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.

 Ketara wrote:
In which circumstance, it's not the recaster which sank Games Workshop and made them go bankrupt. It's not charging a more affordable, yet still profit making sum that drives them to bankruptcy. No, it's Games Workshop themselves waltzing along the edge of business failure on the backs of their own decisions.

So its the victim's fault they were the target of criminals? GW held a gun to their heads and forced them to make recasts of their product?

 Ghaz wrote:

 Ketara wrote:
In which circumstance, it's not the recaster which sank Games Workshop and made them go bankrupt. It's not charging a more affordable, yet still profit making sum that drives them to bankruptcy. No, it's Games Workshop themselves waltzing along the edge of business failure on the backs of their own decisions.

So its the victim's fault they were the target of criminals?

It's a company's fault that they lost out to competition. Piracy/copyright infringement is not the same as someone getting mugged on the street.

I feel the same way about recasts as I do reproduction cartridges and the like in my video game hobby.

It's illegal and I won't reward people for it.

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 Ketara wrote:
In which circumstance, it's not the recaster which sank Games Workshop and made them go bankrupt. It's not charging a more affordable, yet still profit making sum that drives them to bankruptcy. No, it's Games Workshop themselves waltzing along the edge of business failure on the backs of their own decisions.

So its the victim's fault they were the target of criminals?

It's a company's fault that they lost out to competition. Piracy/copyright infringement is not the same as someone getting mugged on the street.

Sorry, but that's not an excuse to break the law.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
It's a company's fault that they lost out to competition. Piracy/copyright infringement is not the same as someone getting mugged on the street.

It's still a criminal act.

 Ghaz wrote:

 Ketara wrote:
In which circumstance, it's not the recaster which sank Games Workshop and made them go bankrupt. It's not charging a more affordable, yet still profit making sum that drives them to bankruptcy. No, it's Games Workshop themselves waltzing along the edge of business failure on the backs of their own decisions.

So its the victim's fault they were the target of criminals?

If the sole reason that they cannot utilise their vast market power to crush foreign replication of a toy design with minor (and they are pretty minor) design costs without going bankrupt, is that they have to support a tottering mountain of unsustainable business decisions made elsewhere....then yes. They made that cross to carry. Nobody made them do it.

And indeed, nobody is making them keep on doing it. They could try and do something about that aforementioned mountain, and make some good business decisions to extract profit from elsewhere. If that ludicrous markup on FW is quite literally the only thing keeping them afloat, and lowering those prices to a point where you're making a good profit instead of a ridiculous one would drive them bankrupt as was claimed, they're the ones culpable of having a crap unsustainable business model.

But quite frankly, the idea that making less money on FW would drive GW into bankruptcy was ludicrous hyperbole anyway, so it's a moot point.

 Peregrine wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
It's a company's fault that they lost out to competition. Piracy/copyright infringement is not the same as someone getting mugged on the street.

It's still a criminal act.

Which I never disputed. But framing recasting in the same vein as, say, being robbed is disingenuous. Piracy, which I would argue is what recasting is, is a much more nuanced problem.

 Ghaz wrote:

 Ketara wrote:
In which circumstance, it's not the recaster which sank Games Workshop and made them go bankrupt. It's not charging a more affordable, yet still profit making sum that drives them to bankruptcy. No, it's Games Workshop themselves waltzing along the edge of business failure on the backs of their own decisions.

So its the victim's fault they were the target of criminals?

It's pretty obvious what you're implying, but making the "If she didn't dress that way" straw man doesn't equate to the recasters and GW.

The reason why GW products have been the most common recast miniatures is due to their price.

This is a single, plastic, mono-pose model. It's $28!



There are a number of resin or metal miniatures that are more detailed and a third/half the price of a plastic miniature from GW. That is why recasters will make copies of GW miniatures instead of something like Dark Sword Miniatures or other smaller companies.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Piracy, which I would argue is what recasting is, is a much more nuanced problem.

No, it's not nuanced at all. People just invent "nuances" to justify their selfish actions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 RivenSkull wrote:
This is a single, plastic, mono-pose model. It's $28!

