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.

 DarthOvious wrote:
Can you clarrify more on this story? I would like to look more into this so I could do with some campany names of those involved.

That was Pierre Fabre Dermo-Cosmetique, which was found to be violating said Article 101 by restricting online sales of their products altogether, a practice adopted by several large French manufacturers at the time. The ECJ ruling is C-439/09 from Oct 13th 2011.

And it has nothing to do with this case, as it was about a company trying to prevent online sales altogether.

As much as it pains me to say it: From an Austrian lawyer's POV (can't really comment on the UK), which includes European Law, GW's handling of the matter is not in breach of law. Whether GW's accusations and eventual punitive measures towards Wayland are justified is indeed a "contractual matter".

Also, please be aware that GW's view of BoW as a subsidiary of Wayland might be wrong, but it is well in their rights to hold that view - if a conflict arises out of this, it is up to a court to decide whose interpretation (GW's or Wayland's) has more merits, "legality" as most people understand it does not come into play here.

Is GW's interpretation of Wayland's relationsh with BoW bullying? Yes, personally, I'd say so. Is it illegal? Surely not.

All that being said, it never ceases to amaze me to what lengths GW will go to alienate their fanbase.

 azreal13 wrote:
It didn't work, info is still leaking, they've just stopped (temporarily) BoW disseminating it.

Which, given the nature of the online community, is like trying to cure the bubonic plague by shooting one rat.

I'm not arguing weather it's good or bad or how well it worked...

ASSUMING that gw changed their trade terms with Wayland to stop BOW from releasing info... THEN they made a move to stop that leak. and by distancing themselves from each other, any leaked info (and i in no way say that wayland was doing such) the change in the agreement caused them to seperate...

that's a lot of assuming..

Are there leaks still, sure... but that's not what the debate is here... Did GW change their agreement to seperate bow and wayland? we can only guess and draw conclusions based on what BOW and Wayland say (and maybe wargamers)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
That's not a fact that's assumption, fact is BOW and Wayland refused the accusations, but decided to part ways so that GW cannot penalize Wayland because BOW reports leaks like the ample ones found here on Dakka or BOK or wherever else.

If the goal was to seperate them, then it worked... I don't know if Wayland gave BOW info, if GW thought they did and wanted to make it difficult to do so, then it did... doens't mean there arent other leaks out there...

Brother Weasel wrote:

If the goal was to seperate them, then it worked... I don't know if Wayland gave BOW info,

If you had even the slightest knowledge of the subject you would know they didn't.

Not just because on the previous page the owner of wayland told you they didn't , but because of what has actually happened.

BoW USED to post a lot of leaks, they leaked tyranids first, Necrons and then the flyers thing. That was before their association with wayland.

After they moved to Hockley and joined up with wayland, they leaked nothing at all, they barely commented on leaks that had 80 page threads full of pictures in this very forum. The association had the exact opposite effect on beasts of war.

As an aside, does anyone else think its rather ironic posters are posting so forcefully about how bad leaks are in a forum entirely devoted to leaks?

Brother Weasel wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
It didn't work, info is still leaking, they've just stopped (temporarily) BoW disseminating it.

Which, given the nature of the online community, is like trying to cure the bubonic plague by shooting one rat.

I'm not arguing weather it's good or bad or how well it worked...

ASSUMING that gw changed their trade terms with Wayland to stop BOW from releasing info... THEN they made a move to stop that leak. and by distancing themselves from each other, any leaked info (and i in no way say that wayland was doing such) the change in the agreement caused them to seperate...

that's a lot of assuming..

Are there leaks still, sure... but that's not what the debate is here... Did GW change their agreement to seperate bow and wayland? we can only guess and draw conclusions based on what BOW and Wayland say (and maybe wargamers)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
That's not a fact that's assumption, fact is BOW and Wayland refused the accusations, but decided to part ways so that GW cannot penalize Wayland because BOW reports leaks like the ample ones found here on Dakka or BOK or wherever else.

If the goal was to seperate them, then it worked... I don't know if Wayland gave BOW info, if GW thought they did and wanted to make it difficult to do so, then it did... doens't mean there arent other leaks out there...

