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:

 Bull0 wrote:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
And no the "they could not sign the contract" does not hold ground, a contract should never be abusive and GWs contracts are about as abusive as it can get.

Sorry, but the point still stands, nobody's forced to trade with Games Workshop.

This argument is facile in the extreme.

You really suggest that any company that has built itself up over years or decades due, in part, to selling products from the largest commercial entity in the industry, can simply eliminate that element from their business because said entity has paranoid delusions and changes your relationship overnight?

Sure, a new company could base its financial projections and viability studies off information that didn't include GW, but a going concern doesn't have that freedom, certainly not in the short term, even if they could divorce themselves in the medium to long term.

GW have already precipitated the death of Maelstrom (even if mistakes were made by MG that compounded the situation) through exactly this sort of shenanigans, and will continue to pull this sort of nonsense for as long as people stand for it.

Honestly? That's business. Until they're in violation of law (which they may well be! These contracts and the associated practices, such as the story about having frank planning discussions only to renew contracts with clauses that preclude those discussions, sound absolutely horrendous), it's on the retailers not to sign up, or not to renew if the new contracts are in their view unfair, or to seek relevant legal advice. If enough of them do it, that's GW blown, and they change tack. Instead, they're signing anyway, and complaining on the internet when the contracts are enforced, hoping that customers will "vote with their wallets" (how does not buying the independent retailers' stock help their cause, again?) and create the change they want to see but aren't able to create themselves. As is probably clear I don't really get it. I'm happy to be enlightened but so far haven't seen anything other than some moralising.

 Pacific wrote:
The fact that so many companies sell their products would seem to suggest otherwise.

Any other company behaved in the same way as GW, I can guarantee you that their products would rapidly disappear off the shelves; the fact that this hasn't happened in the case of GW is indicative of their size within the market place.

I would say its an indication that they are still making a profit from it none the less.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 azreal13 wrote:

 Bull0 wrote:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
And no the "they could not sign the contract" does not hold ground, a contract should never be abusive and GWs contracts are about as abusive as it can get.

Sorry, but the point still stands, nobody's forced to trade with Games Workshop.

This argument is facile in the extreme.

You really suggest that any company that has built itself up over years or decades due, in part, to selling products from the largest commercial entity in the industry, can simply eliminate that element from their business because said entity has paranoid delusions and changes your relationship overnight?

Sure, a new company could base its financial projections and viability studies off information that didn't include GW, but a going concern doesn't have that freedom, certainly not in the short term, even if they could divorce themselves in the medium to long term.

GW have already precipitated the death of Maelstrom (even if mistakes were made by MG that compounded the situation) through exactly this sort of shenanigans, and will continue to pull this sort of nonsense for as long as people stand for it.

Some people may be OK with it. Hence why they stand for it. Personally I just stand in the middle, I don't really care how companies run their contracts with each other. We can debate all day long whether GW should be allowed to have a say in how their products are sold but honestly I don't care. There are companies out there who use third world children to make clothes for them to sell on and nobody really cares about that despite the fact that I consider it unethical. I rather pay more attention to injustices like that rather than a company who lays down the law on how their own products should be sold on.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

PhantomViper wrote:


I have no idea of the costs involved in this, but have you guys thought about sending those GW legal letters and the new trade agreement to the ECJ? Having read it, I find that a few of the clauses in it are probably breaking the Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, particularly section 1(e):

(e) make the conclusion of contracts subject to acceptance by the other parties of supplementary obligations which, by their nature or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of such contracts.

If what you say is true then this sounds like more of a desperate act from GW. If they are willing to break the law in order to protect their assets then I would say that perhaps GW is completely stuffed and you might see them going under at some point in the future if they are unsuccessful.

I think the GW overhead are quite frankly overestimated, personally coming from a country that has no GW and will not have GW I feel their "involvement in spreading the hobby" is absolutely zero and that holds true to the majority of the globe, the local game stores on the other hand and clubs were available get the tough job doing that.

