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.

Furthermore the legal entity that both sold the customer the product and invited them to come play at a given day and time are the same company.

Barring someone from participating because they aren't navigating the way staff are compensated to the liking of those staff is just ridiculous. It's not the customer's business to know internal matters like taht. The store is owned and operated by the same business that sold them the models from their online store.

When the customer has paid, just through a different channel, that's when the line starts to get fuzzy.

And THAT post is exactly WHY the policy often needs to be spelled out. There really isn't anything fuzzy about this at all. If I buy online or at a different GW store - then the store I didn't buy from sees ZERO sales and creeps that much closer to getting closed. People seem to think that, because both the stores and GW Corporate both carry the same boiler plate that they are literally the exact same thing and nothing could be further from the truth.

You can imagine how someone not familiar with GW's staff incentive scheme may be a little baffled to be told they aren't entitled to use a table in a GW store because they've spent £££$$$ in another GW store or through their website.

No. I can't imagine it. At all. Until you said it just now, I was unaware of the staff incentive. I have also NEVER been baffled by not being allowed to take up a table at a store where I never bought anything. Like I said, buying at a different store or online from home does nothing for the store I DIDN't buy from even though they are all "GW". I would never expect to be allowed to take space in any business where the store hadn't directly received some of my money. I don't understand why gamers struggle so hard w/that concept.

Furthermore the legal entity that both sold the customer the product and invited them to come play at a given day and time are the same company.

Barring someone from participating because they aren't navigating the way staff are compensated to the liking of those staff is just ridiculous. It's not the customer's business to know internal matters like taht. The store is owned and operated by the same business that sold them the models from their online store.

Nope. Another common misconception. For reasons of risk/financial liability there are layers in between. Really though, it doesn't matter. It's a pretty basic concept. If a store's sales slip below a certain point, the store gets closed. The fact that the players in the store all bought stuff through other channels won't matter. If THAT specific store does not have sufficient numbers, it WILL close. Between that and the fact that most GW stores have limited space to begin with means table space is at a premium. So of COURSE tables are prioritized to people who actually spend money IN the store.

Again, baffling to me that people are struggling with this concept ..

That just shows how utterly f'd up GW's management structure is/was because people who buy from FW are paying people.

The more angry emails they get due to silly managers turning away paying customers the better.

Yeah ... they paid Forge World. Not the store. If FW and/or GW posts a billion dollar profit but an individual GW store has poor sales ... the store gets closed. In terms of keeping a store running/operating and it's employee/s paid, buying from that store (or ordering online from the in-store kiosk) are the only sales that matter.

Right, so if you need to return something to Target, for instance, but it's more convenient to go to a different store than the original purchase, you don't because that's not where you made the purchase?

Right, so if you need to return something to Target, for instance, but it's more convenient to go to a different store than the original purchase, you don't because that's not where you made the purchase?

This isn't even remotely applicable to the topic.

EDIT: To be clear - I'm not saying you have to buy everything from the store you're playing in. I'm just saying that if you're someone who never (or only rarely) buys from a store, you shouldn't be surprised if table space gets prioritized to people who DO frequently buy there. Again, I sincerely don't get the resistance to this concept ...

Only because you don't understand what I'm getting at.

Only because you don't understand what I'm getting at.

It's just so simple. GW looks at a store's bottom line. Is it generating sales? If the answer is "no" then it gets closed. Period. They don't care that people bought stuff online from home and took it to play in that store. They look at it like those people will buy online whether there's a store or not and GW can't support a store that isn't registering sales. That's all that really matters.

So if you were running a store, and you knew this was the case, you would also prioritize the actual paying customers. That's pretty basic imo ...

To clarify returning a product to a GW shop with a receipt wont matter where it was purchased from, yes a manager might internally be upset about the fact it may effect their sales but any returns I have had to do have been done graciously.

Table space is a different thing, in buying the models you receive the model, it doesn't come with a token for X free games at a GW of your choice. You buy the models, you get the models. Playing in store is an additional privilege extended by the store/managers/companies and usually done at managers discretion (must be painted, or all GW, or GW and FW, they set the standards). As that manager is responsible for that store they set the standards that best suit THEIR customer base, that is the tables exist to facilitate sales that keep THAT store open.