You have the owner of Wayland games posting here personally and you still "don't know if Wayland gave BoW info?"

At this point, given the public statements made, the fact that GW don't distribute information to retailers and the fact that Warren has intimated that his source is a lot closer to home on multiple occasions in the past (mostly on Turn 8, while they were still in Ireland and not partnered with WG) it is fair to assume that WG really aren't responsible for passing info to BoW. Yes, it isn't technically a fact, but then by maintaining that position you're beginning to look like a creationist in a room full of Natural History professors.

NoggintheNog wrote:

Brother Weasel wrote:

If the goal was to seperate them, then it worked... I don't know if Wayland gave BOW info,

If you had even the slightest knowledge of the subject you would know they didn't.

it's unimportant to what i'm saying.. I'm basing arguments off of what a few posters are assuming...






Automatically Appended Next Post:

 azreal13 wrote:

Brother Weasel wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
It didn't work, info is still leaking, they've just stopped (temporarily) BoW disseminating it.

Which, given the nature of the online community, is like trying to cure the bubonic plague by shooting one rat.

I'm not arguing weather it's good or bad or how well it worked...

ASSUMING that gw changed their trade terms with Wayland to stop BOW from releasing info... THEN they made a move to stop that leak. and by distancing themselves from each other, any leaked info (and i in no way say that wayland was doing such) the change in the agreement caused them to seperate...

that's a lot of assuming..

Are there leaks still, sure... but that's not what the debate is here... Did GW change their agreement to seperate bow and wayland? we can only guess and draw conclusions based on what BOW and Wayland say (and maybe wargamers)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
That's not a fact that's assumption, fact is BOW and Wayland refused the accusations, but decided to part ways so that GW cannot penalize Wayland because BOW reports leaks like the ample ones found here on Dakka or BOK or wherever else.

If the goal was to seperate them, then it worked... I don't know if Wayland gave BOW info, if GW thought they did and wanted to make it difficult to do so, then it did... doens't mean there arent other leaks out there...

You have the owner of Wayland games posting here personally and you still "don't know if Wayland gave BoW info?"

correct.. I don't know the guy or his business, he could be full of crap and trying to cover his ass, could be (i do not think he is covering his ass, but this isn't about what i think, it's about what i know)? so no i don't KNOW, without a doubt in my head...

At this point, given the public statements made, the fact that GW don't distribute information to retailers and the fact that Warren has intimated that his source is a lot closer to home on multiple occasions in the past (mostly on Turn 8, while they were still in Ireland and not partnered with WG) it is fair to assume that WG really aren't responsible for passing info to BoW. Yes, it isn't technically a fact, but then by maintaining that position you're beginning to look like a creationist in a room full of Natural History professors.

I said many pages ago that i don't have a vested interest in who is "right" or "wrong" in this... I enjoy counter pointing things that people call facts when they are not facts but assumptions and emotional responses to things...

I guess it doesn't really matter who's doing the leaking - GW thought at one point that it was someone in the retail community doing it, so they changed their trade terms accordingly. I guess the fact that BoW and WG have interpreted this as "GW changed their trade terms specifically to break up the band!" has naturally brought a lot of attention on them, but when you've got WG posting on here stating that they never leaked anything, I feel like it's only respectful to take them on their word.

 Bull0 wrote:
I guess it doesn't really matter who's doing the leaking - GW thought at one point that it was someone in the retail community doing it, so they changed their trade terms accordingly. I guess the fact that BoW and WG have interpreted this as "GW changed their trade terms specifically to break up the band!" has naturally brought a lot of attention on them, but when you've got WG posting on here stating that they never leaked anything, I feel like it's only respectful to take them on their word.

weather i believe him or not, is irreverent

IF GW did this because THEY thought he was leaking info...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Brother Weasel wrote:

 Bull0 wrote:
I guess it doesn't really matter who's doing the leaking - GW thought at one point that it was someone in the retail community doing it, so they changed their trade terms accordingly. I guess the fact that BoW and WG have interpreted this as "GW changed their trade terms specifically to break up the band!" has naturally brought a lot of attention on them, but when you've got WG posting on here stating that they never leaked anything, I feel like it's only respectful to take them on their word.

weather i believe him or not, is irreverent

IF GW did this because THEY thought he was leaking info...

