GW and pricing, there's a problem.

[Arkhanist]

>>Price increases absolutely drive people out of the hobby, or at least dramatically curtail their purchases, and in effect they are voting with their wallet by  stopping buying."

 

Voting implies you had a choice about how much you could afford to buy. No one chooses to be priced out. 

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think we may be defining the phrase differently. I'm using this one: "to choose or vote according to what is best for you financially"

 

There is pretty much always an element of choice in what we spend money on. We can probably agree that GW stuff is not essential to life, which does distort things (people buying say, drinking water when the alternative is death, is not really a choice!). But excluding that type of purchasing, buying anything has what's called an "opportunity cost" - what you might have spent the money on instead. You're comparing how much enjoyment these particular plastic soldiers will bring you vs say, going for a nice meal with friends, or a year's netflix sub - or rent. Though people don't tend to think of it quite that bluntly, it is a big factor in how we choose whether we buy one thing or another.

 

If you don't buy GW products because the opportunity cost is too high i.e. there's other things you'd rather or need to spend that amount of money on - that's still a choice. And it can be because the products are priced too high, or the product itself doesn't appeal - you're still voting with your wallet if you think Primaris suck and don't want to buy them, whether you could affort them or not. So for GW, if too many people 'vote for' - or choose - the alternatives to buying GW products, it needs to make changes before it goes out of business. Either making their products more appealing to more people so it's worth the cost, or cutting prices so the opportunity cost is lower, or both.

 

Now, if you define 'voting with your wallet' as intentional consumer activism, akin to a boycott, then I can see where you're coming from - and yes, someone unable to afford it wouldn't be boycotting per se, as buying wasn't an option in the first place, and indeed, the effect is always going to be so small as to be meaningless as far more people aren't thinking about it at that level.

 

So I think we may be using different meaings of the same phrase, rather then necessarily disagreeing per se.

Edited July 18, 2021 by Arkhanist

[MARK0SIAN]

>>Price increases absolutely drive people out of the hobby, or at least dramatically curtail their purchases, and in effect they are voting with their wallet by stopping buying."

 

Voting implies you had a choice about how much you could afford to buy. No one chooses to be priced out.

Voting with your wallet means you are choosing not to purchase something because you think the price is too high for the value offered, not because you can’t afford it. If someone offered you a can of coke for £10 you would probably choose not to buy it. Not because you can’t afford it but because £10 is too expensive for what they are offering. You are then voting with your wallet. Even a millionaire could still objectively gauge whether something was worth what was being asked for it and make a decision.

 

Now me voting with my wallet and choosing not to purchase a new product from GW will make zero difference, I’m well aware of that. However as the prices keep increasing, the number of people voting with their wallet will also increase. At some point it will hit a critical mass where the number of people voting with their wallet will outnumber the amount of new people they can get to buy their product and their sales/bottom line will suffer.

[Valkyrion]

 

>>Price increases absolutely drive people out of the hobby, or at least dramatically curtail their purchases, and in effect they are voting with their wallet by stopping buying."

 

Voting implies you had a choice about how much you could afford to buy. No one chooses to be priced out.

However as the prices keep increasing, the number of people voting with their wallet will also increase. At some point it will hit a critical mass where the number of people voting with their wallet will outnumber the amount of new people they can get to buy their product and their sales/bottom line will suffer.

 

 

Even over the course of this thread I've changed my mind a few times about this.

I won't buy the £40 Heavy Intercessors, nor the £29.50 guardsmen, but 5 Lernaean Terminators aren't much cheaper than those two combined and I have 15 of them.

 

If the Idoneth Deepkin or Dark Eldar were £1 a model across the range I wouldn't buy any of them but would seriously consider a £350 plastic Thunderhawk or Warhound Titan.

 

Point is that somewhere along the line, GW is going to get my money. 

 

If there was a mass organised boycott and thousands (millions?) of people refused to buy their products from anywhere for a prolonged period of time then we might see a price adjustment, but good luck to anyone trying that. 