To clarify returning a product to a GW shop with a receipt wont matter where it was purchased from, yes a manager might internally be upset about the fact it may effect their sales but any returns I have had to do have been done graciously.

Table space is a different thing, in buying the models you receive the model, it doesn't come with a token for X free games at a GW of your choice. You buy the models, you get the models. Playing in store is an additional privilege extended by the store/managers/companies and usually done at managers discretion (must be painted, or all GW, or GW and FW, they set the standards). As that manager is responsible for that store they set the standards that best suit THEIR customer base, that is the tables exist to facilitate sales that keep THAT store open.

Have an exalt!

Tycho wrote:

Only because you don't understand what I'm getting at.

It's just so simple. GW looks at a store's bottom line. Is it generating sales? If the answer is "no" then it gets closed. Period. They don't care that people bought stuff online from home and took it to play in that store. They look at it like those people will buy online whether there's a store or not and GW can't support a store that isn't registering sales. That's all that really matters.

So if you were running a store, and you knew this was the case, you would also prioritize the actual paying customers. That's pretty basic imo ...

But it's not that simple. Firstly, when running a chain you take a holistic view, it is perfectly feasible for a loss making store to be allowed to remain open if it is felt it offers other value to the company (prominent location, keeping competition from moving in, etc..)

Secondly, as I was getting at with my Target example, when you make a purchase from a company, you're a customer of that company not the store. In the case of indys, that's a distinction without a difference, but in the case of GW it isn't unreasonable to think their purchases of GW product entitle them to service in a GW location. How you would react if when making a return to Target the clerk turned around and sai they wouldn't accept your return because their KPIs included keeping returns below a certain value?

I've had hours of work dumped in my lap down the years when a customer has made a purchase from a different store but come to mine for after sales support, it's no fun, but you suck it up because it isn't the customers fault they don't understand that you're on commission and not only did they give that commission to another's staff member in another store, counting towards their KPIs and not yours, but they're taking you off the sales floor and robbing you of the opportunity to generate your own sales. It comes with the territory of working for a multi location retailer.

If a GW manager has people using GW product bought from GW elsewhere (bought from a competitor is a slightly different prospect) in store, then that's their opportunity to persuade them to buy from the store in future, not the chance to be unprofessional and play pocket dictator with store resources.

As a sales person, it's a total gut punch when a customer comes into your store having made a substantial purchase from another location in your company, but the professional tries to make it into a future opportunity, not run the risk of generating ill will and costing the whole company a customer.

But it's not that simple. Firstly, when running a chain you take a holistic view, it is perfectly feasible for a loss making store to be allowed to remain open if it is felt it offers other value to the company (prominent location, keeping competition from moving in, etc..)

You're wanting GW stores to run in a way GW stores don't really run. Loss making GW stores get closed. Period.

Secondly, as I was getting at with my Target example, when you make a purchase from a company, you're a customer of that company not the store. In the case of indys, that's a distinction without a difference, but in the case of GW it isn't unreasonable to think their purchases of GW product entitle them to service in a GW location. How you would react if when making a return to Target the clerk turned around and sai they wouldn't accept your return because their KPIs included keeping returns below a certain value?

I would crap myself at a front line clerk knowing what a the KPIs even were. Seriously though, you're talking about two different things here. I've NEVER had an issues with a GW return ever. Regardless of where it was purchased from and returned to. It's completely different than being entitled to an implied service because you bought a product. Like Melcavuk said, when you buy a GW product, you get the product. Not the product and a token to play in a GW store. When I buy a car from Toyota, I don't expect that I can go back to the dealership and use their facilities to wash my car.

Most store owners will allow you to p[lay with an army you didn't buy from them, but only provided you aren't taking the space from someone who DID. There's nothing wrong with that and that's my point. Managers can, will, and SHOULD prioritze the customers who put money in their pockets. Yeah, as good sales people they should also be working to build relationships with the other customers, but I don't think it's unreasonable to favor the one who's currently putting food on your table.

If a GW manager has people using GW product bought from GW elsewhere (bought from a competitor is a slightly different prospect) in store, then that's their opportunity to persuade them to buy from the store in future, not the chance to be unprofessional and play pocket dictator with store resources.