Actually in my opinion, the rest of the world and the non GW retailers pay in effect for their overheads since they pay more for GW products than GW pays to sell them in their stores.

My opinion still is that GW wants to control and or eliminate any perceived competition actual or not, by any means possible and mass everybody to their stores be it actual or virtual.

 DarthOvious wrote:
I think GWs main problem is their overheads. They have overheads that other companies don't necessarily have. They provide brick and mortar stores and a table space to play on. They also have design costs and technology costs that other companies may not have. No offence to Wayland Games here and I am not having a dig at them, but they don't have those overheads. They don't need to invest in shops to provide gaming spaces and they don't have to invest money into technology for future products. That's why they are able to undercut GW by 20% in the first place and also why they can undercut your FLGS by 10%.

GW CHOOSE to use independents, so if they dont like losing the margin, the desicion is simple.

Of course, independents cover about 60% of all GW sales, so the idea this is all one way traffic is utter nonsense.

By the way, having been to wayland games , and been a customer of GW stores since they sold D&D, I'll let you in on a secret.

Its much easier to play a game at wayland than it is a current GW store.

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
I think the GW overhead are quite frankly overestimated, personally coming from a country that has no GW and will not have GW I feel their "involvement in spreading the hobby" is absolutely zero and that holds true to the majority of the globe, the local game stores on the other hand and clubs were available get the tough job doing that.

Actually in my opinion, the rest of the world and the non GW retailers pay in effect for their overheads since they pay more for GW products than GW pays to sell them in their stores.

My opinion still is that GW wants to control and or eliminate any perceived competition actual or not, by any means possible and mass everybody to their stores be it actual or virtual.

You might perceive GW to be unethical in the things that they do and that's fine but to do the thing that you suggest they are doing would be stupid. If you think the rest of the stores do the hard work to sell their products and promote their hobby then why would GW want to eliminate the stores who do the hard work to sell their products on their behalf?

EDIT: Also just wanted to add that production costs and future technology costs would cover all their products that they sell across the globe.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

NoggintheNog wrote:
GW CHOOSE to use independents, so if they dont like losing the margin, the desicion is simple.

I understand that, but I think its a case of how the products get sold on afterwards.

Of course, independents cover about 60% of all GW sales, so the idea this is all one way traffic is utter nonsense.

Yes, they probably do.

By the way, having been to wayland games , and been a customer of GW stores since they sold D&D, I'll let you in on a secret.

Its much easier to play a game at wayland than it is a current GW store.

I'm sure that's the case for you but its not for me. I have two different GW stores I can play in. There is an independent store also but its not brilliant. Especially since they don't actually have any proper tables for 40K and focus more on MTG, etc.

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
I think the GW overhead are quite frankly overestimated, personally coming from a country that has no GW and will not have GW I feel their "involvement in spreading the hobby" is absolutely zero and that holds true to the majority of the globe, the local game stores on the other hand and clubs were available get the tough job doing that.

Actually in my opinion, the rest of the world and the non GW retailers pay in effect for their overheads since they pay more for GW products than GW pays to sell them in their stores.

Two words: Design Studio.

Seriously you think their design studio is what recruits people in wargaming? not game stores that display games and sell them, that make them available to the potential customers for purchase, but the design studio?

I would really love to see the marvels of their design studio in a country that GW has no stores and the local game stores do not support them.

No, I think it's expensive and represents a significant part of GW's overheads. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

 DarthOvious wrote:
The reason why companies don't like leaks is because its gives their competitors an idea on what direction they are taking and they could lose a market advantage from doing so. For instance the news in regards to the leaked flyers could have influenced other wargame miniature companies to start making flyers of their own. So the development advantage of releasing these models is cut down a bit as it takes less time for competitors to catch up. I am not saying here that GW came up with the first flyers for a wargame, but I am just stating that their ideas (design wise & model wise) could influence competitors.

