PDA

View Full Version : GW prices; Higher, lower or same?



Cloudscape_online
08-06-2005, 12:41
Recently I noticed that a 10 man tactical squad of marines costs £18. That's £1.80 per model. Kasrkrin clock in at £20, though they're actually made of metal and count as £2 per model. What's going on? Plastics shouldn't cost as much as metals, should they?

In any case, what do you think about GW prices at the moment. Should they be higher, lower, or stay the same? What prices would make you stop buying? What price would you prefer to see the GW models at?

Griefbringer
08-06-2005, 12:54
What prices would make you stop playing?

Nothing really - just because the prices of models rise, will not in any way hinder my capability to play with the models I already have. Plus I can always buy second-hand GW stuff or other manufacturers miniatures.

Actually, it is probably 18 months since I last bought a GW model at the full price.

RŲvhalt
08-06-2005, 13:18
But a box of 20 Cadians cost £18, same as a box of 24 Skinks. So plastic usually don't cost as much as metal.

Jedi152
08-06-2005, 13:34
I honestly don't mind it as it is now. Obviously i want the prices to be lower, but i'm not willing to leave the hobby because they're not.

GW doesn't owe us a hobby, and mini's are a luxury not a necessity.

Besides, when you compare it to other hobbies, it's not that bad.

Opus T. Penguin
08-06-2005, 14:34
Well, I quit paying GW's prices quite some time ago on figures except for the occasional bitz order (which are still painful).

There's plenty of evidence that at least out here on the Left Coast of the USA the last price raise broke the proverbial camel's back -- all of the store owners I've talked to (admittedly just 3) have said GW sales are down substantially compared to last year.

eBay is your friend :)

WLBjork
08-06-2005, 14:38
It's straying into the pricy side.

But, as jedi152 said, it's cheap compared to some hobbies - I fell over when i saw the price of this (http://ecci6000.com/6000_combo_01.htm)!

Frecus
08-06-2005, 14:43
You need to ask if people think GW prices should go down??? :wtf: :eyebrows:

The 20%+ increase in prices the past 4 years are quite a lot IMO! That's 5% a year at least, while inflation has probably not even done half that (ok, that depends on the side of the big pond, but still).
Besides that, miniatures are always a bit more expensive than you'd want them.

Frecus
The glade wanderer
Madwarrior

The Machine GoD
08-06-2005, 14:52
As per there Games Workshop's own #'s GW sales this year are down.

Tenoch
08-06-2005, 15:42
Remeber people Inflation is an average of only around a 1000 products and discludes mortgage payments.

Ergo don't expect it to fit everything, especially not luxury good, which are relatively price demand inelastic

worldshatterer
08-06-2005, 15:52
I was happy with boxed sets at £15, 18 is pushing it for stuff like marines where you only get 10 in a box .

18 would've been fine if the squads sets had something like all of a units weapons options included in the box[ie a heavy weapon sprue and a special weapon sprue] as it would be saving you money and lots of model work . BUt i really despise these price rises without at least an attempt to provide good explanation or convince us what we're getting is more value for money.

Darkzeer
08-06-2005, 16:03
Every time the price goes up I get put off buying anything a little more...right now I intend on buying NOTHING

Commissar von Toussaint
08-06-2005, 16:12
Actually, the price hike has been somewhat of a boon to me: It acts as a price floor when I discard old armies and replace them with non-GW minis. :evilgrin:

But it is annoying and the main reason why I haven't bought anything made by GW in over a year (and that was LOTR).

If GW had its old price structure, I'd be buying lots of stuff, but it simply isn't worth it.

Taliesynkp
08-06-2005, 17:23
Well, my participation in the "GW Hobby" is frozen. I haven't thrown away or sold my WHFB stuff but I haven't played in more than a year and haven't bought anything new in more than two.
There are many reasons I stopped playing, price is only one.

I think a lot of people in the US agree with me, which is why GW's penetration of the continent has been so poor.

Inquisitor Samos
08-06-2005, 17:34
I find myself in agreement with Commissar von Toussaint's last sentiment: I'd be buying more myself if these last couple of price increases hadn't happened!

Luckily for me, I have a fairly good monthly hobby budget, as I have an understanding spouse, and don't have much in the way of other expensive hobbies, or expensive vices! :evilgrin: Still, I haven't been able to bring myself to pay the higher costs for most GW items for quite a while now. In fact, saving a few "gotta-have" Specialist Games items, I haven't bought a handful of new GW minis in the past couple of years.

Charax
08-06-2005, 17:47
Well, with the exception of a few books (codices, new rulebook, novels) I'm proud to say I have bought only one GW model in the last 18 months (SM commander, 'cos I was curious. that'll teach me) - there is no price at which I'd get out of the hobby - the hobby is model-independant, if someone wanted to face me with a space marine force comprised of VOID and Warmachine figs, I'd not give it a second thought. I wont be buying minis from GW anymore (mainly because I dont *have* a local GW anymore)and I have more than enough spares to build a new SM army if I can be bothered.

High prices are bad, but they arent the end of the hobby by a long shot, and considering that GW have never, ever, ever dropped their prices across the board (they dropped the price of the Warhammer fortress by almost half a while back, IIRC - what does that say about their profit margins?) I doubt they're going to start now.

Griefbringer
08-06-2005, 18:26
The 20%+ increase in prices the past 4 years are quite a lot IMO! That's 5% a year at least, while inflation has probably not even done half that (ok, that depends on the side of the big pond, but still).


Actually, the price increases on GW products tend to vary by category of the product - probably the highest raisers were their regiment boxes which started at around 10 £ a piece when they came out in late 90's, and now they are racing at around 18 £ from what I have understood.

f2k
08-06-2005, 18:27
The last price raise resulted in my Ork army getting scraped. I simply canít afford a horde army right now.
Or perhaps I can? I just spend $400 buying this (http://shop.lego.com/product.asp?p=10030&cn=8&d=5&t=3). So I guess that itís just a matter of perspective. I donít mind paying for Lego, but I do mind paying for metal figures.

The only reason I can give is that I feel the price for Lego is fair, while I feel that GW is overcharging for their figures.

