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.

 azreal13 wrote:
Which is all very nice, but misses the point that GW have never been worse at supporting their own product, entirely.

Why would GW spend time and money running tournaments if the fans do it for them?

 Kingsley wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Which is all very nice, but misses the point that GW have never been worse at supporting their own product, entirely.

Why would GW spend time and money running tournaments if the fans do it for them?

Oh, don't know, perhaps because its an excellent shop window that allows them to demonstrate how popular they are, drive sales by insisting on their own models exclusively, generate goodwill with the fan base and control how their brand is perceived in the marketplace?

For the sum total cost of feth all in the grand scheme of things.

 Kingsley wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Which is all very nice, but misses the point that GW have never been worse at supporting their own product, entirely.

Why would GW spend time and money running tournaments if the fans do it for them?

To promote greater word of mouth advertising and to promote the use of GW figures over 3rd party models are the first 2 that come to mind.

 Kingsley wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Which is all very nice, but misses the point that GW have never been worse at supporting their own product, entirely.

Why would GW spend time and money running tournaments if the fans do it for them?

Because when the events are no longer run or sponsored by GW, the incentive to use only GW minis is removed.

Let's see him explain away those reasons guys...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Let's see him explain away those reasons guys...

We should formalise some rules and get it on Kickstarter!

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Let's see him explain away those reasons guys...

Minimum wage?

It turns out that non-GW sponsored tournaments for GW games are still advertisements for GW games! Also, the point about third party miniatures is overstated at best. I've been to several independent tournaments and third party miniatures-- aside from the very popular Pig Iron Productions alternate heads for IG, Space Marine Scouts, etc.-- have not been common.

What's that phrase again... anecdotal evidence isn't.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
What's that phrase again... anecdotal evidence isn't.

If you have evidence indicating that there are lots of tournaments going on that are filled with non-GW miniatures, that GW is losing sales by not running its own events, etc. feel free to post it.

 -Loki- wrote:

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
So no, inflation is not a factor in whether or not I think the price increases which GW has done are reasonable.

Of course it's not. Minimum wage is .

I know my wage has not increased to keep up with inflation...

 Kingsley wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
What's that phrase again... anecdotal evidence isn't.

If you have evidence indicating that there are lots of tournaments going on that are filled with non-GW miniatures, that GW is losing sales by not running its own events, etc. feel free to post it.

It's certainly growing as the various cottage-bits companies grow. I've come across Guard armies made from WGF minis, far more non-GW Thunderwolves then the GW versions, God knows how many Dreadnoughts with 3rd party arms, Ork armies with bits taken from all over the place, Marines with 3rd party bikes, and of course the infamous Chapterhouse Tervigon kit. It's even more rampant from what (admittedly little) I have seen of WHFB tournaments, where Mantic and various historical miniatures companies are starting to eclipse the GW armies entirely.

 insaniak wrote:
It's certainly growing as the various cottage-bits companies grow. I've come across Guard armies made from WGF minis, far more non-GW Thunderwolves then the GW versions, God knows how many Dreadnoughts with 3rd party arms, Ork armies with bits taken from all over the place, Marines with 3rd party bikes, and of course the infamous Chapterhouse Tervigon kit. It's even more rampant from what (admittedly little) I have seen of WHFB tournaments, where Mantic and various historical miniatures companies are starting to eclipse the GW armies entirely.

Good point re: the non-GW Thunderwolves, those were very prevalent in my area for a while. The rest I have not seen, though it may simply vary from place to place. However, it's important to note that many of the "cottage bitz" companies would be acceptable under GW's old rules for model composition, as they typically lend themselves to conversions using GW parts rather than outright replacements.

 Kingsley wrote:
However, it's important to note that many of the "cottage bitz" companies would be acceptable under GW's old rules for model composition, as they typically lend themselves to conversions using GW parts rather than outright replacements.

And... ?

Sorry, but are you trying to make a point here? I'm not sure what it is, or what exactly this statement does to warrant the "however" at the start of the sentence.

 Kingsley wrote:
Some armies got cheaper; some got more expensive. That's the way it goes. I intend to set up a web app at some point allowing people to easily calculate changes in their army's price. My point is not the obviously wrong "GW prices have decreased for everyone," but rather that prices have decreased for some people and increased for others, so saying that GW constantly increases prices is a false generalization.

Not quite. Some prices have gone down, almost always metal kits shifting into plastic or plastic kits going into threepacks. For a while, all battlion/Battleforces went down to $90, but that didn't last long.

