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.

 Kanluwen wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
It's the same author as the previous article about the bonuses that came out right after the allegations started circulating, even though the bonuses themselves were announced months prior. I'm not suggesting there's any conspiracy or anything, but someone at GW pretty clearly has an "in" with that particular author, and is using it to their advantage.

What you're suggesting is literally a conspiracy.

a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose

Also known as "PR."

Sorry, but you know, when I pointed out that it only costs them about five dollars US to make each Space Marine squad box, everyone insisted that no no, they pay all this money to their creative teams.



Believe me now?

First time poster! Wahey!

I'm totally on board with the notion that GW released its end of year accounts last week, generating articles about its staff bonuses and profitability, and is nefariously nurturing a relationship with the goddamn Guardian to try to offset any damage done...somewhere...as a result of a former employee complaining about their pay on Twitter.

It's almost as amusing as the initial notion a few people floated around GW paying the actually previously reported and already paid bonus to its employees as a response to the same complaint.

And yet here we are, with the Guardian dismissing claims of a corporation paying poverty wages and discriminating against someone on maternity leave with verifiably false reporting designed to discredit the claims by suggesting they're just sour grapes caused by GW's recent success. An approach perfectly at odds with the Guardian's normal attitude towards reports of corporations underpaying workers and discriminating against people on maternity leave.

Nobody said anything was nefarious. Feeding favorable information to media sources to get your side of the story out there is hardly unusual. It's just odd to see the Guardian of all places falling so credulously for it. Literally 30 seconds of research by the author would have disclosed that the Twitter allegations were not "prompted by GW's success" but instead by someone quoting a GW job posting that didn't provide salary information, nor was it accurate to say that the people involved had "moved on," given the one who came back from maternity leave was in fact informed that she was being made redundant. At best, it's exceedingly lazy, irresponsible journalism.

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Sorry, but you know, when I pointed out that it only costs them about five dollars US to make each Space Marine squad box, everyone insisted that no no, they pay all this money to their creative teams.



Believe me now?

Errr.... I mean, they still do have to pay the creative teams, and it does add up. Its not just the game designer, its the:
-Artists
-Writers
-Sculptors
-Engineers
-Machinists
-Photographers
-Illustrators
-Graphic Designers

for each kit, even if you're paying them all substandard wages -lets say 25k quid per year- thats still 200k annually minimum, probably a good bit more than that because there are teams of all of these people working on this.

And then its the support staff:
-the marketers
-the managers
-the accountants
-the HR and payroll staff
-the financial and business analysts
-the sales personnel
-the machine operators
-the product assemblers
-the warehouse workers
-the facilities maintenance staff
-the logistics and supply chain analysts

Thats several hundred more people easy. And then you have the facilities costs like electricity, water, heating, cooling, property taxes, general upkeep and mainteance costs (its more expensive than you think), plus the costs to upkeep and maintain the injection molding machines, aircon units, production equipment, etc. And then theres the logistics and distribution cost of palletizing the goods, loading them onto a truck/ship/airplane and sending it out to retailers, regional hubs, distributors, etc.

So again, $5 to produce a box of space marines is a cute little number that gets you the material cost to spit out a set of sprues which get tucked into a cardboard box and shrinkwrapped, but it doesn't even begin to tell the story of how these items actually come to be in the first place or how they get into your hands.

chaos0xomega wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Sorry, but you know, when I pointed out that it only costs them about five dollars US to make each Space Marine squad box, everyone insisted that no no, they pay all this money to their creative teams.



Believe me now?

Errr.... I mean, they still do have to pay the creative teams, and it does add up. Its not just the game designer, its the:
-Artists
-Writers
-Sculptors
-Engineers
-Machinists
-Photographers
-Illustrators
-Graphic Designers

for each kit, even if you're paying them all substandard wages -lets say 25k quid per year- thats still 200k annually minimum, probably a good bit more than that because there are teams of all of these people working on this.

