PDA

View Full Version : GW more expensive? (note not a price rant)



Jan Polder
08-03-2007, 14:11
Hi All,

I have recently scored a few old Imperial Guard Mordians. On the box were still the prices in guilders. So it was the price before we in the Netherlands wwent over to the Euro. After converting it to euro's and adding the inflation from the last 6 years using the data from CBS (Central Buro of Statistics) I came to 2,33 pound per figure. Well, it is often said that the collectors edition are very expensive but it comes out to be only 0,17 cents more expensive (2,50) then 6 years ago. that isn't nearly as bad as some people make out.

I am aware that this is netherlands specific but at least the 'price hikes' didn;t apply to us.

Just thought I'd share it with you guys.

Cheers

Max



P.S. I am aware that this might be a bit of an inflammatory thread. So If you have something to add about price hikes I would prefer if you used statistics and facts so that we have something to discuss.

scarletsquig
08-03-2007, 14:29
GW are utterly average in terms of pricing for reasonably high quality models.

Comparison of the cheapest basic *metal* 30mm models of three other companies that are similar in terms of the quality of the minatures they produce:

Urban Mammoth: 1.50
Games Workshop:: 2
Rackham: 2.25
Privateer Press: 2.50

Models are generally perceived as cheap or expensive depending on the type of game in which they are being used. Games workshop is the only one of the above that fully focuses on trying to get people to buy armies with around 50-100 models in them, rather than the skirmish-based systems of the other 3 companies. This is somewhat mitigated by the availability of cheaper plastic models, but still, the overall costs are higher, and *that's* what people think about when it comes to deciding which game to play.

Eniac
08-03-2007, 14:39
Any discussion on perceived level of quality is always going to be subjective and therefore of no real use to anyone when discussing pricing. Lets keep quality out of this.

I mean personally I find Rackham to be miles ahead of GW in terms of sculpt quality so that extra 25 pence is most definately a bargain. Also I find both UM and PP to be even in quality compared to each other yet still a fair degree higher than GW. But that does not help us any ;)

Osbad
08-03-2007, 15:11
The problem in judging the rate of increase of GW's prices is that they are so damned complicated. There isn't a single price for "a model" as a single human-sized (metal) model can cost as little as 2 or as much as 7 depending on what it is. Back in the early '80's I paid 25p for a Citadel Dwarf and 50p for an Ogre, so how do you compare the rate of inflation?

Plus they do sneaky things like replace metal for plastic and charge almost as much. Or "reduce" the price of a boxed set but include fewer figures so the unit cost increases *cough* Stealthsuits *cough*.

In the end, cold, hard facts aren't so important as our perceptions of "value for money". For instance, many other luxury goods such as TV's, computers etc are actually reducing in cost, so even small price rises when set against that backdrop feel lack a significant reduction in value. So comparing GW price rises against overall inflation in the economy isn't really valid - it needs to be compared to the inflation rate in its own "luxury leisure goods" sector of the market - and I haven't the first clue as to whether such a rate even exists.

All I can say is that compared to historicals, GW (and PP and Rackham) seem expensive - a minimum of twice the price per model. But that is explained by higher investment in the "intellectual property" over and above the basic sculpting and distributions costs of the fantasy wargaming market.

Compared to other sci-fi fantasy models GW's price isn't so radically over the top (although if you aren't specifically after GW's "look" for a given model you can usually find something cheaper online from a less well-known compoany such as "Ground Zero Games" or "Warzone"), but again, that is distorted by (at least in Europe) GW's market dominance - Rackham and PP don't gain anything by undercutting GW by much as customers rarely switch games because of the price of individual models - more because of the "skirmish game effect" and that it costs less to "buy into" a game like WARMACHINE or Confrontation because of the lower cost of an "army".

EDIT: I note the abbreviation "PP" is explained by these silly automated tags as "Plasma Pistol". Of course this is utter tosh: as everone knows, PP stands for Privateer Press!

scarletsquig
08-03-2007, 17:02
Any discussion on perceived level of quality is always going to be subjective and therefore of no real use to anyone when discussing pricing. Lets keep quality out of this.
I guess you're right... I may consider a lot of other model ranges to be pretty crude, but *someone* must like them, otherwise they wouldn't be selling and exisiting. I was just trying to give examples of some of the most popular ranges for comparison rather than trying to spark any debate on quality.


more because of the "skirmish game effect" and that it costs less to "buy into" a game like WARMACHINE or Confrontation because of the lower cost of an "army".

The "skirmish effect" is an important consideration.

That said, I just looked at Warmachine, and worked out I'll have to spend about 110 in order to get a decent looking 500 point force together.

Seems very expensive for a skirmish game, so I'm debating whether or not to buy into it. I'm starting to think "less figures to paint" may be a more important factor with warmachine than "less figures to buy".

Urban war on the other hand was a no brainer - 33 quid and I've got me 14 figures (with 7 models a side), rulebook, a funky plastic model building and the website has around 200mb of free background/ army lists/ support/ player articles etc. to read through. :)

You mentioned ground zero games, they're also really good - I started playing Full Thrust purely because it cost me 15 for a fleet, and again, the rules are free to download online.

So yeah, I'd have to agree with the "overall cost" being a factor when it comes to a new army, rather than the price of the individual model.