Perhaps this is why we complain. We donít really mind the price, seen in isolation. Itís just that, when comparing to other hobbies, the price is slightly too high for what you getÖ

Kelroth
08-06-2005, 19:01
At £15 a pop for regiments, I felt it was fine. £18 is stretching it a bit for me. I'll still buy, but not as much or anywhere near as often, and I now have no interest at all in starting a whole new army.

warlordgrubnatz
08-06-2005, 19:11
although they seem expensive some other wargame makers only sell 2-5pk metal minitures, imagin how much it woulkd cost to buy a large army in those systems.

Rykion
08-06-2005, 22:45
I think everyone wishes the prices were lower. That said some people have voted for higher prices. :eek: Those people feel free to tell me how much you are willing to pay over retail, and I'll buy some GW products and sell them to you at the above retail price you want. ;)

blitz589
08-06-2005, 22:49
tyranids raised in price, used to be 12 stealers for 30usd, now its 8 for 30usd

nurgle_boy
08-06-2005, 23:33
prices will always keep increasing, and ya know what?

i dont care!

its a hobby, and a good one. the models(ok, most of them) are nice, and ofresionable quality.

as someone else said (sorry, cant be bothered to look back over the thread) other companies sell minis in only metal and in blisters of 2-5.

whats esier to work with, plastic of a high quality, or some almost identical metal models?

Crazy Harborc
09-06-2005, 01:10
I know prices will always increase. I know inflation is the big cause. Why in the last 5 years inflation in the UK and the USA has gone up at least 25%. Why naturally, GW had to raise prices (in the USA at least) 5 times for a total of over 75%. Yeah, 25% total surrrrreee does justify prices jumping 75% or more, oh yeah!! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Cloudscape_online
09-06-2005, 01:37
Who are the current target market? 8-16 year olds, right? How many 8-16 year olds, do you know that can afford to buy an army as a hobby?

40K models are less hobby and more investment. Hobby= model airplanes, CCGs. Cost as much as you're willing to pay for and generally that's about £12-15 per month at most (unless you're a real fanatic)

To play 40K at its most cheapest points cost (500pts) would cost about £60 (marines), and that's not including paints+ brushes, Glues and codex. Investment? I think so.

FlameKnight
09-06-2005, 05:56
Who are the current target market? 8-16 year olds, right? How many 8-16 year olds, do you know that can afford to buy an army as a hobby?

I'm 15, and I can! http://img109.echo.cx/img109/3056/banana0rt.gif; I've just calculated that my army, if bought new, would cost $1500 Australian. (I think that's somewhere above $1000 US)

But yes, the cost of this hobby is INSANE. No matter what they say, their costs (i.e. well as staff pay, casting machines, nerdy t-shirts etc.) can not possibly justify what we end up paying for the minis.

Griefbringer
09-06-2005, 09:33
although they seem expensive some other wargame makers only sell 2-5pk metal minitures, imagin how much it woulkd cost to buy a large army in those systems.

Then there are manufacturers who sell metal miniatures individually, and manufacturers who sell metal miniatures in big packs (Old Glory models can be 29 USD for a pack of 30!).

rkunisch
09-06-2005, 11:30
My main problem is still that I buy more stuff than I am able to paint and play with. I somewhat slowed my investments, but the higher prices just mean that I buy fewer models for the same budget. :rolleyes:

I would be happy, if the prices keep stable for a longer period.

Except the Forge World prices, they could surely be lowered a little. :eek: ;)

Have fun,

Rolf.

Jedi152
09-06-2005, 11:35
Or perhaps I can? I just spend $400 buying this (http://shop.lego.com/product.asp?p=10030&cn=8&d=5&t=3). So I guess that itís just a matter of perspective. I donít mind paying for Lego, but I do mind paying for metal figures.
I guess it is about perspective. I would pay £250 for an army that i'm going to play with every week, but not for a giant lego ship that sits on the shelf and does nothing. That to me is insane, to you it's normal. different strokes etc.

I still stand by GW's prices. Compare them to companies like Foundry... (all mini's come in £8.50 packs, no bitz ordering, p&p is a fixed rate £7.50, preview ranges never appear, some ranges dissapear randomly etc)

Also i wonder who the 5 were who think GW prices should be higher...?

lorelorn
09-06-2005, 11:55
As a Warhammer player I don't buy figures I buy armies so what matters to me is not the relative cost of individual figures, but the cost of the particular force I am currently looking at.

I haven't bought a new army in 4 years, though I've written many a prospective army list, as the price was never right for me.

Zombie Pirates though have landed smack in my price range, plus when I'm not using them they can fit right into my VC army. Good stuff.

As someone who looks at army prices as opposed to individual figure costs, I am always happy to see GW expand their plastic regiment range, the more the merrier, I say.

If I had unlimited funds? Slayers.

Eversor
09-06-2005, 12:15
Oh, it's one of these threads again :rolleyes:

I couldn't care less, either way.

f2k
09-06-2005, 18:22
I guess it is about perspective. I would pay £250 for an army that i'm going to play with every week, but not for a giant lego ship that sits on the shelf and does nothing. That to me is insane, to you it's normal. different strokes etc.

I still stand by GW's prices. Compare them to companies like Foundry... (all mini's come in £8.50 packs, no bitz ordering, p&p is a fixed rate £7.50, preview ranges never appear, some ranges dissapear randomly etc)

Also i wonder who the 5 were who think GW prices should be higher...?
Perhaps itís because I donít play very much these days. Most of the time I convert and paint whatever models I find interesting. And these days, due to uni, thatís less than a handful pr. year.

If I wanted to, and if I had the time, then I would pay the current price without blinking. I think that the price is rather high, but I pay it regardless. Itís a hobby, after all, and hobbies are often expensive. I accept that. The day I can no longer accept that is the day Iíll stop buying modelsÖ

Hercco
09-06-2005, 19:13
What the high prices have done for my gaming is that I will probably never start another 40k or Fantasy army unless it is something that I can buy lots 2nd hand and for really cheap.