The thing is, while this certainly happens in other industries (yes, phone developers don't like their competitors seeing what features they are building into their new phones, so that other phones currently in development don't have those same features and more added in to trump them) this really doesn't apply to GW. GW's main competitors aren't even in the same genre. Privateer isn't going to decide to add flyers to their game just because they see that GW is working on one. Battlefront isn't suddenly going to rush out a 28mm scale scifi game with skinny, pointy eared aliens in it just because we see a blurry photo of Eldar models due out in a month's time.

Added to which, GW deny that they even have any competition. Competing minature companies just aren't on their radar.

They have stated publicly why they try to clamp down on rumours and advance showing of their product, and it's nothing to do with competitors stealing their thunder. It's because despite all rational evidence to the contrary (including sales from their own subsidiaries), they believe that not knowing that something is coming makes people more excited about it (and this more likely to buy it) when it is released.

It's lunacy, plain and simple.

 insaniak wrote:
they believe that not knowing that something is coming makes people more excited about it (and this more likely to buy it) when it is released.

It's lunacy, plain and simple.

Besides the known issues with 3rd parties trying to get models to market before GW releases them... Apple can tell you the 'impulse buy' secrecy model works for them. You literally don't know there is a new device Wednesday and on Friday it is in stores ready to buy... IF YOU GET THERE IN TIME GOGOGOGO IPHONE!

Also, the whole 'sunday newspaper ad' is the exact same thing. They share that they have a 20$ blu ray player, but only have 3 of them, so when you get to the store, mind set on having the new release, chances are your impulse buy decision means even if the 20$ blu ray is out of stock, you will still buy a blu ray player that day.

Stores manipulate shoppers into buying stuff by removing the chance for critical thought from the purchase. GW's release model is just an example of this, and it does seem to impact some of their customers in this way.

nkelsch wrote:
Besides the known issues with 3rd parties trying to get models to market before GW releases them...

Well, yes, when GW releases a codex and then waits three years to release models for new units that everyone playing that army wants to use, at least one of the various garage companies out there will release an alternative.

There's a very easy solution that that problem.

And in fact, more transparancy from GW would have aleviated that somewhat... to take the obvious Thunderwolf example - if GW had actually stated at some point immediately after the codex was released that they were working on them, and had shown a green in progress, there are plenty of people who would have waited for the GW model rather than buying one of the 3rd party options that sprang up in the interim, particularly since a lot of the 3rd party options weren't as good as what GW eventually released.

They cut their own throat by keeping hush about the fact that Twolves were in development. They just released a unit entry, and gave no indication that a model would ever be released. It's no wonder that people went and bought from elsewhere.

Apple can tell you the 'impulse buy' secrecy model works for them.

Does it, though? Haven't the last few iPhone and iPad releases all been spoilered by several months?

So, please, why BoW keep advertising GW stuff? Do as the big company want and let them rot alone... GW is not about the hobby anymore, it is just a big company trying to make money on little kids. Why not show to those kids where they should spend their money?

 insaniak wrote:

Well, yes, when GW releases a codex and then waits three years to release models for new units that everyone playing that army wants to use, at least one of the various garage companies out there will release an alternative.

There's a very easy solution that that problem.

They do solve that, by only adding new units they have models for. (i know it's new for GW, but that's what they are doing NOW)

GW doesn't publicly say they have competition, but they know that there are other companies who sell minis and table top war games, and people who make 3rd party parts for their minis or "alternative" versions of their minis for the purpose of playing their games. and that there are people who can 3d print and process faster then they can make their shipments. (see the centurion, people didn't like it, someone came out with a 3d mockup, before it was even out yet)

Mind you I'm not saying Anyone is right or wrong, and i sure as hell don't have any inside information on anything, but that's my conjuncture as to one possible reason. (could be they just don't want anyone to know)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 The Dwarf Wolf wrote:
So, please, why BoW keep advertising GW stuff? Do as the big company want and let them rot alone... GW is not about the hobby anymore, it is just a big company trying to make money on little kids. Why not show to those kids where they should spend their money?

i'd guess that there is a large portion of thier hits that generate them money come from the GW side of what goes on (purly a guess, same reason that independents dont't just drop GW)

 The Dwarf Wolf wrote:
So, please, why BoW keep advertising GW stuff? Do as the big company want and let them rot alone... GW is not about the hobby anymore, it is just a big company trying to make money on little kids. Why not show to those kids where they should spend their money?

