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.

for me it depends on what they're doing with it.

if someone had recast something extremely powerful for the sole purpose of spamming it, such as wraithknights, wraithguard, ironclad dreadnaughts, etc then I wouldn't play them. if it was someone who simply recast some units but still ran a friendly list, then I'd have no concerns. if it was someone who recast parts for conversions, I'd also have no problem whatsoever.

I wish I had more time to go through this thread and exalt every single one of azreal13's posts, but unfortunately there aren't enough hours in the day.

 welshhoppo wrote:
Would you play against this guy knowing that he is undercutting the hobby or would you not?

Yes.

And removing the loaded-ness of the question (ie. knowing beforehand), how would you know anyway?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I wish I had more time to go through this thread and exalt every single one of azreal13's posts, but unfortunately there aren't enough hours in the day.

Shucks....

 some bloke wrote:
for me it depends on what they're doing with it.

if someone had recast something extremely powerful for the sole purpose of spamming it, such as wraithknights, wraithguard, ironclad dreadnaughts, etc then I wouldn't play them. if it was someone who simply recast some units but still ran a friendly list, then I'd have no concerns. if it was someone who recast parts for conversions, I'd also have no problem whatsoever.

How is that any different to just buying the latest spam units?

You could just as equally say you don't play people who play spammy power lists and instead only play people who run "friendly" lists. I'm not sure why recasts needs to come in to it.

 Klerych wrote:

Well, given the fact that it's crime in pretty much every western country and China decided to make it legal because they make profit off it and they're rich and powerful enough to make anyone who has any objections gobble on their rice balls, it's kinda dubious. Of course there it's not a crime, but european/american recasts would be criminals. You know, in India rape is not a crime/noone cares and in some african countries genocide ain't a crime either as long as it profits the warlord. That way you can challenge the thought that even murder is not a crime depending on the location. :-)

Yes, because rape, genocide, and the process of copying and selling a luxury product are all totally equivalent. I also did not at all say that it changed anyone's perceived morality towards the subject. So yes, you are right, there are plenty of laws (or lack thereof) in other countries that are downright evil. You'd do well to gain the respect of others in a discussion if you don't result to being so flippant about serious issues that involve such suffering.

 Klerych wrote:
Well, given the fact that it's crime in pretty much every western country and China decided to make it legal because they make profit off it and they're rich and powerful enough to make anyone who has any objections gobble on their rice balls, it's kinda dubious. Of course there it's not a crime, but european/american recasts would be criminals. You know, in India rape is not a crime/noone cares and in some african countries genocide ain't a crime either as long as it profits the warlord. That way you can challenge the thought that even murder is not a crime depending on the location. :-)

Are you now comparing recasts to murder, rape and genocide?

Different countries have different laws. Your country probably outlaws stuff that I find normal, that's why cannabis-threads always get messy.
And that's why it's so useless to talk about the legal aspect!

I play games, not politics. If a person came to me and over the course of the game, we take time and just look over each other's models, admiring paint jobs and the like, and it comes out that it's a recast, the only reaction you would probably get from me is, "Looks good." The way I see it, is this. If you bought something that was obviously a recast, then you clearly could live with it, and so can I. That being said and you are recasting the things personally, do the right thing at least and take the time to remodel the things to your personal preference so that you can say that it is sufficiently your own style.

 Klerych wrote:
Well, given the fact that it's crime in pretty much every western country and China decided to make it legal because they make profit off it and they're rich and powerful enough to make anyone who has any objections gobble on their rice balls, it's kinda dubious. Of course there it's not a crime, but european/american recasts would be criminals. You know, in India rape is not a crime/noone cares and in some african countries genocide ain't a crime either as long as it profits the warlord. That way you can challenge the thought that even murder is not a crime depending on the location. :-)

It's a good thing this isn't a forum about rape and murder then, because we might actually have to address your concerns! Luckily, this is not a forum about rape and murder, it's a forum about little toy soldiers, so we can stick to talking about little toy soldiers.