So... if the prices were a lower, say 20Ä for a regiment box instead of 27.5Ä (or 30Ä soon) I'd be spending more on GW stuff; to collect a playable army.

Crazy Harborc
10-06-2005, 01:52
What have GW's prices done for me?? Shown me how reasonable everybody elses prices are. :D OG, Crocs, Perry Bro, Reaper and on and on.

Mongoose Publishing's Starship Trooper (first game is Sat.) Great minies, understandable rules, lower prices. Good details on the minies and no more problems with assembly than with GW's stuff. Oh yeah, Mongoose's people HELPED prep the files for SsT on Army Builder.

PenZillA
10-06-2005, 04:53
The only reason I can afford gw minis is cause I work on the rigs.

When I started it was 10 marines for 28 canadien. Now its 45. None of my other hobbies prices increased like this. At least in video games there are 3 big companies to choose from.
But since i love 40k ill have to put up with the gw monopoly.

dancingmonkey
10-06-2005, 14:03
The only thing I will say in favour of the hike is this:
It forces you to buy less!

Hold with me here guys... theres a twisted logic honest.

If I look at my painting desk right now, these about 8 different projects on the go.... some of these are models from purchases from 5-6 years ago.
I still buy about 20-40 quids worth of stuff most months, and it only got worse when I became staff. The amount of ideas that get turned into mail orders that then never even get assembled.... EG. the 40 night goblins still on sprue in my big box.

Plus, I live in student digs, at my real home I have the initial 5 years of buying sitting in boxes gathering dust!

So, by increasing prices it focusses us on completing armies and maxing out paint/conversion skills. I remember my early days, when I had a budget of £1 per week, and had to travel half an hour to reach my "local" store.

Models seemed so much more back then, as each one was precious. So maybe, it will reach a balance, try just buying one box a month... and getting it all fully painted etc! Maybe then the hikes wont hurt so much....

Sorry this is a bit lengthy and random!

The monkey what dances...

Rich
10-06-2005, 18:03
The rising prices have just meant that i rarely buy anything now. Once you get into the habit of not biuying things, you tend to stick to it, and so now I only buy something if it is really good (plastic terminators!) or if it is a codex. I always buy the BL novels though, as I still hold that they are relatively good value.

I thought £15 was a reasonable price - now I doubt I will be buying any more models really.

Crazy Harborc
11-06-2005, 01:16
Gee, perhaps the suits at GWS "want" us to buy less/spend less at/on GW products. It does seem that all the price hikes at GW, in the past 4/5 years encourages customers to look/buy elsewhere. Maybe, just maybe "some" of them have stock in the competition.hehehehehe........ummmm??? naw..suits wouldn't do that.......or WOULD they??

Ouroboros
11-06-2005, 02:53
What the high prices have done for my gaming is that I will probably never start another 40k or Fantasy army unless it is something that I can buy lots 2nd hand and for really cheap.

This is pretty much the situation I find myself in now. I was considring starting fantasy about a year ago until I realized I could probably almost buy a used car for the price of what the army I wanted would cost me. That is just completely ridiculous folks, there's really no other way to state it.

They also just raised the prices $2 on virtually all blisters up here again this month. :rolleyes:

I haven't started a completely new army in about 4 years and I doubt if I ever will again. It's just personally embarrasing for me how much of a waste of money these little plastic men have become.

Crazy Harborc
11-06-2005, 04:25
Ouroboros's post is a very good example of what GW's pricing methods/policies have done (IMHO) to countless "oldtime" GW gamers. Many of them never try other systems and just go find another hobby. I don't think GW is a backer of the hobby of wargaming........just the "hobby of GW getting to be fat cat/wealthy"

Trench_Raider
11-06-2005, 05:25
Also i wonder who the 5 were who think GW prices should be higher...?

I suspect it was five people who are joking. I mean the drooling fanboys and the GW apologists might cheerfully pay whatever insanely high price GW asks of them, but even they can't WANT higher prices.

But then I suppose it could be five GW employees who see higher prices as being more money in their collective pockets? ;)

Anyway, I hit the wall as far as GW prices go earlier this year. Here is how I know it's time to quit.

I'm in my mid thirties and have a secure middle class job. Aside from a small car payment I have no debt and no credit cards. I pay less than a third of monthy take-home pay in rent and my utility payments are small. I'm not married and the woman I date (we are both too old for me to call her my "girlfriend") and I are long past the "dating stage" in which I paid for everything. We now split costs on dinner, movies, etc. The result is that I have ALOT of disposable income and I take my various hobbies quite seriously.

I also hate "building" armies. That is to say no matter the game system when I decide on a new army I buy all the figures for it at one time were possible. This is quite easy when it comes to 15mm historical games like DBM or Warrior as I can buy a complete army with options for less than 200$ US. Up until quite recently I did the same thing were it concerned 40k and WFB. But that has now changed. I've finally hit the wall.

Earlier this year, in a moment of madness, I decided to build a High elf army to fight my friend's Dark Elves. I made up a shopping list of what I would need for a 3000 point force and I was shocked to realise that I cannot afford to buy a full army as a single lot anymore. Years of price increases have finally brought me to that point.

That was the final straw. I've been playing more historical game sof late anyway, and my other hobbies have been growing in size. Therefore I've stopped buying GW product either new or used, and have been downsizing my collection by selling off armies I rarely play. (my cheasy three Wraithlord Eldar army went on Ebay last week) If things don't look up, I may write off GW games (except for their historical rules sets) entirely.

"Trench Raider"
heh...anyone want to buy a highly collectible Squat army?

Griefbringer
11-06-2005, 07:32
As for people wanting higher prices - from what I have heard from a friend, he claims that sometime in the early/mid-90's GW did a market survey in UK and found out that a portion of their active customers actually wanted the products to be more pricy to make the game more "exclusive" (ie. reserved to people with too much cash in their hands). I am not sure of what source he got this info (nor of the reliability).

Trench_Raider
11-06-2005, 07:42
Amazing. Who would believe that?

Even back then I thought GW's figures were too expesive when compared to similar products. Who would of dreamed how far they would go?

"Trench Raider"

gLOBS
11-06-2005, 09:10
Def. need to be lower used to be $20.00 for 3 Rhinos.

