GW and pricing, there's a problem.

[Inquisitor Eisenhorn]

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. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Did they drop their prices based on falling sales in any of those charts?  You said that you are not surprised they have not. But you hit the nail on the head:  "vote with your wallet" is a stumbling block in the conversation, because it's more accurate to simply say that fewer or more people are buying. 

 

But as we've established, this never results in lower prices.  So framing it as voting is not useful.  Your individual choice--absent an organized mass boycott--is just that: your individual choice, which is not going to set any sort of trend, only fall into one if enough people are in a similar situation with the decisions GW makes about how they price their product. 

 

It's important to understand this, and not frame things in a way that is misleading to ourselves about what we can influence. 

[MARK0SIAN]

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

 

 

Did they drop their prices based on falling sales in any of those charts? You said that you are not surprised they have not. But you hit the nail on the head: "vote with your wallet" is a stumbling block in the conversation, because it's more accurate to simply say that fewer or more people are buying.

 

But as we've established, this never results in lower prices. So framing it as voting is not useful. Your individual choice--absent an organized mass boycott--is just that: your individual choice, which is not going to set any sort of trend, only fall into one if enough people are in a similar situation with the decisions GW makes about how they price their product.

 

It's important to understand this, and not frame things in a way that is misleading to ourselves about what we can influence.

I don’t think we are getting anywhere because you’re obsessing over the word vote. However I simply don’t understand how you can argue that if enough people refuse/choose/decide/opt/select not to buy their product or are literally unable to, that will not influence their strategy as a company. It is the very principle of capitalism. If not enough people are buying your goods or service you either change the goods or service, change the price or you go broke.

 

You seem to be under the impression we’re talking about this as some organised boycott or crusade when we are talking about it simply being inevitable if enough people decide to stop purchasing for whatever reason.

[Inquisitor Eisenhorn]

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

 

Did they drop their prices based on falling sales in any of those charts? You said that you are not surprised they have not. But you hit the nail on the head: "vote with your wallet" is a stumbling block in the conversation, because it's more accurate to simply say that fewer or more people are buying.

 

But as we've established, this never results in lower prices. So framing it as voting is not useful. Your individual choice--absent an organized mass boycott--is just that: your individual choice, which is not going to set any sort of trend, only fall into one if enough people are in a similar situation with the decisions GW makes about how they price their product.

 

It's important to understand this, and not frame things in a way that is misleading to ourselves about what we can influence.

I don’t think we are getting anywhere because you’re obsessing over the word vote. However I simply don’t understand how you can argue that if enough people refuse/choose/decide/opt/select not to buy their product or are literally unable to, that will not influence their strategy as a company. It is the very principle of capitalism. If not enough people are buying your goods or service you either change the goods or service, change the price or you go broke.

 

You seem to be under the impression we’re talking about this as some organised boycott or crusade when we are talking about it simply being inevitable if enough people decide to stop purchasing for whatever reason.

 

I'm not obsessed with the word 'vote'--I just said that the concept of "voting with your wallet" is not useful and a bunch of people pushed back that "no, this is VOTING when you don't buy something" and that's a magical way of thinking. 

 

I literally don't disagree with anything you wrote in your reply here.  Dropping sales WILL influence company behavior, but that behavior is unlikely to be dropping prices, since they never have.

[MARK0SIAN]

 

 

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

 

Did they drop their prices based on falling sales in any of those charts? You said that you are not surprised they have not. But you hit the nail on the head: "vote with your wallet" is a stumbling block in the conversation, because it's more accurate to simply say that fewer or more people are buying.

 

But as we've established, this never results in lower prices. So framing it as voting is not useful. Your individual choice--absent an organized mass boycott--is just that: your individual choice, which is not going to set any sort of trend, only fall into one if enough people are in a similar situation with the decisions GW makes about how they price their product.

 

It's important to understand this, and not frame things in a way that is misleading to ourselves about what we can influence.

