising awareness. They're dealing with enormous geographic entities, and often low population density, and opening brick and mortar stores will only ever work in those regions if combined with raising public awareness.

That being said, I understand their reluctance, because they do have very suspect business policies which cause a lot of ire. Even the BBC article I read on them raised concerns about their price point and out-moded business policy, and wanted to ask GW why they maintained such policies when every other comparable company operates in a very different manner. They'd face a wave of difficult questions they don't particularly want to ask, and they don't want potential customers to become aware of their hostile business policies. Publicity is great when your company can foster a good image, like, for instance, Valve. Even their employee handbook being released was a major coup in terms of good publicity, I can only imagine the backlash if similar directives for GW staffers and corporate management were released.

I don't think GW will ever embrace marketing until they have a serious change in corporate direction, in which they would be able to endure tough questions and scrutiny.

As for the Hobbit, it is a victim of this environment. It's an extremely expensive niche-within-a-niche product, with zero marketing. It's not going to appeal to existent GW customers much, and without advertising, there's no way for new people to get in to it. Furthermore, it's a competing product with their own product; it's like low-points 40k with Fantasy models at a higher price point. What person with an existent 40k army will buy a whole bunch of very expensive finecast minis for a small skirmish game, when they can just do killteam? What fantasy player will invest in another expensive set of models, when they already have their larger scale fantasy battles that they enjoy, and what LOTR player will invest in new models which do nothing for their existent armies or games? GW's only customers are its existent ones, and the ones brought in by word of mouth, and I know I'm not encouraging people to come down to my FLGS for a game of The Hobbit, I'm telling them to come down for 40k.

Thus, in the end, I don't think a single Hobbit model has sold from my FLGS, and my FLGS is also a general hobby/collectors store, they've got no shortage of customers with lots of money and particular interests, from sports, to action figures, RPGs, TTWG, and even then, that product ain't moving.

Apart from the obvious mishandling of the license (no marketing etc.) I think the reason it's not a big success is it's not GW's IP. The contraction of their product line to only three games bothers me a lot and I'm sure a lot of other long time players who remember when a GW store carried a dozen games based on their properties. Really I hope the outside IP goes and GW realise there is actually money (and at least a little goodwill) to be made from supporting and creating new game systems outside of the main two.

I though WotR was a great ruleset and I used it as a quicker alternative to fantasy with fantasy models, but I always resented after getting back into the hobby to see Epic (and Necromunda and all the others but especially Epic) relegated to a niche of a niche and getting no attention. I don't know what GW are going to do when they finally have to give up the ghost of pushing Middle Earth tie ins.

Silmarillion: Song of the Ainur coming Christmas 2017. Starter box including the formless personifications of Eru's thought for £95.