Brandir
11-06-2005, 09:18
I voted higher prices because I think that GW need the money to continually invest in new technologies to bring us the best minis inthe world.

I am particularly hopeful that GW will use the extra money to perfect the Miniature Painting Machine technology to supply us all with pre-painted minis to a Golden Daemon standard.

The boyz
11-06-2005, 10:30
I would of liked the boxed sets to stay the £15 they where before. I wouldnt really like to see them rise past £18 though I think that would just be way to expensive for plastic minatures.

Cloudscape_online
11-06-2005, 10:30
lol, omfg, lol. Brandir, you crack me up :p

You're not joking, are you? :eyebrows: That extra money will go to the Excecutives and shareholders.

Griefbringer
11-06-2005, 12:46
II am particularly hopeful that GW will use the extra money to perfect the Miniature Painting Machine technology to supply us all with pre-painted minis to a Golden Daemon standard.

As far as I know, Wizkids et co. have much more advanced technology on this field than GW, so there is a lot to be caught up with. :D

Brandir
11-06-2005, 13:44
lol, omfg, lol. Brandir, you crack me up :p

You're not joking, are you? :eyebrows: That extra money will go to the Excecutives and shareholders.

I do hope some of the extra money comes to shareholders like me - a good dividend would be welcome so I can spend even more money on minis I will never paint. If only they released that eavy metal painting machine!

Trench_Raider
11-06-2005, 20:01
Edit:Responded to wrong topic. REplaced the out of place material...



I voted higher prices because I think that GW need the money to continually invest in new technologies to bring us the best minis inthe world.

Are you en employee, Brandir? You are talking like one. In anye event "the best miniatures in the world" is a very subjective point. For example Foundry and Front Rank are at LEAST as good as GW's products in my opinion. (probably even better due to the in scale weapons on those brands) Also, since circa the late '80s (the age of the C Series and the early RT stuff) GW has been at or near the top of the miniature producing market. Why do they need even greater prices to maintain this position? Did they need it back then?

"Trench Raider"

Crube
11-06-2005, 20:35
As for people wanting higher prices - from what I have heard from a friend, he claims that sometime in the early/mid-90's GW did a market survey in UK and found out that a portion of their active customers actually wanted the products to be more pricy to make the game more "exclusive" (ie. reserved to people with too much cash in their hands). I am not sure of what source he got this info (nor of the reliability).

Yep...it happened - worked for GW at the time - saw the report - laughed heartily - cried somewhat - prayed even more...

Crazy Harborc
11-06-2005, 21:34
Of those people who wanted higher prices to keep the peasants out.........do any of you think any of them actually had to/have to earn the money they spend on GW's goodies?? Maybe they should encourage all the companies and merchants they get anything from to do GW's version of price hikes.

Brandir
11-06-2005, 21:59
..... Are you en employee, Brandir? You are talking like one. .....

No. Never have been. Never will. Why? Well, the pay is far too low!

But I am a capitalist and find no problems with companies setting the price they want. GW can get away with high prices for a large number of reasons; quality of the minis is only one of them.

You see I look at many cheaper companies and their minis. As the clichť goes, you get what you pay for. GW is not a charity and needs to make a profit to stay in business so crack on GW, raise the price if you want.

Crube
11-06-2005, 22:08
But I am a capitalist and find no problems with companies setting the price they want. GW can get away with high prices for a large number of reasons; quality of the minis is only one of them.

You see I look at many cheaper companies and their minis. As the clichť goes, you get what you pay for. GW is not a charity and needs to make a profit to stay in business so crack on GW, raise the price if you want.

I agree. I used to be employed by GW, (but not anymore) and although I would prefer lower prices (wouldnt everyone?) In addition, There are other miniature companies who don't make things to the same quality, and indeed others who followed the process of charging les who are not with us anymore

Renka
12-06-2005, 01:03
I put away a certain amount of money that I buy this kinds of luxuries with, if the prices increase I spend the same amount of money but get less, if the prices goes down I get more for my money. I am stuck in the hobby and have no intention to quit any time soon and as I can't do nothing 'bout the prices I just keep buying.
If you want the product you'll have to pay for it, it's as easy as that.

Griefbringer
12-06-2005, 08:44
Yep...it happened - worked for GW at the time - saw the report - laughed heartily - cried somewhat - prayed even more...

Interesting to hear someone being able to confirm that - can you remember what year it was on?

I remember the time when GW decided for the first time to "raise the price of some models to better reflect their points value" - my local indie store put that announcement to the noticeboard, and underlined those words from it.

It included a list of the products affected, and the relevant price hikes - the only one I can remember for now is the Eldar Dreadnought (sold in blister back then) going from 5.50£ to 8.50£ or so.

Crube
12-06-2005, 09:20
It's gonna be mid 90's (say 96/7 ish... maybe... :eyebrows: ) I was in Mail Order then and when on a late shift we used to sneak around other offices looking fro new prerelease / test sculpts etc and there was some amazing stuff left on peoples desks... :angel:

Bruen
12-06-2005, 10:50
Trick question, who does not want any price to be lower?

The real question is "Would lower prices be good for GW players in the long run?".

My answer to that would be that I don't know.

Rich
12-06-2005, 12:24
I have noticed though that LOTR models are much greater value for money - why is that? They may be smaller scale, but they are not much smaller, and personally i don't see why 40k & fantasy players should pay more so that LOTR players can spend less!!!

Brandir
12-06-2005, 12:47
WH40K/WHFB players do NOT subsidise LOTR players.

LOTR minis use about a third less metal/plastic that WH40K/WHFB minis.

A blister of three Knights of Dol Amroth on foot costs £6.00
A blister of three Teutogen Guard costs £6.00

Where is the difference here?

GW also need more money to secure move film/literary rights - wouldn't it be great if GW secured the rights to the £100 million Elric film that is being planned?

Tenoch
12-06-2005, 13:24
Well when it's broken down, the price of the LOTR license would be broken down and prices on all products are incresaed to fund it. So if you don't play LOTR you are subsidising the game.