They make money from people signing up for premium plans on their site.

People sign up because they want to know more about certain games.

I am guessing that a large number sign up because they want to know more about GW games.

BoW doesn't get any money from GW. They get money from people wanting to know about GW stuff.

Quit covering GW = quit getting money from people who are only there because they want to see coverage of GW.

 DarthOvious wrote:
I am not going to argue right or wrong here, but I think there are a lot of companies out there who don't like their pre-releases being leaked all over the internet. I suppose we could argue about the way in which GW is implementing it but GW have decided their current course and thats up to them to decide. A good example of what I am talking about is the leak of the Sony Ericsson Xperia Z1.

http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2013/09/sonys-mobile-teams-anti-leaks-poster-campaign-leaks/

The reason why companies don't like leaks is because its gives their competitors an idea on what direction they are taking and they could lose a market advantage from doing so. For instance the news in regards to the leaked flyers could have influenced other wargame miniature companies to start making flyers of their own. So the development advantage of releasing these models is cut down a bit as it takes less time for competitors to catch up. I am not saying here that GW came up with the first flyers for a wargame, but I am just stating that their ideas (design wise & model wise) could influence competitors.

Some people do use alternatives sometimes to represent the models in their army so it is not unthinkable that this could result in a loss of sales. I am not saying that it does, but I am just saying its not an unreasonable claim to make.

However much can be said that GW should just focus more on stopping leaks from their company to begin with. It could also be argued if this is a realistic thing for GW to accomplish considering that their stuff gets playtested in advance before release. Perhaps they should change their playtesting policy instead to insure less leaks in the future. Many things can be argued here.

Don't even suggest that. Most likely if they think it's the playtesting method that's causing the leaks, they'll just stop playtesting altogether.

 Battlesong wrote:


Don't even suggest that. Most likely if they think it's the playtesting method that's causing the leaks, they'll just stop playtesting altogether.

They already have, to playtest a game you need more then a hand full of guys at the office pushing models around a table for pictures.

 Bull0 wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:

 Bull0 wrote:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
And no the "they could not sign the contract" does not hold ground, a contract should never be abusive and GWs contracts are about as abusive as it can get.

Sorry, but the point still stands, nobody's forced to trade with Games Workshop.

This argument is facile in the extreme.

You really suggest that any company that has built itself up over years or decades due, in part, to selling products from the largest commercial entity in the industry, can simply eliminate that element from their business because said entity has paranoid delusions and changes your relationship overnight?

Sure, a new company could base its financial projections and viability studies off information that didn't include GW, but a going concern doesn't have that freedom, certainly not in the short term, even if they could divorce themselves in the medium to long term.

GW have already precipitated the death of Maelstrom (even if mistakes were made by MG that compounded the situation) through exactly this sort of shenanigans, and will continue to pull this sort of nonsense for as long as people stand for it.

Honestly? That's business. Until they're in violation of law (which they may well be! These contracts and the associated practices, such as the story about having frank planning discussions only to renew contracts with clauses that preclude those discussions, sound absolutely horrendous), it's on the retailers not to sign up, or not to renew if the new contracts are in their view unfair, or to seek relevant legal advice. If enough of them do it, that's GW blown, and they change tack. Instead, they're signing anyway, and complaining on the internet when the contracts are enforced, hoping that customers will "vote with their wallets" (how does not buying the independent retailers' stock help their cause, again?) and create the change they want to see but aren't able to create themselves. As is probably clear I don't really get it. I'm happy to be enlightened but so far haven't seen anything other than some moralising.