And then its the support staff:
-the marketers
-the managers
-the accountants
-the HR and payroll staff
-the financial and business analysts
-the sales personnel
-the machine operators
-the product assemblers
-the warehouse workers
-the facilities maintenance staff
-the logistics and supply chain analysts

Thats several hundred more people easy. And then you have the facilities costs like electricity, water, heating, cooling, property taxes, general upkeep and mainteance costs (its more expensive than you think), plus the costs to upkeep and maintain the injection molding machines, aircon units, production equipment, etc. And then theres the logistics and distribution cost of palletizing the goods, loading them onto a truck/ship/airplane and sending it out to retailers, regional hubs, distributors, etc.

So again, $5 to produce a box of space marines is a cute little number that gets you the material cost to spit out a set of sprues which get tucked into a cardboard box and shrinkwrapped, but it doesn't even begin to tell the story of how these items actually come to be in the first place or how they get into your hands.

No, Chaos, it was ALL those things came to $5 per box. The actual materials cost something like 50c.

Yeah, plastic is practically free - or used to be anyway, recently I think it's gone up in price. But it's still really cheap.

GW's profit margins are extraordinary, like close to 50% last I checked. Almost unheard of levels of profitability.

yukishiro1 wrote:
At best, it's exceedingly lazy, irresponsible journalism.

While I don't doubt the reporter read James' blog thoroughly after she got in touch and he pointed her to it, I also don't really know what the favourable information you're talking about is. It's a puff piece largely informed by the annual report which was placed on the investor relations website, one highlight of which is the insane profitability of the company. Article one was "They did good, gave staff HUGE BONUS" and then article two was them actually reading the report.

*shrugs*

I just think it's bad enough they pay designers £20k per year and offer no route to advance (two things which are still categorically true as of last summer, btw) without the community's conversation spinning off into easily hand waved conspiracy theories and conjecture. It's a distraction. GW's profit margin growth is insane: fact. That they have increased turnover by £150m odd and profitability has not declined is, frankly, bizarre. How did they do this? Suppressing staff salaries is part of that puzzle.

chaos0xomega wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Sorry, but you know, when I pointed out that it only costs them about five dollars US to make each Space Marine squad box, everyone insisted that no no, they pay all this money to their creative teams.



Believe me now?

Errr.... I mean, they still do have to pay the creative teams, and it does add up. Its not just the game designer, its the:
-Artists
-Writers
-Sculptors
-Engineers
-Machinists
-Photographers
-Illustrators
-Graphic Designers

for each kit, even if you're paying them all substandard wages -lets say 25k quid per year- thats still 200k annually minimum, probably a good bit more than that because there are teams of all of these people working on this.

And then its the support staff:
-the marketers
-the managers
-the accountants
-the HR and payroll staff
-the financial and business analysts
-the sales personnel
-the machine operators
-the product assemblers
-the warehouse workers
-the facilities maintenance staff
-the logistics and supply chain analysts

Thats several hundred more people easy. And then you have the facilities costs like electricity, water, heating, cooling, property taxes, general upkeep and mainteance costs (its more expensive than you think), plus the costs to upkeep and maintain the injection molding machines, aircon units, production equipment, etc. And then theres the logistics and distribution cost of palletizing the goods, loading them onto a truck/ship/airplane and sending it out to retailers, regional hubs, distributors, etc.

So again, $5 to produce a box of space marines is a cute little number that gets you the material cost to spit out a set of sprues which get tucked into a cardboard box and shrinkwrapped, but it doesn't even begin to tell the story of how these items actually come to be in the first place or how they get into your hands.

If they can't turn a profit and pay decent wages to the staff, maybe their C-suite should consider something less challenging, like eating boogers for money on youtube? A lot of chiefsomethingofficer people seem to be real bad at running a business if it doesn't involve scamming their employees on value of their work.

chaos0xomega wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Sorry, but you know, when I pointed out that it only costs them about five dollars US to make each Space Marine squad box, everyone insisted that no no, they pay all this money to their creative teams.



Believe me now?