However that being said, profits from each section are consolidated so we also benefit.

Personally I think it would be worng for GW to push it and shell out for more licenses, particuarly book rights. It seems that it would break the donkey's back, if it doesn't pay for itself then it is not going to pay for itself by a long way and that would most certainly leave GW up **** creek without a paddle.

Brandir
12-06-2005, 14:22
LOTR is a self funding line. In the past three years it has made more money for GW than all other lines combined and helped keep the prices rises of WH40K/WHFB to a minimum. Without LOTR we would see plastic regiment box sets at £20 not £18. LOTR has also helped bring in new WH40K/WHFB players as well as help old gamers return to The Hobby. LOTR has been successful beyond GW's wildest expectations. GW did not pay a very large sum for the licence - it is the royalties that pay for the rights.

The recent acquisition of new subsidiaries (such as Sabretooth, Warhammer Historical and Warp Artefacts) and the setting up of others (such as Black Industries and Black Flame) as well as the development of new plastics technologies have caused the price of minis to go up. The multi million pound loss due to Warhammer Online and the reorganisation of GW North America have also been a massive drain on resources that have lead GW to increase the price of minis.

Blaming LOTR for the price increases is wrong. One should in fact be praising the line for subsidising WH40K/WHFB.

Cloudscape_online
12-06-2005, 15:10
LOTR is a self funding line. In the past three years it has made more money for GW than all other lines combined <snip> Which is probably why they increased the prices of WHFB and 40K. Their main games are less profitable than the LOTR fad, and they can justify the price increase at the moment. Once the LOTR fad has passed and LOTR is discontinued the price hike will still be enforced. :eyebrows:



Without LOTR we would see plastic regiment box sets at £20 not £18. And if they hadn't bought the rights and paid for the moulds, they would still cost £15 :rolleyes:



The recent acquisition of new subsidiaries (such as Sabretooth, Warhammer Historical and Warp Artefacts) and the setting up of others (such as Black Industries and Black Flame) as well as the development of new plastics technologies have caused the price of minis to go up. GW doesn't purchase non-profit making organisations. Within 1 year of the acquisition of a company, GW will have recouped its losses.



Blaming LOTR for the price increases is wrong. One should in fact be praising the line for subsidising WH40K/WHFB. WH40K/WHFB subsidised the creation of the GW LOTR line, the LOTR line cannot support both WHFB and 40K, as these games are too large. LOTR was a quick money-making scheme with dire consequences for the prices of the other GW products.

Brandir
12-06-2005, 15:20
GW were developing the new plastics technology before the LOTR licence was secured. Therefore that cost would have been incured come what may.

Many people like to blame LOTR for anything they see wrong with GW as they hate LOTR. This is wrong.

Griefbringer
12-06-2005, 15:29
The recent acquisition of new subsidiaries (such as Sabretooth, Warhammer Historical and Warp Artefacts)

I don't think they invested particularly big amount of money on Warhammer Historical...

Opus T. Penguin
12-06-2005, 16:02
I voted higher prices because I think that GW need the money to continually invest in new technologies to bring us the best minis inthe world.

Feh. New Technologies? For the plastics, yes, but for the metal figs it really hasn't changed in 30+ years. We're now to the point where GW is charging more for the plastics than the metal figs, despite the marginal cost of the plastic figures being substantially less.

Cloudscape_online
12-06-2005, 16:23
Many people like to blame LOTR for anything they see wrong with GW as they hate LOTR. This is wrong.

I don't know much about WHFB or LOTR because I haven't played them, and I can't hate what I don't know (not that you said I did, but just in case you got the impression.) I'm looking at the whole GW line from the perspective of an economist.

The rules set for LOTR is probably fine, but it's the effect of the product being created that causes problems for many people.

I think the reason GW developed their plastic moulding further is because they would become a legitimate client for the manufacture of a LOTR tabletop battle game. Once tested on the LOTR models, the benfits could be passed on to the other GW model ranges, but this would mean recasting many models over a long period of time.

Bruen
12-06-2005, 16:41
And if they hadn't bought the rights and paid for the moulds, they would still cost £15 :rolleyes:

GW doesn't purchase non-profit making organisations. Within 1 year of the acquisition of a company, GW will have recouped its losses.

WH40K/WHFB subsidised the creation of the GW LOTR line, the LOTR line cannot support both WHFB and 40K, as these games are too large. LOTR was a quick money-making scheme with dire consequences for the prices of the other GW products.

Unless you have access to GW internal accounts I don't see how you could know if these statements are true.

If you want to be taken seriously you should state where you got your information.

Trench_Raider
12-06-2005, 20:57
and that would most certainly leave GW up **** creek without a paddle.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who would be very happy should that happen.

As I have said before, I'm on board for pretty much anything negative that happens to GW and would love to see years of unjustified price increases, retailer and customer abuse, arrogant attititude, and lack of respect for the long time gamers who made them as a company finally come back to haunt them. If they went under tommorrow, I would be a happy man.


I don't think they invested particularly big amount of money on Warhammer Historical...

Agreed.
Most of the employees of Warhammer Historicals were full time GW employees like Jervis Johnson who worked on the historical titles on their own time or folks who reguarly contracted with GW such as a the Perrys. Most importantly the historical line produces no miniatures of it's own (thanks god as this keeps the price of playing these games more in line with the industry standard and keeps away such policies as "play with our figures or else" which has no place in historical gaming) which greatly reduces the ioverhead cost of the historical line.

"Trench Raider"

Brandir
12-06-2005, 22:00
These price related threads are great.

GW receives lots of abuse.

Yet posters still go out and buy the minis in droves and can't wait for the new editions of rules and army books.

Trench_Raider
12-06-2005, 22:11
GW receives lots of abuse.

Lots of WELL DESERVED abuse. :D


Yet posters still go out and buy the minis in droves and can't wait for the new editions of rules and army books.

Not this poster. I long ago stopped buying anything new from GW, instead replying on ebay and the like. I also advocate buying frokm known recasters and downloading printed material from file sharing programs to undercut GW even more. In recent days I've stopped even that and have been downsizing my collection.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a free market advocate as well. However this does not stop me from condemning GW for being out of step with the rest of the wargaming industry as far as pricing, abusing customers and retailers, ect...