(it's all mostly irrelevent, unless someone wants to Sue GW, otherwise it's all weather or not you care, how much you care, and to what extent you care (IE will you stop buying stuff because of what you feel GW did) and how much wil this affect GW (that we will probably never really know if it affects them at all)

Brother Weasel wrote:

I said many pages ago that i don't have a vested interest in who is "right" or "wrong" in this... I enjoy counter pointing things that people call facts when they are not facts but assumptions and emotional responses to things...

Ah, I see. So that explains the wooly arguments and my difficulty pinning down your point.

You don't have one, but are merely here to argue?

How clever.

Ok, we're done now.

 azreal13 wrote:

Brother Weasel wrote:

I said many pages ago that i don't have a vested interest in who is "right" or "wrong" in this... I enjoy counter pointing things that people call facts when they are not facts but assumptions and emotional responses to things...

Ah, I see. So that explains the wooly arguments and my difficulty pinning down your point.

You don't have one, but are merely here to argue?

How clever.

Ok, we're done now.

debating and arguing are completly diffrent... we can't all just rage hate against GW because BOW and Wayland had to part ways.

I was trying to debate the facts of the case without adding in random "but they did this here, and that there (see the pages of chapterhouse talk) and what we KNOW vs what we FEEL.

GW has always used this business models, I can go back over 20 years here, to what some people believe was the good old days of GW, but even then this sort of thing happened.

Like this, you run your successful LFG selling GW or citadel as it was then, the area managers noted where there was good sales levels and suddenly a GW store opened in that town and the LFG is either told they can no longer sell GW or has to buy a lot more product, which it can't afford, this usually led to death of LFG. This happened to several were I lived.

What is happening now is just a extension of this, and GW wont change because it has worked for over 20 years

Brother Weasel wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:

Brother Weasel wrote:

I said many pages ago that i don't have a vested interest in who is "right" or "wrong" in this... I enjoy counter pointing things that people call facts when they are not facts but assumptions and emotional responses to things...

Ah, I see. So that explains the wooly arguments and my difficulty pinning down your point.

You don't have one, but are merely here to argue?

How clever.

Ok, we're done now.

debating and arguing are completly diffrent... we can't all just rage hate against GW because BOW and Wayland had to part ways.

I was trying to debate the facts of the case without adding in random "but they did this here, and that there (see the pages of chapterhouse talk) and what we KNOW vs what we FEEL.

But in the pursuit of your Vulcan like purity of argument, you simply dismiss logical conclusions based on statements from those closest to the situation because "you have no proof"

This does a disservice to the integrity of those making those statements and just makes you look contrary and wilfully ignorant. Not to mention that there will never be enough "proof" in this given situation, as the odds of a statement of admission from GW signed in Kirby's blood is, at best, unlikely.

You may feel you're conducting a debate, but looking at the situation with a slightly less rigid set of parameters would probably give a slightly more realistic picture of events.

alphaecho wrote:
I get that point Azreal13 but if "Magazine Publisher" knows that "Magazine Seller A" is passing the mag on three days before the selling date to his mate, who then scans pages and puts them on the internet then "Magazine Publisher" might want to impose extra terms on "Seller A" to prevent that.

That's one approach, certainly.

The other option is to simply not deliver the magazine to Magazine Seller A 3 days before the selling date.


That option has the added benefit of not requiring 'Magazine Publisher' to watch his sellers like a hawk to ensure they are abiding by the trade terms...

Consider me duly chastised about how I should spend my day, and what i feel is important.

Brother Weasel wrote:
Consider me duly chastised about how I should spend my day, and what i feel is important.

Now don't get all precious because I called it as I see it.

You're perfectly entitled to conduct yourself as you see fit, just as I'm perfectly entitled to call it shenanigans if I see fit.

 Pacific wrote:
I thought a particular low point was the feature on AoBR miniatures, and a double page spread on the boxset, in White Dwarf a month before the release of 6th edition. You have to think was an attempt to help clear out the last of that stock.

Obviously if you're a serious fan then you would have known the new edition was right around the corner, but I wonder how many casual buyers (parents etc.) got caught out by that one.