The word "crime" does not have a single definition. It can mean something punishable by law, therefore if it's not against the law it's not a crime. But it can also be defined as something morally wrong, so something that is not against the law but is considered morally wrong can be a crime under that definition.

With that in mind, lets move away from the term "crime" and stick to terms that are better defined like "illegal" and "morally wrong".

Is it illegal and is it morally wrong? Things can be illegal and not be morally wrong. Things can be morally wrong and still be legal.

It is legal, so is it morally wrong? I think it is, but I don't really care enough to make a stand against it and since I don't work for GW, you won't find me railing against people who buy recasts. Seeing as it's not illegal (and even if it was that doesn't mean it's morally wrong anyway) it's their choice if they find it morally wrong and whether they can live with themselves for doing it.

As a society I think we should be moving toward an attitude of paying the content creators for their content and if we don't like the price they charge, we should just not partake of the content, thus they go out of business due to lack of desire to pay for their content rather than going out of business because someone else on the other side of the world has an hourly wage a tenth of yours and can afford to reproduce it for almost nothing. My reason for this thinking is simple: We should encourage the content creators and not discourage them. It costs more to create than it does to copy, so by purchasing (or pirating depending on the medium) you are showing a self entitled disregard for the process of content creation.

But that said, in the context of recasts of GW models, I don't care enough to make a stand against it, it's up to society to decide and up to the individual to decide.

Seems pretty unequivocal that it's unethical. Whether it's amoral is probably more of a grey area. (Personally, I'ma come down on the 'no,' side.)

So it's unethical and immoral for me to use my dot matrix printer to print out a picture that someone else took and is normally sold and then place it on my wall?

Yeah.. no it's not theft. It's not even immoral or unethical.

It's a constraint of the capitalistic system that we live in that you believe it to be "unethical" or "immoral" as your view point is driven by a desire to see this capitalistic system sustain itself.

Again I advocate the burn this melon-fether down viewpoint of capitalism.

 Cheexsta wrote:
I have no problem playing people who use recasts.

What I do have a problem with is when those people (excessively) use those recasts in their FLGS. I firmly believe that you should pay where you play, so they can stay in business.

Basically this, playing against copied stuff doesn't bother me in the least, if they are good enough you can only tell if you are told the quality is there.

That said, if the opponent makes a point of noting they are recasts, and how much cheaper they are, then I'd probably think they are a bit of a twit, more so if they keep going on about it.

At a local shop its something I'd play against, but would prefer them to keep quiet about it there, basic respect really.

Agree on buying stuff from a shop if you play there, doesn't have to be everything, but if they have it in stock I'd get from them over ordering elsewhere.

I wouldn't mind in the slightest. I know I try to buy the real deal when I can, but since I collect so much retro stuff, recasts are inevitable in some capacity. Whatever they do to get their models is their prerogative. If you're concerned about the models not being "official GW" or whatever, then you can rule out third party models too, which I wouldn't want to do. There are guys in my group who are upfront that the models are recasts, and nobody really minds. Most of us (even those guys) still buy the legit stuff when they can, but things happen.

Oh man, that was just an example, guys, don't flip out and turn it into a lynch. He said that it's legal in China, so there's nothing wrong with it. I exaggerated it to show how worse things are legal in some other countries just to show how flawed such logic is, no matter what it is.

Sheesh, let's drop the topic.

Hollismason wrote:
So it's unethical and immoral for me to use my dot matrix printer to print out a picture that someone else took and is normally sold and then place it on my wall?

Yeah.. no it's not theft. It's not even immoral or unethical.

Well, it's not nice either as you're taking a thing he made without paying him even though the 'legal' way of obtaining it is buying it from him if he decided to sell it rather than hand out for free. But yeah, seeing how this thread goes it's more about taking his photo and selling your own prints of it cheaper than he does, denying him sales on something he made. Even less nice.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 some bloke wrote:
for me it depends on what they're doing with it.

if someone had recast something extremely powerful for the sole purpose of spamming it, such as wraithknights, wraithguard, ironclad dreadnaughts, etc then I wouldn't play them. if it was someone who simply recast some units but still ran a friendly list, then I'd have no concerns. if it was someone who recast parts for conversions, I'd also have no problem whatsoever.

How is that any different to just buying the latest spam units?

You could just as equally say you don't play people who play spammy power lists and instead only play people who run "friendly" lists. I'm not sure why recasts needs to come in to it.

I think it's just the combination of 2 things they probably shouldn't be doing. it's similar to proxying - proxy one un it, sure, but saying that 4 squads of marines are actually sternguard with plasmas and combi-plasmas is too far. if someone finds a model they love but can't afford and buys it cheap, like a spartan assault tank, then no worries. if someone buys 5 of them, all recast, then there's a problem.

and yes, i do refuse to play people with pure-spam lists. but pure spam and everything is recast cheap models, then they're taking the urine.

 Klerych wrote:
Oh man, that was just an example, guys, don't flip out and turn it into a lynch. He said that it's legal in China, so there's nothing wrong with it. I exaggerated it to show how worse things are legal in some other countries just to show how flawed such logic is, no matter what it is.

Sheesh, let's drop the topic.

I'm all for dropping the topic, but first let me point out that reductum ad absurdum is a lousy argument technique, and if you employ it again in future, you'll likely get a similar response, even if you use a less emotive analogy than rape and murder.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:


As a society I think we should be moving toward an attitude of paying the content creators for their content and if we don't like the price they charge, we should just not partake of the content, thus they go out of business due to lack of desire to pay for their content rather than going out of business because someone else on the other side of the world has an hourly wage a tenth of yours and can afford to reproduce it for almost nothing. My reason for this thinking is simple: We should encourage the content creators and not discourage them. It costs more to create than it does to copy, so by purchasing (or pirating depending on the medium) you are showing a self entitled disregard for the process of content creation.
.

First of all your sociaty is not ours. There is a huge difference between a rich country , with a lot of natural resources and one that has non of it. If China , Korea ,India or Japan went that way , they would be super poor countries. That becomes when one goes back a century or two back in time and sees that non of the rich copyright enforcing wester countries of today got rich by doing moral stuff.

 azreal13 wrote:

 Klerych wrote:
Oh man, that was just an example, guys, don't flip out and turn it into a lynch. He said that it's legal in China, so there's nothing wrong with it. I exaggerated it to show how worse things are legal in some other countries just to show how flawed such logic is, no matter what it is.

Sheesh, let's drop the topic.

I'm all for dropping the topic, but first let me point out that reductum ad absurdum is a lousy argument technique, and if you employ it again in future, you'll likely get a similar response, even if you use a less emotive analogy than rape and murder.

Oh well, the responses were just absurd as my intentionally exaggerated example, so yeah.

As for the recasts.. I guess I can be called a hypocrite by those more inclined towards arguing, but I think that it's not -that- wrong when the model is better than original like the aforementioned hierophant or some models I've seen in person, but it's mostly with resin/finecast which is terribad.

Nope. I expect all models to be strict WYSIWYG, 100% GW, and fully painted with three different colours.

Nah, just kidding. I don't care as long as it is roughly the right size for the model.

 Peregrine wrote:

And they will pirate it if they feel the price is unfair.

And for a lot of people "unfair" is "anything above $0". Stop trying to turn this into some bizarre moral high ground where piracy is just a statement about fairness. It isn't, it's simply a decision that you'd rather steal something than not have it.

Yes, some people will always pirate. And some people will always pay full price, or be content with not having the thing at all.

But then there's loads of people (including myself and every gamer I know IRL) who will pirate an exorbitantly priced game or mini, but will be happy to pay what we feel is reasonable. It's about respect. If i get treated with respect, I will be an honest customer. If I feel like I'm being fleeced, I will retaliate in the best way known to me, with a swift kick right at your bottom line.

And please don't use the word steal when you're referring to piracy, they are far from being the same.

OT chatter removed.

Toy Soldiers, folks. Please check your discussion of comparative societal structures at the door.

Related topic, I saw a tournament in Oz require proof of ownership of physical books in order to use digital copies before they were a thing from GW. I wasn't going to it, but had to lol at non-employees policing that stuff for GW when it's perfectly legal to format shift here.

The only people who can legitimately criticise others for buying recasts due to it being theft of intellectual property are those who never illegally download or stream songs, films, books, audiobooks etc, otherwise it is just pure hypocrisy. If you don't do that, good on you, you're a model citizen and can sleep soundly at night.

OT, why would I have a problem playing against recasts? I wouldn't know unless I was told, and all I would be interested in would be the quality of the cast and the details of where they got it from so I could buy something.

I don't see how that isn't relative as the whole concept of "Intellectual Property " is a product of the failed Capitalistic system we currently exist in. This whole discussion is about "the legal or ethically" use of recast figures.

On one side we have people state that is in fact theft.
Then we have one side that says they do not care because it is not their job to police models that their opponent uses.
Then we have people who state that while it is theft, it is justified
Then we have me who says that this entire discussion is moot as it only in unethical because you are trapped in a failed capitalist system.

I'd say it's your imperative to in fact cast your own and take the means of production into your own hands.

I point that out because the original sculpture of the model itself does not receive a proportionate amount of compensation and themselves do not own their own creation. If anything we should be paying the original sculpturer.

it would be pretty hypocritical if i did make a scene......

gw's prices are the one major thing stopping more people enjoying the game, if they've found a way around it then it means i have more people to play against.

I'm still somewhat offended that there is any sort of level of expectation of morality leveled against the general public at all.

Steve steveson wrote:

 Captain Avatar wrote:

Klerych wrote:
Yeah! Why not go steal someone's car? I mean.. I already have downloaded a book and pirated a game, so now I am excused in further law violations and it's perfectly okay and justified! And if I infringed someone's copyright already, why not go for more? All I'm saying that if one crime is not wrong, then maybe another one isn't either, right?

See the flaw yet?

Yes, it is in your analogy.

A more accurate auto motive analogy would be to ask if it is ok to pull molds of the body panels and then "build" your own car.

To do such is perfectly legal. In fact there is an entire industry built around it. They are called "Kit Cars" or "Repli-cars".

No. Most car manufactures either licence or tolerate replica/lookalike kits. Some don't:

http://m.autoblog.com/2012/03/23/daimler-crushes-unauthorized-mercedes-benz-300-sl-body/

Thank you for proving my point. The car in question was seized and later destroyed not because it was a copy, but that it was sold for profit. You know, What I have been saying all along.

You see, the Kit and Replicar industry actually sells the tools to help people to pull their own molds off of existing cars. They can use these home made molds to them make as many copies as they want.

It only becomes illegal if a person or company tries to profit from an "exact replica" without a licensing agreement or if they attempt to pass off the replica as genuine.

Note, selling such as a replica without a license ends up in civil litigation and trying to pass off a replica as an original ends up as a criminal case.

.........What I have been saying all along.

Btw, next time instead of trying for a quick Google headline How about putting a bit of work in and researching the case. Just saying.

Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

 Captain Avatar wrote:

It has been pretty much proven that "fakers" can not profitably undercut the manufacuter's price unless the company is overcharging by a fair margin. It is simply a matter of the scale of production.

Also, design and prototyping make up about a penny of the sale price of most models.

Says a source you just made up.

I have already replied to this but felt that a bit of history would help to put things into perspective.

The following link is to a 2006 web page where the person did the leg work to find out industry pricing and costs at the time. He uses the then only 5 y.o. Land Raider model as the model for cost analysis. At that point. The Kit was $40-$45 US and design and mold costs were about
$ .08 (8 cents/kit).
The Land Raider is a large single model kit that has a low volume of sales compared to the infantry kits.

Also please note that the Land Raider has now had another 8 years of sales with a current price about $75 US.

Finally, Remember I stated design and mold costs at about a penny per model, not per kit.

Here is the link:http://www.fightingtigersofveda.com/roarseconomics.html" target="_new" rel="nofollow"> http://www.fightingtigersofveda.com/roarseconomics.html

Peregrine wrote:

Captain Avatar wrote:It has been pretty much proven that "fakers" can not profitably undercut the manufacuter's price unless the company is overcharging by a fair margin.

Sigh. It really hasn't been proven, because there is no such thing as "overcharging" in this context. There is no "fair" price for a 40k model, the price is simply what GW feels like charging. The fact that you wish the prices were lower does not mean that they're too high in some objective sense.

Yes, there is. A company can be viewed as overcharging if they have applied for and received special protections and permissions from the government concerning there products. That by asking for copyright and IP protection that leaves them as the sole suppliers of a certain product they are supposed to to provide their products at a fair price.
Same reason why congress can get involved in pro sports. Pro sports leagues have received a special dispensation/protection from anti-trust litigation in order to provide "national" leagues that are somewhat protected from the emergence of competing leagues.
Same should apply to companies that use copyright laws to gain control over certain parts of the market.

Peregrine wrote:

Captain Avatar wrote: Also, design and prototyping make up about a penny of the sale price of most models. Look at who gets paid what and what tools are available for prototyping and you will see that HW staff "artists" and designers make a middle class wage and that those teams are quite small.

The point is that it's a huge up-front investment, even if the per-model cost is small. If recasters had to do all that work before making a new kit they'd be out of business overnight. The only reason they can make a profit selling at their current prices is that all they have to do to start production of a new kit is buy one from GW and make some molds from it.

As you can see by the link I provided to Hivefleet Oblivion, The costs in business term are minor. To design a mold and to have it produced. $36,000 US up front isn't that much when you only have to sell 2,500 kits @ $50 US a piece To recoup your investment in tooling, labour, design and mold costs. After the first 2,500 kits they will be making a rough pre-tax profit of $36-$38 US per Land Raider kit after costs.
GW makes an estimated rough pre-tax profit of $58-$61 US per Land Raider Kit kit.

Peregrine wrote:

Captain Avatar wrote:For years, GW defrauded their customers by selling cheap Chinese plastics as expensive Nottingham pieces.

Did GW ever advertise where the models were produced? Because I don't remember seeing any claims about that.

Yes, they vigorously maintained that their products were from either the Nottingham or Memphis plants at that time. This was right after the US production move fro Anne Arundel, MD to Memphis, Tn.

Peregrine wrote:

Captain Avatar wrote:That's right the price they should be charging because they are producing GW models with GW molds and with GW methods. The price difference between GW and thier former Chinese factories should be pennies but due to GW's price gouging the chinese can operate profitably at 50% of the price.

First, no, price gouging does not exist for gaming miniatures. Please stop making this absurd claim that "I want it to be cheaper" is the equivalent of increasing bottled water prices 100000% when a natural disaster hits.

Second, you're still ignoring all of the other costs GW has to pay. The cost of a model kit includes a lot more than just the raw materials and manufacturing cost, and those Chinese factories avoid paying those costs by stealing GW's work. You wouldn't be getting those kits at the same price if the Chinese factory had to design their own kits (including the rules to use them), advertise them, and back them with GW's level of customer service.

A) You're only using one very narrow definition of Price Gouging(not surprising). Here are the Others:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/price+gouging- This states it as...[Noun 1. price gouging - pricing above the market price when no alternative retailer is available]

http://www.webster-dictionary.org/definition/price%20gouging- Websters says the same.....Noun 1. price gouging - pricing above the market when no alternative retailer is available

Yes there are legal definitions concerning "criminal price gouging" but I never made reference to GW commiting a crime via Price gouging.....only that they made a habit of the basic practice of price gouging as defined by the above references.


The only illegal action that I have implied as to GW is when they sold Chinese models while marketing them as GW made in Nottingham.

Peregrine wrote:

Captain Avatar wrote: They were never intended to be used as a means by which corporations create mini-monopolies.

Are you serious? Do you actually have any clue what a monopoly is? Let me give you a hint: GW being the only company that can produce space marines for 40k is not a monopoly.

First please note that I typed "mini-monopolies".

Second, You ask if I know...here you go:http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/monopoly" target="_new" rel="nofollow"> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/monopoly
This states a monopoly as
1: exclusive ownership through legal privilege, command of supply, or concerted action
2: exclusive possession or control
3: a commodity controlled by one party

The problem is that your view is so narrow that you seem to be unable to see how Corporations like GW use the copyright and IP laws as a means of gaining exclusive control of certain parts of the market. Remember, GW was the company that tried to use the civil court system to bully a private individual over the use of the name Space Marines. I mean forget that the term was coined back in the 1930's and was regularly used in sci-fi through the 1960's, 70's and 80's before GW ever thought to Rip-off the Aliens franchise with a game that would grow to become 40K.

This is why IP and copyright reform are so badly needed. Seriously, think what would of happened if Isaac Asimov or Gene Roddenberry had to deal with such non-sense back in the 1950's golden age of sci-fi. We probably wouldn't have most of their contributions and would have lost the works who were inspired by these imaginative writers.

 Captain Avatar wrote:
That by asking for copyright and IP protection that leaves them as the sole suppliers of a certain product they are supposed to to provide their products at a fair price.

Lol? GW is not the sole supplier of any product, unless you use an absurdly narrow product definition like "GW is the sole supplier of GW plastic model kits". There are plenty of other suppliers of gaming miniatures in the market, and GW doesn't get any special protection beyond the standard IP laws (which exist for very good reasons).

GW makes an estimated rough pre-tax profit of $58-$61 US per Land Raider Kit kit.

...

Did you even bother reading the article you posted? You know, the one that estimates GW's profit on the Land Raider kit at about $5-7? Or are you just forgetting that profit is not just the sale price minus the raw material costs?

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/price+gouging- This states it as...[Noun 1. price gouging - pricing above the market price when no alternative retailer is available]

http://www.webster-dictionary.org/definition/price%20gouging- Websters says the same.....Noun 1. price gouging - pricing above the market when no alternative retailer is available

Note the key part of that definition: no alternative retailer is available. Lots of alternatives to GW exist, therefore GW charging prices that are above what you want to pay is NOT price gouging.

The problem is that your view is so narrow that you seem to be unable to see how Corporations like GW use the copyright and IP laws as a means of gaining exclusive control of certain parts of the market.

...

Are you serious? GW does NOT have exclusive control of any market, unless you define the market as "space marine kits for Warhammer 40k" instead of "tabletop gaming miniatures". They have lots of competition and companies are free to make their own scifi gaming miniatures, they just can't sell recasts of GW's kits.

Seriously, think what would of happened if Isaac Asimov or Gene Roddenberry had to deal with such non-sense back in the 1950's golden age of sci-fi. We probably wouldn't have most of their contributions and would have lost the works who were inspired by these imaginative writers.

You do realize that there are lots of authors/TV writers/etc making good scifi right now, right? In fact, there are even companies making scifi gaming miniatures, including scifi gaming miniatures that draw from some of the same inspiration as GW, without any interference at all from GW!

 Peregrine wrote:

 Captain Avatar wrote:
That by asking for copyright and IP protection that leaves them as the sole suppliers of a certain product they are supposed to to provide their products at a fair price.

Lol? GW is not the sole supplier of any product, unless you use an absurdly narrow product definition like "GW is the sole supplier of GW plastic model kits". There are plenty of other suppliers of gaming miniatures in the market, and GW doesn't get any special protection beyond the standard IP laws (which exist for very good reasons).

Which by GW's stance they can not produce models for GW games or in some cases models that "might" be used in or with a GW product. GW has done and will continue to try to pull off some seriously absurd stances on how far their IP extends control.

Also note that you may feel that current IP laws exist for good reason, I and many disagree with you. Having watched GW and other corporations exploit the system in a constant effort to prevent the emergence of potential competitors has lead many to not have such a blindly positive view towards these laws.

Peregrine wrote:

Captain Avatar wrote: GW makes an estimated rough pre-tax profit of $58-$61 US per Land Raider Kit kit.

Did you even bother reading the article you posted? You know, the one that estimates GW's profit on the Land Raider kit at about $5-7? Or are you just forgetting that profit is not just the sale price minus the raw material costs?

Obviously you missed the part where the thread and pricing within it are 8 years old AND that I stated Pre-tax.

Also note that at the time of the linked page, GW was investing heavily in their retail presence which they have pretty much cannibalized over the past 8 years. So I left the retail operating costs out and went with a more modern internet store model for "pre-tax" profits.

Lastly, I used that link because it was overly generous to GW in its pricing estimations. even with them being overly generous they illustrated just how little design and tooling account for GW model pricing. If a company can produce the same model for 2/3's the price them maybe GW stock holders should be contacting a couple of these economic geniuses to take over as CEO and CFO.

Again, seriously, Scale of Production matters. No outsider should be able to profitably undercut GW's pricing by 25%-50% and stay in business. GW should be able to bury the recasters just based off of volume discounts for raw materials If recasters are able make the same quality models and beat GW's prices then it is a corporate management failure and failure at just being a business in a capitalist market.

In a free market a company knows that if another company can produce the same quality product for less and stay in business then that company will. Undercutting a competitors price is an integral part of capitalism.
Erecting barriers to competition so that a company can charge what ever they want without fear of competition is NOT how the free market system is supposed to work.

Peregrine wrote:

Captain Avatar wrote:http://www.thefreedictionary.com/price+gouging- This states it as...[Noun 1. price gouging - pricing above the market price when no alternative retailer is available]

http://www.webster-dictionary.org/definition/price%20gouging- Websters says the same.....Noun 1. price gouging - pricing above the market when no alternative retailer is available

Note the key part of that definition: no alternative retailer is available. Lots of alternatives to GW exist, therefore GW charging prices that are above what you want to pay is NOT price gouging.

Except for GW's past attempts to shut down any company that makes a model that looks anything remotely similar to a 40K model.For years they stifled competition via use of Civil suit harassment. Its all in their attitude that they ARE the "Hobby".

Well if they want to claim to be the only game in town then instead of arguing with them I say "OK, you are a monopoly and as such are open to prosecution or at least litigation..

Peregrine wrote:

Captain Avatar wrote:The problem is that your view is so narrow that you seem to be unable to see how Corporations like GW use the copyright and IP laws as a means of gaining exclusive control of certain parts of the market.

...

Are you serious? GW does NOT have exclusive control of any market, unless you define the market as "space marine kits for Warhammer 40k" instead of "tabletop gaming miniatures". They have lots of competition and companies are free to make their own scifi gaming miniatures, they just can't sell recasts of GW's kits.

The emergence of viable competitors is both recent and still weak mainly due to GW's attempts at being "The Hobby". Up until recently they managed to dominate the miniature game market through their very aggressive abuse of the copyright and IP laws.

Also, would like to correct you on something. A company does not have to be the only one of its type to be considered a monopoly. There are many instances of company's being ruled as trusts when they had competitors still in the market. If that company could be viewed as to having control over their entire market in a manner that stifles their competitors then they can be declared as to having a monopoly.

 Captain Avatar wrote:
Which by GW's stance they can not produce models for GW games or in some cases models that "might" be used in or with a GW product.

And there you go again, using an absurd definition of the market. The product in question is gaming miniatures, not space marine kits. Banning other manufacturers from producing copies of GW kits is not the same thing as banning them from the market.

And no, there's no "might" about the companies GW's lawyers have tried to shut down. Whether or not their actions are legal those companies were blatantly producing models that were intended for GW games and only GW games. Nobody with any common sense believes that those "scifi power armor shoulder pads" were meant for anything other than GW space marine models.

GW has done and will continue to try to pull off some seriously absurd stances on how far their IP extends control.

And I'm not supporting all of that. But this is a straightforward case of IP protection, not an abuse of the system.

Also note that you may feel that current IP laws exist for good reason, I and many disagree with you. Having watched GW and other corporations exploit the system in a constant effort to prevent the emergence of potential competitors has lead many to not have such a blindly positive view towards these laws.

Sigh. No. GW is not using IP law to prevent competition, unless you define the market as "making space marine kits for Warhammer 40k". Companies are free to make their own competing 28mm scifi miniatures games, and plenty have. And the competing games that have failed have failed on their own merits, not because GW's lawyers shut them down.

Obviously you missed the part where the thread and pricing within it are 8 years old AND that I stated Pre-tax.

...

You still haven't bothered to read your own article. The estimated profit is $5-7, even assuming that inflation doesn't exist and 100% of the price increase went directly into profit that's still only about $30, not the $60 you claimed. Please at least attempt to understand the sources you're citing, and don't just pull context-free numbers out of them without having any clue what those numbers mean.

Erecting barriers to competition so that a company can charge what ever they want without fear of competition is NOT how the free market system is supposed to work.

This is not a barrier to competition, it's a barrier to stealing another company's work. Competing companies are free to make their own miniatures, they just can't recast GW kits.

Except for GW's past attempts to shut down any company that makes a model that looks anything remotely similar to a 40K model.

No, it really isn't. The companies that GW targets are blatantly making 40k parts, and the "similarity" argument is nothing more than an attempt to satisfy the IP law requirements involving differences from the "copied" product/design. There's a pretty good argument that what they're doing is in fact legal, but let's not pretend that GW is going around issuing legal threats to everyone who dares to make a scifi power armor miniature.

The emergence of viable competitors is both recent and still weak mainly due to GW's attempts at being "The Hobby". Up until recently they managed to dominate the miniature game market through their very aggressive abuse of the copyright and IP laws.

No, you just have no clue how the industry works. GW didn't dominate the market because they shut down the competition, they dominated the market because their competition sucked and gave GW the "all of my friends are playing it, I guess I will too" factor. You can see a similar thing in the MMORPG market, WoW dominated without using any legal threats because all of the competition was just inferior WoW clones that nobody wanted to play.

The emergence of viable competitors has nothing to do with legal action, it's the result of three things: GW's incompetence in maintaining a game that people want to buy, competing companies that actually publish a good game that people want to play, and the use of kickstarter and similar methods to fund a game that would otherwise have trouble getting into the market.

Also, would like to correct you on something. A company does not have to be the only one of its type to be considered a monopoly. There are many instances of company's being ruled as trusts when they had competitors still in the market. If that company could be viewed as to having control over their entire market in a manner that stifles their competitors then they can be declared as to having a monopoly.

Yes, but GW isn't even close to being in that situation. They don't control their market or stifle competition, they're just bigger than the competition right now. In fact, given how GW is losing market share and struggling to avoid complete disaster the claim that they're a stifling monopoly is just laughably wrong.

 Captain Avatar wrote:

A company does not have to be the only one of its type to be considered a monopoly. There are many instances of company's being ruled as trusts when they had competitors still in the market. If that company could be viewed as to having control over their entire market in a manner that stifles their competitors then they can be declared as to having a monopoly.

Sorry, this is so far from reality that it is laughable.

Competition laws exist so that people selling identical products - ie gas, oil, and other utilities - are (hopefully) forced into genuine competition.

What you seem to be fantasising about is other companies being able to copy GW's work, in order to increase competition. This is a nonsense; all it will do it stem the supply of original work.

Once again, while I personally wouldn't have a problem with a decent oppo fielding recasts, the arguments here, in favour of recasts, are principally from people who are supporting thieves, because they don't want to pay too much for their toys.

These apologists and schadenfreude-freaks don't seem to understand the consequence; you will end up with no toys to play with at all, for once GW IP is worthless, the counterfeiters will simple turn to some other, more valuable IP.