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.
Some more news: all retailers will now be able to order products from Webstore. This is a new change, where before only vat paying retailers had the option to do that. The new discounts will be inferior and I've no clue whether they will also be applied to those who could order direct before.
Until they figure out quantum physics and make it possible for two things to happen in the same time and space, massive. Literally everything you do is sacrificing an opportunity to do something else, and nobody has limitless time, space or resources.
Things get progressively less obvious the further up the chain you go, until some things essentially only get to you because they're a coin flip, with no obvious good or bad option. Thing is, once you pursue one, you'll never be able to go back and try the other to see if you made the right call.
Stuff like allocating machine time can be fairly elementary, but it gets a lot more complex than that.
In this context machine time/opportunity cost was used as a reason for the price increase in that reddit post. GW raised prices when they didn't have those issues (I remember some bits from those threads a few years ago), when sales were declining and the price increases was keeping them profitable. if declining sales and rising sales can be used as a justification to increase prices then I ask myself: Do the sales numbers/opportunity cost even matter in this specific case when a change in any direction justifies the price increase anyways? GW is a premium/luxury hobby and has been more expensive than a lot of the competition in this niche. It's what they do.
And like I wrote above: How big is the opportunity cost even if most boxes make most of their sales in their initial run? Why increase prices of stuff that most probably doesn't sell in huge numbers anyways? Wasn't that one of the main reasons why they "raised prices" by just increased the price of new boxes (in comparison to comparable older boxes) instead of doing the old yearly (or once every two years) price increase of a bunch of everything?
You're missing my point a little. Opportunity cost isn't solely to do with pricing, it affects everything you choose to do when you have limited time and resources.
It is a big deal in a very global sense, it affects everything to some degree.
Is it a big factor in GW raising their prices? Probably not The rumour has been that their production is flat out for a while. Until their new facility comes online they have no means to increase income other than to raise prices, they can't make more stuff to sell, and if they're selling through what they make then the market is telling them it'll stand it.
But the reason I mentioned opportunity cost was because another user was describing it without naming it, and it is a very important concept to understand when running a business. I wasn't necessarily saying it was a big deal in this specific circumstance.
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
frozenwastes wrote: People didn't close down their factories and move them to jurisdictions with no environmental laws in order to use their influence to encourage the spread of environmentalism. They did it so they could pollute with impunity. In the 80s and 90s the western world was increasing their requirements and companies off shored specifically to avoid the costs of being green. For some businesses the cost savings are as big a factor was the labour cost savings. Right now in the world 90%+ of ocean pollution comes from ten rivers. None of which are in Europe or North America.
If you move your production to Asia you get to have your waste dumped in those rivers and then it goes in the ocean. That's the point of moving production there. No laws, no having to recycle or process. Just dump it. In the UKGW has to meet some of the most stringent standards when it comes to their manufacturing waste. They can't just dump it in the River Trent and have it flow into the North Sea. Instead the companies are doing the same thing to these Asian and African rivers as they did to the Trent from 1880 to 1970. But at a truly global scale. Kudos to any company that doesn't participate in that when they easily could and would make a profit doing so.
It took 50 years with some very strong regulations and operating treatment plants for the Trent to become safe to drink again (though just barely). I don't know if the billion or so poorest people around the 10 major rivers in Asia and Africa will ever get their clean water back.
But hey, if GW out sourced we could get cheaper plastic orks, right?
Except that isn't the case any more. Companies are being held to account for their decisions with regard to labour and environmental impact when outsourcing manufacture. Many companies have affected change as a result, because the optics are incredibly negative. I'm not for one second suggesting this they've done it out of the goodness of their hearts, but they've done it because not doing it threatens their bottom line.
I really wish this was the case. Most of the production along these rivers is for goods that go to North America and Europe. And the pollution is still happening and in many areas increasing. Many of the "greening" companies are simply a sham where you set up companies to act as middle men who themselves don't really pollute and then say those are your clean suppliers.
