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.

Thing is, GW already knows their customers only last for 2 or 3 years before maybe going into maintenance mode with minimal buying.

 Denny wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
People who enjoy painting all the models in between? Insanity

YMMV.

I can't say I enjoy every model (in the same way as when I go to the gym I don't enjoy every rep) but the pay off is fantastic and makes everything worthwhile. There is massive achievement in spending months or years working hard to achieve a goal. Nothing else comes close.

As I said in my post.... just above the bit you quoted

and I'm sure LOTS of people love painting the last squad in an army and seeing it all completed.

People who enjoy painting all the models in between? Insanity

The reason the last squad is enjoyable is because of the torture you went through to get there.

That's why IMO wargaming models are not comparable to a lot of other hobbies as far as hours burned per dollar spent.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Thing is, GW already knows their customers only last for 2 or 3 years before maybe going into maintenance mode with minimal buying.

Only?
Dont you mean 1 or 2 years if their lucky?

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Thing is, GW already knows their customers only last for 2 or 3 years before maybe going into maintenance mode with minimal buying.

But is that because the prices burn out the customers?

GW tracks customer spend really well, and they've gotten pretty good at optimizing the initial army collection revenue.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Denny wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
People who enjoy painting all the models in between? Insanity

YMMV.

I can't say I enjoy every model (in the same way as when I go to the gym I don't enjoy every rep) but the pay off is fantastic and makes everything worthwhile. There is massive achievement in spending months or years working hard to achieve a goal. Nothing else comes close.

As I said in my post.... just above the bit you quoted

and I'm sure LOTS of people love painting the last squad in an army and seeing it all completed.

People who enjoy painting all the models in between? Insanity

The reason the last squad is enjoyable is because of the torture you went through to get there.

That's why IMO wargaming models are not comparable to a lot of other hobbies as far as hours burned per dollar spent.

Depends on your hobbies. If you do anything creative (writing, painting, acting) then significant parts of your hobby time constitutes of being frustrated and hating what you are doing. Ditto any exercise/sport, or anything outdoors.Most hobbies require hard work and persevering through points where you feel like quitting because it’s hard.
And that’s the thing; carrying on when you want to quit is enjoyable. Far more enjoyable than an easy hobby. I understand not everyone feels that way, but I think you need to realise that for some people the fact it is really hard and maddening halfway through is WHY we enjoy it.

I like not giving up. And I like being challenged.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
GW tracks customer spend really well, and they've gotten pretty good at optimizing the initial army collection revenue.

But not so good at retention, looks like. Maybe it has to do with the prices, who knows.

GW recognizes that retention is not important - once they get the first year or two's spend, it always tapers off, and GW doesn't need you, so they don't care if you leave. GW got it's money.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
GW recognizes that retention is not important - once they get the first year or two's spend, it always tapers off, and GW doesn't need you, so they don't care if you leave. GW got it's money.

Which is an incredibly stupid business strategy for GW to have when paired with their strategy of doing zero marketing and depending on their customers to sell the game. GW absolutely needs veteran players to stay in the hobby because they need people showing off fully painted armies in their stores, people convincing their friends to get into the game, etc. If 40k had nothing but kids whining until their parents buy them a starter box of space marines and then promptly dropping the hobby it would be the start of GW's death spiral.

 Denny wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Denny wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
People who enjoy painting all the models in between? Insanity

YMMV.

I can't say I enjoy every model (in the same way as when I go to the gym I don't enjoy every rep) but the pay off is fantastic and makes everything worthwhile. There is massive achievement in spending months or years working hard to achieve a goal. Nothing else comes close.

As I said in my post.... just above the bit you quoted

and I'm sure LOTS of people love painting the last squad in an army and seeing it all completed.

People who enjoy painting all the models in between? Insanity

The reason the last squad is enjoyable is because of the torture you went through to get there.

That's why IMO wargaming models are not comparable to a lot of other hobbies as far as hours burned per dollar spent.