Errr.... I mean, they still do have to pay the creative teams, and it does add up. Its not just the game designer, its the:
-Artists
-Writers
-Sculptors
-Engineers
-Machinists
-Photographers
-Illustrators
-Graphic Designers

for each kit, even if you're paying them all substandard wages -lets say 25k quid per year- thats still 200k annually minimum, probably a good bit more than that because there are teams of all of these people working on this.

And then its the support staff:
-the marketers
-the managers
-the accountants
-the HR and payroll staff
-the financial and business analysts
-the sales personnel
-the machine operators
-the product assemblers
-the warehouse workers
-the facilities maintenance staff
-the logistics and supply chain analysts

Thats several hundred more people easy. And then you have the facilities costs like electricity, water, heating, cooling, property taxes, general upkeep and mainteance costs (its more expensive than you think), plus the costs to upkeep and maintain the injection molding machines, aircon units, production equipment, etc. And then theres the logistics and distribution cost of palletizing the goods, loading them onto a truck/ship/airplane and sending it out to retailers, regional hubs, distributors, etc.

So again, $5 to produce a box of space marines is a cute little number that gets you the material cost to spit out a set of sprues which get tucked into a cardboard box and shrinkwrapped, but it doesn't even begin to tell the story of how these items actually come to be in the first place or how they get into your hands.

Somebody with more time than me please re-write the classic "rocks are not free, citizen" piece but about this.

LMAO this thread.

Of COURSE they get paid crap. The dude even outright said why in the tweets - because the quality of the output is by and large irrelevant. As long is it mostly kinda sorta works, that's enough. Like it or not, GW can get a bunch of literal single digit age children to write the rules for Warhammer 40K 10th edition and it wouldn't impact sales one iota.

Couple that with the fact that there is an endless horde of neckbeards who would gleefully shank their own parents for a chance to work designing games for GW; and it becomes fiscally irresponsible to pay anything more than trash tier wages for that job.

And unions, oh boy... you guys crack me up. It's like listening to my kid who never worked a day in his life tell me why employers won't care about tattoos on someones face.

Rihgu wrote:

Somebody with more time than me please re-write the classic "rocks are not free, citizen" piece but about this.

Sure' We'll call it 'Misrepresenting arguments and ignoring the point is not free, citizen'.

 Phobos wrote:
LMAO this thread.

Of COURSE they get paid crap. The dude even outright said why in the tweets - because the quality of the output is by and large irrelevant. As long is it mostly kinda sorta works, that's enough. Like it or not, GW can get a bunch of literal single digit age children to write the rules for Warhammer 40K 10th edition and it wouldn't impact sales one iota.

Couple that with the fact that there is an endless horde of neckbeards who would gleefully shank their own parents for a chance to work designing games for GW; and it becomes fiscally irresponsible to pay anything more than trash tier wages for that job.

And unions, oh boy... you guys crack me up. It's like listening to my kid who never worked a day in his life tell me why employers won't care about tattoos on someones face.

Ah bad situations, it’s a shame we should ever think about doing something about them right?

Templarted wrote:

 Phobos wrote:
LMAO this thread.

Of COURSE they get paid crap. The dude even outright said why in the tweets - because the quality of the output is by and large irrelevant. As long is it mostly kinda sorta works, that's enough. Like it or not, GW can get a bunch of literal single digit age children to write the rules for Warhammer 40K 10th edition and it wouldn't impact sales one iota.

Couple that with the fact that there is an endless horde of neckbeards who would gleefully shank their own parents for a chance to work designing games for GW; and it becomes fiscally irresponsible to pay anything more than trash tier wages for that job.

And unions, oh boy... you guys crack me up. It's like listening to my kid who never worked a day in his life tell me why employers won't care about tattoos on someones face.

Ah bad situations, it’s a shame we should ever think about doing something about them right?

Why do you think this is a bad situation and what do you think "should be done" about it?

 Phobos wrote:

Templarted wrote:

 Phobos wrote:
LMAO this thread.

Of COURSE they get paid crap. The dude even outright said why in the tweets - because the quality of the output is by and large irrelevant. As long is it mostly kinda sorta works, that's enough. Like it or not, GW can get a bunch of literal single digit age children to write the rules for Warhammer 40K 10th edition and it wouldn't impact sales one iota.