However, when compared to what has gone up, it's a pretty small segment. Compare the above to nearly all vehicles, squad boxes, metal kits that shifted into finecast, etc.

A false generalization would mean that there is no value in the saying, "GWs prices generally go up." There clearly is value to that, because the prices do go up!

A better argument is that the gamer gets more value for his money now, compared to 10 years ago. it'll still be a tough sell with some pretty dramatic increases on core units, but as noted while ork boys cost more, they include more meaningful options. Alas, not all kits are like that. I'm looking at you Cadian/Catachan Infantry. But... the models are better, more squad boxes come with all options, and more squad boxes can build multiple units. That's a lot of value.

But... the average gamer is simply going to spend more out of pocket to build an army now than 10 years ago. I'd be really impressed if you could show otherwise.

 Polonius wrote:
and more squad boxes can build multiple units. That's a lot of value.

That portion of the story is primarily of value to GW - not the consumer. While it is nice to buy one box that can build three different entries in an army list - you normally need the core of the box to build one legal entry of an army list and you have a bunch of left over stuff. If you do a lot of kitbashing, converting or sculpting - that can have some value. The majority of people build the box though.

The real value though is that GW goes from having three SKUs that they have to deal with to having one SKU they have to deal with. Their ROI is shorter on their investment in design and tooling and they have simplified their supply chain. Good for them, but indifferent for the consumer.

 Polonius wrote:
Not quite. Some prices have gone down, almost always metal kits shifting into plastic or plastic kits going into threepacks. For a while, all battlion/Battleforces went down to $90, but that didn't last long.

However, when compared to what has gone up, it's a pretty small segment. Compare the above to nearly all vehicles, squad boxes, metal kits that shifted into finecast, etc.

While there are certainly more kits that have increased in price than kits that have decreased in price, the kits that have decreased in price are often the core squads that make up an army (Dark Eldar Wyches, Necron Immortals, Grey Knights, Grey Knight Terminators, etc.) Generally GW's strategy appears to be to keep prices on core units relatively stable while adding new options, but to increase prices on vehicles, characters, and similar "centerpiece models."

 Polonius wrote:
A better argument is that the gamer gets more value for his money now, compared to 10 years ago. it'll still be a tough sell with some pretty dramatic increases on core units, but as noted while ork boys cost more, they include more meaningful options. Alas, not all kits are like that. I'm looking at you Cadian/Catachan Infantry. But... the models are better, more squad boxes come with all options, and more squad boxes can build multiple units. That's a lot of value.

But... the average gamer is simply going to spend more out of pocket to build an army now than 10 years ago. I'd be really impressed if you could show otherwise.

I'm currently working on a tool that will help people calculate this figure for themselves. My impression is that the overall change will depend on situational factors-- for some, their armies cost more than they once would have, while for others their armies are now less expensive. For instance, an Imperial Guard army with lots of infantry will pretty clearly have gone up in price, but a Necron army based on fielding lots of Immortals will pretty clearly have gone down in price.

 Sean_OBrien wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
and more squad boxes can build multiple units. That's a lot of value.

That portion of the story is primarily of value to GW - not the consumer. While it is nice to buy one box that can build three different entries in an army list - you normally need the core of the box to build one legal entry of an army list and you have a bunch of left over stuff. If you do a lot of kitbashing, converting or sculpting - that can have some value. The majority of people build the box though.

The real value though is that GW goes from having three SKUs that they have to deal with to having one SKU they have to deal with. Their ROI is shorter on their investment in design and tooling and they have simplified their supply chain. Good for them, but indifferent for the consumer.

Well, comparing one plastic box that builds two units vs. two kits that each build one... sure.

But comparing a plastic box that builds two units vs. one plastic kit plus a metal bitz pack for the second?

I'm in the "added bitz is added value" camp, although not nearly enough for extra bitz to make a kit cost significantly more than a comparable unit box.

 Kingsley wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Which is all very nice, but misses the point that GW have never been worse at supporting their own product, entirely.

Why would GW spend time and money running tournaments if the fans do it for them?

Because fan tournaments do not follow the GW only rule.

 Polonius wrote:

 Sean_OBrien wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
and more squad boxes can build multiple units. That's a lot of value.

That portion of the story is primarily of value to GW - not the consumer. While it is nice to buy one box that can build three different entries in an army list - you normally need the core of the box to build one legal entry of an army list and you have a bunch of left over stuff. If you do a lot of kitbashing, converting or sculpting - that can have some value. The majority of people build the box though.