They do this all the time, and have done so at least since the early to mid 1990s.

Once you've been around the block a few times, you see the marketing. Warhammer Quest had the "Two Years On" article, all the six-month games had one, and so on...

I don't begrudge them at all, the models in the box are still good and the box itself comes with a ton of stuff. I make a game of tracking down old boxes of Battle for Macragge and Black Reach on ebay. They often go for as much as they did at retail.

--Chris
www.chrisvalera.com

 chris_valera wrote:
In fairness, that Russian company makes stuff very close to GW, and so do Mantic, especially at the beginning.

Zveda can pretty much do what they want, secure in the knowledge that copyright law is unlikely to ever be enforced upon them. Although aside from a few very early (and mostly different scale) efforts, they seem to have branched away from the GW look.

I don't recall Mantic ever really copying GW's look. Their Elves, Dwarves and Orcs all follow very different aesthetics to GW's. And zombies and skeletons look much of a muchness whoever does them.

 insaniak wrote:

alphaecho wrote:
I get that point Azreal13 but if "Magazine Publisher" knows that "Magazine Seller A" is passing the mag on three days before the selling date to his mate, who then scans pages and puts them on the internet then "Magazine Publisher" might want to impose extra terms on "Seller A" to prevent that.

That's one approach, certainly.

The other option is to simply not deliver the magazine to Magazine Seller A 3 days before the selling date.


That option has the added benefit of not requiring 'Magazine Publisher' to watch his sellers like a hawk to ensure they are abiding by the trade terms...

I think this approach is why people don't get their WD on time, though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 chris_valera wrote:

 Pacific wrote:
I thought a particular low point was the feature on AoBR miniatures, and a double page spread on the boxset, in White Dwarf a month before the release of 6th edition. You have to think was an attempt to help clear out the last of that stock.

Obviously if you're a serious fan then you would have known the new edition was right around the corner, but I wonder how many casual buyers (parents etc.) got caught out by that one.

They do this all the time, and have done so at least since the early to mid 1990s.

Once you've been around the block a few times, you see the marketing. Warhammer Quest had the "Two Years On" article, all the six-month games had one, and so on...

I don't begrudge them at all, the models in the box are still good and the box itself comes with a ton of stuff. I make a game of tracking down old boxes of Battle for Macragge and Black Reach on ebay. They often go for as much as they did at retail.

--Chris
www.chrisvalera.com

Man, AoBR was a bargain. The way all the marine models were suitably generic that you could field them as whoever you choose. Guess that's why the DV models are so screamingly Dark Angel, though.

 Peregrine wrote:
The issue isn't just people ragequitting over GW's business policies, it's that those policies are inherently bad.

For you. Apparently they work out pretty well for GW, which depends heavily on the impulse purchase, without thinking about the price tag. They're probably right, and they probably have the sales data to back it up.

 Zweischneid wrote:
Bigger companies than GW, such as Starbucks and their "drip feeder", have been (almost) brought to their knees by a social media shitstorm and customer boycott. Politicians and CEO careers have ended due to Twitter and/or Facebook backlash. In early 2011, governments south of the Mediterranean toppled not in small parts thanks to Twitter.

Saying that an online backlash is irrelevant for ... all things considered ... a small-to-medium-sized company like GW is ludicrous.

Counterpoint; fan backlash hasn't caused any price drops since the release of the CSM core box set back in 2001.

I will say that GW shutting down their facebook comments is a bad idea, and is an example of them sticking their head in the sand. They want to make a luxury product, but want to market it to everyone, and are surprised about the backlash.

 DarthOvious wrote:
Excuse me but I don't how many times I have read posts by people who buy Mantic models to represent their Warhammer Fantasy army. I lost count.

In fairness that's anecdotal evidence. For every fan who jumps ship for Mantic, there might be twenty that just bought Island of Blood or Dark Vengeance. GW certainly says and acts as though that's the case.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AlexHolker wrote:
He mentions the "I won't buy X because Y is coming out" issue, but GW does not necessarily profit from this.