Depends on your hobbies. If you do anything creative (writing, painting, acting) then significant parts of your hobby time constitutes of being frustrated and hating what you are doing. Ditto any exercise/sport, or anything outdoors.Most hobbies require hard work and persevering through points where you feel like quitting because it’s hard.
And that’s the thing; carrying on when you want to quit is enjoyable. Far more enjoyable than an easy hobby. I understand not everyone feels that way, but I think you need to realise that for some people the fact it is really hard and maddening halfway through is WHY we enjoy it.

I like not giving up. And I like being challenged.

I think you're missing my point a bit.

I don't deny that there's joy in coming out at the end of something difficult. My other hobby is cars and I can say I have a love-hate relationship with my car, it doesn't bloody run (or run right) half the time.

It's just I don't place a high monetary value on the the time burned in frustration***. So saying a box of 5 models costing $50 (or whatever) amounts to $1 per hour because you're going to take 50 hours building them is, IMO, a terrible way of judging value. You're paying $1 an hour for suffering, not fun


***I'd also argue the frustration involved in painting wargaming models is WORSE than a lot of other hobbies because it's tedious monotony. Every hour I work on my car it's something different. Even building and painting an airfix model takes a lot longer than your average GW model, but it's not monotonous hours.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 auticus wrote:
90% of my GW tiime is spent painting. Painting and storytelling are the two things I get out of the hobby more than anything. The pure gamers that are only into gaming and not much else surely exist in great numbers but the people that enjoy painting armies are not a tiny minority in my experience.

I never said the others were pure gamers.... I'm sure LOTS of people love reading fluff, creating army list, theoryhammering and mathhammering, coming up with paint schemes, chatting on internet forums or loitering in their local gaming shops. None of that stuff actually requires buying a model though.

I'm sure LOTS of people love painting the first squad or two of their army, and I'm sure LOTS of people love painting the last squad in an army and seeing it all completed.

People who enjoy painting all the models in between? Insanity

I often work on some models that are pure display pieces which never see a gaming table. I enjoy doing so. But they aren't whole armies and nor are they GW models. I spent well over 100 hours on a Spitfire that only cost me $50AUD and actually enjoyed it because it's not monotonous like painting a whole army.

Perhaps some crazy folk find the monotony soothing or something, lol.

Count me as one of these crazy people. Love building kits, love painting. Hell, I even love clipping things off the sprues. I don’t game any GW games much anymore at all, it’s mainly historicals, simply because I have friends that play FOW, Team Yankee, Saga, Bolt Action etc. I don’t have any friends that play GW games, and I’m not really in the hobby just for the sake of playing games - I can’t stand playing strangers and I hate tourneys. It’s a total social thing for me - if we can’t drink beer, listen to death metal and have a laugh and some serious banter while we push little toy soldiers around, frankly, I’m not interested in playing.

Building and painting is my de-stressor after work. I am a faculty head at a huge senior high school, and my job is full on. I interact with hundreds of people a day, and when I’m not dealing with the roller coaster of emotions that are teenagers, I’m managing adult staff (who tend to be worse). After work, I need to be alone for a few hours with just some paint, glue, plastic mans, a good scotch and some heavy metal.

Agreed... assembling/painting stuff while there's something put on the TV just to listen to from time to time is one of the ways I make sure I won't build up enough stress that one day I go to work with a flamethrower.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Thing is, GW already knows their customers only last for 2 or 3 years before maybe going into maintenance mode with minimal buying.

I paid full retail for 10+ years, with a WD subscription for 5 years.
More some years than others, but a couple hundred bux plus magazines.
I bet most others would do similarly if GW gave good reasons, treated with respect, delivered as good as it gets, and so on.
But, GW doesn't.
It takes as much as possible and gives as little as necessary.
Oh, of course, but what about the FAQs and codexes and all the pulp fiction.
Infinite zeroes still add to zero,
and half-a$$ed everything still ends up half-a$$ed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
GW recognizes that retention is not important - once they get the first year or two's spend, it always tapers off, and GW doesn't need you, so they don't care if you leave. GW got it's money.