The real value though is that GW goes from having three SKUs that they have to deal with to having one SKU they have to deal with. Their ROI is shorter on their investment in design and tooling and they have simplified their supply chain. Good for them, but indifferent for the consumer.

Well, comparing one plastic box that builds two units vs. two kits that each build one... sure.

But comparing a plastic box that builds two units vs. one plastic kit plus a metal bitz pack for the second?

I'm in the "added bitz is added value" camp, although not nearly enough for extra bitz to make a kit cost significantly more than a comparable unit box.

I am too, and I would guess most of the gaming population who are active on forums are as well - though that isn't the case in general. I hear with some regularity complaints about extra bits from others. There is the assumption that the make the box cost more than it would have if it just contained exactly what was needed - and then there are also those who have no interest in converting or kitbashing so they don't want to have to deal with any extras when they are done.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Which is all very nice, but misses the point that GW have never been worse at supporting their own product, entirely.

Why would GW spend time and money running tournaments if the fans do it for them?

Because fan tournaments do not follow the GW only rule.

Again, is there any evidence that this matters at all?

 Kingsley wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
Not quite. Some prices have gone down, almost always metal kits shifting into plastic or plastic kits going into threepacks. For a while, all battlion/Battleforces went down to $90, but that didn't last long.

However, when compared to what has gone up, it's a pretty small segment. Compare the above to nearly all vehicles, squad boxes, metal kits that shifted into finecast, etc.

While there are certainly more kits that have increased in price than kits that have decreased in price, the kits that have decreased in price are often the core squads that make up an army (Dark Eldar Wyches, Necron Immortals, Grey Knights, Grey Knight Terminators, etc.) Generally GW's strategy appears to be to keep prices on core units relatively stable while adding new options, but to increase prices on vehicles, characters, and similar "centerpiece models."

Of course, only one unit you mentioned was a troops unit prior to being released in plastic. And comparing modern to 2004 prices (the oldest catalog I have), shows that 5 metal termies was the same as modern plastics, metal Grey knights were cheaper than current plastics, metal wyches were $20 for five instead of $29 for twn, and immortals went from $8 a piece to 5 for $33.

So yeah, when stuff jumps to plastic, it gets cheaper. But the stuff that's always been plastic, or that switched to finecast (i.e., most of the line) have jumped much more dramatically.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sean_OBrien wrote:

I am too, and I would guess most of the gaming population who are active on forums are as well - though that isn't the case in general. I hear with some regularity complaints about extra bits from others. There is the assumption that the make the box cost more than it would have if it just contained exactly what was needed - and then there are also those who have no interest in converting or kitbashing so they don't want to have to deal with any extras when they are done.

I'm willing to assume that at least some of the reason GW can churn out as much plastic as they can is because of the kits doing double duty. I'm ok with it.

 Kingsley wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
Not quite. Some prices have gone down, almost always metal kits shifting into plastic or plastic kits going into threepacks. For a while, all battlion/Battleforces went down to $90, but that didn't last long.

However, when compared to what has gone up, it's a pretty small segment. Compare the above to nearly all vehicles, squad boxes, metal kits that shifted into finecast, etc.

While there are certainly more kits that have increased in price than kits that have decreased in price, the kits that have decreased in price are often the core squads that make up an army (Dark Eldar Wyches, Necron Immortals, Grey Knights, Grey Knight Terminators, etc.) Generally GW's strategy appears to be to keep prices on core units relatively stable while adding new options, but to increase prices on vehicles, characters, and similar "centerpiece models."

Your entire theory on price decreases revolves around the decrease when metal moves to plastic. When I bought the pieces for my wych cult, wyches were $20 for a box of ten. What does it matter that the ancient kits from way back when were tiny, expensive metal kits when since then they've gone up by nearly 50%, along with every other $20 plastic kit?

Sir Pseudonymous wrote:
Your entire theory on price decreases revolves around the decrease when metal moves to plastic. When I bought the pieces for my wych cult, wyches were $20 for a box of ten. What does it matter that the ancient kits from way back when were tiny, expensive metal kits when since then they've gone up by nearly 50%, along with every other $20 plastic kit?

Some prices go down for other reasons. For instance, Crisis Suits are now less expensive than they were prior to the new Tau release, despite being plastic and not changing model-wise.

Also, when were plastic Wyches ever 20 dollars for 10? If I recall correctly, they released with the rest of the Dark Eldar revamp at 29.00 for 10 and have stayed there ever since.