And? If you don't think it's worth $28 then don't buy it. But you aren't entitled to buy an illegal recast just because you want to get it at a cheaper price.

It's a bit like hostile takeovers, or asset stripping, or failing to diversify and being left to the whims of a monopsonist or sole supplier. They're not very nice things to have happen to your company, but if you're the moron who left your company wide open to it through poor business decision, then you have a certain amount of culpability.

Granted you could say, 'Yes, but those things are legal. Recasting isn't, it's unfair competition!.' But the truth of the marketplace is that the three examples I just provided above often happen on the shadier side of the law, and later get marked as being illegal. They still happen ( a certain company's attitude to trying to control online web carts breaches certain competitive laws for example...).

They still happen anyway though. It's not fair, and it's not pleasant. But if you're the idiot executive who made your company that vulnerable, you have the lions share of the blame.

The price of Louis Vuitton bags or Rolex watches doesn't give the counterfeiters a moral or legal right to copy their products. Its the same with Games Workshop. Trying to blame Games Workshop because of their pricing is trying to lay the blame on the victim and justify the illegal activity.

 Ghaz wrote:
The price of Louis Vuitton bags or Rolex watches doesn't give the counterfeiters a moral or legal right to copy their products. Its the same with Games Workshop. Trying to blame Games Workshop because of their pricing is trying to lay the blame on the victim and justify the illegal activity.

You're missing the point. I'm not even talking about recasters here particularly. The query was made that if Games Workshop was forced to make less profit on their FW, and subsequently went bankrupt, whether or not the fault would lie with the recasters. The answer, quite logically from a business/holistic perspective of GW, is that FW is a minor part of their operation and turnover, and if deflating some minor profits from there kills their entire company, it has little to do with recasters, and more to do with the fact GW cannot run a sustainable business.

Perhaps another example is required, one that doesn't affect ethical...sensibilities. If GW's resin supplier marks up their prices by 5% because the oil market has gone up in price, and GW folds, is it the fault of the resin supplier? Yes, it was their action that caused the crumbling edifice to come tumbling down. But the reason that edifice was crumbling was down to the builders, not the resin supplier.

But to reiterate for a second time, it was a ludicrous statement to begin with, as GW aren't that fragile, and there would be many other factors to take into account around a profit decrease on individual items (improved sales, for one).

 Peregrine wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Piracy, which I would argue is what recasting is, is a much more nuanced problem.

No, it's not nuanced at all. People just invent "nuances" to justify their selfish actions.

And you can yell that at the internet all day and night but it won't solve the issue of piracy. Piracy can't be solved by more stringent enforcement of the law like robbery can. Industries that have more or less successfully dealt with that issue improved their products to out compete illicit competitors because, regardless of it's morality, piracy is a competitor. The music and movie industries made their products more accessible in order to combat piracy. The reason why Games Workshop recasts are so popular is because people believe they are simply not worth the price yet they want to enjoy their products. Whether or not this reeks of entitlement is besides the point. If GW wants to stamp out piracy making their products more accessible and a better value would be a start.

I'll agree that most of the differences are technicalities.

Copyright law is ALL about technicalities. The ENTIRE law practice (corporate, civil, criminal) is built upon a foundation of technicalities.

Where I live, the two things (theft and copyright infringement) are NOT the same, certainly not legally - despite what the PTB have tried to pull in the last few years.

Morality doesn't even come into it.

beowulfhunter wrote:
I posted in a FB thread were they where accusing some trader of selling recasts. I made the innocent comment that I did not see it as a big deal. You would think I would have said playing "baby baseball" is a good idea as I got attacked by sculptors in the industry and other hobbists.

When it comes to OOP minis and figures owned by big companies GW I am looking at you, I see no issues with recasts. Thoughts?

OK, If full disclosure is stated by the seller(your first sentence), I personally have no issue with it and I really don't care if anybody has issue with my opinion. However, if the individual is selling recasts as "real" that's a problem. I would never sell/trade a recast without full disclosure and appropriate discount.

So to answer your subject line, I don't really care unless it was being passed off as legit.