15 full thrust or 33 urban war is a much easier decision for me than 100 warmachine force or 200 GW army.

Vic
08-03-2007, 17:13
BUY OR DONT BUY!!

Sheesh!

The price is what the price is. I dont much care for GW's pricing, so I look for the best prices out there for my 40K kick. GW can charge what they want, it is their business. I can pay what I want, it's my wallet. Where the two meet is what I am willing to pay for 40K product. That that point of meeting is whats weening me from the amount of 40K kick i get/need is another story.

Bombot
08-03-2007, 17:18
Hasn't the pound got quite a bit weaker against the euro compared to six years ago?

If you want to do a valid comparison, don't convert to pounds.

The game is afoot
08-03-2007, 21:27
Hasn't the pound got quite a bit weaker against the euro compared to six years ago?

If you want to do a valid comparison, don't convert to pounds.

That is a very good call Bombot.


There isn't a single price for "a model" as a single human-sized (metal) model can cost as little as 2 or as much as 7 depending on what it is. Back in the early '80's I paid 25p for a Citadel Dwarf and 50p for an Ogre, so how do you compare the rate of inflation?

The variables are enormous.


All I can say is that compared to historicals, GW (and PP and Rackham) seem expensive - a minimum of twice the price per model. But that is explained by higher investment in the "intellectual property" over and above the basic sculpting and distributions costs of the fantasy wargaming market.

Historicals are cheap and very good.

Eniac
09-03-2007, 06:49
I am not going to argue with that logic. If you shop around for historicals you can pick up models for 50-70p a piece from companies like black tree designs. And I do :p

Foundry do some quite good sci-fi minis but they are more expensive at 1 per figure.

marv335
09-03-2007, 11:43
frankly GW is the cheapest hobby/pastime i've got.
i mean, my xbox360 and a few games cost the same as two 1500pt armies

buzzin_yoof
09-03-2007, 16:19
frankly GW is the cheapest hobby/pastime i've got.
i mean, my xbox360 and a few games cost the same as two 1500pt armies

Excellent point, which people often ignore. How much time and enjoyment do you get out of a box of little men at 20 compared to a night out 30+ or a trip to the cinema (20 for 2 tickets, travelling, and snacks).

Also, until recently (year, 2years?) Dreadnoughts cost 20 a go. This is the exact price I payed 13 years ago when I bought my 1st dread.

Eniac
09-03-2007, 22:00
Yes but your first dread was a good old chunk of highly detailed lead, not a few pence worth of chunky cheap plastic.

lord_blackfang
09-03-2007, 22:07
Yes but your first dread was a good old chunk of highly detailed lead, not a few pence worth of chunky cheap plastic.

What is it with the lead fetish? I'll gladly pay the same cost for a plastic model that I can convert without power tools, holds paint better and doesn't make my arms ache when I carry my army to the club.

Eniac
09-03-2007, 22:15
Hey, I like knowing I have gotten my money's worth of material. If I pay 25 quid for a single model it better be made of something more valuable than plastic.


Plus metal holds paint just as well, you just have to have prepare it and treat it differently. Plus I work out ;)

Crazy Harborc
10-03-2007, 00:35
Metal minies don't really float my boat like plastic does. That said, thanks to the much shorter usage life of the molds for metal minies AND the assembly difficulty of metal versus plastic minies....GW metal minies are models of last resort for me. Even at todays prices GW's plastic minies are far, far better than GW's metal minies.

gjnoronh
10-03-2007, 03:47
Hey, I like knowing I have gotten my money's worth of material. If I pay 25 quid for a single model it better be made of something more valuable than plastic.
Just a reminder lead goes for less than 4 dollars US per pound (0.5 KG)
Most miniatures are going for 4 dollars per - at about a 4 gram (0.04) weight.

Yes Pewter costs more - on the order of 10 dollars per pound still a ridiculous raw material/cost ration

You aren't getting even _remotely_ your moneys worth of raw materials on a miniature from any manufacturer the packaging, and shippping almost certainly cost more than the raw materials.

Of course a DVD/CD costs pennies in raw materials, my car is probably worth about 200 dollars in raw materials etc. That shirt you are wearing probably has about 50 cents or less of cloth in it.

Raw materials don't tell you much about what a thing is worth.

Eniac
10-03-2007, 07:35
Of course, but that doesnt mean I shouldn't value pewter or lead more than mere plastic.

Plus I like the weighty feel of a nice metal miniature and to go off topic a little, I find the quality of metal minis higher in terms of detail and that for me is why metal is better.

buzzin_yoof
11-03-2007, 19:39
You aren't getting even _remotely_ your moneys worth of raw materials on a miniature from any manufacturer the packaging, and shippping almost certainly cost more than the raw materials.

...Raw materials don't tell you much about what a thing is worth.

I'm sure wood is very cheap in terms of how much you get for a , but people still don't mind paying hundreds for a table or a wardrobe.

My personal opinion - I would rather have plastic so it is easier to convert and MOST IMPORTANTLY - paint on plastic models don't chip if you drop them!

Eniac
11-03-2007, 21:42
I have never ever in 12 years dropped a single miniature. And the only accident I ever had was some 13 year old who hung over the table and his baggy hoody took my elf mage right off the middle of the table onto the floor. Damage? A broken sword but no chips. I use varnish, you should try it.