[MARK0SIAN]

 

 

 

>>Price increases absolutely drive people out of the hobby, or at least dramatically curtail their purchases, and in effect they are voting with their wallet by stopping buying."

 

Voting implies you had a choice about how much you could afford to buy. No one chooses to be priced out.

However as the prices keep increasing, the number of people voting with their wallet will also increase. At some point it will hit a critical mass where the number of people voting with their wallet will outnumber the amount of new people they can get to buy their product and their sales/bottom line will suffer.

Even over the course of this thread I've changed my mind a few times about this.

I won't buy the £40 Heavy Intercessors, nor the £29.50 guardsmen, but 5 Lernaean Terminators aren't much cheaper than those two combined and I have 15 of them.

 

If the Idoneth Deepkin or Dark Eldar were £1 a model across the range I wouldn't buy any of them but would seriously consider a £350 plastic Thunderhawk or Warhound Titan.

 

Point is that somewhere along the line, GW is going to get my money.

 

If there was a mass organised boycott and thousands (millions?) of people refused to buy their products from anywhere for a prolonged period of time then we might see a price adjustment, but good luck to anyone trying that.

Yeah a mass boycott will never happen. But what you’re talking about is exactly what I mean. You’ve judged that the heavy intercessors do not offer sufficient value for the price despite the fact that you can clearly afford them. As the prices increase there will also come a point where you will likely feel the same about the terminators.

 

As long as prices rise faster than inflation and wage growth then it’s inevitable that at some point that critical mass will be reached. For GW, all they’ve got to do is keep going until they reach that point then hold just on the edge of it forever and they’ll be fine. But, the more people who vote with their wallet means they’ll reach that tipping point sooner rather than later and prices may stabilise for a few years.

[Dark Shepherd]

Pure conjecture but post pandemic GW especially next year will be interesting.

 

Theyll be due a Space Marine wave or push after a fairly quiet first 9 or 10 months of 2021. Theyll also have a lot of data on what is selling and what isnt. Theres definitely a pent up demand for in person/store gaming and social aspect plus people wanting to field armies theyve painted.

 

But there could also be collection saturation for some which may affect new purchases. Could also be less sales for kids as theyre stuck indoors/away from friends less. Some people could also be sick of modelling/painting or even have backlogs or a glut of supplies. Then theres people rediscovering dating/boozing/gigs/sports etc. Supply issues have peeved a lot of people off too.

 

Lot of people distracted by their lockdown dogs which gets in the way of hobbying too :)

 

Conversely a lot of people couldve gotten back into GW the last 18 months too

Edited July 18, 2021 by Dark Shepherd

[Schurge]

 

By and large I am still fine with 40k prices outside of Forgeworld, they are reaching their limit however. I'd pay anywhere up to $60 for a squad of five infantry with GW's level of quality. I wouldn't pay $65. It is just a coincidence that Heavy Intercessors happen to cost my limit. Since I started in Warhammer there have been many price increases and they've never really bothered me.

 

Now where GW has crossed the line for me is some of the Age of Sigmar line and basically the entirety of Forgeworld. I'm not paying $140 for a Bloodthirster. I'm not paying $195 for a Mega Gargant. I'm not paying $100 for Varanguard and I'm not paying $165 for Archaeon. Now I would love to buy all those models. Hell you knock $40 off of the Varanguard and $60 off of Archaeon and I'd buy 2000 points of them right now. You lower the price of a Mega Gargant to $90 and I would buy it instead of the $40 Mantic giant next week for my Flesh Eater Courts. I will gladly pay more for quality or aesthetics but even that has its limit.

 

EDIT: Edited first paragraph for tone.

Schurge, all i can say is that I disagree with your sentiments on what is acceptable pricing and find it funny that you also bring to light that AOS models have crossed a price point you don't like. Others have long since reached this point much sooner than you in both systems.

 

Then they came for me.....