Couple that with the fact that there is an endless horde of neckbeards who would gleefully shank their own parents for a chance to work designing games for GW; and it becomes fiscally irresponsible to pay anything more than trash tier wages for that job.

And unions, oh boy... you guys crack me up. It's like listening to my kid who never worked a day in his life tell me why employers won't care about tattoos on someones face.

Ah bad situations, it’s a shame we should ever think about doing something about them right?

Why do you think this is a bad situation and what do you think "should be done" about it?

I think it’s a bad situation because GW has a (not uniquely) terrible internal culture and treats people as disposable with inconsistent pay rates. The pay rates for the work is bad considering GW’s overall profitability went up during the period. So maybe GW should look after the staff better and treat them fairer? If not the staff as a whole could form a group and collectively withdraw their labour until conditions improve(in my opinion it’s a bit extreme).

On the bright side, mediocre rules means that competitors have an opportunity to compete even without GW's massive, vertically integrated money-printing STC.

Templarted wrote:

 Phobos wrote:

Templarted wrote:

 Phobos wrote:
LMAO this thread.

Of COURSE they get paid crap. The dude even outright said why in the tweets - because the quality of the output is by and large irrelevant. As long is it mostly kinda sorta works, that's enough. Like it or not, GW can get a bunch of literal single digit age children to write the rules for Warhammer 40K 10th edition and it wouldn't impact sales one iota.

Couple that with the fact that there is an endless horde of neckbeards who would gleefully shank their own parents for a chance to work designing games for GW; and it becomes fiscally irresponsible to pay anything more than trash tier wages for that job.

And unions, oh boy... you guys crack me up. It's like listening to my kid who never worked a day in his life tell me why employers won't care about tattoos on someones face.

Ah bad situations, it’s a shame we should ever think about doing something about them right?

Why do you think this is a bad situation and what do you think "should be done" about it?

Templarted wrote:
I think it’s a bad situation because GW has a (not uniquely) terrible internal culture and treats people as disposable with inconsistent pay rates.

OK, lets accept as a given that their culture is horrible and so is the pay. It isn't affecting their profitability, so does it matter? They aren't hurting for people to work there, so does it matter? No, it doesn't. Just because you (universal you, not your specifically) don't like how they do things, doesn't mean they are objectively bad. Plenty of people either don't mind or actually like it. It doesn't sound like anyone there is shackled by golden handcuffs, so they can just jump ship anytime.

Templarted wrote:
The pay rates for the work is bad considering GW’s overall profitability went up during the period. So maybe GW should look after the staff better and treat them fairer?

This is a knife that cuts both ways. Would the employees be OK with a pay decrease in lean years? If not, how is that fair to the company? Fairness is equality to both sides. If you are going to argue fairness, it must be fair to everyone, not just your side.

And it seems that GW is being "fair" after all - they did pay out a bonus and stocks, so they did pretty much what you wanted them to do anyways.

Templarted wrote:
If not the staff as a whole could form a group and collectively withdraw their labour until conditions improve(in my opinion it’s a bit extreme).

Absolutely, if they feel that will redress their grievances, they can and should. They fact that they haven't means either they are OK with things, or that their labour isn't as valuable as you (universal you again) think it is.

 Phobos wrote:

OK, lets accept as a given that their culture is horrible and so is the pay. It isn't affecting their profitability, so does it matter? They aren't hurting for people to work there, so does it matter? No, it doesn't. Just because you (universal you, not your specifically) don't like how they do things, doesn't mean they are objectively bad. Plenty of people either don't mind or actually like it. It doesn't sound like anyone there is shackled by golden handcuffs, so they can just jump ship anytime.

But it should effect their profitability. Which is kinda the point. As customers we have a responsibility to not do business with companies who abuse their employees and have dubious buisness practices.

 Phobos wrote:

And it seems that GW is being "fair" after all - they did pay out a bonus and stocks, so they did pretty much what you wanted them to do anyways.