I don’t think we are getting anywhere because you’re obsessing over the word vote. However I simply don’t understand how you can argue that if enough people refuse/choose/decide/opt/select not to buy their product or are literally unable to, that will not influence their strategy as a company. It is the very principle of capitalism. If not enough people are buying your goods or service you either change the goods or service, change the price or you go broke.

 

You seem to be under the impression we’re talking about this as some organised boycott or crusade when we are talking about it simply being inevitable if enough people decide to stop purchasing for whatever reason.

I'm not obsessed with the word 'vote'--I just said that the concept of "voting with your wallet" is not useful and a bunch of people pushed back that "no, this is VOTING when you don't buy something" and that's a magical way of thinking.

 

I literally don't disagree with anything you wrote in your reply here. Dropping sales WILL influence company behavior, but that behavior is unlikely to be dropping prices, since they never have.

Yes, I agree I don’t think we will see a price drop whatever happens. However, I think it feasible that we get to a point where sales start to suffer and so we get a price stabilisation for a few years without the usual annual increase and without each new kit seeming to cost an arbitrary amount more than than the previous one. This obviously wouldn’t be publicly acknowledged by GW but the company would do it if the alternative was a sudden drop in sales. I’ve got nothing to base this next part on but I feel like for GW a drop in sales wouldn’t be a slow wind down, I think it would be the kind of short, sharp shock that panics boards and shareholders. Edited July 19, 2021 by MARK0SIAN

[Inquisitor Eisenhorn]

Yes, I agree I don’t think we will see a price drop whatever happens. However, I think it feasible that we get to a point where sales start to suffer and so we get a price stabilisation for a few years without the usual annual increase and without each new kit seeming to cost an arbitrary amount more than than the previous one. This obviously wouldn’t be publicly acknowledged by GW but the company would do it if the alternative was a sudden drop in sales. I’ve got nothing to base this next part on but I feel like for GW a drop in sales wouldn’t be a slow wind down, I think it would be the kind of short, sharp shock that panics boards and shareholders.

 

I won't speculate as to when GW may slow the breaks on the price increases; they blast by my expectations every single year.

 

But you are right they absolutely won't acknowledge it as such if they do. 

[MegaVolt87]

I think GW's way of dropping prices will be in the form of an increased offering of bundled deals a la combat patrols etc. The ones with a vehicle or walker work out  to have those be basically free. GW also suffers from a lot of waste IMO. They should be quick on the embrace of digital rules to cut printing costs etc. Hard copy codex bundled with a combat patrol, bump up patrol box by X which is at cost print for codex. Mark up separate codex's to make them unattractive to customers to encourage the bundles at a better value proposition, along with cheaper digital rules via the app. GW has leeway to drop prices without dropping prices, its a matter of will. 

[Valkyrion]

I don't know anything about the wider wargaming community - for example, how reliant is Goblin Gaming or Wayland Games on GW products in terms of profit, or is it just the window dressing and other games actually make the real money for them.

Same with flgs and even GW brick and mortar stores - I don't have a local one of either so I genuinely don't know if there is a true need for GW store? Do they get good footfall? I do know that paying staff and business rates and all the overheads are expensive, more so in places where GW are wont to put their stores.

And flgs - are the customers in there playing 40k and AoS or would the store survive without GW products.

 

I'm just wondering if any of these would be the first casualties in a GW boycott, planned or otherwise. 

[Rik Lightstar]

I don't know anything about the wider wargaming community - for example, how reliant is Goblin Gaming or Wayland Games on GW products in terms of profit, or is it just the window dressing and other games actually make the real money for them.

Same with flgs and even GW brick and mortar stores - I don't have a local one of either so I genuinely don't know if there is a true need for GW store? Do they get good footfall? I do know that paying staff and business rates and all the overheads are expensive, more so in places where GW are wont to put their stores.

And flgs - are the customers in there playing 40k and AoS or would the store survive without GW products.

 

I'm just wondering if any of these would be the first casualties in a GW boycott, planned or otherwise. 

 

As far as I'm aware most hobby stores are reliant on a couple of "key product ranges" to keep the lights on, they're basically Magic: The Gathering, Games Workshop (mainly 40k, but AoS too) and whichever of the other Collectible Card Games is most popular in the area. There was a period where X-Wing was pretty big for a lot of UK stores.