Which is an incredibly stupid business strategy for GW to have when paired with their strategy of doing zero marketing and depending on their customers to sell the game. GW absolutely needs veteran players to stay in the hobby because they need people showing off fully painted armies in their stores, people convincing their friends to get into the game, etc. If 40k had nothing but kids whining until their parents buy them a starter box of space marines and then promptly dropping the hobby it would be the start of GW's death spiral.

Exalted.
I figure this death is in full spiral,
because the people that sell the game as it is now, well,
maybe another short generation will follow,
but the culture just isn't as deep.
Add the years of accumulated salt, and, well...
I have a bunch of models that I will never use,
and I will be giving those away when I meet the persons who need them.
I will encourage those persons to buy secondhand, to buy from China, to buy third-party,
to avoid giving GW a dime and to look forward to a 41st Age community driven ruleset.
I did buy Chapter Approved,
and promptly gifted it to a friend who will use it.
Drowning in FAQs is not my idea of a good time.
I have a few "new" White Dwarfs and am not impressed.
More pleasure from looking at pizza shop adverts.
The Battle Reports are sometimes OK,
and the fan armies are of course the highlight,
but, well, AoS, Stormcastes, Primaris...
All sorts of half-a$$ed toys with the base let to rot.
Insulting, really.
Why carry their water, when they do their best to drill holes in my bucket?

For me, it's a case of am I receiving value for my money, and the answer is definitively no. And I'm a keen painter, who spends hours cleaning up mould lines, assembling and painting (to an admittedly mediocre standard) yet I still think GW charge far too much.
Years ago you could get this many models for this much money, blah, blah, blah, this argument doesn't interest me, I understand prices will rise, and not just due to GW's costs rising, but even so, GW should be ashamed of some of their prices, and I say some, a few of the sets are priced fairly in my opinion.

 Denny wrote:
Fair enough.

I think partly it depends why you buy stuff.

I enjoy painting and modelling as much (maybe more?) than playing. It also takes me ages to paint stuff because I take my time and my wife/son also need my attention (as well as work/family/etc).

Now, if I factor in the painting time as 'fun' then some of the expensive kits don't look like too bad value for money; I'm gonna get hours of fun out of the kit before I've even put it on the table.

If you are a gamer who sees painting stuff as almost a tax for getting your fun then the value for money argument looks a lot less compelling.

I enjoy painting miniatures - I currently have a biweekly painting session getting kids into the hobby.

But I primarily paint to play.

It is why, when GW's rules started really sucking, I ditched both their games and their miniatures.

Had they continued producing overpriced minis, but also continued producing good or at least enjoyable rules, I might well still be playing their games.

Kvetching? Heck, yes!

But playing.

Now, from what I gather, the rules have started getting better again. They are fixing a lot of the problems and listening to their players again.

But... I have to say that getting back on the horse is harder than I expected - I like the new Necromunda figures, and planned on using them for Oldcromunda... but I keep finding things that I would rather spend the money on.

I have fun painting - but there are less expensive things that I can paint with the exact same amount of enjoyment.

And still play games with them - which is the whole point.

So, I can put $25 on a single plastic miniature, or I can buy a whole passel of miniatures from other companies - and get exactly the same amount of enjoyment per figure.

Heck - I would rather put the money towards a Kickstarter, and wait a year than buy a $25 character model.

Your mileage may vary, etc. but....

The Auld Grump - this week we are starting a Mordheim campaign.

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

Heck - I would rather put the money towards a Kickstarter, and wait a year than buy a $25 character model.

I've mostly stopped doing this. I have a ton of KS minis I have little interest in painting, because after - usually more than - a year, I'm sick of still waiting for the mini and have lost interest. Kickstarter is worse than Early Access games at killing interest by release date, at least from my experience. That's pretty low on the scale of value. At least my Cthulhu Wars is perfectly playable without painting/assembly.

I used to buy GW's stuff because I thought I liked playing the game.