Which don't actually make up for the difference in pay.

 Phobos wrote:

Absolutely, if they feel that will redress their grievances, they can and should. They fact that they haven't means either they are OK with things, or that their labour isn't as valuable as you (universal you again) think it is.

Ah, the old union-buster logic raises it's ugly head. 'If you're labor isn't worth enough to you to be killed over it, then it's worth what we tell you it is'.

 Phobos wrote:

Templarted wrote:
I think it’s a bad situation because GW has a (not uniquely) terrible internal culture and treats people as disposable with inconsistent pay rates.

OK, lets accept as a given that their culture is horrible and so is the pay. It isn't affecting their profitability, so does it matter? They aren't hurting for people to work there, so does it matter? No, it doesn't. Just because you (universal you, not your specifically) don't like how they do things, doesn't mean they are objectively bad. Plenty of people either don't mind or actually like it. It doesn't sound like anyone there is shackled by golden handcuffs, so they can just jump ship anytime.

Templarted wrote:
The pay rates for the work is bad considering GW’s overall profitability went up during the period. So maybe GW should look after the staff better and treat them fairer?

This is a knife that cuts both ways. Would the employees be OK with a pay decrease in lean years? If not, how is that fair to the company? Fairness is equality to both sides. If you are going to argue fairness, it must be fair to everyone, not just your side.

And it seems that GW is being "fair" after all - they did pay out a bonus and stocks, so they did pretty much what you wanted them to do anyways.

Templarted wrote:
If not the staff as a whole could form a group and collectively withdraw their labour until conditions improve(in my opinion it’s a bit extreme).

Absolutely, if they feel that will redress their grievances, they can and should. They fact that they haven't means either they are OK with things, or that their labour isn't as valuable as you (universal you again) think it is.

Again we get to something is bad should we do something about it? You’re right it doesn’t impact their profitability so should I just feel happy for GW then? It kind of is a terrible pay rate so we should accept it because GW make money? When are we allowed to be bothered by something? The you can leave anytime you want is a bad excuse for employers who want to treat their staff like garbage.

If the company is losing money I don’t think it’s right those lower down should suffer (a lot are dangerously close to minimum wage) financially, they’d probably be at risk of losing their jobs anyway if a company is doing bad, so they should be compensated if it does well. Fair goes both ways.


A bonus after a pandemic isn’t the same as a pay rise, this scheme has always been in place but never used because GW not doing well enough to use it.

I reject the notion "it isn't affecting their profitability."

We know that GW can be profitable while paying what many people feel is a low wage and fostering what appears to be an unhealthy culture around that.

We do not know how more or less profitable GW would be if their studio Devs were better paid and potentially happier (therefore potentially producing a better product that drives sales more effectively.)

Therefore it isn't possible to say it isn't affecting their profitability.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Phobos wrote:

OK, lets accept as a given that their culture is horrible and so is the pay. It isn't affecting their profitability, so does it matter? They aren't hurting for people to work there, so does it matter? No, it doesn't. Just because you (universal you, not your specifically) don't like how they do things, doesn't mean they are objectively bad. Plenty of people either don't mind or actually like it. It doesn't sound like anyone there is shackled by golden handcuffs, so they can just jump ship anytime.

But it should effect their profitability. Which is kinda the point. As customers we have a responsibility to not do business with companies who abuse their employees and have dubious buisness practices.

Yet it doesn’t affect anything at all. And that proves my point.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Phobos wrote:

And it seems that GW is being "fair" after all - they did pay out a bonus and stocks, so they did pretty much what you wanted them to do anyways.

Which don't actually make up for the difference in pay.

That's demonstrably not true. Wage levels are determined much less by any intrinsic valuation of your labor, and much more by external factors such as the laws the employment relationship is governed by, the supply of labor relative to the need, how cozy you are with the person paying you, etc.

Almost nobody is paid what they are worth in any meaningful sense of the term worth, whether moral or on a value-added basis. At best you end up with the conclusion that you are paid at least the salary an employer is required to pay you to stop you from quitting, because otherwise you wouldn't still be employed by them. But it is circular reasoning to suggest that means you are paid the appropriate amount in some wider moral or value-derived sense.