 

Historically GW Retail stores used to generate quite a lot of new hobbyists, back in the days when I worked for them we'd get a fair number of "walk-ins" who'd have an intro game and go on to become regular customers. I'm really curious how much of an impact on sales there was from the reduction in store hours and dropping games nights since going to "one-man stores".

 

Rik

[RWJP]

I don't know anything about the wider wargaming community - for example, how reliant is Goblin Gaming or Wayland Games on GW products in terms of profit, or is it just the window dressing and other games actually make the real money for them.

Same with flgs and even GW brick and mortar stores - I don't have a local one of either so I genuinely don't know if there is a true need for GW store? Do they get good footfall? I do know that paying staff and business rates and all the overheads are expensive, more so in places where GW are wont to put their stores.

And flgs - are the customers in there playing 40k and AoS or would the store survive without GW products.

 

I'm just wondering if any of these would be the first casualties in a GW boycott, planned or otherwise. 

I can't speak for every store, but one of my local stores has said that 40k and Magic The Gathering keep them running and then the other product lines are just a little bit of extra income on top.

 

If that is true for other small independent stores, then in the event of a "GW boycott" I think the first casualties would be the smaller independent stores, then GW stores. After that, the bigger stores like Wayland Games would start to feel the pinch.

[Karhedron]

I think GW's way of dropping prices will be in the form of an increased offering of bundled deals a la combat patrols etc.

I think we have been seeing this for a while. I remember reading a while back that their response to perceived high prices was not to discount but to introduce a variety of different price entry points. I think Indomitus, the various 40K starter editions and the Start Collecting boxes all tie in with this strategy.

[Lord Marshal]

I think GW's way of dropping prices will be in the form of an increased offering of bundled deals a la combat patrols etc. The ones with a vehicle or walker work out  to have those be basically free. GW also suffers from a lot of waste IMO. They should be quick on the embrace of digital rules to cut printing costs etc. Hard copy codex bundled with a combat patrol, bump up patrol box by X which is at cost print for codex. Mark up separate codex's to make them unattractive to customers to encourage the bundles at a better value proposition, along with cheaper digital rules via the app. GW has leeway to drop prices without dropping prices, its a matter of will. 

 

They did something like this when Fyreslayers weren't selling. If you ordered a Magmadroth, they just sent you the Start Collecting(!) since it cost the same price.

[Marshal Loss]

 

I think GW's way of dropping prices will be in the form of an increased offering of bundled deals a la combat patrols etc. The ones with a vehicle or walker work out  to have those be basically free. GW also suffers from a lot of waste IMO. They should be quick on the embrace of digital rules to cut printing costs etc. Hard copy codex bundled with a combat patrol, bump up patrol box by X which is at cost print for codex. Mark up separate codex's to make them unattractive to customers to encourage the bundles at a better value proposition, along with cheaper digital rules via the app. GW has leeway to drop prices without dropping prices, its a matter of will. 

 

They did something like this when Fyreslayers weren't selling. If you ordered a Magmadroth, they just sent you the Start Collecting(!) since it cost the same price.

 

Hah, really? Didn't know that - hilarious.

 

edit: agree with MV's OG post as well

Edited July 21, 2021 by Marshal Loss

[Halandaar]

Dropping sales WILL influence company behavior, but that behavior is unlikely to be dropping prices, since they never have.

In the respect that once GW release a specific product they never reduce its price, you're right, and anybody hoping for prices on existing product to be reduced is in for disappointment.

 

But we have seen a few limited instances where poor sales based on poor reception to price have influenced future pricing. I've cited the the example before, but the Witch Elves were waaaay too expensive when they first released and comparable infantry kits that followed it were all cheaper. It took YEARS for the infantry price to creep back up to that level. GW overstepped and the target audience refused to buy in, forcing them to re-evaluate the pricing on what followed. That's what the "vote with your wallet" argument is; that if enough people find the price objectionable to the extent that they won't buy, then GW will have to think twice about pricing another product in the same way.