Most stores barely have room for the one small table they've got. I completely agree that it should be looked at as a future sales opportunity, but really, is that hard to see the manager's pov here? If I've got players in store who buy from me all the time (or at least on a regular basis) and players who don't - I'm not kicking out the players who don't, but I am for sure prioritizing the players who DO.

 Peregrine wrote:
You didn't use those words, but that's what you're describing.

I didn't use those words precisely because that is not what I am describing. I'm describing being reasonable and respectful to other human beings - something that even applies to retail clerks, believe it or not.

 Peregrine wrote:
In a normal for-profit store you walk in and buy the thing you want, and if the store doesn't give you what you want you go elsewhere.

Sure - at a WH Store, the things you would be buying would be models. They don't sell table time. Remember? That's the topic ITT: table use is up to the manager's discretion.

Ok, you can set the whole returns thing to one side, I was drawing a line between GW and another retail chain, and how you'd reasonably expect every store in a retail chain to extend the same level of service to a customer who had made a purchase from the chain regardless of location, I chose returns as the most common.

Refusal to allow a customer of GW to use a table provided for the use of GW customers because the manager deems some customers more equal than others based on how they contribute to their wage packet is analogous to having a return turned down by a clerk in a store for the same reasons.

I'm not pretending for one second I don't see the manager's POV. You don't think that on some level, every time I had a customer require an hour or more of my time to sort out their problems after someone else had made £100s in commission from them and didn't have to deal with their gak, I didn't want to scream at them to feth off back to the store they bought it from and let me get on with dealing with customers that would actually make me money? Of course I did, but you don't, you smile, you act like a professional and look for an opportunity to get the customer to come back next time they were looking to buy.

Sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn't, but you sure as hell made sure that the image of the company was upheld ahead of most anything else.

EDIT: Aimed at Tycho before Manchu got in the way!

@Azrael13 - Surely there are more options than on the one hand offending a potential (however unlikely) customer by crudely casting them aside and on the other hand totally ignoring the fact that some customers are actually buying things from you when you know that they know they have other, and in some cases cheaper and more convenient options, and that the reason they choose to support you even if it is more expensive and less convenient is because you manage a rapport with them and offer them a venue for play. There is room, between those ends of the spectrum for an effective salesperson to cultivate that rapport with the paying customers without being a jerk to the tirekickers and gamestore hobos.

I think the issue with using the tables without spending can be summed up by the following example (names masked for decency)

I play in Store X, a fellow local gamer wanted to organise a Horus Heresy league in shop after the release of prospero (the boxed game). Despite attempts to garner interest nobody in shop was very interested (more of a Sigmar Scene), so instead he pitched it to gamers from store Y

Now All gamers from store Y love their manager, bought their prospero, kits and paints from Y, and then would be coming over to store X to use both gaming tables for their games, preventing any customers from X from gaming in the shop despite having spent money there.

In that example I feel it is completely acceptable for the Manager of Store X to prioritise his own customers, over providing gaming space for players who have no intentions of spending any money and just want to use the store with bigger better tables to game on.

Edit: Manager not owner, my bad

, I was drawing a line between GW and another retail chain,

GW ≠ Target

There are more Targets within 10 miles of my house than there are GW stores in the next few states combined. Target sells common items that everyone needs everyday. GW is a niche luxury retailer in a niche non-essential product category. You simply cannot compare the two at all. I know what you were trying to do, but it just doesn't work like that in this instance.

Refusal to allow a customer of GW to use a table provided for the use of GW customers because the manager deems some customers more equal than others based on how they contribute to their wage packet is analogous to having a return turned down by a clerk in a store for the same reasons.

No. It really isn't analogous, and this is because, again, GW stores work differently than you want them to. This isn't some petty little "If I get them to buy from me I can hit my quota and get a 5cents per hour raise" type of deal. It's a "If my sales drop I don't have a job anymore" type of deal. I'm sure there are some bad apples out there, but this is, in principle, a much less petty thing than you seem to think it is.

And yeah, if you've got no one on your tables that day and two people you've never met before walk in with legit GW armies and you tell them to sod off - that's just bad business. For sure. So I'm not advocating that either.