 

 

I don't think this is a "then they came for me" situation. I don't need to buy GW miniatures. I certainly want to, but I don't need to. Much of the AOS range costs more then I am willing to pay so I don't buy those parts of the range and I don't expect that prices will be lowered any time soon. There are lots of things I don't buy because of the price - movie theater snacks, booze at bars, restaurant food, new cars, and new phones to name a few.

 

Am I supposed to not purchase anything that has its price increased even if I'm willing to pay it in solidarity with those who are unwilling to pay it because some day down the line the price might increase beyond what I'm willing to pay? I don't know that that is a reasonable request.

Edited July 18, 2021 by Schurge

[Silas7]

 

 

By and large I am still fine with 40k prices outside of Forgeworld, they are reaching their limit however. I'd pay anywhere up to $60 for a squad of five infantry with GW's level of quality. I wouldn't pay $65. It is just a coincidence that Heavy Intercessors happen to cost my limit. Since I started in Warhammer there have been many price increases and they've never really bothered me.

 

Now where GW has crossed the line for me is some of the Age of Sigmar line and basically the entirety of Forgeworld. I'm not paying $140 for a Bloodthirster. I'm not paying $195 for a Mega Gargant. I'm not paying $100 for Varanguard and I'm not paying $165 for Archaeon. Now I would love to buy all those models. Hell you knock $40 off of the Varanguard and $60 off of Archaeon and I'd buy 2000 points of them right now. You lower the price of a Mega Gargant to $90 and I would buy it instead of the $40 Mantic giant next week for my Flesh Eater Courts. I will gladly pay more for quality or aesthetics but even that has its limit.

 

EDIT: Edited first paragraph for tone.

Schurge, all i can say is that I disagree with your sentiments on what is acceptable pricing and find it funny that you also bring to light that AOS models have crossed a price point you don't like. Others have long since reached this point much sooner than you in both systems.

 

Then they came for me.....

 

 

I don't think this is a "then they came for me" situation. I don't need to buy GW miniatures. I certainly want to, but I don't need to. Much of the AOS range costs more then I am willing to pay so I don't buy those parts of the range and I don't expect that prices will be lowered any time soon. There are lots of things I don't buy because of the price - movie theater snacks, booze at bars, restaurant food, new cars, and new phones to name a few.

 

Am I supposed to not purchase anything that has its price increased even if I'm willing to pay it in solidarity with those who are unwilling to pay it because some day down the line the price might increase beyond what I'm willing to pay? I don't know that that is a reasonable request.

 

I'm just saying that others have already reached an internal breaking point on pricing, a concept that you share. You stated that all of the price raises thus far haven't bothered you, this is what the "then they came for me" was directed at. Spend your money how you will ( I like buying popcorn & drinks at the movies and liquor at the bar ) but as others have said eventually the new-bloods stop coming and FLGs start closing, once the critical point is reached when enough people would rather go do something else.

[WarriorFish]

Given the source of the quote I am sure that a better analogy can be used as it seems more than a little absurd when we're talking about buying toy soldiers.

[BrandX]

Is there some hobby game that is priced more fairly for what you buy? I just came from playing a different game and for the price of a battle sisters squad I could have gotten a 10 man squad with zero pose options zero extras zero weapon options only 4 actual different models with 3 being cloned 3 times. Or I could have bought a 5 man squad with the same applying above. Or I could have gotten a single model which again had no pose options. Maybe it had one or two extra weapons to create 2 or 3 different models. But they only fit in one way and trying to cut them up to put them in a different pose would mean hacking through 2 inches of torso.

 

So I’m wondering is there a different game that is priced in a way that you think is reasonable? Or is the wargamming hobby in general expensive?

[BrandX]

Honestly my first purchase from GW was a steal by comparison to what I used to pay. These models are significantly better.

[Dark Shepherd]

Honestly my first purchase from GW was a steal by comparison to what I used to pay. These models are significantly better.