In the past year or three, I've come to realize that isn't the case. There's plenty of other better, cheaper games. But I still find myself buying the models, assembling and painting them - though I'll still seek out the cheapest price I can get and avoid the stupidly overpriced character models.

And I simply don't play their games - at least, more than in passing (all of 2 games in 8th edition, about 12 from 6th/7th and maybe a handful from 5th - prior to that, maybe a dozen games of RT & 2nd).

I have to say, I really enjoy putting the models together. A little less on the painting - I only paint because I can't afford to have someone paint my models up for me. Unfortunately, I've only gotten decent it at, but my skills aren't even 'Eavy Metal quality. Just enough to be able to have painted models on the battlefield. Not for a game, but for a session of solo mental 'pew pew'. Which I have found, is good enough for me.

Lets put it this way a space marine comander would set you back the hansome sum of £6:50 later incresed to £8 (I looked in the old White Dwarf) back in 2006 now in 2018 a space marine commander will set you back £14 for exactly the same spure. The inflation to me seemsto have neglected the fact that we have seen economic crash and a fall in the real term wages plus also the fact the inflation rate in the uk is 0.5%

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
GW recognizes that retention is not important...

In your long and sordid history with this site DD you've said some real zingers.

This might be right up the top though.

GW has also reversed that approach. In their last two financial reports (I think that's what they are called?) they specifically call out keeping customers and getting back lapsed customers as priorities.

I believe it's true that a person spends the most in their first year or so of being in the hobby, but I don't think it takes that long for the reduced or maintenance spending year in, year out to eclipse that. And if a person can be convinced to start a new army, it's like getting a new customer all over again.

One thing that hasn't changed with GW is that different products represent vastly different amounts of models for the same money. A start collecting box vs buying characters individually is a really good example.

I'm not at all convinced that people spend the most in the first year.

See, when I started I were just a nipper. I simply didn't have the cash to do stuff properly. So armies were cobbled together from well-meaning presents, and the odd bit of pocket money saving.

Now? Well, I'm doing me sums and I reckon I can afford to drop £200 on a Custards army this weekend. And I'll definitely be having a slice of whatever Morathi's army turns out to be, because Morathi.

That's money I could only dream of spending all those years ago, even adjusting for GW's own inflation.

And that's not accounting for anything else that might be in the pipeline. The year is barely started, and I'm all excite for Custards, Morathi and Undead stuff. Perhaps I'm the odd one out, but I can only speak from my own experience.

I think the prices are mostly OK, for sure I could lament vs. what prices were like back in RT and second edition when a much younger a less grey version of me got into the hobby but the reality is the detail on the models and the general construction of the sprues is genuinely fantastic and much higher than the limited single pose metals that a nostalgic me still loves.

Are there some bad examples in the current range? of course there are, but there were bad examples 20 years ago.

As far as hobbies go I find it reasonable (compare to fishing prices for example). But it all depends on what you get your fun from, how much money you have available to aid in that and ultimately does it net out at a positive experience?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
And that's not accounting for anything else that might be in the pipeline. The year is barely started, and I'm all excite for Custards, Morathi and Undead stuff. Perhaps I'm the odd one out, but I can only speak from my own experience.

I think that's a fair take. I guess the only one who really has complete data on what a first time purchaser tends to buy is GW. I suspect that a new customer is sold some sort of starter type product like start collecting, maybe a codex and some paints? So maybe it's not too much.

I don't really find GW's prices to be crazy, but I don't do 2000 point games. I like 500-1000 with loads of terrain. And talking about the game before playing it so you don't get a bunch of guys with bolters vs 5 tanks.

To get started, the 'recommended bundle' is the boxed game (so 40k, AoS, whatevs), the starter paint set, glue and an undercoat spray. Or at least, it was last time I worked for GW in 2010ish.

You then invite the fledgling hobbyist down to Sunday Beginners. Each week, sometimes just once a month, they'll inevitably add something new. Might be WD, could be just a couple of paints and a brush, could be a large centre piece model - that's left up to them.