 RivenSkull wrote:
The reason why GW products have been the most common recast miniatures is due to their price.

And their popularity. If you were a recaster in China there's no point buying a model and recasting it 1000 times if there's not 1000 people who are willing to buy it from you to save a few bucks with all the negatives that it comes with.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Piracy can't be solved by more stringent enforcement of the law like robbery can.

Why not? The primary reason that piracy is possible is that the law isn't strictly enforced. It's written off as "too small to matter" and not given much attention. If websites/ebay sellers/etc were treated as seriously as, say, someone putting up a site offering one-click deals on assassination it would eliminate the problem almost entirely. Recasters wouldn't be able to stay in business with only a handful of stubborn buyers trading illegal models in absolute secrecy.

The music and movie industries made their products more accessible in order to combat piracy.

But, again, GW can't do this. GW's products are already as accessible as possible for a physical product, and much more accessible than any recasts. The only way for GW to attempt to compete with illegal recasts is to slash their prices to the point where their prices are equal to or cheaper than "competition" that doesn't have to pay any of GW's design/marketing/etc expenses. The movie and music analogy just doesn't hold up at all.

 chromedog wrote:
Morality doesn't even come into it.

It's true morality doesn't always come in to whether something is legal or not....

But morally speaking, I think supporting recasters is being a leech on wargaming.

I know it's culturally biased, and it's culturally engrained to think recasting is bad. But guess what? I prefer that culture. I prefer the culture that allows artists to dictate (to some extent) the price and terms of use of what they create and where consumers are free to weigh up whether they like what has been created enough to pay the price and agree to those terms. If the consumers feel like they aren't getting the value they desire, the respectful thing to do is go to another artist who is offering what you want, not a leech of a recaster who is simply able to reproduce it cheaper.

If I wanted to live in China where the culture supports reproducing things at the lowest cost possible rather than putting in the effort to make something new and desirable, I'd go live in China.

 Ghaz wrote:
The price of Louis Vuitton bags or Rolex watches doesn't give the counterfeiters a moral or legal right to copy their products. Its the same with Games Workshop. Trying to blame Games Workshop because of their pricing is trying to lay the blame on the victim and justify the illegal activity.

I can choose to buy much more reasonably priced watches, as I have. I can choose to buy my girlfriend much more reasonably priced handbags as well. And I can ridicule the inflated prices of those luxury items all I want, because I can buy what is essentially the exact same thing. I can buy 3rd party miniatures at a reasonable price as well. Lets see if GW lets me play my Necrons in their store with my Puppets Wars miniatures I have with them.


Those things you listed are luxury items - people are doing nothing more than paying for the brand name to inflate their ego's. These are toy soldiers that are used to play games with - not the collector's models that GW is desperately trying to convince everyone that they are. When people look at GW's prices and go "That's over priced" and the only response is "If you don't like the price, don't buy it", it seems that people are following that option and spending their money elsewhere. Hence GW's falling revenue and profit for the last number of years. If people are getting priced out of something, other things will rise up to cater to them.

If GW wants to be a luxury item like Rolex or Louis Vuitton, then spending the "luxury" price for GW products just becomes the same ego feeding, dick measuring of "I have more money that you". And at that point, I feel less problems with buying GW recasts.

 Peregrine wrote:
The only way for GW to attempt to compete with illegal recasts is to slash their prices to the point where their prices are equal to or cheaper than "competition" that doesn't have to pay any of GW's design/marketing/etc expenses.

Or somewhat more expensive. As long as they retain the legal copyright required to keep recasters to obscure email chains for 98% of the time, and models aren't ludicrously overpriced, the vast, vast majority of people will take the legal route for purchasing. As said, when it's a £10 saving, who wants to go to that sort of effort and risk in finding a recaster? It's only when the price differential reaches ludicrous levels (like £15 more per individual model, or £70 more per tank) that people are willing to go to the extra effort.