It really isn't business. While there is an element which appear ready to crawl over the corpse of their grandmother to make an extra few pennies in the pound, the vast majority conduct themselves in a far more affable manner. Not out of the goodness of their hearts, but because any business positioned in the manufacturing, distribution or wholesale sector needs other businesses to buy its product in order to survive.

Now, GW are an exception to the standard model in that they have direct online and physical presences, which inevitably leads to some conflict of interests. This isn't a unique situation, but it is unusual. I do have fairly extensive experience in an industry where independent retailers compete directly in the marketplace with their suppliers direct channels, but in 12 years I've encountered nothing like the control that GW are trying to exert on their Indy partners.

It would be far more sensible to acknowledge that the independent channel appeals to, and reaches, a different sector of the customer base than their own stores, and adjust their offering through that channel accordingly, but no, they'd apparently beat them into submission or extinction than utilise them to their own advantage.

I've also run my own business where I made a decision to sign up to a franchise, because, in theory at least, it allowed me to offer a wider range of product, make a greater margin on my sales and provided a greater degree of admin support behind the scenes. On the surface, a no brainer decision, but as time went by, the franchise agreement was amended, reducing my freedoms to run my business as I saw fit while leaving me with all the financial risk. Most of these changes were within the existing agreement's remit, and the couple that required me to re-sign or terminate, well, it isn't as simple as "just say no" when your income and your ability to service your customer base is on the line, believe me. Any of this sound familiar?

Just because something is legal doesn't make it moral or ethical, and that is the real debate here (or though, as you rightly mention, there may be a suggestion it isn't even legal) and if people find it distasteful, well, I'm not surprised.

As for voting with their wallets? I'm sure most Indys wouldn't care if their GW stock started gathering dust, as long as their income was maintained from other sources, my understanding from speaking to most Indy retailers is that GW is considered a necessary evil by most, and have been a bear to deal with for years. If they were gaining enough sales from other systems and manufacturers that they could afford to drop or de-emphasise GW, I suspect many would do it with a sigh of relief.

While the retailers may eventually get their gak together and posse up, in the meantime, anyone who finds this sort of behaviour distasteful needs to take responsibility and withold their cash from GW. If enough share this view, then change will happen, if we really are just an insignificant minority shouting on the Internet, then that's capitalism.

One things for sure, if enough people really do say "no, I will not endorse this behaviour by rewarding you with my business" GW won't be able to bully, manipulate or litigate their way out of it.

I have recently bought some new GW paint thinking it would be like their old stuff, wow even their paint is gak now. Its the same paint that you can buy at the crafts stores/walmart/target for a buck a bottle. I bought 6 paints only opened 3 and its all gak, doesnt mix with water cant do gak. Feels cheap smells cheap is gritty and fethed. I'm done, I was trying to finish my wolves with GW paint but feth it. To Vallejo paint and mantic/reaper minis for me.

Triszin wrote:
I have recently bought some new GW paint thinking it would be like their old stuff, wow even their paint is gak now. Its the same paint that you can buy at the crafts stores/walmart/target for a buck a bottle. I bought 6 paints only opened 3 and its all gak, doesnt mix with water cant do gak. Feels cheap smells cheap is gritty and fethed. I'm done, I was trying to finish my wolves with GW paint but feth it. To Vallejo paint and mantic/reaper minis for me.

That's surprising, I've really liked some of their new paints. They've been useful when I wanted nice bright colours to offset more serious tones. Maybe you just had a bad batch?

 motyak wrote:

Triszin wrote:
I have recently bought some new GW paint thinking it would be like their old stuff, wow even their paint is gak now. Its the same paint that you can buy at the crafts stores/walmart/target for a buck a bottle. I bought 6 paints only opened 3 and its all gak, doesnt mix with water cant do gak. Feels cheap smells cheap is gritty and fethed. I'm done, I was trying to finish my wolves with GW paint but feth it. To Vallejo paint and mantic/reaper minis for me.