[battle captain corpus]

=][= Keep on topic folks =][=

 

Just discussion based on the title of the thread & the OP’s points therein. 
 

Happy Hobbying!

 

BCC

[Karhedron]

Just seen GW's financial results for the last year. https://investor.games-workshop.com/

 

For anyone who wants a quick summary, profits are up 66% and they are looking at ways to increase production as they are struggling to meet demand.

 

Whatever we may feel here on this forum, objectively speaking, GW does not seem to be running into any kind of price ceiling from the general customer base.

[MARK0SIAN]

They have also pushed through price rises of between 2% and 7%. Totally in line with the UK’s 0.85% inflation for last year. It’s like a big hug from GW

[Dark Shepherd]

Bad news is the profits they make just from currency conversions have halved Edited July 27, 2021 by Dark Shepherd

[Lord Marshal]

They really, really, dont have any excuses for price increases for quite some time. Unless their big push into Asia is a Dreadfleet level disaster.

 

Their excuse is people keep buying no matter what and the shareholders will benefit.

[Dark Shepherd]

 

 

They really, really, dont have any excuses for price increases for quite some time. Unless their big push into Asia is a Dreadfleet level disaster.

Their excuse is people keep buying no matter what and the shareholders will benefit.

I should have said good excuse :)

[Azekai]

 

They really, really, dont have any excuses for price increases for quite some time. Unless their big push into Asia is a Dreadfleet level disaster.

 

Their excuse is people keep buying no matter what and the shareholders will benefit.

 

*Some people keep buying no matter what. Not everyone. My last three army projects all involved GW alternative parts.

I don't care for GW's modern scale-bloated aesthetic and I am certainly not paying through the nose for it.

 

I like my local GW guy but the only thing I bought from him in the last year were plain bases.

Edited July 27, 2021 by Azekai

[Valkyrion]

What does 'design to manufacture' mean in the accounts, page 12. It shows a breakdown of profit by segment, and I understand trade, retail and online, but design to manufacture is £226,000,000.  What is that?

[Inquisitor lorr]

 

 

 

They really, really, dont have any excuses for price increases for quite some time. Unless their big push into Asia is a Dreadfleet level disaster.

Their excuse is people keep buying no matter what and the shareholders will benefit.

I should have said good excuse :)

It doesn’t need one?

 

It’s a publicly listed company, with shareholders who demand growth and profit and to whom they a number of obligations. It’s entitled sell its product at a price it considers suitable for all its needs - not those of its demographic. Plainly those two will intersect at a certain point (I.e. they push prices too far) but we are not there yet, and I hazard a guess that we’re not even close to that mark.

 

Before anyone jumps in - I’m not a corporate shill. I just understand we live in a capitalist society and people are complaining about the cost of a non-essential luxury item. Some context is necessary here.

[Valkyrion]

Correct, and there's probably around 90% of GW products that I won't buy for various reasons, price being least amongst them.

 

Also, it is only fair to mention that whilst the price point of certain products is high, often too high for people to swallow, the actual gateway to the hobby is reasonably priced. 

The core rules are free and £32.50 gets you a small board, piece of card terrain and around £70 of miniatures with which to learn the game.

Granted, it's not an army, but the £105 core set is good value too, as are most of the Combat Patrol boxes, so for less than £200 you can have a roughly 50 Power necron or space army, or £250 gets you a 50 power army of both factions. (even cheaper when you can buy it from from a third party)

 

As far as high end niche hobbies go that is a really reasonable figure to start from scratch. 

[Tyberos the Red Wake]

What does 'design to manufacture' mean in the accounts, page 12. It shows a breakdown of profit by segment, and I understand trade, retail and online, but design to manufacture is £226,000,000.  What is that?

 

"Design to manufacture: this includes manufacture of the products and incorporates the production facility and the design studios. This includes adjustments for the profit in stock arising from inter-segment sales." - Page 19

[Valkyrion]

Cheers, but I still don't understand! 

It's such a huge figure, but what is it profit on?