You claimed that lowering their prices to a more reasonable and competitive level that would enable them to squash the recasters would drive them to bankruptcy. I maintain that GW isn't so financially fragile and that other benefits (such as increased sales to offset less profit per model and spreading the design cost amongst more units) would accrue. I remain convinced that the reason they choose not to do so, is because they have calculated that they derive more net profit by charging maximum price per unit and leaving the recasters operational, than by reducing prices to a point where they'd make a fair, but far smaller profit, and crush the recasters.

Indeed, frankly, they'd be idiots to not have performed that calculation.

To quote many a poster already, 'Theft is theft'. There is no grey area, there never has been and those trying to make an argument that recasting a model because it's OOP is acceptable are dead wrong. There's not a single model out there that isn't readily available on Ebay or through one of the Swap Shops on community boards like Dakka. If you can't afford it, tough! Get something else or get a better job/allowance/return bottles for deposit/whatever so you can afford it.
If you've ever been a victim of theft, then you know how it feels and you know it's unequivocally wrong. Recasting is theft and if you think it doesn't affect GW, et al, then you're wrong again, because it does, which means, ultimately, it will affect us all...and not in a good way.

 BigWaaagh wrote:
Recasting is theft

It really, really, really isn't. Legally, grammatically, or even technically. Please read a thread before posting.

 Ketara wrote:
Or somewhat more expensive. As long as they retain the legal copyright required to keep recasters to obscure email chains for 98% of the time, and models aren't ludicrously overpriced, the vast, vast majority of people will take the legal route for purchasing. As said, when it's a £10 saving, who wants to go to that sort of effort and risk in finding a recaster? It's only when the price differential reaches ludicrous levels (like £15 more per individual model, or £70 more per tank) that people are willing to go to the extra effort.

It's hardly difficult to find recasts. A quick search on ebay will give you plenty of options, with ebay's refund policies protecting you if it's a scam instead of just a recast. So you're left with speculation that people will magically grow a conscience if they can't save as much money instead of continuing to buy the cheapest option because they don't care about the morality of it.

You claimed that lowering their prices to a more reasonable and competitive level that would enable them to squash the recasters would drive them to bankruptcy.

And this is almost certainly true. GW has to tell us their financial information, and we know what their profit margins are. If you take away half of GW's revenue to match prices with recasters their revenue drops below their expenses. To argue that GW can survive such massive price cuts you have to believe that recasting is taking up such a high percentage of the the total market for 40k models that putting the recasters out of business would result in a massive flood of new honest customers and allow GW to completely reinvent its business model to take advantage of economies of scale.

Now, could it be possible if you only consider FW models? Possibly, but probably not. Cut the price of the average FW kit in half and it's down to the level of similar plastic kits that have much lower production costs. I'm skeptical that this would be profitable at all, and really skeptical that it would be enough for GW to continue to sell those product lines. Cutting FW to making a tiny profit and struggling to survive most likely results in GW closing that branch of the company to focus on their core product lines.

 BigWaaagh wrote:
To quote many a poster already, 'Theft is theft'. There is no grey area, there never has been and those trying to make an argument that recasting a model because it's OOP is acceptable are dead wrong. There's not a single model out there that isn't readily available on Ebay or through one of the Swap Shops on community boards like Dakka. If you can't afford it, tough! Get something else or get a better job/allowance/return bottles for deposit/whatever so you can afford it.
If you've ever been a victim of theft, then you know how it feels and you know it's unequivocally wrong. Recasting is theft and if you think it doesn't affect GW, et al, then you're wrong again, because it does, which means, ultimately, it will affect us all...and not in a good way.

But it's not theft. It's a copyright infringement.

One of my recast models is a Necron Sentry Pylon. I got it at what I thought was a reasonable price. There was no way I would pay the $80 for a single model of that size/quality. If FW sold it at 10% higher than what I paid for the recast, I would have gladly gotten it through FW.

But because I would never, and will never pay FW $80 for such a simple model, is it a lost sale?

 BigWaaagh wrote:
There's not a single model out there that isn't readily available on Ebay or through one of the Swap Shops on community boards like Dakka.

Not true. There are quite a few OOP models that are very difficult to find for sale at ANY price. As in "if you watch ebay obsessively for 5 years you might see one" levels of difficulty, not just "this might take me a few hours of searching to find a seller".

 Peregrine wrote:

It's hardly difficult to find recasts. A quick search on ebay will give you plenty of options,

Fortunately for GW, the people who sell on ebay aren't recasters. They're resellers of recasted goods, which means the item has already gone through another pair of hands (requiring a second cut of profit), a shipping fee, another 10% ebay fee, and another 3% paypal fee. The result being the prices are actually a lot closer to GW's.

Unfortunately, some people don't know the recasts on ebay are recasts, and get stung. It's why I've reported about six accounts in the last month alone. Generally speaking though, the accounts get hammered quite quickly by GW, before they can pass the maximum 15 items a new account can list. That's why a new account is a good indicator of a recaster.

I suspect that the number of people buying recasts off ebay is quite slim these days though regardless. I see many items ending with no bidders. Christ, if GW lowered their prices by a mere 20%, they'd kill off the ebay resellers, even if not the Chinese producers. There wouldn't be enough profit for it to viable.

And this is almost certainly true. GW has to tell us their financial information, and we know what their profit margins are.

Somewhere in the region of 9 million last year wasn't it?

If you take away half of GW's revenue

Woah there.....half?! You think forgeworld accounts for HALF of their revenue? Source, please.

to match prices with recasters their revenue drops below their expenses. To argue that GW can survive such massive price cuts
you have to believe that recasting is taking up such a high percentage of the the total market for 40k models that putting the recasters out of business would result in a massive flood of new honest customers and allow GW to completely reinvent its business model to take advantage of economies of scale.

Now, could it be possible if you only consider FW models?

Ah, I see now. Your above statements moved the goalposts to consider recast GW generally. As opposed to the heavily specified Forgeworld I've only ever made reference to. So in other words, everything said before this was in response to an argument I never made, and is thus null and void. Gotcha.

Although, thinking about it, who buys non-FW from abroad? I mean, I know some of them do crappy ABS versions of HIPS kits, but those are very noticeably inferior in quality, and I don't think they sell many of them. Certainly, I know I've never seen any on Ebay.

Possibly, but probably not. Cut the price of the average FW kit in half and it's down to the level of similar plastic kits that have much lower production costs. I'm skeptical that this would be profitable at all, and really skeptical that it would be enough for GW to continue to sell those product lines. Cutting FW to making a tiny profit and struggling to survive most likely results in GW closing that branch of the company to focus on their core product lines.

Mate, if resin casting was that expensive and bleak, none of the existing third party companies would exist. Look at the Solar Auxilia Tactical Command. It's £65 for five 28mm models. They'll cost a pittance to make a mould and resin for, and the models won't have cost them more than a grand (absolute tops) to design. If they're making £55 per transaction on every one of those sold, they're hardly borderline! Cutting the price of those five models to £35 would hardly drive FW to the wall, and I maintain if it did so even with increased sales, what the hell were they spending their money on?! Gold plated blackjack and hookers? Vic Miniatures will sell me twice as many models for less money and still turn a profit!

 Ketara wrote:
Fortunately for GW, the people who sell on ebay aren't recasters. They're resellers of recasted goods, which means the item has already gone through another pair of hands (requiring a second cut of profit), a shipping fee, another 10% ebay fee, and another 3% paypal fee. The result being the prices are actually a lot closer to GW's.

That seems kind of off, since I'm right now looking at FW recasts on ebay that are around 50% of the price of the real model. And good casts, not garbage made by someone who can't sell for decent prices.

Ah, I see now. Your above statements moved the goalposts to consider recast GW generally. As opposed to the heavily specified Forgeworld I've only ever made reference to. So in other words, everything said before this was in response to an argument I never made, and is thus null and void. Gotcha.

It's hardly "moving the goalposts" to consider GW recasts in general, especially when various price complaints in this thread involve GW plastic kits, not FW.