That's surprising, I've really liked some of their new paints. They've been useful when I wanted nice bright colours to offset more serious tones. Maybe you just had a bad batch?

The dry paints are gak, but most everything else is ok. Difficult to make a case for Citadel over Vallejo or Reaper though, existing colour use or ubiquity aside.

 azreal13 wrote:

 motyak wrote:

Triszin wrote:
I have recently bought some new GW paint thinking it would be like their old stuff, wow even their paint is gak now. Its the same paint that you can buy at the crafts stores/walmart/target for a buck a bottle. I bought 6 paints only opened 3 and its all gak, doesnt mix with water cant do gak. Feels cheap smells cheap is gritty and fethed. I'm done, I was trying to finish my wolves with GW paint but feth it. To Vallejo paint and mantic/reaper minis for me.

That's surprising, I've really liked some of their new paints. They've been useful when I wanted nice bright colours to offset more serious tones. Maybe you just had a bad batch?

The dry paints are gak, but most everything else is ok. Difficult to make a case for Citadel over Vallejo or Reaper though, existing colour use or ubiquity aside.

Ah right, I haven't tried their dry paints and other fancy kinds yet. I didn't realise he was referencing them.

I don't think he was, just me!

The textures are ok, but most of my dry paints went rubbery and useless, but I can't say I was a fan previously.

 insaniak wrote:

 DarthOvious wrote:
The reason why companies don't like leaks is because its gives their competitors an idea on what direction they are taking and they could lose a market advantage from doing so. For instance the news in regards to the leaked flyers could have influenced other wargame miniature companies to start making flyers of their own. So the development advantage of releasing these models is cut down a bit as it takes less time for competitors to catch up. I am not saying here that GW came up with the first flyers for a wargame, but I am just stating that their ideas (design wise & model wise) could influence competitors.

The thing is, while this certainly happens in other industries (yes, phone developers don't like their competitors seeing what features they are building into their new phones, so that other phones currently in development don't have those same features and more added in to trump them) this really doesn't apply to GW. GW's main competitors aren't even in the same genre. Privateer isn't going to decide to add flyers to their game just because they see that GW is working on one. Battlefront isn't suddenly going to rush out a 28mm scale scifi game with skinny, pointy eared aliens in it just because we see a blurry photo of Eldar models due out in a month's time.

Added to which, GW deny that they even have any competition. Competing minature companies just aren't on their radar.

They have stated publicly why they try to clamp down on rumours and advance showing of their product, and it's nothing to do with competitors stealing their thunder. It's because despite all rational evidence to the contrary (including sales from their own subsidiaries), they believe that not knowing that something is coming makes people more excited about it (and this more likely to buy it) when it is released.

It's lunacy, plain and simple.

Lunacy? Yes. But people still drink the koolaid and give it to their kids as well. The only way GW will change policy is if they see an actual drop in sales.

ender502

Brother Weasel wrote:
They do solve that, by only adding new units they have models for. (i know it's new for GW, but that's what they are doing NOW)

Yes, it's new, and it took losing a lawsuit for them to realise that not releasing stuff that customers want will cause other people to release that stuff instead.

If GW had instead just told their customers that they were working on a Tervigon kit, and showed them WIP shots that would have shown how much better it was going to be than the CH conversion kit, how many fewer kits would CH have sold?

... and that there are people who can 3d print and process faster then they can make their shipments. (see the centurion, people didn't like it, someone came out with a 3d mockup, before it was even out yet)

Sure, a little garage operation can throw together a 3d render and upload it to Shapeways faster than GW can get models produced and out to stores. But realistically, how many is that little garage operation going to sell?

The alternate Centurion sculpt is not serious competition for GW. It's a drop in the pond. And it's a drop that GW could dry up by just not releasing crap models.

To continue the off topic discussion... Just slightly. I've not painted for a couple of months. Every single one of my new paints has ended up separating into some water and a congealed blob of goo. So I need to go into every one with a tooth pick to mix them back into paint again.