 Kingsley wrote:

Sir Pseudonymous wrote:
Your entire theory on price decreases revolves around the decrease when metal moves to plastic. When I bought the pieces for my wych cult, wyches were $20 for a box of ten. What does it matter that the ancient kits from way back when were tiny, expensive metal kits when since then they've gone up by nearly 50%, along with every other $20 plastic kit?

Some prices go down for other reasons. For instance, Crisis Suits are now less expensive than they were prior to the new Tau release, despite being plastic and not changing model-wise.

Also, when were plastic Wyches ever 20 dollars for 10? If I recall correctly, they released with the rest of the Dark Eldar revamp at 29.00 for 10 and have stayed there ever since.

They were released at $20 a box, as were warriors. Raiders were $30, and Ravagers $50 (as I recall). Several months later it all jumped up by about 10%, and then it jumped again (by about as much) at some point, and then again, up to $27 for ten wyches and I stopped looking at the prices at that point.

I entered the hobby 7 years ago, and people were crying the end of GW then too. As long as GW is a company, there will be people with doomsday proclamations.

When they did the back to back to back price spikes like 2 years ago, people said GW was over. We all see how that turned out.

 Kingsley wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Which is all very nice, but misses the point that GW have never been worse at supporting their own product, entirely.

Why would GW spend time and money running tournaments if the fans do it for them?

Because fan tournaments do not follow the GW only rule.

Again, is there any evidence that this matters at all?

The fact that GW follow the GW only rule indicates it is important to them. They impose it in their own shops and on fan tournaments which they support.

Sir Pseudonymous wrote:
[They were released at $20 a box, as were warriors. Raiders were $30, and Ravagers $50 (as I recall). Several months later it all jumped up by about 10%, and then it jumped again (by about as much) at some point, and then again, up to $27 for ten wyches and I stopped looking at the prices at that point.

Looks like we were both wrong-- Wyches and Warriors were both 25 USD at release.

 Polonius wrote:

 Sean_OBrien wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
and more squad boxes can build multiple units. That's a lot of value.

That portion of the story is primarily of value to GW - not the consumer. While it is nice to buy one box that can build three different entries in an army list - you normally need the core of the box to build one legal entry of an army list and you have a bunch of left over stuff. If you do a lot of kitbashing, converting or sculpting - that can have some value. The majority of people build the box though.

The real value though is that GW goes from having three SKUs that they have to deal with to having one SKU they have to deal with. Their ROI is shorter on their investment in design and tooling and they have simplified their supply chain. Good for them, but indifferent for the consumer.

Well, comparing one plastic box that builds two units vs. two kits that each build one... sure.

But comparing a plastic box that builds two units vs. one plastic kit plus a metal bitz pack for the second?

I'm in the "added bitz is added value" camp, although not nearly enough for extra bitz to make a kit cost significantly more than a comparable unit box.

Added bitz are only added value if you have the means to use said bits. For example, I have far, far too many Skeleton bits for my Vampire Counts. I now have 20 sword and shield arms from my Grave Guard, 50 spear arms from my Skeletons, Zombie Dragon bits from my Terrorgheist, Crypt Horror bits from my Vargheists, etc. When I look to source the 'core' bits from those boxes, with shipping, I end up paying more than I would simply for another box in most cases, because bits sellers know how much those core bits are needed.

So those added bits are not added value - they're junk. I'm a hoarder when it comes to wargaming stuff, but it's really not worth the effort clipping them off the sprue and keeping them - its quite literally cheaper to buy the box again than source the core parts.

That doesn't make it added value, because there's nothing I can really do with the additional bitz. It's junk, and junk that inflates the price of the kit.

I get that they need to reduce SKU's for shelf space, but as said, it's value to GW, not to the average customer, because the bits just don't have a use after the kit is built..

You know fellas, call me cynical but I can't help but feel that our constant arguing will do anything to affect what actually happens to Games Workshop. I know it would make good business sense to freeze the price increases, stop the draconian copyright enforcement and once more support the 40k community at large. But ultimately all this posturing will be meaningless. It will not be the dakka dakka member who will convince Mr. Kirby and Krew to quit their BS but the silent majority of 40k players who will stop giving GW their money. Capitalism is a democracy and your money are your votes.

I'm not trying to say "Oh, this isn't going to do nothing so stfu!". Quite the opposite, I encourage these arguments. They are nice mental exercises and very interesting to read. I'm just saying that the real fall of GW will not be because of this message board.

BTW, whoever says prices have gone down on items is clearly disconnected from reality. I hardly see a land raider going from 50 to 75 dollars as a price decrease. As for inflation, Games Workshop products aren't food so they shouldn't spike each year like they do.