There's obviously a huge spectrum from factories that would meet our greener standards to horrible polluters who dump all their waste in these rivers and then still slap an environmental compliance logo on your goods. It's really impossible to say where the majority of the stuff manufactured for the gaming industry falls on this. We can say for sure though, that GW's miniature made in the UK are compliant with the higher standards. They're being made in a jurisdiction with more environmental requirements than most of the USA and Canada. And GW has embarked on a project to convert the factory roofing into a solar array.
I've encouraged GW through both their survey and their share holder contact information to try to move as much production out of countries without the same standards they follow in Nottingham. If they have to charge higher prices to do so, I'm all for it. I'd love for the books and boxes to be printed in the UK as well. As well as the terrain kits.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2019/07/15 03:38:35
Balance in pick up games? Two people, each with their own goals for the game, design half a board game on their own without knowing the layout of the board and hope it all works out. Good luck with that. The faster you can find like minded individuals who want the same things from the game as you, the better.
Azreal13 wrote: Except that isn't the case any more. Companies are being held to account for their decisions with regard to labour and environmental impact when outsourcing manufacture. Many companies have affected change as a result, because the optics are incredibly negative. I'm not for one second suggesting this they've done it out of the goodness of their hearts, but they've done it because not doing it threatens their bottom line.
Ha ha ha ha. No. Remember that case of worker suicides in Apple plant (well, it was subcontractor, but factory built to cater to Apple needs only)? The only thing that happened was welding the windows shut (safety, what's that?) and installation of anti-jump nets on the roof. Suicides still happen thanks to hunger wages and colossal pressure applied by trillion dollar company that literally sits on unused tens of billions of dollars, they just aren't reported as such. Progress!
Or, remember panama papers? That illustration of colossal wrongdoings by hundreds of companies and their owners? Here we are, two years later, and the only thing that happened was murder of journalist who helped to expose that. Account? What account?
I'm less concerned with your cynical outlook than I am with the fact it's taken you a whole week to come up with the response despite apparently being active the whole time?
How's about we let sleeping dogs lie on what is fundamentally off topic in an essentially dead thread?
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Chopstick wrote: If by 3d printing you mean actually buy a 3d printer and print it yourself then I can inform you that it would be unlikely to "take over" GW business.
The moment GW ditch the old "too complicated" rule and replace it with simplified rule that even simpleton could play with their profit skyrocket and players start pouring in. And you expect that same players would do something like print their own models? These players have money, they aren't stupid, they're just really lazy. Also not to mention the waiting, the sanding and knifework after. printing....hmmm nope too complicated and time consuming.
Lazy is one way to put it. TIme-Poor, or having other priorities would be another. As I've gotten older, I've got more disposable income and less time to use it. I've already got more models than is sensible to have in the painting queue, and the building and painting of said figures (amongst other things - such as family time, gaming, gym, movies, etc in my non-work time means I'm waiting for 3d printing to become simpler and involve less hassle for the end user.
bananathug wrote: The numbers in the post are good but the conclusions are just, like, your opinion, man...
As a US customer I'd rather GW use some of them offshore accounts and save me 10-15% they could be saving in taxes, make their stuff in china/3rd world and knock another 15-20% off. Those are the customer concerns I'd like to see them address (also since 3/4 of their customers are outside of the UK...)
Well how very self centered and mercenary of you, personally I would rather pay the higher price and support local talent and workers and the UK economy.
If i were paying UK prices maybe i would agree with you, but paying almost 30% more for the same product might change your tune.
bananathug wrote: The numbers in the post are good but the conclusions are just, like, your opinion, man...
As a US customer I'd rather GW use some of them offshore accounts and save me 10-15% they could be saving in taxes, make their stuff in china/3rd world and knock another 15-20% off. Those are the customer concerns I'd like to see them address (also since 3/4 of their customers are outside of the UK...)
Well how very self centered and mercenary of you, personally I would rather pay the higher price and support local talent and workers and the UK economy.
If i were paying UK prices maybe i would agree with you, but paying almost 30% more for the same product might change your tune.
Edit failure
This is all arbitrary anyway, the prices are what they are and either vote with your wallet or accept them for what they are
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/07/25 17:11:26