Momma don’t let your babies grow up to be game devs.



..... or cowboys either.

 Phobos wrote:

Yet it doesn’t affect anything at all. And that proves my point.

What point might that be? That as long as it's profitable, it's OK? Funny, I can think of a lot of profitable ventures that ended badly for all involved.

 Phobos wrote:

What difference are you talking about? The imaginary difference in your head between what they’re being paid and what you think they should be paid? Back here in the real world GW had no obligation to pay them a single extra penny, yet they did.

The difference between what GW pays and the industry standard. And sure, they didn't. Unless you assume that it was an attempt to get out in front of a pair of really bad PR decisions, at which point they absolutely did.

 Phobos wrote:

Lol hyperbole much? Nobody’s dying over anything here. The cold hard truth like it or not is that you’re paid what you’re worth in almost all cases. Don’t like it? Then get a skill set that’s worth more.

Wow, the lies are strong with this one. No, people aren't paid what their skills are worth. That this is fact is supported by your country being currently in the throws of a labor shortage because all the poor shlubs you underpay started refusing to work for the pittance you offer. (And entirely predictable, since similar work stoppages have happened after every plague in history.)

BTW: There are only 30 people in the United States who can do my job. What would you say that would be worth? Because my skills are both rarer and more in demand than a brain surgeon, and yet, I can't help but feel overworked and underpaid.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Phobos wrote:

Yet it doesn’t affect anything at all. And that proves my point.

What point might that be? That as long as it's profitable, it's OK? Funny, I can think of a lot of profitable ventures that ended badly for all involved.

We are talking about GW. Not every other venture under the sun. I fully agree that this crap won't fly in most other places. GW is very unique in that the point I was making is that they don't have to pay better to get better quality, because quality isn't needed to sell their products and there is a line out the door and around the block of people salivating to work there. This is a very unusual situation. But it is the only situation we are discussing.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Phobos wrote:

What difference are you talking about? The imaginary difference in your head between what they’re being paid and what you think they should be paid? Back here in the real world GW had no obligation to pay them a single extra penny, yet they did.

The difference between what GW pays and the industry standard. And sure, they didn't. Unless you assume that it was an attempt to get out in front of a pair of really bad PR decisions, at which point they absolutely did.

Where on earth are you getting this information? How do you know what the "industry standard" for a miniature game designer is? Or a studio painter? Or a miniature sculptor? Please post links, I'd love to read them. Furthermore, we don't even know what GW pays these people, because that isn't public information. Even assuming arguendo that they are below industry standard (whatever that may be), nobody is forced to work there. If GW doesn't pay enough to be a X, then go do X somewhere else. Indeed, if as you say they are so substandard, people should be leaving in droves and GW would be forced to do something about it. The fact that that isn't happening says something.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Phobos wrote:

Lol hyperbole much? Nobody’s dying over anything here. The cold hard truth like it or not is that you’re paid what you’re worth in almost all cases. Don’t like it? Then get a skill set that’s worth more.

Wow, the lies are strong with this one. No, people aren't paid what their skills are worth. That this is fact is supported by your country being currently in the throws of a labor shortage because all the poor shlubs you underpay started refusing to work for the pittance you offer. (And entirely predictable, since similar work stoppages have happened after every plague in history.)

BTW: There are only 30 people in the United States who can do my job. What would you say that would be worth? Because my skills are both rarer and more in demand than a brain surgeon, and yet, I can't help but feel overworked and underpaid.

1. What lies?
2. Our labor shortage was caused by our idiot ex-President and the morons in our Congress paying people to sit home and play xbox.
3. As to what your skillset is worth? Well, look at your paycheck for your answer. If you think it is worth more than that, then ask for the amount you feel it is worth. If you are right, they will pay it.
4. News flash, EVERYONE feels overworked and underpaid. Yet you are still going to get up tomorrow and go to work, no matter how you feel. Just like I am, and just like everyone else is.

