it is a step designed to make it harder for internet stores to sell productsOriginally Posted by Sgt John Keel
it is a step designed to make it harder for internet stores to sell products
"You have respect, you don't lose your teeth" - Wanderlei "The Axemurderer" Silva
So is the rule no pictures of GW products (which is what I thought it was), or you just can't use GW's actual images but are allowed to take pictures of your GW box sitting in front of you?
It's a backwards policy if you can take a picture of the box and you're fine. Though in the US even that step doesn't matter as you can't use an automated shopping cart. And according to the War Store, it seems you can't even have a product list and prices.
They presumably think that by allowing people to use photos they've taken of boxed products, it will loosen their rights to other images they hold legal claim to.
I don't see the issue myself. If you're running a webstore and want images, spend a couple of hours scanning the front of your boxes...
Why would they want to make it hard for people to sell their product? I'm sure there is a good reason but on the face of it, it doesn't make sense. At least not to me.
Wattle's Termite Tranport
http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=259494
They want you to buy direct from them. Essentially they want to cut the middle men out of the equation. And they want to keep all the profit they get from cutting the middle men. Simple really. Time will tell if it succeeds.
Surely it would be even harder for Internet stores to sell GW product if they couldn't use pictures of the product at all?
Unless there's some strange case law, I think licencing of copyrights is a not insignificant industry in the UK which would suggest that is not the case. Also, I don't think they're using photos but a reduced version of the computer images they send to printing.
The way I see it, it's like they would allow physical stores to have only damaged boxes on the shelves. Not a huge bother, just plain surreal, especially as it's right next to competing product with ostensibly better presentation.I don't see the issue myself. If you're running a webstore and want images, spend a couple of hours scanning the front of your boxes...
Last edited by Sgt John Keel; 15-02-2012 at 08:43.
“There's a hole in the world. Feels like we ought to have known.”
Unfortunately, I get the impression GW are of the opinion the vast majority of their customer base doesn't give a damn how much they pay for their toys. So every single sale an independent retailer makes (online or otherwise I guess) means a loss to them of the difference between the trade and retail price of the item, since if there were no discounted independents to buy the product from, we'd all just pay full price for everything to GW themselves, right?
-"I agree. PCs break and enter into places, commit many senseless acts of murder by slaughtering creatures for acting their nature, loot and pillage their fallen enemies homes, and then return to town and celebrate with a drink.
Sociopaths wish they had it this good."
Not right, well the difference between trade price and RRP is right but the premise for why they do these things isn't. They try to make things harder for internet retailers to try and preserve the sales through Indies in their own perverse way.Unfortunately, I get the impression GW are of the opinion the vast majority of their customer base doesn't give a damn how much they pay for their toys. So every single sale an independent retailer makes (online or otherwise I guess) means a loss to them of the difference between the trade and retail price of the item, since if there were no discounted independents to buy the product from, we'd all just pay full price for everything to GW themselves, right?
GW doesn't look at the trade side of the business and worry that it is making 30% less on the sales as that is more than offset by the profit margin that the trade department makes due to having a very small overhead. Mail order makes the most profit, then trade and finally retail; retail needs to cover its overhead base first, once that is done then retail becomes insanely profitable (look at the LoTR profit numbers) but until then it is just a very expensive recruitment exercise
"You have respect, you don't lose your teeth" - Wanderlei "The Axemurderer" Silva
GW is the only company I have dealt with in the last 13 years that does discourage indie merchants selling GW products from using company provided and photos the indies create to sell the GW products they are licensed (by GW) to sell/retail.
I am therefore I think OR I think therefore I am?
Do you think there is a market for a photographer who might put the effort into photographing and providing a library of product images?
The Hammer and I
Looking for other Warhammer Fantasy players in the Bicester/Buckingham/Aylesbury area for informal games - can host. PM me if interested.
