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.

WayneTheGame wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
The new Assault Squad is not only AUD$15 more expensive than the last Assault Squad (with no discernible difference beyond poses), it's more expensive than the far more fancy Vanguard box.

AUD$70 for 5 models that used to cost $55 (and were less than that when they first came out). People were shocked at the cost of 10 Witch Elves. This, and the Electro-Priests before them, is worse.

GW is changing... by making things worse.

I find the fact that new kits are always priced higher with very little or no changes to be mind-boggling. What justification is there for a price increase on this kit? It's still 5 guys. Why is it more expensive? Currently it's $33 USD for 5 Assault Marines (sold out, of course). What makes these new ones cost $8 more? That means a full assault squad (because really who is going to field just 5 of them?) is going to cost $82 for 10 models in plastic.

Why do people still put up with this bullgak? You're paying more money for the same gak, using molds that have likely already paid for themselves. The markup on this has to be huge.

I think that part of it is due to production limitations. GW may be pricing certain kits at a level that will ensure that fewer kits are sold so that their production facilities may focus on the new releases. It's all churn and burn.

 agnosto wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
The new Assault Squad is not only AUD$15 more expensive than the last Assault Squad (with no discernible difference beyond poses), it's more expensive than the far more fancy Vanguard box.

AUD$70 for 5 models that used to cost $55 (and were less than that when they first came out). People were shocked at the cost of 10 Witch Elves. This, and the Electro-Priests before them, is worse.

GW is changing... by making things worse.

I find the fact that new kits are always priced higher with very little or no changes to be mind-boggling. What justification is there for a price increase on this kit? It's still 5 guys. Why is it more expensive? Currently it's $33 USD for 5 Assault Marines (sold out, of course). What makes these new ones cost $8 more? That means a full assault squad (because really who is going to field just 5 of them?) is going to cost $82 for 10 models in plastic.

Why do people still put up with this bullgak? You're paying more money for the same gak, using molds that have likely already paid for themselves. The markup on this has to be huge.

I think that part of it is due to production limitations. GW may be pricing certain kits at a level that will ensure that fewer kits are sold so that their production facilities may focus on the new releases. It's all churn and burn.

Probably. I mean they ARE cool figures. But the price point is getting more and more crazy. If the game itself encouraged/only allowed 5 in a squad, then okay it's not that bad. But it really feels like they're trying to cheat you by making 10 desirable and selling boxes of 5 instead so you have to pay twice. Maybe I'm wrong, and 5 Assault Marines isn't terrible (it was awful back in my day, they'd die before they did anything at all) but their pricing is weird as hell with that.

It shouldn't bother me, I don't play. But I always think of playing and things like this make me not want to. I even was looking for a while of playing the way GW wants me to, and for instance only fielding 5 Assault Marines, since 5 is what comes in the box.

WayneTheGame wrote:

It shouldn't bother me, I don't play. But I always think of playing and things like this make me not want to. I even was looking for a while of playing the way GW wants me to, and for instance only fielding 5 Assault Marines, since 5 is what comes in the box.

I agree. I played 40K for almost 25 years, with a few breaks here and there when life got in the way. I haven't played a game since the end of 5th edition or so, or maybe beginning of sixth. Every now and again I consider getting back into it, but the price point is the single thing that prevents me from doing so.

Saldiven wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:

It shouldn't bother me, I don't play. But I always think of playing and things like this make me not want to. I even was looking for a while of playing the way GW wants me to, and for instance only fielding 5 Assault Marines, since 5 is what comes in the box.