Which works. Sort of. Ish. Maybe.

And even that doesn't help their 'Imperial Primer' paint. All I want to use it for is to cover over some bits my spray paint missed. But no. That's too hard.

Shades are fine if you paint GW style (base > shade > actual paint), but far too thick to actually use as proper washes.

Glazes, I still have no idea what they 'do'. And I've bought the paint guide.

The selection of red paints they have now is terrible. Khorne Red is NOT a dark red. It's barely a midtone in my mind.


My 8 year old GW paints? Completely fine.

-----------------

On topic, Wayland actually invests a great deal of cash back into the hobby. - Hence why they were working with Beasts of War in the first place, I imagine.

But also, Tabletop Nation is now probably the premier gaming hall in the UK outside of Warhammer World (if there's others like it, especially in the southwest, please tell me!). Especially since it seems that 'Eye of the Storm' couldn't survive Maelstroms death after all.

Dammit, am I talking myself into buying more X Wing toys from Wayland now?

 ender502 wrote:
Lunacy? Yes. But people still drink the koolaid and give it to their kids as well. The only way GW will change policy is if they see an actual drop in sales.

Except going by the last few financials, they're already seeing a drop in sales volumes... they're just making up for it with price increases and cost cutting.

So they're either handwaving the problem away, or they're thinking that sales would be worse if they were telling people what they were going to release next. Either one seems a little crazy.

 motyak wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:

 motyak wrote:

Triszin wrote:
I have recently bought some new GW paint thinking it would be like their old stuff, wow even their paint is gak now. Its the same paint that you can buy at the crafts stores/walmart/target for a buck a bottle. I bought 6 paints only opened 3 and its all gak, doesnt mix with water cant do gak. Feels cheap smells cheap is gritty and fethed. I'm done, I was trying to finish my wolves with GW paint but feth it. To Vallejo paint and mantic/reaper minis for me.

That's surprising, I've really liked some of their new paints. They've been useful when I wanted nice bright colours to offset more serious tones. Maybe you just had a bad batch?

The dry paints are gak, but most everything else is ok. Difficult to make a case for Citadel over Vallejo or Reaper though, existing colour use or ubiquity aside.

Ah right, I haven't tried their dry paints and other fancy kinds yet. I didn't realize he was referencing them.

I was referencing their new Layer paints, and the base paints. The layers do not mix correctly with water, it turns the paint into a wash. With the older (4+ years ago) the paint would mix great with water to create lighter shades that would still stick like paint. This new stuff when mixed just runs. Also my brother happened upon a rogue trader era box of GW citadel paint and Its all perfect didnt separate and is awesome to paint with.

I'll stop with the off topic, If i feel the need to talk/rant about it some more i will create a thread in general.

 Zweischneid wrote:
This kinda should go here

Spoiler:

GW will forever rue the day they lost Ronnie Renton....

You, sir, are a gentleman and a scholar.

The Auld Grump

 insaniak wrote:

 DarthOvious wrote:
The reason why companies don't like leaks is because its gives their competitors an idea on what direction they are taking and they could lose a market advantage from doing so. For instance the news in regards to the leaked flyers could have influenced other wargame miniature companies to start making flyers of their own. So the development advantage of releasing these models is cut down a bit as it takes less time for competitors to catch up. I am not saying here that GW came up with the first flyers for a wargame, but I am just stating that their ideas (design wise & model wise) could influence competitors.

The thing is, while this certainly happens in other industries (yes, phone developers don't like their competitors seeing what features they are building into their new phones, so that other phones currently in development don't have those same features and more added in to trump them) this really doesn't apply to GW. GW's main competitors aren't even in the same genre. Privateer isn't going to decide to add flyers to their game just because they see that GW is working on one. Battlefront isn't suddenly going to rush out a 28mm scale scifi game with skinny, pointy eared aliens in it just because we see a blurry photo of Eldar models due out in a month's time.

Added to which, GW deny that they even have any competition. Competing minature companies just aren't on their radar.