But crucially, they're not spending their own money. Because they're kids. A sub-species of human typically characterised as semi-parasitic

They can't do the 'army of their dreams'. They're not the ones going doolally on their new Necromunda board, finally having not only the funds but a wide choice of terrain kits to make it the way you've always craved since, what, 1996ish?

We are. We're the ones with the cashmonies. And being Nerds, we're used to spending our money on toys and trinkets

Heck, as well as the £200ish I may be spending on Custards, I definitely want to add even more to my Necromunda terrain collection. Currently working on a large, ground based LoS challenging pile of tubes and vats and things. I want a set of the Haemotrope reactors to add to that, and maybe some more Plasma or Prometheum pipes. Probably both. I'm looking around £70 from GW for that. Less if I nip over to Darksphere after work.

It's a rare kid that'll be able to match my spending - and that's most months (overtime rules!). Sure, some are incredibly spoiled - I know, I've served them. But they are the exception.

 Chamberlain wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
And that's not accounting for anything else that might be in the pipeline. The year is barely started, and I'm all excite for Custards, Morathi and Undead stuff. Perhaps I'm the odd one out, but I can only speak from my own experience.

I think that's a fair take. I guess the only one who really has complete data on what a first time purchaser tends to buy is GW. I suspect that a new customer is sold some sort of starter type product like start collecting, maybe a codex and some paints? So maybe it's not too much.

GW has been tracking customer spend for years and years. They know very clearly what the arc is for a typical customer, and they know for a fact, supported by years of spend data, that most customers are young guys who buy a lot in the first year or two, and them taper down dramatically, to the point that GW simply doesn't care if they stay on or not, as long as there is a new guy coming in buying a new army, and all the stuff that comes with it.

Dakka is the exception for people who continue playing, and especially those who continue buying.

With Apocalypse / WFB 8 / End Times / AoS, GW found that they could sell a few more models to bulk things up, along with really expensive centerpieces to older gamers if it was outlandish, beyond anything that they had ever seen or bought before, supported by garish OTT rules. Then GW found that they could sell all-new Fantasy not-Space Marines to those same older gamers. Then GW figured out that a simpler rulebook would help hook new people.

But once people have their centerpieces and not-Space Marines, GW knows that spend will drop like a stone, and they're OK with that. I skipped out on hordes and ET and not-SMs. I did buy a smattering of Made To Order, but it's not much money from a GW POV. GW knows I'm not a customer any more, and I've finally figured that out, too.

When I got into 40k in the 90s, a smaller model on a 40mm base like a troll, tyranid warrior, ogre or whatever was $16. Vehicle sized things on a similar base like a warwalker or a hive tyrant was $35-42. A single space marine with a lascannon was $13. Two metal miniatures with special weapons like melta or plasma would also be $13 Characters were $13 and Special characters were $18-25. Most fantasy command groups (champion, musiscian, standard bearer) were $15.

GW prices are pretty much the same when you look at things in todays dollars. The only difference is you are getting current plastic kits instead of 90s metal.

Do i think $50 beasts of nurgle and $45 primaris characters are overpriced? Yep. But they tend to get balanced out by start collecting boxes, starter sets and similar products. When the General's Handbook 2017 and AoS Skirmish came out, GW also put out some money saving bundles there as well.

My personal approach is to use ebay bits sellers and build each character I want exactly how I want them. My primaris captain is an dark imperium LT with a head swap, shoulder pad swap and weapons from vanguard and sternguard kits. Oh, I think I may have given him a 30k helmet crest. I made a chaplain in a very similar fashion. I plan on doing something similar with cataphractii legs, a grey knight terminator chest piece and parts to make a primaris librarian. No way I was going to spend $45 a pop on those guys. But if I did, it would really be okay given the deal I've already gotten on Primaris stuff from Dark Imperium.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
GW has been tracking customer spend for years and years. They know very clearly what the arc is for a typical customer, and they know for a fact, supported by years of spend data, that most customers are young guys who buy a lot in the first year or two, and them taper down dramatically, to the point that GW simply doesn't care if they stay on or not, as long as there is a new guy coming in buying a new army, and all the stuff that comes with it.