I agree. I played 40K for almost 25 years, with a few breaks here and there when life got in the way. I haven't played a game since the end of 5th edition or so, or maybe beginning of sixth. Every now and again I consider getting back into it, but the price point is the single thing that prevents me from doing so.

last time I played was around 2001-2002, shortly after the Tau first came out and IIRC just before the 3.5 Chaos Codex (which I bought but never got to use as I stopped playing right around then)

But yeah, price most of all, crappy rules second. I keep telling myself that there's a dedicated 40k group nearby, so I know I could get games in, just it doesn't feel like it's worth it as I'd have to spend a lot of money anyways, and if I played the way I want I'd probably get steamrolled. I picked up Warmachine about 2 years ago and i'm liking having actual good rules.

Well, collecting slowly since second edition makes for interesting armies and what goes out of style comes back in again.

I find the only expense is the darn BRB and the various codex's you think you will use for the combined mess this edition is. Due to the mix and match nature of the present game they MUST be selling more books than ever.

The occasional new models are fine.
Anyone buying from scratch: that would hurt.

"Making GW change." is not possible, never mind if you could get them to change: would they do it the way you would want? Not likely.

I have done what I can:
- I do not buy ANY supplies of theirs (paint, prime, wash, tools).
- I buy used where feasible if I need to bulk out a force.
- I have invested in other game systems to keep me happy for "pick-up" games.

GW 40k stuff is pretty much for playing with friends or "regulars" I know at the FLGS.

No matter how GW messes around, at this stage they give me little reason to splurge on their product unless they can find a way to make the game fun for pick-up games again.

Right now it is like trying to negotiate an armistice otherwise.

A point i'd like to make vis-a-vis prices of the models is the inflation one.

Last time i looked at prices of models compared to when i was getting into 40k have basicly followed inflation - back in 1994/1995 a dreadnought cost about £20 for those lead ones in the styrofoam tray boxes - now it's £28 for a plastic one which doesn't suffer catastrophic existence failure when you look at it too quickly.
Obviously things are different with different kits, but it got me thinking that maybe it's my interpretation of the value of my money which is at fault here and i should be more angry at the politicians/bankers over that than GWplc.

So as i see it, complaints about the prices are more a sign that the wealthy are screwing the poor a bit too hard right now and the balance needs to be reset.


All that said; It kinda feels like the new kit prices are ones which GW knows will sell well and are raking in as much as possible - normally i'd say that probably is a sign of poor financial expectations later on in the year, but given the amount of 'must have' units which have been released (jetbikes, farseer jetbike, skitarii, onager, kataphrons, etc etc) and the spending that caused in people who wouldn't normally buy GW stuff, i'd say it's more them cashing in hard on the 'wants' of us with some cash spare - especially after seeing the rush there was for skitarii and jetbikes.

tgjensen wrote:
The only way to make them change is to STOP GIVING THEM MONEY.

That's what I did

As others have said - the only way to make them change is to stop buying.

Mind you, if half as many people buy then the change is likely to be GW charging twice as much... but, hey, it's change, right?

The Auld Grump - three years and counting since my last GW purchase.

 agnosto wrote:

 TheKbob wrote:
The very best part is that GW is in a perfect position to still shutdown the market if they chose. They aren't constrained by the production limitations of other companies as they can do full production, save printing, in hous. All things considered, because of this, their miniatures should be the cheapest not the most expensive.

Given their deep range of flexible model kits, they'd really just need to open conversation (good with the flood of bad pent up) with folks, see what's selling in the competition, and use their remaining clout/weight to hire premiere rules writers and remake their side games while completely gutting their main ones from the horrible mess they are in.

The reason why GW gets so much disdain it's rationally justifiable from anyone who isn't emotionally attached, blinded by their rose colored FineGlasses. If more folks put aside their cherished love for the setting and realize how bad GW really is, then they'd hopefully change or at least bottom out sooner so we have a chance of rebuilding with new management.

I think the thing that boggles my mind is that people will adamantly refuse to look at facts and just wave away any commentary on GW's financials as "hate." I don't hate a company that is spending more money than they take in, just to fund dividends to investors, I question the sanity of the executives who decide to do that but I don't hate them.