They stated repeatedly that they do,

 AlexHolker wrote:
If X is, say, a PS4, GW does not benefit from people buying a PS4 because they don't know they need to save up money for the next Tyranid release. And they do not benefit from people buying a PS4 and then finding out they don't have any hobby money - or hobby time - to spend on Tyranids.

For every adult that budgets and thinks carefuilly about what they want, there's probably 20 kids with Mommy's credit card.

I admit it, I'm not immune. I ran out to buy the old Dark Elf box sets becasue I knew they would be clearanced out, and I thought about starting an Empire and Ultramarines army because they were featured in WD. That two-and-a-half company Ultramarines army in the latest WD was very impressive.

--Chris
www.chrisvalera.com

 Bull0 wrote:

I think this approach is why people don't get their WD on time,

No, people don't get their WD on time because GW posts than to subscribers on release day. That's an entirely different issue to getting them to retailers at the right time.

 chris_valera wrote:


Counterpoint; fan backlash hasn't caused any price drops since the release of the CSM core box set back in 2001.

So that lack of a price drops proves that there have been zero effects on the bottom line (for example, but not limited to, lost customers or customers buying less?

I don't quite follow how that is a "counterpoint"?

 chris_valera wrote:


In fairness that's anecdotal evidence. For every fan who jumps ship for Mantic, there might be twenty that just bought Island of Blood or Dark Vengeance. GW certainly says and acts as though that's the case.

True enough. Mantic Games did... um ... 3 Million USD on Kickstarter last year? Let's say they did twice as much again off Kickstarter for a ~ 10 Million USD Revenue in a year?

Games Workshop makes that much revenue about every two weeks.

GW is using its bulk to threaten or eliminate whoever does something they do not like or perceive as a threat, regardless of its legality or ethical considerations, there are ample of examples for this in the past and the trend, BOW case been the latest, only gets worse.

If people want to defend this behavior and believe its good for anybody that is not GW, good for them, for me and others its at least worrisome and unhealthy for the industry.

Something I wanted follow up because people seem to be unable to see past their own gaming tables and obsessions.

Many LGS and online traders have, since either GW has put out games, or since internet trading of such things has existed, built a business of selling the most popular games. Now at least 5 years ago, or more, GW games were it. Yeah PP had stuff out, and Rackham still existed. But if you were going to be a gaming store of some form, you would more than likely base your business on the big sellers.

Now of course that is fine and good business sense.

Now where this becomes unhealthy for the industry as whole is that GW can wield this financial control like a hammer. By denying trade with a store, for no real reason than that it out competes you own store in the area (and more than likely sells other war gaming products) is fundamentally wrong. GW can with their historical dominance cause the shut down of a store, and also shut out the competition. This is why for stores it's not as easy as 'stop selling GW stuff', because for historical reasons (i.e. GW was the only game in town at the time) your business is built upon their products.

Therefore GWs behaviour to stores, in a heavy handed manner, does damage the industry as they can shut down outlets of rival products, because of this historical dependence.

So what is the best thing in future for stores in this situation?

If anything, this behaviour should push stores to promote other rival products more - to diversify their income streams. Then if GW did bring down the hammer on them, then fine, who cares. But this is going to take time.

So what is the take home here? GW is unethical in how it operates with stores because it has its own competing stores online and offline. It therefore acts in a manner akin to insider trading (oh look this store is doing well, lets set up there). GW is also unethical because it can easily estimate how dependent a store is on their products, and so hold this over them. So yes, GWs practices are damaging to the industry because of the broadness of the influence they have. And how they can even apply this influence to indirectly manipulate groups (like changing their TOC). A hypothetical here is that GW could change the TOC in a manner that shuts down Table Top Nation, simply because it is too much of a rival to Warhammer World, and because they want to shut down a place that hosts tournaments and events for rival products.



If anything, GW would be best if it was two entities. Citadel Miniatures (maker of the games and minis), and Games Workshop (seller of games in general). And traders would be best of steering their customers to other products.

 Taarnak wrote:

Your statement originally struck me as an absolute one. Limiting it to this thread just makes it look like you are trying to dodge conceding a point though.

Erm, whatever. Sure big guy. I'm sure you've never used language like that before. I'll hand myself in to the grammar Nazi's first chance I get.