I'm not pretending for one second I don't see the manager's POV. You don't think that on some level, every time I had a customer require an hour or more of my time to sort out their problems after someone else had made £100s in commission from them and didn't have to deal with their gak, I didn't want to scream at them to feth off back to the store they bought it from and let me get on with dealing with customers that would actually make me money? Of course I did, but you don't, you smile, you act like a professional and look for an opportunity to get the customer to come back next time they were looking to buy.

Sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn't, but you sure as hell made sure that the image of the company was upheld ahead of most anything else.

I'm not sure you ARE seeing the manager's POV here though. You seem to think it has to do with them getting a small incentive bonus and it's (unfortunately) a hell of a lot bigger than that. That's why your Target example falls apart. GW's system is set up to compete with itself. Target isn't. Since you brought Key Performance Indicators into it - we can start there -

GW isn't tracking where you play with the models you bought online. GW isn't taking surveys of what stores people are going to. GW isn't watching what FW products get bought online and taken into a store for league play. The KPI they ARE tracking, is the store's bottom line. They don't have the corporate culture that is overly concerned with how it looks to close a corporate store and will do so with almost cavalier readiness. The managers often aren't even given a whole lot of time to get sales up. Sell now or be in the unemployment line tomorrow. Oh, and by the way, the entire time we're telling you to get your sales up, we're also directly completing with you. So good luck.

I wish it was set up differently, but the fact of the matter is, this is the reality the managers are dealing with. So while I would hope no manager would be overly tyrannical about it, I can't really blame them for saying "You haven't bought anything from me. That guy bought 2000pts of Orks last week. He gets the table space."

 Manchu wrote:
@Azrael13 - Surely there are more options than on the one hand offending a potential (however unlikely) customer by crudely casting them aside and on the other hand totally ignoring the fact that some customers are actually buying things from you when you know that they know they have other, and in some cases cheaper and more convenient options, and that the reason they choose to support you even if it is more expensive and less convenient is because you manage a rapport with them and offer them a venue for play. There is room, between those ends of the spectrum for an effective salesperson to cultivate that rapport with the paying customers without being a jerk to the tirekickers and gamestore hobos.

I honestly can't see a way you can "get them to step aside as soon as a paying customer needs a seat" and not leave them feeling like a second class citizen, no.

Working further up the chain, having a conversation about whether people making a purchase may want to book a table later that week etc may help keep the tables busy with paying customers and naturally inhibit the opportunities for "outsiders" to get a game in.

But no matter how politely it's presented the message of "move aside, this person is better than you because they made the choice to buy from the same company in a different manner" is going to be a tough concept to sell and a hard pill to swallow.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Seriously though, if people are choosing to pay full price for product but are deliberately choosing not to do so from their local GW store, to the point where it's hurting sales to the degree that the store is in danger of closure, that's probably indicative of a bigger problem.

People buying elsewhere at a discount and using tables is a different matter.

@Melcavuk

In that case, manager of X gets to decide whether the 30k event is a good opportunity to move HH product or whether it is just going to put out the paying AoS crowd. But that is why this is best left up to that manager's discretion.

@Azrael13

I don't think the manager should ever say 'step aside' barring some specific circumstances where that woul actually be reasonable. But neither do I think a good customer is one who throws a fit when they are slightly inconvenienced.

This is the part of the relationship that is up to the customer,

I dont walk into the WH Store with all my gear, feeling entitled to a table. I go in, see if there are tables available, ask if I can play, then go back to get my stuff. It'd be even smarter on my part to call ahead.

Whether customer or salesperson, we're all playing the game to get what we want - why not play smart?

People buying elsewhere at a discount and using tables is a different matter.

No it isn't. That's just trying to move the goal posts.

If I'm a manager and I know you occasionally buy elsewhere, I don't really care (and in my experience most GWmangers don't care) as long as you are also buying from me form time to time. However, if you don't ever buy from me, and then only want to use my tables ... sorry. Probably not gonna happen. There's one table in most GW stores and if I'm the store manager, that's going to the paying customers. The stores aren't rec centers or charities. They're businesses. Yeah, if you come in during slow times or off-peak hours I probably wouldn't care that much as there's always the chance to get you to buy things like paint, etc. from me, but like I said, you need a table and a paying customer needs a table ... hmmmmmm ... let me think about that one ....