Golf Clap

MB

 SirDonlad wrote:
A point i'd like to make vis-a-vis prices of the models is the inflation one.

Last time i looked at prices of models compared to when i was getting into 40k have basicly followed inflation - back in 1994/1995 a dreadnought cost about £20 for those lead ones in the styrofoam tray boxes - now it's £28 for a plastic one which doesn't suffer catastrophic existence failure when you look at it too quickly.
Obviously things are different with different kits, but it got me thinking that maybe it's my interpretation of the value of my money which is at fault here and i should be more angry at the politicians/bankers over that than GWplc.

So as i see it, complaints about the prices are more a sign that the wealthy are screwing the poor a bit too hard right now and the balance needs to be reset.

There's a lot more to it than that. Asset prices have skyrocketed in the last fifteen years, for example, much faster than overall inflation. The inflation rate is an average, but prices for individual things can vary enormously above or below that average. As technology improves it becomes possible to make more detailed models using different materials, but the process for doing so is more expensive than the old one. Even just changing the casting process or re-designing the moulds can raise prices, even if all other things remain equal.

In general though, while GW prices have risen, they're not really any higher overall than other companies charge for similar stuff.

Really? a 5 man assault marine squad at 15 dollars a few years ago, and now they are wanting 82bucks for 10? 30bucks for 10 to now 82 is a BIG price increase

 office_waaagh wrote:

In general though, while GW prices have risen, they're not really any higher overall than other companies charge for similar stuff.

Im sorry, that's just demonstrable nonsense.

When comparing like for like, GW are nowhere near the prices other, smaller companies with fewer economies of scale are charging.

When other companies are charging similar prices per model, those models frequently compose a greater proportion of a typical collection required to play at a given level.

No other company has such a high compulsory buy in to field a legal force as GW, their barrier to entry is a veritable stockade.

 Azreal13 wrote:


No other company has such a high compulsory buy in to field a legal force as GW, their barrier to entry is a veritable stockade.

One might say a veritable wall and moat...

 Azreal13 wrote:

 office_waaagh wrote:

In general though, while GW prices have risen, they're not really any higher overall than other companies charge for similar stuff.

I'm sorry, that's just demonstrable nonsense.

When comparing like for like, GW are nowhere near the prices other, smaller companies with fewer economies of scale are charging.

When other companies are charging similar prices per model, those models frequently compose a greater proportion of a typical collection required to play at a given level.

No other company has such a high compulsory buy in to field a legal force as GW, their barrier to entry is a veritable stockade.

Hell, nearly all of those other companies outsource their manufacture![/i] GW is getting the same for cheaper because they do it all in house - and into the bargain they do not need to work their releases around the manufacturer's schedule.

They charge more because they have enough suckers buying their overpriced miniatures - and every time they lose a sucker they fleece the remaining victims for that much more.

Eventually they will have one customer that will buy one box of marines for 18 million pounds, once a year - and they will call it progress. (Why, yes, that was hyperbole... how could you tell?)

The Auld Grump - and paint for same at 10,000 quid per bottle.

*EDIT* Removed Warhammer $40,000 joke... it has been done.

 shasolenzabi wrote:
Really? a 5 man assault marine squad at 15 dollars a few years ago, and now they are wanting 82bucks for 10? 30bucks for 10 to now 82 is a BIG price increase

good point there, maybe fuelled by a re-design of the molds?

Here's a useful tool for us to be informed before we make claims about rates of inflation...
http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/


and one for the uk...
http://calculateinflation.com/uk/

And here's a list of old catalogues you can look through for accurate prices at accurate dates...
http://www.solegends.com/citadel/catindex.htm

A US inflation calculator is a little limited in it's use for a company that is based in the UK.

I mean sure, it can tell you what the US prices should be in relation to what they are, but if you're trying to figure out what influence inflation is having on GW, UK inflation is more pertinent.

 Azreal13 wrote:
A US inflation calculator is a little limited in it's use for a company that is based in the UK.