"Trench Raider"

Brimstone
12-06-2005, 22:33
Not this poster. I long ago stopped buying anything new from GW, instead replying on ebay and the like. I also advocate buying frokm known recasters and downloading printed material from file sharing programs to undercut GW even more. In recent days I've stopped even that and have been downsizing my collection.

And this is against Warseer rules, your opinions and actions are your own but you WILL NOT use this forum to advocate infringing of GW's IP rights.

Dargon
13-06-2005, 01:36
But it is annoying and the main reason why I haven't bought anything made by GW in over a year (and that was LOTR).

If GW had its old price structure, I'd be buying lots of stuff, but it simply isn't worth it.I'm in exactly the same boat as CvT - only it's been close to 3 years (perhaps more) since I last bought a GW model due to the price increases.

If GW had their old prices, (the prices they maintained for 4 years after the first Warhammer regiment set was produced), there would be almost no limit to the models I would be buying - their products would be in a price range for impulse buying!

As it is now, not only are their products at a point that requires serious consideration for purchase (to the point of needing to plan well ahead to save up money for a purchase), but they are also at a point where people are debating whether GW's products are worth buying at all.

Sure, there are hobbies out there that are more expensive, but not mine...
Reading? I can get 4-5 paperback novels for the price of a regiment set.
Drawing? I can get a years worth of stationary for the price of a regiment set.
DVD's? I can get 2-4 good DVD's for the price of a regiment set.
Tennis? The Raquet was expensive, but didn't require any further costs.
Computer Games? More expensive than a regiment set (if you get games new), but you get the whole thing in one purchase - plus the price will drop dramatically over time if you can't afford a game when it is first released.

Currently, I work in Theatre, building large scale sets (effectively modelling on a large scale). I've built some increadible sets for under $500 (Aus), and that includes paint. When I look at what I can build from GW for the same price... let's just say it puts things into perspective ;) .

I don't need GW's models to enjoy the hobby. GW's rulebooks are all still at a reasonable price, and that's all I really need to enter GW's world and play the game.

Just a thought...

Griefbringer
13-06-2005, 09:38
Not this poster. I long ago stopped buying anything new from GW, instead replying on ebay and the like. I also advocate buying frokm known recasters and downloading printed material from file sharing programs to undercut GW even more. In recent days I've stopped even that and have been downsizing my collection.


My first-hand miniature purchases from GW for the last three years have been minimalistic - approximately three blisters in total. I just do not find their models good enough value for the money at full price, and I am not too wild on many their newer sculpts (while technically good, they don't always inspire me). My miniature purchases during this period have been either second-hand or from other manufacturers. I still tend to buy the occasional book, as I find them to be decent value for the money.

And the same thing seems to happen to many people on these forums everytime GW hikes up the prices (or does something else annoying customers, like the US ban on web sales for independents), a bunch of people realise that they cannot anymore justify buying new GW stuff, and either remain content on their current collection or just stick to second-hand models or other manufacturers.

But I would never advocate copyright infringement (GW or otherwise) - it does nothing to improve the situation or to encourage competition. Were I to know any commercial recasters, I would try to take some effort to get them to justice (private recasting here is legal, as long as you don't sell or give the models away).

Cloudscape_online
13-06-2005, 10:23
to Bruen: I have an A-level Business Studies Education. From what I know of GW from reading WD, reading up on the competition and reading up on moulding costs, I can guess-estimate that each GW plastic mould costs about £250,000 -£270,000.

In context, LOTR had about 6-9 moulds(mass production), plus rules development, plus marketing, plus LOTR customer support, hidden overheads, licencing fees, legal fees, etc. All in all, I'd guess that the whole LOTR expansion has cost in the region of £7million.

This cost needed to come from somewhere. This is why I think that the regiments increased in price.

to Brandir: Rulebooks, army-books and codices, yes. Not so sure about the minis though...

I think, in order to get my Stormtroopers I'll get some normal troopers and give 'em a cool paintjob and model on some gas-masks and convert their equipment to look L337. Cheaper, easier to convert, easier to paint, any pose I want. :angel:

Instead of £20 for 10 Kasrkrin, it'll be £18 for 20 Stormtroopers. Teh cool.

(BTW, if we still had the rep system I'd have upped your count, brandir. ;) )

Trench_Raider
13-06-2005, 12:49
And this is against Warseer rules, your opinions and actions are your own but you WILL NOT use this forum to advocate infringing of GW's IP rights.

Well my apolgies then.
However, I was under the impression that the rule was against ACTUALLY infringing GW's IP or explaning how to do it rather than simply stating that I am ok with someone doing so? :wtf: That seems to be something of a stretch to me, my friend...

Anyway, back on topic:

I just do not find their models good enough value for the money at full price, and I am not too wild on many their newer sculpts (while technically good, they don't always inspire me)

I agree.
I have often said that I feel that while GW's stuff has high production values, to say that nothing out there comes close in quality is simply a myth.....or the ravings of some fan-boy blinded by his whole-hearted aceptance of the "GW hobby" nonsense. The new scupts are often nicely made, but lack the character of the old "C series" and early Rogue Trader figures. These lines represent the "Golden Age" of Citadel in my (and many others judging by the content I see on some of the collecting forums) opinion.

"Trench Raider"

Brandir
13-06-2005, 13:13
Looking at my old Citadel minis (my collection dates from 1979) I would suggest that there was no 'Golden Age' of minis. But I suppose that many people do tend to look in the past and think 'it my day it were better'

When I first started to buy minis price code B was 22p. I could never find anything price code A ........ Anyway now B is what, £4.00? A bit of inflation yes - but my earnings have gone up by an even greater ammount.

But comparing those minis with the new ones, well. Twice as much metal, and a more expensive white alloy vice lead alloy. Crisper casting with far more detail. In fact, it looks as though there has been some money spent on refining the manufacturing process! Did someone suggest that the metal mini procvess hadn't changed in 30+ years???? Wrong! Ther have been massive changes.