Its an economy of scale and relative to profits. GW is huge compared to most others so it costs less to produce most things but also they have 1974 to 1978 disco music sales levels of profit so dont need constant price increases

 

But wargaming in gen especially for quality minis is expensive

[BrandX]

 

Honestly my first purchase from GW was a steal by comparison to what I used to pay. These models are significantly better.

Its an economy of scale and relative to profits. GW is huge compared to most others so it costs less to produce most things but also they have 1974 to 1978 disco music sales levels of profit so dont need constant price increases

 

But wargaming in gen especially for quality minis is expensive

But it seems their price increase is consistent with the price of other companies.

[Karhedron]

I am not sure I agree with the concept of pricing people out. I have 3 kids so I have a somewhat limited hobby budget but that budget does not disappear if GW raises their prices. If GW raise their prices by 10%, there is no magic line beyond which I suddenly become unable to participate in the hobby.

 

I may have to save up a bit longer for a particular unit but it has not been put beyond my reach. Of course it may reach the point where I no longer feel it offers value for money but that is a choice on my part, not an arbitrary exclusion. I don't usually bother with Forgeworld stuff because it generally seems to me too expensive for something that is just a variation on what is on offer in plastic.

 

That does not mean I have been priced out of FW, I have just decided my limited funds are better used elsewhere. Clearly this has not had an impact on FW's bottom line as enough people like their stuff to buy whatever they produce. Now FW could release a model tomorrow that I absolutely can't resist. Then I have to decide my priorities and maybe forgo several other plastic units to afford this dream model.

 

No one is excluded by price rises, particularly if you have existing collections. You just have to decide your priorities and budget according to the funds you have available. This is why my Eldar still rock metal Wraithguard.

[BrandX]

I’m the same way. The only difference is I’m at the begining of my journey. My initial investment of $200 was money from my birthday and Christmas. I only work a summer job so it’s going to take me some time to build the massive force some of you have. Team yankee cost me $50 for 5 small tanks that could be used as stepping stones by my sisters. The price per model is worse than warhammer. The only difference is I only need $200 for a full army. So I don’t see an issue with the cost of the model. I see an issue with people wanting to have swarms of the models to reach a 2000 point game. That might be a requirement for events but I can play a 500 point game and I’ll only be spending 60-120 more than my team yankee army. Personally my sister army is way more interesting and fun to build and paint than my tanks. Also no one will loose their minds and tell me it’s not historically accurate to have pink tanks. One of these games is more inclusive to me and thus worth that small price increase. And it’s not actually more expensive than team yankee. It just requires more models than team yankee.

[Dark Shepherd]

 

 

Honestly my first purchase from GW was a steal by comparison to what I used to pay. These models are significantly better.

Its an economy of scale and relative to profits. GW is huge compared to most others so it costs less to produce most things but also they have 1974 to 1978 disco music sales levels of profit so dont need constant price increases

 

But wargaming in gen especially for quality minis is expensive

But it seems their price increase is consistent with the price of other companies.

Like I said, they have much lower costs per unit of other companies, hence the grievance many people have, which have only gone down the past 18 months

 

Their investot statements and financial reports are very interesting to check out

Edited July 19, 2021 by Dark Shepherd

[MegaVolt87]

Also keep in mind BrandX, Battlefront minitures is a small private company in New Zealand, GW is a proper corporate entity listed on the stock exchange. Apples to oranges comparison. BF products still work out cheaper overall. You aren't getting a standard 2k list in 40k for what you are spending on a standard 100pt team yankee force.

[Firedrake Cordova]

Is there some hobby game that is priced more fairly for what you buy? ... Or is the wargamming hobby in general expensive?

Plastic models in general are an expensive hobby, from what I can see. :( I think if you're looking for cheaper models/systems, a lot of people will point at Frostgrave/Stargrave, the Warlord Games games (mostly authored by ex-GW people), Perry Miniatures (the Perry twins used to work for GW way back when, and made a large proportion of their line), Infiniti, and some of the "independent" games like Badgers and Burrow. Can't say I have any experience with them, mind.