That's a circular definition of worth. If you define the worth of someone's labor as what salary they can get someone to pay them, of course you end up with the self-fulfilling prophecy that everyone is paid what they're "worth." But that's just because you've defined your terms in a way to engineer your end result, i.e. engaged in a logical fallacy.

As to what your skillset is worth? Well, look at your paycheck for your answer. If you think it is worth more than that, then ask for the amount you feel it is worth. If you are right, they will pay it.

That's genuinely one of the funniest things I've ever read.

 Phobos wrote:

We are talking about GW. Not every other venture under the sun. I fully agree that this crap won't fly in most other places. GW is very unique in that the point I was making is that they don't have to pay better to get better quality, because quality isn't needed to sell their products and there is a line out the door and around the block of people salivating to work there. This is a very unusual situation. But it is the only situation we are discussing.

So,you're saying that we should just accept substandard products produced by people working slave wages because it's GW? I'm glad you're not a China fan.

 Phobos wrote:

Where on earth are you getting this information? How do you know what the "industry standard" for a miniature game designer is? Or a studio painter? Or a miniature sculptor? Please post links, I'd love to read them. Furthermore, we don't even know what GW pays these people, because that isn't public information. Even assuming arguendo that they are below industry standard (whatever that may be), nobody is forced to work there. If GW doesn't pay enough to be a X, then go do X somewhere else. Indeed, if as you say they are so substandard, people should be leaving in droves and GW would be forced to do something about it. The fact that that isn't happening says something.

We don't have 'links' where I get my info. But feel free to look around job offers from places like Wizkids and Chaosium. Or talk to the flood of people leaving GW that you claim aren't there. I suspect that big bonus had a motive.

 Phobos wrote:

1. What lies?

That people are paid what they're worth.

 Phobos wrote:

2. Our labor shortage was caused by our idiot ex-President and the morons in our Congress paying people to sit home and play xbox.

If you think that, you're the one with a reality impairment.

 Phobos wrote:

3. As to what your skillset is worth? Well, look at your paycheck for your answer. If you think it is worth more than that, then ask for the amount you feel it is worth. If you are right, they will pay it.

My boss has repeatedly said that if he were allowed to, he'd double my salary, but it's limited by law. (It really is, I checked)

 Phobos wrote:

4. News flash, EVERYONE feels overworked and underpaid. Yet you are still going to get up tomorrow and go to work, no matter how you feel. Just like I am, and just like everyone else is.

Actually I'm not since I have vacation time that I have to use or lose. Apparently it really can accumulate when you're 'essential' and there's a pandemic on. And, if 'everyone' did, then why is there a labor shortage?

4. News flash, EVERYONE feels overworked and underpaid. Yet you are still going to get up tomorrow and go to work, no matter how you feel. Just like I am, and just like everyone else is.

And it's a Good Thing! Helps keep costs down when one person does the job of 5!

 Phobos wrote:

3. As to what your skillset is worth? Well, look at your paycheck for your answer. If you think it is worth more than that, then ask for the amount you feel it is worth. If you are right, they will pay it.

That is not quite how salary works. For example there was a chap who was literally the only guy in any NATO country who knew how a certain type of IED worked. MOD offered a voluntary redundancy scheme to all staff which he applied for only to be told he wasn't allowed as he was too valuable. So he wanted a bonus/increase in grade (his salary back then was at the top of his grade band). Nope, not possible within the department. A company got to him and convinced him to join them in his twilight years. So he quit. His labour was promptly sold back to the MOD for £1250 a day.

There is no fictitious perfect market where we all have perfect information and complete freedom of action. Multiple factors are at play.

In James's case he made several excellent games, but his biggest seller was just because people wanted the models, a friend who is now I think the longest serving or one of the longest serving GW manager,s has plenty of stories of people throwing away the Calth game components in the shop when opening the box. How do you price his labour? I bought his gamnes on the strength o the games, but I am a tiny minority in GWs demographic. Their biggest seller is 40k which has objectively terrible rules when compared to other wargames. How to pay those developers?