Trench_Raider
13-06-2005, 13:30
That's all well and good, inflation exists. However GW's price increases have been well above the average rate of inflation since 1992 or so. In any event, their pricing is completely out of keeping with most of the rest of the wargaming miniature community. Take two other British companies that are of similar or greater quality. Foundry is also expensive, (they have gone the rote of GW in insane pricing in the last five years or so) but they are still not as pricey as GW. Front Rank cost a little over half of what GW does, yet are of similar quality. when you add to this blatant price gouging their other unsavory practices, then you see why many people (myself included) hate them as a company.

As to there not being a golden age, I ask you to look at Jes Goodwin's original Eldar range, the Perry's C series Dwarves, pretty much anything the Morrisons released under the Reaper lable, or Kev Adam's original Orks and tell me with a straight face the new scupts are better.

"Trench Raider"

edit: missed this point.


Twice as much metal, and a more expensive white alloy vice lead alloy.

I think "twice as much" is a bit of an exageration. As to white alloy bieng more vasty more expensive than lead, that is a crock.
About a year and a half ago I wrote an excellent post regarding the big "lead scare" of the early '90s (which turns out was baseless) and the myths it caused. It's unfortunate that the database for that time has been lost otherwise I would link it for you. In any event, I cited an industry source that went on the record at the time in saying that the newer alloys were not apreciably more expensive than lead and that tooling up for another metal cost next to nothing. Certainly it did not justify the 50-100% price increase that occured when the change to non-lead was done not to mention the blatant lie GW told us when they claimed that said change would not raise prices.

GW's "customer friendly" status was starting to slip before this happened, but they really went down hill with their cynical abuse of the lead scare and have not looked back since.

Have I told you how much I hate GW today? :p

Griefbringer
13-06-2005, 14:04
About a year and a half ago I wrote an excellent post regarding the big "lead scare" of the early '90s (which turns out was baseless) and the myths it caused. It's unfortunate that the database for that time has been lost otherwise I would link it for you. In any event, I cited an industry source that went on the record at the time in saying that the newer alloys were not apreciably more expensive than lead and that tooling up for another metal cost next to nothing. Certainly it did not justify the 50-100% price increase that occured when the change to non-lead was done not to mention the blatant lie GW told us when they claimed that said change would not raise prices.


I remember when they moved to lead-free alloy - there were price increases, but nowhere close to 50-100%. More like somewhere in 25-33% range (still steepish).

Anyway, that was far more than the actual change in material expenses - tin was more expensive than lead, but not by any insane amounts.

Brandir
13-06-2005, 14:09
their pricing is completely out of keeping with most of the rest of the wargaming miniature community.

Erm, cartels and price fixing is illegal in the UK.

And GW is a market leader, not a follower. Therefore they set their own prices.


when you add to this blatant price gouging their other unsavory practices, then you see why many people (myself included) hate them as a company.

What other unsavoury practices? I can't see any. They are a listed company that operates within English company law. If you know of any unsavoury practices then you should report them to the Stock Exchange, Police or DTI rather than rant and rave on this forum.


As to there not being a golden age, I ask you to look at Jes Goodwin's original Eldar range, the Perry's C series Dwarves, pretty much anything the Morrisons released under the Reaper lable, or Kev Adam's original Orks and tell me with a straight face the new scupts are better.

With straight face:

The new GW sculpts are better.


GW's "customer friendly" status was starting to slip before this happened, but they really went down hill with their cynical abuse of the lead scare and have not looked back since.

I find that GW's customer friendly status has improved over the years. I will be taking my disabled son to Games Day this year and GW events staff are going out of their way to ensure his experience his as good as any non-disabled attendee, despite his profound difficulties. I found it so difficult to attend the ********** show I left very early as the organisers just dismissed my queries (note: the case is now with the Disability Rights Commission so I am unable to say anything that may identify the show or organisers until the case has been investigated).

Unlike many mail order only companies, GW has a big network of bricks and mortar stores that provide great support for people into the GW games. Staff are very friendly (although one or two are a little obsessive about The Hobby!). GW need to raise prices to support such an extensive network.


Have I told you how much I hate GW today? :p

Can you be a little more explicit, as I am not sure what your opinion of GW is today?

Inquisitor Samos
13-06-2005, 15:39
Plenty of "pro-GW" and "anti-GW" comments made since I last looked at this discussion thread!

Let me add what I think, IMHO, is a moderate, middle-of-the-road view.

A brief intro: I'm a long-time buyer of GW's products, and someone who is quite fond of one of their background settings (40K universe) as well. I am not, however, a "die-hard fanboy type;" I do buy other things from other gaming settings that have nothing whatever to do with GW's products or IP. So, I am neither a "GW apologist" nor a "GW despiser." Just wanted that made clear up front.

Now then, I do have a fairly good-sized disposable income for my hobby and entertainment buying. I'm not independently wealthy by any means (nor do I have parents who are), but I don't have to save for weeks just to buy more than a couple of items either. I count myself as probably about middle of the range for the size of my available hobby/gaming budget.

I have no problem with GW doing whatever it wants to do in terms of how it produces, distributes, and prices its products. I have a bit of a beef with how they seem to mistreat independent stockists in my area, but again that's a business decision: if GW thinks honking off local retailers and making it hard to find their products anywhere except from GW's own retail sources is good for their business, that's up to them. While I do like to support my local indie stores, I'm not at all beyond buying direct from GW.

My biggest problem with GW products at this time boils down to just one thing: price. The costs of GW items have reached the point now that I more often find myself deciding not to buy rather than buy, even in the case of new items. I can rather too easily convince myself that the money those items would cost would get me more if spent on something else.

To sum up: I think GW's item prices have gone past the level where they're generally seen as being worth it. Thus my "prices should be lower" vote.


In answer to two of Cloudscape_online's other original questions:

There isn't really a price that will stop me playing GW's games; I have good-sized collections already, so I can always play. There are certainly prices that'll stop me from buying more items; those have pretty much been reached, as I mentioned above!

My own preference for prices on GW items would be: the price levels as existed before the last two increases. At those prices I bought more quantity and more frequently, and if those prices were still around I'd certainly see myself still doing that now!