 

I would also add that it depends on where you are in the world. In the UK, a box of Intercessors is cheaper than a box of Privateer Press Grymkin Hollow Men, but in the US the situation is reversed (the Privateer Press set is also more expensive in the UK than a straight currency conversion would indicate; same with the Intercessors in the US).

 

I am not sure I agree with the concept of pricing people out ... Of course it may reach the point where I no longer feel it offers value for money but that is a choice on my part, not an arbitrary exclusion. 

To be honest, what you've just described is being priced out, to me - something was deemed "affordable" by the hypothetical you (as in, you are willing to pay that price), the prices went up, and you now no longer do.

[Arkhanist]

There are multiple competitors to Games Workshop. The biggest is x-wing, which is even bigger than 40k. Obviously  it doesn't compete in quite the same market segment, given the models are pre-assembled and pre-painted, but it's a lot cheaper to get into and attracts a lot more casual players because of both factors.

 

Warmahordes is another notable competitor, and again cheaper, though you don't get the customisation of games workshop models.

 

Personally, I think the biggest threat to GW is 3d printing. You can buy a good 50nm resolution resin printer for $200, or a 35nm one for $300 (plus taxes and shipping). 50nm is as good a quality as plastic with a little cleanup, and 35nm is sharper detail still.

 

Resin printing models does have a learning curve, but not that steep. There are non-toxic eco resins now, and you can print infantry sized models for next to nothing. A cadian-sized infantry model is 7p of resin, 10p if I do it multipart and takes a couple of hours to print a unit's worth. You can do tanks too. There are multiple popular patreons and stores for cheap model designs that are as good or better than games workshop, whether it's proxies for 40k (infantry based on french WW1 soldiers somewhat akin to Krieg is a very popular one) or for use in D&D, or other board games. And the opportunity for printing custom bits is virtually unlimited. Obviously I'm not condoing printing stuff that infringes GW copyright (i.e. outright clones), but there's lots of ways to design parts that are distinct in their own right and look good, as shapeways has demonstrated.

 

You can't use printed models in GW stores, or any 3d printed parts at all in GW tournaments - but when the cost of buying a printer + printing just one army is less than the cost of one small 40k army, and you see GW are using 3d printers themselves for their promo models (and not doing a great job of cleaning them up either), I'm not sure how much longer selling models for 30-50 times the price of a 3d printed equivalent can last, especially as the tech just keeps getting better and cheaper at a scarily fast rate.

[Valkyrion]

 

You can't use printed models in GW stores, or any 3d printed parts at all in GW tournaments - but when the cost of buying a printer + printing just one army is less than the cost of one small 40k army, and you see GW are using 3d printers themselves for their promo models (and not doing a great job of cleaning them up either), I'm not sure how much longer selling models for 30-50 times the price of a 3d printed equivalent can last, especially as the tech just keeps getting better and cheaper at a scarily fast rate.

 

Is there an example of this? (i don't doubt you, just interested to see)

[BrandX]

You aren't getting a standard 2k list in 40k for what you are spending on a standard 100pt team yankee force.

I know. I just said that. But the models I get are better. At about the same cost. It will cost me more to build an entire crusade of sisters than it will for me to get 20 tanks. But I’ll only have 20 tanks. The cost of the two kits are comparable. But with one kit I have more to paint.

[Bung]

 

 

 

You can't use printed models in GW stores, or any 3d printed parts at all in GW tournaments - but when the cost of buying a printer + printing just one army is less than the cost of one small 40k army, and you see GW are using 3d printers themselves for their promo models (and not doing a great job of cleaning them up either), I'm not sure how much longer selling models for 30-50 times the price of a 3d printed equivalent can last, especially as the tech just keeps getting better and cheaper at a scarily fast rate.