I mean sure, it can tell you what the US prices should be in relation to what they are, but if you're trying to figure out what influence inflation is having on GW, UK inflation is more pertinent.

He was using dollars for his reconing so i figured it's best to use the same units while in converse to help things along a bit.

And wouldn't GW having a division in the US and selling goods there mean that the US inflation figures are in fact relavent?

@TheAuldGrump: why are those of us who still like GW minis suckers???
have you ever stopped to think that it is a source of enjoyment for some people???
could you be a little more insulting next time???

i bought my first Citadel minis in 1984...
i've been through all of the price rises since then, and never once felt like a victim...
nobody is forcing me to buy them, and i am not blind to rising costs...
i buy GW books and minis because i love the aesthetic and world, and i do it willingly and happily...
doing what i love makes me a sucker????

i doubt i will ever be priced out of collecting GW books and models, because i buy only what i like, and don't pay any of the "troop tax", or buy the "latest cheese"...
every single model i buy makes me happy, so what is wrong with that???

one thing that really gets me, is people's inability to seperate the execs from the design studio...
to me, GW is the design studio...
i can support the work of Jes Goodwin without saying Kirby is awesome...
as far as i'm concerned, Kirby & Cronies can all go to hell for how much they have upset the community, and driven away customers, but Jes & Co.'s work will always have my support...
with that in mind, i will continue buying what i like, not buying what i don't, and not worrying about the policies or economics...

cheers
jah

 SirDonlad wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
A US inflation calculator is a little limited in it's use for a company that is based in the UK.

I mean sure, it can tell you what the US prices should be in relation to what they are, but if you're trying to figure out what influence inflation is having on GW, UK inflation is more pertinent.

He was using dollars for his reconing so i figured it's best to use the same units while in converse to help things along a bit.

And wouldn't GW having a division in the US and selling goods there mean that the US inflation figures are in fact relavent?

A bit, sure, but the majority of their business (and by that I mean employment, raw material purchases, overheads etc not just where they sell stuff) is outside of the U.S. and sterling inflation will be significantly more important.

 Azreal13 wrote:

 SirDonlad wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
A US inflation calculator is a little limited in it's use for a company that is based in the UK.

I mean sure, it can tell you what the US prices should be in relation to what they are, but if you're trying to figure out what influence inflation is having on GW, UK inflation is more pertinent.

He was using dollars for his reconing so i figured it's best to use the same units while in converse to help things along a bit.

And wouldn't GW having a division in the US and selling goods there mean that the US inflation figures are in fact relavent?

A bit, sure, but the majority of their business (and by that I mean employment, raw material purchases, overheads etc not just where they sell stuff) is outside of the U.S. and sterling inflation will be significantly more important.

If you live in the US the inflation rate is more than a 'bit' relevant, and 'shasolenzabi' came up with a blinder of an example to prove his point - it's probably one of the more extreme examples, but the fact that is true and probably isn't an isolated case really pushes the argument for GW 'pricing high because they can' being the true state of affairs.

This discussion has drifted into "do the products rise in line with inflation or not" and it seems that outside of core lines like the dreadnought (which was £20 in 1996 and is £28 now - inflation would have it at £29.40 using the consumer price index and £34.23 with the retail price index) and the razorback (which was £15 in 1996 and now is £25 - inflation says £22.05 using CPI and £25.68 using RPI) the price rises have been pretty stratospheric; the humble rhino was £6 (!) now £22.50 which is £8.82 CPI or £10.27 RPI and the mighty land raider was £13 (!!!) in 1996 and is now £45 inflation putting it at £19.11 CPI and £22.25.RPI.