They have stated publicly why they try to clamp down on rumours and advance showing of their product, and it's nothing to do with competitors stealing their thunder. It's because despite all rational evidence to the contrary (including sales from their own subsidiaries), they believe that not knowing that something is coming makes people more excited about it (and this more likely to buy it) when it is released.

It's lunacy, plain and simple.

I think we can all agree the Internet is used for porn and complaining (sometimes combined). Every time someone leaks something an image, it's pages of complaints unless there are dedicated fanboys to actually hype something up. GW releases something, you get pages of people calling it crap and if someone likes it, they are a fanboy (except if you're commenting on PP then you're not because everyone knows they are wine and cheese to GWs beer and pretzels). You see it time after time - the entire Mantic line of models for example (exception being their goblins, GWs don't have the same noses). After a while, there is no reason to cater to the denizens online. Their opinions don't matter as much because no matter what happens their commentary is negative. Why cater to someone who won't buy from you to begin with. The constant negativity is why GW stopped hanging out on portent.net back in the day. People have been predicting they would go out of business and they are all unoriginal hacks since 1995-7. Now 15-20 years later, they are still here and still the 800 pound gorillas in the industry.

Yes there is some truth to GW not wanting to show the world their WIP but a couple of weeks wouldn't hurt their sales. To early and you risk cannibalizing existing kits as people wait to get the new models. Heck when I saw the greens for the third edition Eldar, I waited 18 months before I bought a single aspect warrior because the scorpions looked so much better and I wanted scorpions and banshees but didn't like the second edition models. If they telegraph their moves, they risk someone else beating them to the market.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DarthOvious wrote:
I am not going to argue right or wrong here, but I think there are a lot of companies out there who don't like their pre-releases being leaked all over the internet. I suppose we could argue about the way in which GW is implementing it but GW have decided their current course and thats up to them to decide. A good example of what I am talking about is the leak of the Sony Ericsson Xperia Z1.

http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2013/09/sonys-mobile-teams-anti-leaks-poster-campaign-leaks/

The reason why companies don't like leaks is because its gives their competitors an idea on what direction they are taking and they could lose a market advantage from doing so. For instance the news in regards to the leaked flyers could have influenced other wargame miniature companies to start making flyers of their own. So the development advantage of releasing these models is cut down a bit as it takes less time for competitors to catch up. I am not saying here that GW came up with the first flyers for a wargame, but I am just stating that their ideas (design wise & model wise) could influence competitors.

Some people do use alternatives sometimes to represent the models in their army so it is not unthinkable that this could result in a loss of sales. I am not saying that it does, but I am just saying its not an unreasonable claim to make.

However much can be said that GW should just focus more on stopping leaks from their company to begin with. It could also be argued if this is a realistic thing for GW to accomplish considering that their stuff gets playtested in advance before release. Perhaps they should change their playtesting policy instead to insure less leaks in the future. Many things can be argued here.

I agree with you.

boyd wrote:
Every time someone leaks something an image, it's pages of complaints unless there are dedicated fanboys to actually hype something up.

That's because most of GW's releases recently are disappointing. They're either truly awful (everything from Apocalypse 2.0) or mediocre milking of the cash cow (the "dip it in glue and roll it around in purity seals" marine models). There are some good kits (the new Tau pathfinders), but if you look at GW's average output it's not really a surprise that discussion of it would be dominated by negative comments.

People have been predicting they would go out of business and they are all unoriginal hacks since 1995-7. Now 15-20 years later, they are still here and still the 800 pound gorillas in the industry.

Don't forget that GW's dominance has a lot to do with their retail strategy. You can make a lot of money and dominate an industry with mediocre products if you run your business well, especially if you have a 10-20 year head start on your competition.

If they telegraph their moves, they risk someone else beating them to the market.

Not really, since most of the leaks we're talking about happen fairly close to the release date. Showing pictures of the new kits in the month before the pre-orders go up isn't going to give their competition any meaningful advantage.