Is there an example of this? (i don't doubt you, just interested to see)

The masters are 3D printed. You can find alot of printer marks in FW stuff

Edited July 19, 2021 by Bung

[Arkhanist]

 

 

You can't use printed models in GW stores, or any 3d printed parts at all in GW tournaments - but when the cost of buying a printer + printing just one army is less than the cost of one small 40k army, and you see GW are using 3d printers themselves for their promo models (and not doing a great job of cleaning them up either), I'm not sure how much longer selling models for 30-50 times the price of a 3d printed equivalent can last, especially as the tech just keeps getting better and cheaper at a scarily fast rate.

 

Is there an example of this? (i don't doubt you, just interested to see)

 

Most recent example where it was noticeable was the cadian upgrade sprue.

 

 

 

The melta barrel in particular, and the plasma as well, you can see recurring lines. These are symptomatic of 3d printing (known as layer lines) and usually come from where you're printing a flat surface close to parallel with the print bed. It's a symptom of screen pixel size, and as printer resolution increases, this gets less and less of a problem (plastic FDM printers have much, much lower resolution than resin, thus the very visible lines on that type of printer). They're easy to fix with a sanding stick/micromesh (easier than fixing sprue marks!) but it wasn't done on the ones that made it into the promo shots. You wouldn't be able to tell otherwise, quality has gotten that good.

 

I've seen it said in multiple places that GW 3D print at least some models early so they can get to them the painters for the promo photos to go in codexes etc that have a long lead time, rather than waiting for the plastic production - and have been for a while. Given they're using CAD to design models and lay out sprues now, it would be trivial to take the same CAD files and 3d print them.

 

Further examples that have been spotted in the wild of pre-production models with minor 3d printing artifacts if you look really close.

[Inquisitor Eisenhorn]

 

>>Price increases absolutely drive people out of the hobby, or at least dramatically curtail their purchases, and in effect they are voting with their wallet by stopping buying."

 

Voting implies you had a choice about how much you could afford to buy. No one chooses to be priced out.

Voting with your wallet means you are choosing not to purchase something because you think the price is too high for the value offered, not because you can’t afford it. If someone offered you a can of coke for £10 you would probably choose not to buy it. Not because you can’t afford it but because £10 is too expensive for what they are offering. You are then voting with your wallet. Even a millionaire could still objectively gauge whether something was worth what was being asked for it and make a decision.

 

Now me voting with my wallet and choosing not to purchase a new product from GW will make zero difference, I’m well aware of that. However as the prices keep increasing, the number of people voting with their wallet will also increase. At some point it will hit a critical mass where the number of people voting with their wallet will outnumber the amount of new people they can get to buy their product and their sales/bottom line will suffer.

 

 

While it's true that if sales go down, their profits might suffer, that doesn't mean that anyone voted for anything; you and everyone are simply framing the choice not to buy something as a "vote". 

 

Does GW know the difference between people who are "voting with their wallets" because prices of kits are overpriced for their value, from the people who are "voting with their wallet" because the new kit is an ugly mess?  And how are GW obligated to respond these "votes"? 

 

Must they lower prices because you "voted with your wallet"?  No. They are not obligated to do anything because no one voted.  GW may choose to do many other things instead that you didn't "vote" for to respond to lower profits, including raising prices. 

 

I could frame price increases a different way than a vote:  When you chose not to buy GW products because of a price increase, GW is in fact selecting a different customer base with more buying power than you by setting a higher price for their product. But that sounds worse because then we're not in control in some grander market sense of why GW raised their prices, again, like every time. 

 

"Voting with your wallet" hasn't lowered GW prices, not once.

 

You can tell yourself you are voting when you don't buy something expensive, I just don't see the point.

 

The actual concrete actions an individual could take to cultivate an environment where the cost of the hobby went down are well outside of the scope of discussion for the board, unfortunately. 

[Azekai]

 

 

>>Price increases absolutely drive people out of the hobby, or at least dramatically curtail their purchases, and in effect they are voting with their wallet by stopping buying."