Both these kits have had a dramatic overhaul in structure and looks so the aurgument is probably still open on those two but the trend continues with special characters which have not been re-designed - ragnar blackmane, ulrik the slayer, njal stormcaller and wolfgaurd runepriest (in terminator armour).
Ragnar, ulrik and njal all cost £5 then, and now cost £12 (£7.35 CPI £8.56 RPI); the rune priest was £3, now £12 and should be nearer £4.41 and £5.14 by CPI and RPI repectively.

With GW's old pricing you could get a feel for how much work and materials went into the model (fully plastic land raider vs part metal razorback) that you don't really get now unless you're really into your factories and machnes!

The point about the Marines is a pretty poignant one.

Considering that companies like Wargames Factory, or Gripping Beast (or Victrix, or the Perrys, or any of the other companies that make plastics for Wargames) can create what are VASTLY more detailed miniatures (in terms of surface topology) than a Space Marine, and they sell FOURTY of them for about ⅔ the price of a Box of Space Marines. . . .

That TENDS to suggest that GW's prices are a BIT inflated.

It costs no more to make the molds for a spree of Space Marines than it does to make a Sprue of Vikings, Republican Roman LegionIres, Imperial Roman Legionaires, Greek Hoplites, Saxon Fyrd, Napoleonic Fusiliers or Grenadiers/etc., or War of the Roses Men-at-Arms.

The plastic for 5 Space Marines costs LESS than the plastic for 12 Legionaires, or 10 Vikings, or the other sprues which contain the parts for more than five figures.

The design work for the Space Marines is non-existent, since that was done in the 1980's, when they were first created. All work since then has just been a repetition of that earlier work.

So... There is really NOTHING to support the claim that the Five Space Marines contained on the Sprue is worth the $40 it costs to buy them.

Look at a comparable plastic model kit from Tamiya, Revell, or ANY other high-quality scale model, and you will not even find that kind of expense for a model similar to the Space Marines (I think their WWII, 1/48 scale Soldiers are around $24 for a box of 12 to 18 soldiers, last I checked... It could have gone up some since then, I will admit). But the point remains that the value for money just does not exist with GW when compared to other products of similar type.

MB

 SirDonlad wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

 SirDonlad wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
A US inflation calculator is a little limited in it's use for a company that is based in the UK.

I mean sure, it can tell you what the US prices should be in relation to what they are, but if you're trying to figure out what influence inflation is having on GW, UK inflation is more pertinent.

He was using dollars for his reconing so i figured it's best to use the same units while in converse to help things along a bit.

And wouldn't GW having a division in the US and selling goods there mean that the US inflation figures are in fact relavent?

A bit, sure, but the majority of their business (and by that I mean employment, raw material purchases, overheads etc not just where they sell stuff) is outside of the U.S. and sterling inflation will be significantly more important.

If you live in the US the inflation rate is more than a 'bit' relevant, and 'shasolenzabi' came up with a blinder of an example to prove his point - it's probably one of the more extreme examples, but the fact that is true and probably isn't an isolated case really pushes the argument for GW 'pricing high because they can' being the true state of affairs.

If you live in the U.S. Then US inflation is of course very relevant, but inflation is more led by the producer than the consumer, and as a UK based company, it is more relevant to look at UK inflation because this is what puts the pressure on GW's expenses, it is the cost of raw plastic, utilities, rents, rates, mortgages and wages in the UK in sterling which will be any driving force.

Sure, if you want to compare the prices in US$ now to what they should be then US inflation would be the figure to use, but UK inflation would be what drove any financial pressure on the majority of GW's overhead if you wanted to assess the true impact of inflation.

It's mostly moot anyway, as you yourself have pointed out most things are in front of inflation, in some cases significantly. Whether it's naked greed or (more likely) a pretty dreadful method of maintaining revenue, inflation isn't likely much of a component in GW prices.

 jah-joshua wrote:
@TheAuldGrump: why are those of us who still like GW minis suckers???
have you ever stopped to think that it is a source of enjoyment for some people???
could you be a little more insulting next time???