If it weren't for online stores, I wouldn't have dropped god-knows how much on my DE army. The 25% off (god bless you Dark Sphere) made it possible. I didn't even know about the online stores when I was first pricing up the army, and after looking at GW's prices decided against getting back into the hobby. Then I was told about Dark Sphere who were (might still be) running 25% off, and that price was affordable.
Of course, if GW dropped their prices by 25% I would happily just spend directly through them
Actually everyone would just continue to buy from discounters. I mean if GW still are retaining profits there is no reason for them to drop prices. Even if they can significantly reduce production costs we should still see same prices. However that is a discussion for a much larger (already created thread).Of course, if GW dropped their prices by 25% I would happily just spend directly through them
I have to agree. GW created a need for discounters, and now that market has been opened, GW will have the devil's own time recapturing that custom. Some would say it doesn't matter. GW gets the money from LGSs or discounters alike. They make less gross, but have far lower overheads than selling through their retail chain. It has been said that trade accounts have a better ROI than GW's own stores by people more knowledgale than me.
As for having no reason to drop prices, we'll have to agree to disagree there. It's not just about whether GW are making money to the shareholders. It's also about whether GW could be making more with a more sensible pricing structure.
SG
Epic: Armageddon
Are you a soldier, or are you a general?
no, it doesn't matter how cheap something is people will always want to buy something cheaper, that has nothing to do with the RRP on an item. If GW dropped their prices by 50% do you think that someone still wouldn't offer an additional 10% off?
"You have respect, you don't lose your teeth" - Wanderlei "The Axemurderer" Silva
I disagree. I buy most of my gaming stuff at RRP, because it's worth the price. I feel like I get value for money, and don't need to go to discounters to justify spending. If I needed to get something from GW aside from paints, I'd certainly look at discounters because I can't justify spending what GW asks. There was a time when I felt like GW offered value for money, but it is long past. When I felt it did, I bought direct.
GW's price rises have contributed in large part to the rise of discounters for this very reason. However, now that people have discovered and switched to discounters, you're right. GW dropping prices will not get customers (or discounters) to change their behavior. They will continue to buy (and sell) at discount, because now they are used to it. To bring this tangent full circle, keeping webstores (which after all are more likely to offer discounts due to reduced overheads versus B&M stores) from displaying GW stock photos or even having GW product available to put in a shopping cart system will not keep people from purchasing there. Again this goes back to value for money. GW can make it hard for companies to sell their product (a questionable decision in itself), but there is a need for discounters and people will seek them out regardless. I stand by my assertion that that need is in large part a creation of GW policies.
SG
Epic: Armageddon
Are you a soldier, or are you a general?
MSRP matters if there is a big discrepancy between MSRP and the price they sell to stockists. I believe in the Video Game industry wholesale prices to smaller stores is something like 40-45 dollars for a 50 dollar game.
I highly doubt this. Could you please provide more information on this?
fundamentally its true. If you are in a dominant place within a market (like GW, they make Warhammer, etc) then you cannot refuse to supply someone. However you can put in a set of criteria that everyone stocking their products must meet in order to be supplied, so it is easily slipped round
"You have respect, you don't lose your teeth" - Wanderlei "The Axemurderer" Silva
Well I do know a bit about antitrust law. What I'm interested in is something which backs up this specific claim in detail. We're not talking about discrimination, the claim was not limited to that. I get a littly picky with "eurosceptics".
Not quite true. Consumers look at both the percentage discount and the absolute discount when considering cheaper items, and compare to the opportunity cost of buying from said discounter.
For example; I could buy Bananas at my corner store for $5, or drive half an hour to buy them for $4? I'll buy them here, thanks.
But if I could buy a TV at my corner store for $500, or drive half an hour to get it for $400, the latter is more likely to occur.
The other reason is from the retailer's point of view. If GW halved their prices overnight, Wayland's (et al) rent, staffing costs, etc would stay the same. Suddenly they're bringing in half the revenue, and however successful they are, I doubt they could cope with that. (The other side of the coin is that we know GW can't afford to do that either).
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote