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.

Ebay/local ads

Well Modeling supplies I don't mind paying GW coz they are reasonable IMO. Plus I can pick up a new brush or occasional pot of spaint/spray paint in town when i run out rather then wait.

In terms of models...

I like buying sprues coz well I like to put the model together myself. I enjoy the process..

Seriously.. I got 10 DA brand new on sprues in box(you know the one before they decided to downsize the box to 5...) for the price of 5 GW are selling for NOW on ebay...
5 HB oop metal ones (the nice ones) NIB for £5 - GW price £24 pmsl
I got OOP metal farseers off ebay for 99p each.. (new unpainted) Missing heads granted but guess what... the DA sprues come with 16 heads to make 10 models

The so called "books" ( ) - Free on torent pdf if you want to go down this route.
Otherwise BRB and codex from GW is like £80... £80!!!!????
(I can get like 4 sets of game of thrones books for that money and maybe a used car.. okay, exaggerating but seriously..)

The only thing I am considering buying from GW is the farseer box that comes with 3 warlocks coz I realy like the model and they are not too common so might as well pay retail...


In terms of price ?
If they dropped 30% - 40% off their model ranges(limited edition stuff can stay the same price as collector exclusive pieces..) and about 60-70% of the books I would buy from GW only.

Da Stormlord wrote:


Well, its what a dude said on youtube.

So what you're saying is that you blindly trusted some dude on the internet without doing even a basic check yourself to see if it was true or not?

The web bundles offer zero savings. Go look yourself.

The box sets do offer savings. You can tell the difference because in the picture on the website, there will be a box behind the models. These offer savings somewhere in the 20-25% range, usually, but it varies.

The boxed sets are frequently also available from 3rd party sellers too, who offer further discounts, so it still makes no sense to buy from GW.

 Azreal13 wrote:
The boxed sets are frequently also available from 3rd party sellers too, who offer further discounts, so it still makes no sense to buy from GW.

True, which, when combined, can exceed 40% savings, or at least in the ballpark of that.

So that could explain Stormlord's 40% figure.

Unless what you want to buy is direct only, in that case you're fethed.

I'm actually happy buying the products of other companies at this point. Now that I think about it I can't understand why I was okay with GW's heroic scale in the first place.

I see a simple question to ask here: what would be a reasonable price for a new player to get into the hobby with an average sized army, say 1500 pts?

 prowla wrote:
I see a simple question to ask here: what would be a reasonable price for a new player to get into the hobby with an average sized army, say 1500 pts?

$200 for models and rules imo. Ignoring paint and hobby supplies I can get into most (all?) other games at the smaller end of average points for that much (or less).

*Just to clarify I find this reasonable from the perspective of someone looking at various games sitting on a shelf, now from a GW pricing point of view. Asking for 1500 points at that price is ridiculous, but only because they overcharge so badly.

 jonolikespie wrote:

 prowla wrote:
I see a simple question to ask here: what would be a reasonable price for a new player to get into the hobby with an average sized army, say 1500 pts?

$200 for models and rules imo. Ignoring paint and hobby supplies I can get into most (all?) other games at the smaller end of average points for that much (or less).

*Just to clarify I find this reasonable from the perspective of someone looking at various games sitting on a shelf, now from a GW pricing point of view. Asking for 1500 points at that price is ridiculous, but only because they overcharge so badly.

And I'm going to take this opportunity to keep on beating my drum that "its not about the prices its about the value".

Raise the points cost of everything back to what they were in 3rd or 4th edition and suddenly that price seems much easier to achieve. What would also help is if GW dropped this DLC nonsense and included all the rules in the army books like they were supposed to and scaled back the cost of the physical rulebooks to what they are actually worth.

I'm guessing that if all of the above was made, they wouldn't even need to touch the price of the actual miniatures.

PhantomViper wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:

 prowla wrote:
I see a simple question to ask here: what would be a reasonable price for a new player to get into the hobby with an average sized army, say 1500 pts?

$200 for models and rules imo. Ignoring paint and hobby supplies I can get into most (all?) other games at the smaller end of average points for that much (or less).

*Just to clarify I find this reasonable from the perspective of someone looking at various games sitting on a shelf, now from a GW pricing point of view. Asking for 1500 points at that price is ridiculous, but only because they overcharge so badly.

And I'm going to take this opportunity to keep on beating my drum that "its not about the prices its about the value".

Raise the points cost of everything back to what they were in 3rd or 4th edition and suddenly that price seems much easier to achieve. What would also help is if GW dropped this DLC nonsense and included all the rules in the army books like they were supposed to and scaled back the cost of the physical rulebooks to what they are actually worth.

I'm guessing that if all of the above was made, they wouldn't even need to touch the price of the actual miniatures.

Also if you didn't have to buy 2 boxes to make one unit, whether because of options not included (e.g. SM heavy weapons) or because a box only has 5 and you typically want 10 (e.g. Dire Avengers)

their prices should be lowered by 50%.

KaptinBadrukk wrote:
their prices should be lowered by 50%.

I think that would be dangerous. If sales don't double in the first year they are in the hole. A better idea is to double the contents of the boxes. Most of the costs involved in a box of tactical marines is packaging, shipping, storage and the costs of the store selling them. The plastic involved is maybe a couple of cents. They wouldn't eat any extra costs but would drive sales right up.

KaptinBadrukk wrote:
their prices should be lowered by 50%.

I love posts like this. What justification do you have for picking the 50% number? Is it based on analyzing GW's finances and concluding that a 50% reduction is the optimal point on the supply vs. demand graph? Or is it nothing more than "I want my toys to be cheaper, therefore GW should make them cheaper"?

 Peregrine wrote:

KaptinBadrukk wrote:
their prices should be lowered by 50%.

I love posts like this. What justification do you have for picking the 50% number? Is it based on analyzing GW's finances and concluding that a 50% reduction is the optimal point on the supply vs. demand graph? Or is it nothing more than "I want my toys to be cheaper, therefore GW should make them cheaper"?

That depends if we are discussing what would be optimal for GW, or about what do the customers want

 prowla wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

KaptinBadrukk wrote:
their prices should be lowered by 50%.

I love posts like this. What justification do you have for picking the 50% number? Is it based on analyzing GW's finances and concluding that a 50% reduction is the optimal point on the supply vs. demand graph? Or is it nothing more than "I want my toys to be cheaper, therefore GW should make them cheaper"?

That depends if we are discussing what would be optimal for GW, or about what do the customers want

Its a good point, but 50% would benefit GW

Da Stormlord wrote:

 prowla wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

KaptinBadrukk wrote:
their prices should be lowered by 50%.

I love posts like this. What justification do you have for picking the 50% number? Is it based on analyzing GW's finances and concluding that a 50% reduction is the optimal point on the supply vs. demand graph? Or is it nothing more than "I want my toys to be cheaper, therefore GW should make them cheaper"?

That depends if we are discussing what would be optimal for GW, or about what do the customers want

Its a good point, but 50% would benefit GW

They have a less than 10% average profitability on each model sold.

If they didn't do anything else other than just cutting the price of everything by 50%, they would be bankrupt by the end of this year...

How do they have 10% profitability and yet sell to trade customers at like 40 or 60% retail?

 Peregrine wrote:

KaptinBadrukk wrote:
their prices should be lowered by 50%.

I love posts like this. What justification do you have for picking the 50% number? Is it based on analyzing GW's finances and concluding that a 50% reduction is the optimal point on the supply vs. demand graph? Or is it nothing more than "I want my toys to be cheaper, therefore GW should make them cheaper"?

In all honestly, I also consider GW prices to double what they should actually be (in certain cases, triple or more), so a 50% drop all across their ranges would be a fine move towards getting themselves back into their own market.

Of course they'll never do it, and actually doing it right now could end up killing the company on a short-term scenario. But it's only their fault things have got to this point.

 jonolikespie wrote:
How do they have 10% profitability and yet sell to trade customers at like 40 or 60% retail?

That percentage is based on the trade price, not the retail price.

 jonolikespie wrote:
How do they have 10% profitability and yet sell to trade customers at like 40 or 60% retail?

Because those sales have someone else covering the additional cost of store rent, salary for the retail employees, shipping, etc. And if GW set the final price to that level they'd have to sell to third-party stores at half the current price, or effectively stop doing business with third-party stores that would no longer be able to compete with GW's own stores.

Korinov wrote:
In all honestly, I also consider GW prices to double what they should actually be (in certain cases, triple or more), so a 50% drop all across their ranges would be a fine move towards getting themselves back into their own market.

But, again, WHY should the prices be half (or even less!) or what they currently are. Have you analyzed GW's financial information and concluded, with solid evidence to support your conclusion, that GW would make more money by selling more boxes at a lower price per box? Or are you just another person who thinks that "I want my models to be cheaper" inevitably leads to "GW should make everything cheaper"?

For a minute there, i thought he might be australian.

A quick apology about my mistake in my previous post.

I meant to say if GW had not got the cost of a retail chain to pay for their gross profit would be 67% of the retail price, rather than just 12%.
So their chain of B&M stores that give them 42% of sales costs them appx 55% of their profit.

GW plc simply have to do market research to find out what adds value to their product, from the customers perspective.

When the GW B&M stores were 'Hobby centers' they added value.
When WD was a 'Hobby supplement' , it added value.
When the rules were focused on game play, not short term money grabs, they added value.

A while back GW plc had the option to take on competition directly in the open market.Engage with customers in a meaningful way and be competitive on value for money in the open market.
OR follow an insular marketing approach , using thier B&M chain to try to isolate GW customers from the rest of the war games market.

The easiest option the 'fat and lazy' one was the second option.
The world has changed massively since the 1990s, but GW business plan has not.