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.

GW's biggest problem is that they want to be both a retailer and a manufacturer.

You don't see Apple acting like Best Buy is robbing from them for selling iPhones.

The two sides of the business should have been split from each other long ago.

A very nasty tactic indeed, especially when peoples livelihoods are on the line. Seems like GW wants to have their cake and eat it too. They should either supply these people in full, or not at all.

A few things on contracts and "price fixing".

It is not uncommon for companies like Apple to tell licensed retailers that they MUST charge MSRP for their products, or risk losing their contract to sell. A few companies do this to a smaller degree in the music equipment field, namely Mesa Boogie and SKB cases. Those companies straight up tell retailers that X is the price, and they cannot change it.

That of course has nothing to do with profit margins and everything to do with brand value. They want their products being seen as high end, and therefore do not allow sellers to discount them at all.

At the same time, Guitar Center could easily drop those brands if they felt it would hurt their sales in some way.

GW is not in a position to play that card. GW cannot afford to lose 3rd party distribution. The WarStore sells more GW product than GW's own site does, which was a major reason that many items went direct only, and why online carts were removed for GW products.

I personally think that GW being a retailer is a terrible idea, and is a waste of their money. What they should be doing is supporting local shops, and finding markets where shops need to open and convince someone to open up there. The remaining money should be spent on marketing and promotions in those stores. Sanctioned events, prize support etc.


Look at Magic the Gathering. EVERY card selling game store has Friday Night Magic, which is sanctioned play, and offers official prize support. Tournaments are put on regularly, as are "drafts" which are a brilliant method of quick easy sales. That game alone keeps many shops open just because of the volume of repeat business as well as the income from those events.

GW is not "the big boy" in gaming. They are perhaps for model gaming, but there are other companies that are far more successful in the geek market who have managed to stay profitable without opening their own stores, and fething with LGS's.

Exactly. Magic is wiping the floor with GW in sales volume. That alone should tell GW they should perhaps consider how WotC handles customer relations might make a good template for their OWN dealings with customers...

I was really sorry to hear about this. Combat Company is my main online shop and I order about 75% of my hobby needs through them. The owner is a great guy and ships really fast (free if it is over $100). He also travels and sets up a big stall at a lot of tournaments.

They offer 20% off GW stuff and that is likely the main reason GW has done what they have. Why they would do this to someone that helps grow the gaming hobby eludes me

daemonhunter187 wrote:

nkelsch wrote:
For example, you know if a Walmart decided, for example, they wanted to refuse service to anyone who appeared Haitian, you know that's not going to fly. And while that's not what happened here, it shows the principle that you can sell to - or not sell to - whomever you like to not all all be an absolute.

Correct. Because that's racial discrimination.

If Apple sends Best Buy a letter that states:

"Hey Best Buy. So the iPhone 6 is coming out. We're keeping 33% of the production run for apple.com, and 33% for our own apple stores. The remaining 33% will be distributed equally to all our third party vendors. That's you, Walmart, and anyone else who signed a contract.Stocks are going to be tight. Once production ramps up, expect more, but for the initial rollout, you're only likely to see 4 units per store. It'll generate some great consumer demand in your marketplace. Use it or lose it."


It's not unethical, or illegal, or anything other than sheer business practice. In fact, if they DIDN'T protect their own store inventories in this way, they'd run afoul of their own shareholders.

Unless of course apple forces, as part of their contract terms, for best buy to pre order 500 phones.

Apple turns up with its contract manager and sells them on more phones.

And best buy orders 2000 phones, all which are snapped up as pre orders.

Now Best buy has leveraged their contract terms with apple, to enter in to 2000 agreements with customers.

now apple, in your example, turns around and says WHOOPSIE DOO we cannot get you the stock that we forced you to purchase at release, nor can we get you the extra stuff that you have also paid for.

I would consider that legal grounds. Also if they can prove malice, which they seem to imply, that has a lot of weight in Australia, as "Fairness" is taken into account with contract law over here.

Gw is doing what every company with a public stock is doing.
They are trying to get by with as little as possible to please the shareholders.
Any company with a stock does not seem to care about anything other than dividends,quality be damed

 Aerethan wrote:

Look at Magic the Gathering. EVERY card selling game store has Friday Night Magic, which is sanctioned play, and offers official prize support. Tournaments are put on regularly, as are "drafts" which are a brilliant method of quick easy sales. That game alone keeps many shops open just because of the volume of repeat business as well as the income from those events.

Please, not again MtG vs 40k comparison. Card games are a different beast with much broader popular appeal than miniatures, and much smaller "effort entry cost" than mini wargames. You don't have to paint, base or prepare your cards any way, you can play them right out of the box (which is why Sealed deck and Draft tournaments exist: it's the most original (and best) way of playing Magic. Obviously, such format would be impossible in miniature wargaming). Generally speaking, TCG's have much higher player turnover than wargames. Players do not get attached to their cards or decks in same way as with miniatures. Also, professional tournament circuit as in MtG could never work in a wargame with free movement. When lots of money is on the line, such unprecision within the ruleset is unacceptable.

The simple fact is that we (Aussies) are ripped off constantly. GW are just the guys who's actions affect gamers but it happens every day with overseas manufacturers. Scuba gear is another example - its all manufactured overseas and the same product purchased in Spain for $250 (AUD) will cost you $600 (AUD) here, and its not the dive shops who are making the mega profits I can assure you.

Many people have commented on this thread that there is no legal basis for Combat Company considering legal action. Maybe in America but we operate under our own legal system and we have strong legislation against anti competitive behaviour designed to protect us as consumers. It's been mentioned a few times on this thread that why shouldn't GW have a monopoly on their own product, well nobody is suggesting GW should give their product away for free nor should they (or could they) be forced to sell their products at discounted prices but if they are deliberately manipulating stock volumes to put legitimate resellers at a competitive disadvantage then Combat Company may be able to make a complaint to the ACCC (Australian Competition and Consumer Commision).

Look, they may have nothing but all they're are really saying is that they are looking in to it.

GW seem to have had a fairly low regard for their Australian consumers for some time now and its not just the prices. Gamesday Australia has been canned .............again and after having a chat with my local GW store manager I was told that as Golden Daemon was inextricably linked to Gamesday Aussies would miss on out on that too. I know we are a small group of consumers compared to US, Europe, UK etc but come on, nothing?...............at all?

As a game store owner I get to deal with the background stuff all the time.

Currently I am not carrying new GW product just because of the fear of not being able to be let to run my business without hassle.

I deal in both second hand GW product and Bitz. The thought of having to prove to GW what I have brought in second hand and what I have bought from them and potentially having my sales account cut off because I happen to sell bitz just turns my stomach.

Oddly enough I happen to have a former GW upper manager as a regular customer and they do not have much good to say about the current sales tactics either. I am told the sales tactics come direct from head office and are applied internally as they are externally in a "comply or forfeit your job" type of manner.

Pure sillyness. GW Wake up. I would like to sell your product...

While I make no bones about paying local prices, whenever I do it it's supporting my FLGS. Generally also with legal issues, I've been on GW's side (I'm still on their side in the chapterhouse case).

But right now?
Go get 'em, Combat Company. Do us Aussies proud.

 marv335 wrote:
I can't see this actually going anywhere.
There is no unequal treatment per se,
GW have three avenues for sales, their own B&M, GW Online, FLGS. each are getting a 1/3 of the total supply.

You're operating on the assumption that those figures reflect their sales. The reality is different. It'd be closer to 10%/40%/50%. By short stocking the FLGS, and overstocking the B & M Stores and direct order, they would most likely be in breach of Australia's Competition and Consumer Act.

daemonhunter187 wrote:

nkelsch wrote:
For example, you know if a Walmart decided, for example, they wanted to refuse service to anyone who appeared Haitian, you know that's not going to fly. And while that's not what happened here, it shows the principle that you can sell to - or not sell to - whomever you like to not all all be an absolute.

Correct. Because that's racial discrimination.

If Apple sends Best Buy a letter that states:

"Hey Best Buy. So the iPhone 6 is coming out. We're keeping 33% of the production run for apple.com, and 33% for our own apple stores. The remaining 33% will be distributed equally to all our third party vendors. That's you, Walmart, and anyone else who signed a contract.Stocks are going to be tight. Once production ramps up, expect more, but for the initial rollout, you're only likely to see 4 units per store. It'll generate some great consumer demand in your marketplace. Use it or lose it."


It's not unethical, or illegal, or anything other than sheer business practice. In fact, if they DIDN'T protect their own store inventories in this way, they'd run afoul of their own shareholders.

1.) Nkelsch didn't say that, I did. You've misquoted the post.

2.) You also cherry picked a single line out of the post and stripped it of all of it's context which is specifically and explicitly refuting the notion that you then added to the end. There is such a thing as unfair trade practices, and while I don't know if GWS did or did not violate them, I do know they exist. It's not so black and white as "they can sell to whomever they like, or not, at their whim and discretion".

RogueRegault wrote:

You don't see Apple acting like Best Buy is robbing from them for selling iPhones.

Well actually, they are currently under EU investigation whether their retail policy is fair & legal.

Backfire wrote:
Well actually, they are currently under EU investigation whether their retail policy is fair & legal.

This is good news!

 Eisenhorn wrote:

Any company with a stock does not seem to care about anything other than dividends,quality be damed

That's often repeated and simply not true.

Dividends are actually not issued by the majority of publicly traded stocks, so it's obviously false.

 frozenwastes wrote:
Dividends are actually not issued by the majority of publicly traded stocks, so it's obviously false.

Depends on the market, in Aus they are due to full franking

Interestingly enough, depending on just what sort of level of dominance GW has in the marketplace, GW could conceivably be guilty of violating anti-trust laws in the US as well, but thus far, no one has ever pressed the issue, that I know of.

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Interestingly enough, depending on just what sort of level of dominance GW has in the marketplace, GW could conceivably be guilty of violating anti-trust laws in the US as well, but thus far, no one has ever pressed the issue, that I know of.

They are close but not quite yet. Give them time and they will hang themselves with their own level of arrogance.

 AgeOfEgos wrote:
If this wasn't just a sales rep spouting the corporate reply after the Tau issue (Never let them assume an order will be filled a new release from this point on)---AND they truly have distribution issues again--I think the more interesting question would be; Why is GW suddenly having this issue?

Are they reaping the last several years of "fat trimming"?
Are they scaling back production to keep growth more stable/limited?
Are they experiencing raw material issues?
Or is this just two coincidental shortages (If this one pans out)?

The common factor: Xenos.

"Gee, you think people are tired of more marines?" ya think!
Or could it be that tau and eldar had a lot of pent up demand in the YEARS they never got good updates.

Silly rabbit, not everyone wants humans to play... now give us some freakin xenos terrain!

GW forces retailers to buy quite abit of stock in their trade agreements, you would think they would hold up their end of the deal and actually give their retailer the new stock items...
=/

davethepak wrote:
Silly rabbit, not everyone wants humans to play... now give us some freakin xenos terrain!

When they do finally recognize there's a demand for themed terrain they'll probably release limited quantity kits. In Finecast. At twice the price of the plastic terrain.

 Lockark wrote:
GW forces retailers to buy quite abit of stock in their trade agreements, you would think they would hold up their end of the deal and actually give their retailer the new stock items...
=/

You underestimate the depths of dickishness GW will sink to. Anything for an extra fething buck, apparently.

Slipstream wrote:
Now if only independents worldwide would unite together at the same time and go on the attack...

We have made an offer previously, on this subject.

sarduka42 wrote:I agree, but... Isn't this what Apple does. Apple advises of the price that want it sold for and if the retailers sells it for a discount without Apples permission then Apple tears up the distribution contract?

From what I've read, Apple sells their product at 10% off, and if you sell everything at their MSRP throughout the year, they give a 'bonus' of 20% for all stock moved through the year (eg, 30% off if you sell at MSRP, 10% off if you discount).

The underlying problem is this:

Generally, when you open up a trade account with a supplier, you enter into a legal contract in which, the trade account holder MUST buy the supplier's products and the supplier MUST supply the product to the trade account holder. More often than not, there is usually some sort of "membership fee" (so to say) involved in such contract. In this specific case, independent retailers must have X amount in stock and must buy X amount from GW. It would be one thing if GW simply didnt have anymore in stock to fulfill the retailer's orders. However, GW is simply withholding the stock for their own purposes.

I'm no lawyer, but when a supplier enters into a contract to supply the goods, but does not do so while holding an exclusive control over the supply is indeed deemed as a monopoly. IMO, what GW is currently doing is to make the independent suppliers be fed up with GW so that they null the trade account contract from their end, rather than GW terminating the contracts themselves (since there will be compensations involved). Once there are no more trade account holders left, they will be the sole supplier/seller of their own products. Therefore, they will no longer monopolize the market for GW products by definition (since you can't monopolize your own products). Viola! no more legal liabilities for monopoly!

To be fair GW do have to protect themselves from the current Flying Assault Butts craze that is sweeping the Globe.

I approve...this is great news!

There are also often rather tough penalties for suppliers that fail to meet demand. In the case of Wal-mart, inc, for example, a supplier getting the paperwork wrong is grounds for a several thousand dollar fine.

Has there been any update on this?

I would like to know if GW is still saying "Spread the stock around"

With the printed version of the Iyanden supplement (the same price as Codex: Eldar in the UK) being direct only, that should be another point to add to the argument, right?