Whether customer or salesperson, we're all playing the game to get what we want - why not play smart?

Yes, and I do not believe moving people on because they don't happen to have made a purchase in a while is smart.

EDIT
Note I'm specifically objecting to interrupting people, less so simply saying "no" to gaming/painting space, that is at least easier to execute without offending anyone.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tycho wrote:

People buying elsewhere at a discount and using tables is a different matter.

No it isn't. That's just trying to move the goal posts.

No, it's not, because the basis of this conversation is people buying direct, just not from the store.

Azrael13, I think we are probably on the same page and the internet is just distorting things lol.

Sounds about right, call it a draw!

No, it's not, because the basis of this conversation is people buying direct, just not from the store.

And, at least as GW is concerned, that's your problem. Like I said before, for the purposes of sales, KPIs etc., GW doesn't look at its stores like other retail chains do. Target has incredibly complex interaction models and very deep pockets. They can keep a store open that's losing money because they're bale to track and see the fact that even though it isn't a huge money maker, it works as a hub for other community interactions and is worth it to the brand of Target to stay open.

The way GW judges their stores means that each one is on its own once it's been set up. Little to no help in terms of cash infusions etc., or any of the other things retail chains usually expect. So when you say "bought direct", the way they judge their stores, "direct" only counts if you bought from that store. So again - it's a case of you (and honestly me too) wanting the GW stores to work differently than GW currently has them working.

Should you remove a customer who's currently on a table? nah. Let them complete the game (or at least complete whatever round they are on). On the other hand, should a customer who buys the majority of their stuff elsewhere reasonably expect a store to accomodate me in the same way it would a regular who buys there all the time? Well ... apparently if I'm a gamer I guess ...

Tycho wrote:

No, it's not, because the basis of this conversation is people buying direct, just not from the store.

And, at least as GW is concerned, that's your problem. Like I said before, for the purposes of sales, KPIs etc., GW doesn't look at its stores like other retail chains do. Target has incredibly complex interaction models and very deep pockets. They can keep a store open that's losing money because they're bale to track and see the fact that even though it isn't a huge money maker, it works as a hub for other community interactions and is worth it to the brand of Target to stay open.

The way GW judges their stores means that each one is on its own once it's been set up. Little to no help in terms of cash infusions etc., or any of the other things retail chains usually expect. So when you say "bought direct", the way they judge their stores, "direct" only counts if you bought from that store. So again - it's a case of you (and honestly me too) wanting the GW stores to work differently than GW currently has them working.

Which is a problem for GW to solve, or it's staff members to tolerate or move on. It isn't coincidence that staffing issues have been in the chairman's notes in several FYE reports over the last couple of years, clearly the system is flawed.

None of this is the customer's problem. If they've spent £500 this month on GW.com and go into store to play, they're clearly a more valuable customer to GW than one who bought a Tac Squad this month, but happened to do it from that same store yesterday.

It's an issue, but it isn't one that the customer shouod be affected by.

Should you remove a customer who's currently on a table? nah. Let them complete the game (or at least complete whatever round they are on). On the other hand, should a customer who buys the majority of their stuff elsewhere reasonably expect a store to accomodate me in the same way it would a regular who buys there all the time? Well ... apparently if I'm a gamer I guess ...

Yes, they should. Buy a GW product from a GW direct channel, you are a customer of GW. Buy it from a FLGS, you are a customer of that FLGS. If you're a customer of GW, why wouldn't you expect service from one of their shops?

Irrespective of all the reasons you keep rolling out that Target is different, you're still missing the point (by getting hung up in the choice of example, rather than looking at the point I'm making, still, one more go eh?) If you've bought something from anywhere in a company, it is not unreasonable to assume your custom is equally valuable to that company irrespective of where it occurs. Therefore, being told you're less valuable as a customer because of the location you chose to make a purchase from despite it being the same company is not good.

You're getting hung up on being able to "expect" a service. You buy a model from GW you get the model, there is no entitelement to followup service via in store gaming through that purchase. It isn't part of that transaction.