Bear in mind - the person that popularized the term 'Sucker' was P.T. Barnum - who was selling 'a source of enjoyment for some people'.

Your enjoyment of the game does not make you less of a sucker.

Knowing that GW is treating you like a sucker and buying anyway simply means that you are an informed sucker.

People continued going to the circus after P. T. Barnum called them suckers.

They too were informed suckers.

So, yes, the term 'Sucker' applies.

Me, I followed the sign pointing to the Egress....

And I am not going back to the GW circus until they stop treating their supporters as suckers.

Leaving the circus is the only way to stop being a sucker - no matter how much fun you have on the midway.

Kirby may liken himself to Jobs - but Barnum is a lot closer.

Except that Barnum was a competent manager.... B. & B. & R. B. C is a lot bigger than GW, even today, when most of the big tops have come down.

It may be that you think enjoying GW games is worth being a sucker - goodness knows there are things that I consider it being worth being a sucker for.... But when either you or I is being a sucker, enjoyment does not mean that we are not being suckered.

The Auld Grump - I took my girlfriend to an amusement park last week... and, trust me, I was suckered.... (The fried dough... it's all about the fried dough....)

Here is just an example of why people buying from GW are being 'suckered'.

If you buy a £50 box of the brand new Assault marines.
Do you know how much it cost GW plc research develop manufacture (including ALL associated overheads.)and pack this product ready to be transported to the shops?
£12.

Other companies basically add the logistic cost on to this price.(To ship the product to retailers and wholesale.)
And double this cost to arrive at the RRP..
Eg £12 +£1. logistic cost = £13 This is doubled to £26. RRP.
The retailer gets £6.50 profit , and the manufacturer gets £6,50 profit, off each box sold. (25% gross profit for the manufacturer.)
As plastic manufacture is geared to maximize profit from economies of scale.(The more you sell the more profit you make.)
Pricing to sell lots and lots makes much more sense if you are selling a product as a 'social event' as war games are.
(The more people play and have good experiences the more you sell to more people!).

If the current £50 price tag was just £26, then they would sell quite a lot more product.

So where does the extra £23 per box that GW charges go ?GW plc are not making 46% gross profit ...Only about 12 %.

All the extra £23 pounds GW customers pay on a £50 box set pays for GW plc outdated ideas of owning their own retail chain.
As GW plc have been reducing the value of GW hobby shops by making them sub par one man retail outlets.

You are actually paying an extra £23 on a £50 box RRP to make up for GW plc incompetent corporate management.
This is what I like to call GWs incompetent management tax.

You need to knock sales tax off RRP in your calcualtions, otherwise your logic is spot on.

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
Knowing that GW is treating you like a sucker and buying anyway simply means that you are an informed sucker.

Lanrak wrote:
Here is just an example of why people buying from GW are being 'suckered'.
If you buy a £50 box of the brand new Assault marines.
Do you know how much it cost GW plc research develop manufacture (including ALL associated overheads.)and pack this product ready to be transported to the shops?
£12.

This is the type of attitude that just makes no sense to me.

I like Coca-Cola, a nice bottle of wine, a good steak at a good restaurant, a decent car, a good computer, a good novel, and a good movie in the theatre. All of these things cost a fraction to produce of the final sale price; does that make anyone who enjoys these things "a sucker"? If someone buys a painting for thousands of dollars, are they a sucker?

I do not subscribe to the notion that: (a) people who spend money on things they enjoy in life are necessarily foolish or (b) people who produce desirable things in life for a profit, however high that might be, are necessarily looking for foolish people.

If I made something for $12 and I sold it for $50, and the profit were $38, **and people would buy it** that would be great! If people would pay $100 for it, that would be even better! Microsoft sells Office for a way higher multiple of its cost; Google sells advertising for a much higher multiple of its cost; the Avengers movie tickets (and Robert Downey Jr's salary) are sold at a very high planned profit margin.