Mate, if resin casting was that expensive and bleak, none of the existing third party companies would exist. Look at the Solar Auxilia Tactical Command. It's £65 for five 28mm models. They'll cost a pittance to make a mould and resin for, and the models won't have cost them more than a grand (absolute tops) to design. If they're making £55 per transaction on every one of those sold, they're hardly borderline! Cutting the price of those five models to £35 would hardly drive FW to the wall, and I maintain if it did so even with increased sales, what the hell were they spending their money on?! Gold plated blackjack and hookers? Vic Miniatures will sell me twice as many models for less money and still turn a profit!

Ok, now consider something like their tank kits. ~$100 for a FW LRBT (resin conversion kit + some of the GW sprues), compared to ~$50 for the GW plastic kit. We know that GW's plastic kits aren't making that much of a profit margin, and we know that resin kits cost more to manufacture than plastic kits. So if FW cuts the price in half they're now selling a kit that costs more to manufacture at the same price as the plastic kit, which almost certainly eats up the small profit margin that the plastic kit is selling for at that price.

 Peregrine wrote:

That seems kind of off, since I'm right now looking at FW recasts on ebay that are around 50% of the price of the real model. And good casts, not garbage made by someone who can't sell for decent prices.

Link? I'll report them to FW. PM, of course.

It's hardly "moving the goalposts" to consider GW recasts in general, especially when various price complaints in this thread involve GW plastic kits, not FW.

It kind of is in specific discussion with me I feel. Moving briskly on though.

Ok, now consider something like their tank kits. ~$100 for a FW LRBT (resin conversion kit + some of the GW sprues), compared to ~$50 for the GW plastic kit. We know that GW's plastic kits aren't making that much of a profit margin, and we know that resin kits cost more to manufacture than plastic kits. So if FW cuts the price in half they're now selling a kit that costs more to manufacture at the same price as the plastic kit, which almost certainly eats up the small profit margin that the plastic kit is selling for at that price.

If we're going to look at tank kits, let's rock with the full scale ones. A Sicarian Battle Tank is £76. For a similar size, Maxmini do a Gothic KV2 for £35. And that's the cheap end of Forgeworld. FW Spartan Assault Tank? £105. Ramshackle Games? £20 for a chimera counts as (slightly smaller tank than the Spartan but not by that much!) Cerastus Knight Castigator Titan? £175. Mecha Prometheus by Blight Wheel Miniatures? £70.

Face it, Forgeworld takes the reasonable amount any other resin miniatures manufacturer charges for a given model of a shape or size (whilst still making a profit), then doubles it, then adds half again for good measure. Resin manufacture is not cheap. But it is not expensive. Forgeworld could trim 50% off every price and still be turning more of an average profit per item than everyone else in the industry.

 Ketara wrote:
If we're going to look at tank kits, let's rock with the full scale ones. A Sicarian Battle Tank is £76. For a similar size, Maxmini do a Gothic KV2 for £35. And that's the cheap end of Forgeworld. FW Spartan Assault Tank? £105. Ramshackle Games? £20 for a chimera counts as (slightly smaller tank than the Spartan but not by that much!) Cerastus Knight Castigator Titan? £175. Mecha Prometheus by Blight Wheel Miniatures? £70.

Face it, Forgeworld takes the reasonable amount any other resin miniatures manufacturer charges for a given model of a shape or size (whilst still making a profit), then doubles it, then adds half again for good measure. Resin manufacture is not cheap. But it is not expensive. Forgeworld could trim 50% off every price and still be turning more of an average profit per item than everyone else in the industry.

But these aren't very fair comparisons. Whatever the reason is (higher design costs, higher labor costs, etc) GW's prices are higher than their competition despite not making better profit margins. So yeah, it's nice that other companies can sell kits at lower prices, but GW can't. If they're barely making money on a $50 plastic LRBT there's no way they're going to be making a profit on a $50 resin LRBT.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:


How are press molds ethically viable?

The fact that GW have previously specifically encouraged it helps.

Recasting for your own purposes instead of buying more product is apparently theft, so why isn't press molding? If press molding is okay, how about if I pay someone to make a press mold for my personal use?.

I already covered this. Casting a model is (probably) prohibited by copyright law. Casting part of a model is not the same thing, so far as the law is concerned.

You possibly still run into potential trademark issues if the thing you're copying is a trademarked symbol, though.