The last two financial documents talk about GW putting plans in place to get back lost customers. So I don't think it's quite as simple as "GW simply doesn't care if they stay on or not." That might have been true during the decline of sales under the previous CEO, but now they seem vary interested in getting lapsed customers back-- though I think what they want them to come back for is another pass through the sales process that new customers go through. Another buy in, another year or two and then dropping off. Then maybe GW will try something else to get them to do it all again.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I'm not at all convinced that people spend the most in the first year.

See, when I started I were just a nipper. I simply didn't have the cash to do stuff properly. So armies were cobbled together from well-meaning presents, and the odd bit of pocket money saving.

Now? Well, I'm doing me sums and I reckon I can afford to drop £200 on a Custards army this weekend. And I'll definitely be having a slice of whatever Morathi's army turns out to be, because Morathi.

That's money I could only dream of spending all those years ago, even adjusting for GW's own inflation.

And that's not accounting for anything else that might be in the pipeline. The year is barely started, and I'm all excite for Custards, Morathi and Undead stuff. Perhaps I'm the odd one out, but I can only speak from my own experience.

Perfectly well explained.

But although people like yourself are dropping money GWs way, they are pricing out the current nippers. In 10 years, there won't be the influx of people like yourself flinging them money. GW seriously need to think a little bit more long term. Are the next generations of nippers spending pocket money with GW anymore?

I know the local store can't keep the $20/£10 "Easy to Build" boxes on the shelf. I think they're totally in range of most nippers. And with them including data sheets and the core rules for open play being free, I think there's definitely a child friendly way into 40k and AoS right now.

It also may actually give an overall more enjoyable hobby experience than those setting out to do 2000 point tournament games.

 Gimgamgoo wrote:
But although people like yourself are dropping money GWs way, they are pricing out the current nippers. In 10 years, there won't be the influx of people like yourself flinging them money. GW seriously need to think a little bit more long term. Are the next generations of nippers spending pocket money with GW anymore?

My nephews aren't. They're more than happy with the hobby, but their money goes to either CCGs or GW's competitors. They don't have a particular problem with GW - they got into 40k with Dark Vengeance as a Christmas present.

This, again, comes down to GW not having a pocket money price point anymore.

When they're older and have more money to spend, they've been giving money to the likes of Corvus Belli, Wyrd, Knight Models, Wizards of the Coast, etc. And those are likely who they will continue to give money to.

Being able to go and drop $20-$30au and get something actually meaningful is a huge draw for the younger crowd.

 John Prins wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

Heck - I would rather put the money towards a Kickstarter, and wait a year than buy a $25 character model.

I've mostly stopped doing this. I have a ton of KS minis I have little interest in painting, because after - usually more than - a year, I'm sick of still waiting for the mini and have lost interest. Kickstarter is worse than Early Access games at killing interest by release date, at least from my experience. That's pretty low on the scale of value. At least my Cthulhu Wars is perfectly playable without painting/assembly.

*Shrug* It could just be that I tend to go for Kickstarters for minis that I know I will still be interested in, a year later.

Reaper Bones - not tied to any system, and useful for RPGs as well as wargaming. And cheap minis.

Mantic fantasy games - which allow me to use some of the above mentioned Reaper Bones. (Less interested in their SF, for some reason.) And cheap minis. (Right now, waiting on Terrain Crate.)

Heroines in Sensible Shoes - my wife is a female gamer, and she wears sensible shoes... mostly. (Doc Martins are sensible, right?)

Or just be that, except for the Reaper Bones, I tend to 'fire and forget' - not worrying or even much thinking about the minis until they are in my grubby little mitts.

More often, I am sorry that I didn't pledge on a given Kickstarter. (The mediaeval CMoN Zombicide - should have, didn't.)

Mind you, I only back one or two Kickstarters in a given year.

The Auld Grump