It is extremely interesting (and eye-opening). There are transcripts, evidentiary filings, and rulings all linked in the thread here on Dakka. And they are spread out, so not easy to find or point to. But the entire thread is worth reading.

Yes well 188 pages is going to take me a while. I'll just need to read what I can.

Well, she will likely never come out and say for sure whether she was fired, asked to resign, or voluntarily quit, so we will always be in the dark about that. And we will never know whether it was her performance during the trial, her setup for it, or some combination thereof. We do know via her Linkedin profile that she is looking for work.

In the first few pages I think someone suggested that it was normal for lawyers to do this and move about a bit. However I guess we'll never know.

I don't believe that the original use of the term would be protected anymore. IIRC, it was used first in the 30's. This, also was discussed in the Chapterhouse thread though. (Seeing a theme? )

Yes, the theme is that big companies are full of jackasses. That's what I got so far. Also all the jokes about lawyers on the moon weren't actually jokes. They were feasible solutions.

We don't really need to see what they do in the future. The pattern of bad behaviour is already in the historical record.

That doesn't mean they will stop though.

It would be entertaining for some other, larger, companies whose work "inspired" GW in the past to take an interest in them, for sure. Come to think of it, there is a large computer games company (EA, I think) who is using designs that seem heavily "inspired" by GW ones. Wonder why they haven't been sued yet?...

Not sure why but I don't really know what designs we are talking about.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:

 Bull0 wrote:


But it's a lot juicier if you lie and pretend they were trying to copyright roman numerals as an isolated concept. Anybody can relate to that! They've existed for thousands of years! Scandalous

That's a big if and a huge assumption that everybody here mentioning it is really lying, you can of course go like everybody else follow the trial read the transcripts and form your won opinion, see the charts and the notes on what they claimed it was their, read the experts reports and the discussion by forum members there, inducing actual layers.

Or you can assume everybody here is purposefully lie.

Or perhaps you link to a copy of those transcripts instead of a 188 page thread. You know, original source material and all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 azreal13 wrote:
Ok, for those interested but unmotivated.

Pg 170 in the CHS thread is the point where the trial concludes,
There is a post by czakk (who I believe is a practicing lawyer) half way down pg 178 which has the ruling documents attached.

No trawling required.

Trust you to go and actually do something sensible, like point us in the right direction rather than having us go on a wild goose chase.

 DarthOvious wrote:
Or perhaps you link to a copy of those transcripts instead of a 188 page thread. You know, original source material and all.

Or perhaps we could all stop trying to recreate that 188 page thread here. All of the relevant discussion has been linked to. There is no need to discuss it all again here, in a thread that has nothing to do with the Chapterhouse case.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:

 Bull0 wrote:


But it's a lot juicier if you lie and pretend they were trying to copyright roman numerals as an isolated concept. Anybody can relate to that! They've existed for thousands of years! Scandalous

That's a big if and a huge assumption that everybody here mentioning it is really lying, you can of course go like everybody else follow the trial read the transcripts and form your won opinion, see the charts and the notes on what they claimed it was their, read the experts reports and the discussion by forum members there, inducing actual layers.

Or you can assume everybody here is purposefully lie.

Considering what happens any and every time Matt Ward is rumored to be writing an upcoming book?

Yeah. It's not unfair to assume that people purposefully lie where GW is involved.

I hear that. The many idiots who have stated they don't like Matt Wards fluff and then point to Mephiston as an example. Yeah cause I'm sure Mephiston's fluff hasn't been around since third eidition, oh wait, it has.

 chris_valera wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:
Saying that an online backlash is irrelevant for ... all things considered ... a small-to-medium-sized company like GW is ludicrous.

Counterpoint; fan backlash hasn't caused any price drops since the release of the CSM core box set back in 2001.

Fan backlash is one of the more pointless actions a GW customer can engage in. They'd be more likely to get a reply if they queried a rock, chatted up a stone or ranted at a brick.

"Decent people should not live here. They'd be happier someplace else."

 DarthOvious wrote:
I hear that. The many idiots who have stated they don't like Matt Wards fluff and then point to Mephiston as an example. Yeah cause I'm sure Mephiston's fluff hasn't been around since third eidition, oh wait, it has.