 

Voting implies you had a choice about how much you could afford to buy. No one chooses to be priced out.

Voting with your wallet means you are choosing not to purchase something because you think the price is too high for the value offered, not because you can’t afford it. If someone offered you a can of coke for £10 you would probably choose not to buy it. Not because you can’t afford it but because £10 is too expensive for what they are offering. You are then voting with your wallet. Even a millionaire could still objectively gauge whether something was worth what was being asked for it and make a decision.

 

Now me voting with my wallet and choosing not to purchase a new product from GW will make zero difference, I’m well aware of that. However as the prices keep increasing, the number of people voting with their wallet will also increase. At some point it will hit a critical mass where the number of people voting with their wallet will outnumber the amount of new people they can get to buy their product and their sales/bottom line will suffer.

 

 

While it's true that if sales go down, their profits might suffer, that doesn't mean that anyone voted for anything; you and everyone are simply framing the choice not to buy something as a "vote". 

 

Does GW know the difference between people who are "voting with their wallets" because prices of kits are overpriced for their value, from the people who are "voting with their wallet" because the new kit is an ugly mess?  And how are GW obligated to respond these "votes"? 

 

Must they lower prices because you "voted with your wallet"?  No. They are not obligated to do anything because no one voted.  GW may choose to do many other things instead that you didn't "vote" for to respond to lower profits, including raising prices. 

 

I could frame price increases a different way than a vote:  When you chose not to buy GW products because of a price increase, GW is in fact selecting a different customer base with more buying power than you by setting a higher price for their product. But that sounds worse because then we're not in control in some grander market sense of why GW raised their prices, again, like every time. 

 

"Voting with your wallet" hasn't lowered GW prices, not once.

 

You can tell yourself you are voting when you don't buy something expensive, I just don't see the point.

 

The actual concrete actions an individual could take to cultivate an environment where the cost of the hobby went down are well outside of the scope of discussion for the board, unfortunately. 

 

 

 

Trends start with individuals. What about Arkhanist's excellent and well documented post where in the 2010s so many people opted out of the hobby that GW was hemorrhaging money? They were forced to right the ship or die as a corp. Things seem to be getting out of whack again. If enough people go cold on the hobby, GW will be left sitting there with their overpriced plastic and resin and wondering what happened.

 

Forget the word 'vote' for a minute, it seems to be a big stumbling block. No one has to buy GW's crap. If GW is marketing their minis as an upscale luxury item only, that is a tactic they may well take, but the tradeoff is that they will naturally be reducing who can and will buy their product (it's already a niche market); they may well overshoot the mark and in their search for profit drive themselves into irrelevancy.

 

Note that I am not surprised the prices haven't fallen- when you see products consigned to the bargain bin with prices slashed, it devalues a brand, it sends the message that no one cares about this stuff. GW is likely unwilling to admit defeat... and why should they? Unless large numbers of consumers reject them (via voting with their wallets, per se), they have no incentive to change. 

 

 

 

 

[Lord Marshal]

Gentrifying is an appropriate word. When I got into the hobby some twenty years ago, being an impressionable Lil Timmy, I knew if I saved up my £3/4 pocket money for a couple of weeks I'd be able to buy a blister pack for this or that character. Now I don't know if the much younger Lil Timmy's had their pocket money go up with inflation, but unless we're talking about a largely middle/upper-class demographic, I don't see me having been able or even wanting to buy a Primaris Captain at half the cost of a new video game. 

 

This makes me wonder what exactly GW's target demographic is now. The Kirby Era openly made it clear, they wanted 'em young, get them fixed up early, squeeze the parents and the teenagers and then move on to the next lot. Unless their strategy is entirely to bank on 'the rich kids' I don't really see how that can work now? It definitely feels like the median age for 40k/AoS players has gone up, even the new starters largely seem to be guys in the 20's and pretty much none at LFGS' for wargaming is under 18.

Edited July 19, 2021 by Lord Marshal