Your box of tactical marines entitles you to that one box of tactical marines, it doesn't come with inherent rights to X amount of gaming time as you have bought it. At no point in the transaction from the shop were you advertised to use it in a different shop (infact when buying from a GW I get invited back to that GW to use my models, not "well why not head one town over to use this model you just bought from me).

The shop tables are a privilege not a right guaranteed because you spent X online.

And by store manager standards buying X amount online and having it delivered to the store, not using the store terminal is actually potentially considered a black mark on the store. If a customer COULD have made it down to that money, and IS infact coming in to collect it, question are asked as to why that store manager didn't manage to sell said products through their shop. To you it might seem like you spent 500 at GW and are therefore more valuable than the guy who bought the tactical squad but from a store performance criteria that customer buying the tactical squad is justifying the stores retail location, your online purchase doesn't.

Again, why's any of that's the customer's problem?

That GW's staff incentive scheme is flawed and can cause staff to act in a negative manner to people who spend more money with the company in total over people who happen to spend their pocket money in store is a problem for GW to solve.

As for entitlement, I'm pretty sure most of the managers I've let offer me a demo have, at some point or another, used the availability of in store gaming as an enticement to buy.

 Melcavuk wrote:
You're getting hung up on being able to "expect" a service. You buy a model from GW you get the model, there is no entitelement to followup service via in store gaming through that purchase. It isn't part of that transaction.

There's no entitlement through purchase. There's just the gakky customer experience of being treated worse because of what sales channel you purchased your product through.

 Manchu wrote:
I didn't use those words precisely because that is not what I am describing. I'm describing being reasonable and respectful to other human beings - something that even applies to retail clerks, believe it or not.

No, you're describing a community of friends that goes way beyond basic politeness. Being respectful and reasonable would be things like not swearing at the GW employee when you return a defective product, and politely explaining the situation and letting them resolve the replacement. That does NOT include things like buying extra stuff to be nice to them, or trying to figure out the mood at a new store. You wouldn't "feel out" the community if you went to a different grocery store, you'd just go in and buy your stuff.

Sure - at a WH Store, the things you would be buying would be models. They don't sell table time. Remember? That's the topic ITT: table use is up to the manager's discretion.

They may not explicitly charge money for the tables, but it's implicit when you buy GW models that GW hosts in-store gaming. Easy access to in-store gaming is a major reason why people buy GW games, even if the game isn't 100% ideal for them. So essentially what you're saying here is that GW should get the extra revenue from the promise of in-store gaming, but then their individual employees should have the ability to deny access to anyone that doesn't help their personal sales quotas.

Of course the real problem here is that we're talking about a GW store, where GW's idiotic retail policies limit in-store gaming space to 1-2 tables at most and there's often a shortage of space. At an independent store there are likely to be 10+ tables (up to 50 or more, depending on the store!) and plenty of space for everyone who wants to play there. The conclusion is that you shouldn't buy from or play at GW's own stores, and they should be allowed to die for the good of the community.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Melcavuk wrote:
And by store manager standards buying X amount online and having it delivered to the store, not using the store terminal is actually potentially considered a black mark on the store. If a customer COULD have made it down to that money, and IS infact coming in to collect it, question are asked as to why that store manager didn't manage to sell said products through their shop. To you it might seem like you spent 500 at GW and are therefore more valuable than the guy who bought the tactical squad but from a store performance criteria that customer buying the tactical squad is justifying the stores retail location, your online purchase doesn't.

This is only a problem because of GW idiocy. A reasonable person would see that most people aren't going to be interested in making a special trip out to a store to use the store's computer to make an online order. This isn't 1990 anymore, people have their own internet access and can buy something from home without needing a store employee's help. And that reasonable person would also understand that if a customer is placing an order to be picked up at a local store, instead of having it shipped directly to their home, it's probably because they're expecting to be at that store to play games/paint/whatever and the store's existence is contributing to their decision to make the purchase.

@Peregrine

You feel the limit of courtesy owed to anyone who is not a friend is mustering the forbearance to not swear at them. OK ...