Rykion
13-06-2005, 15:52
GW doesn't have a large network of stores in the US. I've gamed for more than 20 years and have never seen a GW store. They've killed online retailers in the US only, to prevent IP infringement. :wtf: GW sounds like a great company in the UK and parts of Europe, but their US division seems to be sorely lacking. If part of the premium price of GW goods is the service they provide, then I've paid a lot and never seen it.

Cloudscape_online
13-06-2005, 15:53
The GW network is global and it is the customers who have to pay for it. There is no problem with that. The problem comes with the many stores that operate at a loss. having a store for a year at a cost of £36,000 per year is cheaper than a 6 commercial radio or 1 day TV commercial, and has the potential to sell on the spot. Multiply that cost (or more), by the number of stores and the payout becomes huge. GW would save more money by cutting its' losses and not using stores that generate more than a 25% loss. After all, half of the point is to be well known and I believe they managed that by winning the LOTR rights.

Brandir
13-06-2005, 16:05
GW no longer sees its stores as places to purely sell products. They are essentially loss-leaders. GW's policy is now to develop a network of hobby centres. Yes, a few will remain predominately sales points (ie those that lack room to establish a club room and are generally in shopping centres). But, as and when leases run out, GW will relocate stores to more suitable premises that can accommodate tables away from the shop floor. GW are also investigating establishing dedicated gaming room with no shop - look at the place in Sheffield.

Consider at recent financial results. In the UK just over 50% of sales were from stores - worldwide the overall share from stores was 46%.

Of course people will be able to pick out examples that do not meet the above statements. But don't get carried away with a few blips - the policy overall is in the long term to change as described above.

Cloudscape_online
13-06-2005, 16:29
Consider at recent financial results. In the UK just over 50% of sales were from stores - worldwide the overall share from stores was 46%.Yeah, but GW has reported a 28% loss in April (that's the end of the financial year). The loss is on their turnover, not on their profits, which means that in the last financial year GW has lost '$hi£load$' of money. Judging by Rykions dispostion most of the cut-backs will have been in the U.S.

Gaming rooms are good, but the customers shouldn't pay for something they may never use. Groups of customers who wish to have a regular place to play should use Village halls, and the like. Local public halls are closing down all the time because no-one supports them. For £25 per day you can get the use of an entire hall, plus storage.

Bruen
13-06-2005, 17:08
Gaming rooms are good, but the customers shouldn't pay for something they may never use. Groups of customers who wish to have a regular place to play should use Village halls, and the like. Local public halls are closing down all the time because no-one supports them. For £25 per day you can get the use of an entire hall, plus storage.

Perhaps thats true where you live but down here in Surrey the room that my club rents in a local hall costs £28 for 4 hours plus £10 a week for insurance and we can only get 6 6x4 tables in there and there is no storage.

Plus we had to wait like 6 months to get a decent evening timeslot.

For pickup games its a whole lot easier to go into a GW store where they will have terrain etc all ready for you, the only real problams with playing in GW stores are too many kids and they you can't play non-GW games.

If I thought that it would reduce the number of kids I would vote for higher prices, but I don't so I didn't.

Brandir
13-06-2005, 17:28
Yeah, but GW has reported a 28% loss in April (that's the end of the financial year). The loss is on their turnover, not on their profits, which means that in the last financial year GW has lost '$hi£load$' of money.

Wrong. GW's financial year ends Sunday 29 May 2005. There results for the last financial year will be out 26 July 2005. There interim results from 30 May 04 to 28 Nov 04 showed an increase in operating profits (by £0.5 million) and a downturn in turnover (by £1 million).

On 4 Apr 05 GW issued a trading warning that it expected its turnover to be down from the 2004 year of £151.8m. GW expect over £129 million but under £162 million by 29 May 05. This was because poorer that expected turnover during the Easter 2005 period (perhaps because it was very early this year???).

Please, get your facts right before ranting and raving.

Opus T. Penguin
13-06-2005, 17:44
Did someone suggest that the metal mini procvess hadn't changed in 30+ years???? Wrong! Ther have been massive changes.

Name one.

The metal hasn't improved (a lead + tin alloy is *still* the best way to go -- the current and past several attempts at "white metal" are an imperfect substitute for numerous reasons).

Spin moulds are still formed by the same process that they were 30+ years ago. (I'd actually hazard 60+ years, but my earliest reference is 1979, and it wasn't revolutionary equipment but rather common practice).

The moulds are still made of the same material.

You still pour the liquid metal into the mould while it is spinning. There have been automated ways to do this since at least the 1960s.

You still spin the moulds.

The metal still must cool into a solid.

What else is there? They even use the same releasing agents they did back then.

We're talking manufacturing process here.

Brandir
13-06-2005, 17:54
Name one.


The material that GW use for the moulds has changed, allowing for finer casting.

Cloudscape_online
13-06-2005, 19:38
Please, get your facts right before ranting and raving.
[Removed]. I was not ranting and raving, I was merely stating what I had been told by GW staff. If you want to start a Flame War, open up a new thread and invite me on to it, until then, don't get aggressive. If you can't play nicely, don't play at all.

The financial year does end in April, International companies like GW have 30 days from April 31st to collect information from their international departments and file them to all trade departments in all countries where they have an outlet. This information is then made public, as you said, about 2 months after that.

In anycase, from what I've been seeing here there is a trend of people not only wanting lower prices, but also their spending habits being affected by said prices. If what we have seen here on this thread is a growing trend, what does this say about the future of GW? Are they going to target younger age groups in a bid to break parent's financial standing? Are they going to target an older audience and capitalise on the fact that many people who got into the hobby as a child, are now adults with significantly large disposable incomes? Will the prices continue to soar, even though sales figures may go down? We shall see...

Mods can close this thread now, I have gotten the data I need.

Brandir
13-06-2005, 19:48
There is no need to get angry Cloudscape_online and use expletives. That sort of language is unacceptable.

Brimstone
13-06-2005, 19:48
Cloudscape Online you hearby earn you first strike for swearing and flaming.

Thread Closed.