How much is a box of assault marines worth? The same thing as a box of chocolates: it's worth what people are willing to pay for it. That could be $0, $25, $50. It has nothing in the least to do with production cost, other than that the manufacturer can't sell it for lower than that, without losing money. It should be manufacturer's goal to optimize their profits, not to make any particular person happy. If it were my company, surely this is what I would do -- of course, with the caveat that growing the market is a part of optimizing profits, which is something GW doesn't seem to care about.

The other thing that baffles me is the commoditization of miniatures. Miniatures, like video games, are not commodities. Just because you can buy a video game for $2.50 doesn't mean it will bring you as much enjoyment as a video game for $60. Or, maybe, with a particular title, the $2.50 title it will bring you MORE enjoyment, and the $60 will be a waste of money. Miniatures are the same thing. A miniature from company X is not identical to a miniature to company Y, even if they are of "equivalent quality". Hell, even two miniatures from Company X are not necessarily worth the same. Because they're not the same miniature! If I like Iron Man, I'll buy Iron Man comics, but not Superman comics, even if DC comics are 50% cheaper than Marvel comics. If I like George Martin, I'll buy the next Song of Fire and Ice book, even if it costs 50% more than the next JK Rowling book. Is that so hard to understand?

What you're not grasping is the crucial difference, which is the attitiude to you as the customer.

I'm sure most restraunteurs, movie producers, authors etc are, on a greater or lesser level depending on the immediacy of the relationship, appreciative of your custom.

Stories of GW's contempt for their customer base, and their apparent attitude that their customers are a resource to be exploited rather than an asset to be nurtured are what make the distinction here.

As Grump says, if you're aware of their behaviour towards their customers and other parties inside and outside of the wargaming industry and continue to buy, then all that means is you're well informed.

 Azreal13 wrote:
What you're not grasping is the crucial difference, which is the attitiude to you as the customer.

I'm sure most restraunteurs, movie producers, authors etc are, on a greater or lesser level depending on the immediacy of the relationship, appreciative of your custom.

Stories of GW's contempt for their customer base, and their apparent attitude that their customers are a resource to be exploited rather than an asset to be nurtured are what make the distinction here.

As Grump says, if you're aware of their behaviour towards their customers and other parties inside and outside of the wargaming industry and continue to buy, then all that means is you're well informed.

Yes, but being informed and buying product from a company that doesn't care about me is not being a sucker. I do this every time I fill up with gas at Chevron, purchase Frito-Lay potato chips, or a can of pop. Hell, every time I take public transit, or turn on the lights, or watch cable TV, use the cell phone, or browse the Internet. I eat McDonald's, and I'm certain they could give a crap about me. I don't need the company that makes stuff that I like to love me, I just need them to make stuff that I like (or need). Now, obviously, if I like the company, I'll be happier giving them more of my money.

Now, specifically Games Workshop: I disagree with the characterization that they have a poor attitude towards me. I've emailed both the White Dwarf guys and Customer Service, and always gotten a pleasant, human response, and even carried a conversation via email. I would actually say that Games Workshop treats me better than most companies that aren't local small businesses treat me. Certainly as well as I would expect any multimillion dollar company that's located halfway around the world would.

Do some of their rules infuriate me? YES. Do I wish some of the products cost les? YES! But you know what, I don't think it's because they don't hear the noise from the crowd, I think it's because they want the game a different way. Just because they don't do what I want doesn't mean they aren't listening to me, it just means they disagree. It's their product, and they can write it however way they want. If it diverges too much from what I want, or if someone makes something that I want more, or if they make a product I can't afford, my money will go elsewhere.

None of which makes me a sucker.

I don't think you're in a position to judge that dude.

 Azreal13 wrote:
I don't think you're in a position to judge that dude.

Did you mean me? That I'm not in a position to judge whether I (or jah, for example), is a sucker?

That seems like an odd thing to say, as it's just a matter of opinion.