I realize you are probably (hopefully) exaggerating for effect but even so your point seems to be that because GW is a business (instead of your friend) it categorically owes you something that (a) it does not sell and (b) you did not buy and - here is the kicker - you are within your rights to demand it so long as that demand is not expressed using foul language/you are not acting like a complete (as opposed to partal?) dick.

And your rationalization is that part of the value of the item actually offered for purchase is the implicit promise that you can play with it in a WH stores. But buying a kit is not enough to actually play a game. You need other kits, you need skills and tools to assemble and paint them, you need rules, you need dice and a measuring tape, you need terrain. At what point have you purchased enough to trigger this "implicit" clause in your contract with GW where it owes you a table? I hope the absurdity of the question reveals the absurdity of your premise. But for the sake of argument, let's just assume you have purchased all of it right down to the Citadel glue. Even then, there is no bargain, not even an implicit one, that GW owes you a table at a particular time convenient to you. Even restaurants, which unlike WH stores exist only to host diners, make no such promise barring reservations. And GW has no reservations policy. All you can say is, there are tables there and people sometimes play GW games on them. This custom doesn't amount to a promise.

Furthermore, you absolutley require an opponent to play these games. So what if nobody wants to play with you (hypothetically, because you are that guy who thinks not swearing at others is the limit of courtesy owed to acquaintances) and so a game is impossible? Or are you also suggesting that in such circumstances the GW employee is duty-bound to suffer through a game with you when no one else wants to play with you? In that case, it seems like you are the one confusing businesses with friends. Because only a true friend would deign to spend their leisure time with our hypothetical miserable bore.

Concluding that it's "idiotic" that GW should equip WH stores with so few tables assumes that WH stores - again, like restaurants - exist to host customers playing GW games. I do agree with you completely that online discount retailers have changed the market such that brick and mortar gaming stores have to compete as venues for gaming in addition to being a place where you can buy stuff. Why is it any different for WH stores? One important reason is, GW is not some kind of chain of local gaming stores. The LGS gets by on gamers while the WH store is about creating new GW customers. Gaming in a WH store is a kind of living retail display (hence all the policies about playing only GW games with GW products) - not a feature to compete against online sellers - which let's keep in mind also includes GW. In fact, this is why online sales from the GW website are not credited to a WH store even when the items are delivered to that store. As explained by Tycho above, a WH store stays open as a function of [i]its[i] sales.

Like you, I am obviously not a new customer. I buy stuff from the WH store at full retail on condition that the WH store can offer me something online retailers (including the GW webstore!) cannot ... namely, a venue for gaming. To me, that includes more than just a table and use of terrain that the poor manager has been forced to pay for out of her paycheck. It includes an enjoyable atmosphere - which is something that the store clerk requires discretion to manage, including as to how tables are used. And here too is where I come in, as a customer not as a friend, to contribute to time spent there being pleasant by conducting myself in a reasonable and respectful manner (I define it as more than just forebearing to curse out the clerk). But I also realize that I am not the store's key demographic. Notwithstanding that I make purchaes there, I am not the coveted new customer.

As to the grocery store analogy - if all I wanted to do at a WH Store is buy a kit and leave then sure there would be no need to get a sense of the atmosphere - and no need to consider whether GW owes you a table to play. But we are actually talking about going to a WH Store to spend hours of free time enjoying a social hobby. So yes it is reasonable to check out the vibe of the store to see if it's suitable.

 Manchu wrote:
You feel the limit of courtesy owed to anyone who is not a friend is mustering the forbearance to not swear at them. OK ...

I said no such thing, please don't make straw man arguments. I gave that as one example of something that is owed by basic politeness, the same kind of thing you give to all retail employees you deal with.

(a) it does not sell

And this is simply wrong. GW sells table space as an implicit part of the games they sell. They market it to you by telling you all about how they have a network of GW stores everywhere, so no matter where you go you'll be able to play the game you just bought (unlike all those competitors, where you might not get to play again if you leave your original group). It's just like how WOTC markets MTG with FNM events, "wherever you go there is MTG to play, so buy MTG". The fact that you don't sign a contract for the use of the table doesn't negate the fact that GW is, implicitly or explicitly depending on the employee, promising it as part of the package you get by buying into a GW game.

But buying a kit is not enough to actually play a game. You need other kits, you need skills and tools to assemble and paint them, you need rules, you need dice and a measuring tape, you need terrain. At what point have you purchased enough to trigger this "implicit" clause in your contract with GW where it owes you a table?

This question makes no sense. Of course you aren't going to play a game if you don't buy all of the pieces required to play a game. That's why GW tries to sell you their games as a complete package involving multiple kits/paint/glue/rules/etc, not as single kits.

Furthermore, you absolutley require an opponent to play these games. So what if nobody wants to play with you (hypothetically, because you are that guy who thinks not swearing at others is the limit of courtesy owed to acquaintances) and so a game is impossible? Or are you also suggesting that in such circumstances the GW employee is duty-bound to suffer through a game with you when no one else wants to play with you.

You're missing the point there. GW is not selling you a game of 40k whenever you want, they're selling you access to GW's in-store gaming space where there are typically other 40k players to play with. If nobody wants to play with you then GW hasn't failed to deliver anything, and of course the store employee isn't obligated to play a game with you (they might, however, in an attempt to sell you more stuff).

Concluding that it's "idiotic" that GW should equip WH stores with so few tables assumes that WH stores - again, like restaurants - exist to host customers playing GW games.

Of course they exist for that purpose, why else would GW bother to have physical retail stores in low-traffic areas? You'd have a point if GW put their stores in high-traffic locations where having a physical retail store lets them get attention from random people walking by and potentially find new customers, but most of GW's stores seem to be hidden in random low-traffic strip malls. If you aren't going there specifically to play a game on GW's tables then there's no reason to ever go to one outside of maybe the occasional "I need more of one specific paint for this model tonight" run.

But the real reason it's idiotic is that independent stores usually have more tables available (along with discounts, non-GW products, etc). The independent store is offering a superior product if you want to buy GW stuff, so there's no reason to go to the GW store if you have a decent independent store in your area. Why go to the store with 1-2 tables when you can go to the one with 10+ and not have to worry about having too many people?

As explained by Tycho above, a WH store stays open as a function of [i]its[i] sales.

Explaining it doesn't make GW's decision any less stupid. It's clear to any reasonable observer that many online sales are happening as a direct result of the GW store existing, so those sales should count towards GW's calculations about the net value of the store. GW's handling of the situation is lazy and incompetent accounting, not a reasonable business decision.

@Peregrine

Quoting your hyperbole back to you doesn't constitute a strawman. But I can certainly understand why you'd like to backpeddle on characterizing yourself as a jerk. Again I get that (or at least hope that) you don't actually act that way IRL - the fact remains that you apparently feel you're owed a table whenever you darken the door of a WH store, regardless of any factor other than having at some point/through whatever channel purchased GW product.

You appear to justify this entitlement by arguing that (a) you relied on GW providing space for you to game as part of your decision to buy GW products and (b) GW caused you to reasonably infer that you could rely on it providing that space. Again, setting aside the threshold question - what amount of purchases is necessary to trigger this reliance? - can you cite any actual, current GW marketing patter to support the inference made by you on which you say GW customers supposedly rely (and yet I don't), namely that that GW will provide you with gaming space if you purchase GW products? Just to be clear, I'm not asking where GW makes that specific promise - I'm asking where GW says anything at all from which it could be reasonably inferred that anyone who buys GW product will be provided space by GW to play GW games.

Turning back to how many (or rather how few) tables you find at a WH store ... doesn't this in fact tend to militate against that very inference? Could it possibly be that what you are calling "idiotic" is actually just something you refuse to understand because it contradicts your underlying assumption? To wit, you claim WH stores exist to deliver on the implicit promise GW makes to provide gaming space to whoever buys their products; ergo it is idiotic to have so few tables. OR it could be that - GW made no promise, implicitly or otherwise, to provide play space and those tables are not there for the same reason there are tables at a LGS because the WH store is not and is not even intended to be a LGS.

Also - we have had two GW/WH stores where I am in the last decade. Both were/are in high traffic/affluent areas. If your WH store is hidden away in some obscure locale and has too few tables and remains open then it stands to reason that it is doing better than you are assuming.