I think you'd find it's actually second edition. Getting your facts wrong whilst berating other people for getting their facts wrong is a very particular kind of obtuseness.

 Kanluwen wrote:
How is that "worrisome and unhealthy for the industry"?

Do you think that if the Infinity Art Book had been leaked by the publisher that CB would have been happy?

Now, now. Corvus Belli are perfect little angels who would commit no wrong.

At the end of the day companies suck, but we need them to live our lives. I've seen way much worse than this. For instance good example here:

http://www.cracked.com/article_19288_8-weirdly-sexual-products-you-wont-believe-are-kids.html

I especially find this one disturbing.

In case you were thinking the pole dancing kit was intended for some kind of nonstripper (poles make for good exercise, right?), then you didn't notice it comes with a garter and play money to stuff into it.

The product was sold in a chain called Tesco, which is like the Walmart of Great Britian, who denied that this was marketed to children and has since relegated it to the exercise department. That's not only about as transparent as selling a pole dancing kit in the children's toy section -- it's also a hilariously blatant lie. As advertised on the website before being forced to take it down, the Peek-a-Boo Pole Dancing Kit was "suitable for participants of 11 years old and upwards."

Nice attempt at a derail there, friend.

We're not building a league table of corporate ignominy here.

 DarthOvious wrote:


Now, now. Corvus Belli are perfect little angels who would commit no wrong.

I quite like how you brought something from pages past and completely ignored my reply on that subject too.

since you like short versions, yes they had similar problems in the past and worked their internal security, not chased people.

 Agamemnon2 wrote:

I think you'd find it's actually second edition. Getting your facts wrong whilst berating other people for getting their facts wrong is a very particular kind of obtuseness.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Agamemnon2 wrote:
Nice attempt at a derail there, friend.

We're not building a league table of corporate ignominy here.

No, we can just point to you instead.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:

 DarthOvious wrote:


Now, now. Corvus Belli are perfect little angels who would commit no wrong.

I quite like how you brought something from pages past and completely ignored my reply on that subject too.

since you like short versions, yes they had similar problems in the past and worked their internal security, not chased people.

I saw your reply. My response is one of mere cynicism when it comes to corporate behaviour.

 Bull0 wrote:
Man, AoBR was a bargain. The way all the marine models were suitably generic that you could field them as whoever you choose. Guess that's why the DV models are so screamingly Dark Angel, though.

Notice Battle for Macragge had both the Tyranids and Space Marines on separate sprues, but when they realized how many people were simply flipping the sprues on ebay, they combined them all, for Black Reach. Didn't work, fans just cut the pieces out, and flipped the clipped-out models on ebay. Now they're trying to "narrow" things by only including DAs, but really all that means is that everyone starts a DA army.

I'd also take a moment to point out the LE versions of The Hobbit and Dark Vengeance, were specifically designed to part the fence-sitters with their money. I admit it, I bought both box sets, even though I usually wait to get things from ebay or internet discounters. The extra figure was worth it to me, and I'm sure it was worth it to a great many other fence-sitters as well.

I dare say GW knows who their target customer is.

 Kanluwen wrote:
The leaks that we have been seeing from GW are not coming from someone within GW. Internal security checks do nothing to stop an external source--in this case, the leaks have been coming from whoever they have publishing White Dwarf.

Then GW should threaten the magazine publisher, threaten to switch publishers, or have them punish or fire whoever leaked the pics.

This is a huge deal, although I doubt anything can get done. Pics for a magazine such as, say, Playboy get leaked all the time, and there are sites that specialize in getting the photos early.

 Zweischneid wrote:
So that lack of a price drops proves that there have been zero effects on the bottom line (for example, but not limited to, lost customers or customers buying less?

I don't quite follow how that is a "counterpoint"?

I wasn't aware I had to disprove every sale made at every GW register ever.in the history or mankind. I only mentioned that fan backlash hasn't been an issue as it relates to prices except in the case of CSM box set. Customers leaving because of steadily increasing prices is something else, although I do think that happens as well. It's just that fan backlash, as it pertains to feedback and social media criticism, doen't seem to have much of an effect on GW.

--Chris
www.chrisvalera.com