Kirb your enthusiasm!
"...generalship should be informing list building." - Sir Biscuit

Wednesday, April 13, 2011
"Why Does GW Keep Making Units With No Models?!?"

One of the strangest complaints I hear around the web (aside from "the new DE/GK codex sucks compared to the old one!") is about models. Specifically, about the lack of some of them for units released in the new books, most especially the Venom, Tervigon, and Thunderwolf. Why, the line of thought goes, would GW make such patently awesome units without also producing a model for them? Even long after the units have shown their dominance models are still strangely absent. Just as often, it continues: units SHOULDN'T be put in codices if they don't have models, it's unfair!
I do not have the words to describe my disbelief at this garbage. Well, I have words, but Kirby would undoubtedly edit them out of my post, so we shall pretend that I do not.
The reasons for not producing models are manifold; for one, it is expensive to do so, and GW cannot afford to invest such enormous sums of money in every single book. For two, doing so is freeing to the codex writers, as it allows them to fill gaps and tweak strategies without being beholden to the lengthy requirements of model design six or twelve or twenty-four months in advance. For three, it gives converters something to do, and given that these complaints often come from the same mouths that kvetch about "cookie-cutter" armies and "spam" killing the hobby side of the game, it's hilarious indeed to watch the hypocrisy in action.
Let us start off with cost. Although I am personally not any kind of expert on metal-casting and mold-forming processes, I am told that such things are... not cheap. And by "not cheap" we mean hundreds of thousands of dollars. Games Workshop, although the largest miniature wargaming company in the industry (to my knowledge), is still tiny by most comparisons, and such investments can't be taken lightly for them. Contrary to popular belief, I do not see any connection between the new kits they bring out and which units in a codex are "strong." VT2 seems convinced, but I would point our dear readers to such triumphs as the Pyrovore, Legion of the Damned, Thunderfire, etc; these units are atrociously bad and yet GW chose to sink huge sums of money into their releases. And this is not simply a case of something being deceptively underpowered, like Howling Banshees- these are units that are obviously worthless to even the most ravening fluff-junkie. No, whatever their reasoning process may be for choosing which units get a model, there is no relationship to the power levels involved and just as obviously Games Workshop cannot afford to make a model for every unit under the current design philosophy.
How and why so? Well, back in the day, this wasn't true. Codices were "bland," having a relatively small number of different units in them with options piled on options for each unit. Sternguard and Vanguard used to be the same generic unit- "Veterans"- with no special rules to speak of. However, somewhere around the dawn of 5th edition, all of that changed- by the close of 4E, GW realized that piling tons of worthless choices onto a unit just made things annoying and encouraged bad army design, while one or two overpowered options inevitably snuck through the cracks. So instead they chose to forcibly diverge units from each other and limit the choices each unit could make- hence Sternguard/Vanguard, Warriors/Shrikes, etc. This made playtesting infinitely easier and made playing easier as well- you had fewer options to explain to your opponent and fewer silly piece of wargear to write down when making army lists.
This created a new dilemma, though: such "divergent" units, when added to the expanding fluff and new units created for each book, meant that some things had no model. Before, this was a no-no; GW was a model company and you didn't write things into codices unless they had a model, because that was basically advertising a product you didn't sell. There were some rare exceptions (like Space Marine Drop Pods), but they were few and far-between, not the standard that they have become today. However, under the new philosophy of codex design, GW realized that such units were not only necessary to write balanced books, but also beneficial to them.
If you want to play with a Tyranid or Dark Eldar army these days, what do you do? Buy a bunch of Hive Guard or Warriors, sure. Add Raiders and Incubi, naturally. But what then? You still need to make some Tervigons/Venoms. So you buy a couple other kits- maybe a Carnifex and Trygon, or maybe a Vyper and Raider. You hack them up. You add bitz you had left over. You get some third-party stuff even, maybe. But here is the important thing: you buy more models. It is nigh-impossible to construct these "units without models" without buying at least some GW models, and often a LOT. Conversions, unless you have tons of bitz laying around or are extremely savvy with Ebay, are expensive things. They may only be a bit more than the standard GW kit, or they may run 2x or 3x the cost, but they are almost universally more expensive. Games Workshop has learned that they are okay with this- when someone makes a Griffon out of a Basilisk and some parts, they are still buying a Basilisk kit; likewise a Thunderwolf from a box of Space Wolves and some Fantasy horses/daemons/etc. Even without them lifting more than a couple fingers to add some text to a book, they are making money off of models that don't exist, and doing so in a way that fits almost perfectly into what they want to be their business model (i.e. selling miniatures, not rules.)
So look at this from GW's perspective: having units without models lets them write a better game, encourages people to buy their stuff, encourages kitbashing and other hobby activity, and saves them a ton of money on making expensive molds. What's not to like.
And from the player's perspective? We get a cool new unit that you can use or not as you prefer, a chance to showcase your creativity if you so desire and a better-balanced codex thanks to the freedom the designers get.
Would it be nice if some of these things got models? Certainly- I can understand that not everyone wants to convert a dozen skimmers just to play an army. Do I understand why GW picks the models they do to release? Not in the slightest, but perhaps that is the burden of having to do the sculpting part of the production on a very different timeline than the playtesting portion. But, despite these difficulties, I think that the existence of these units is nothing but a boon to the game and the hobby.
Comments (84)

Sort by: Date Rating Last Activity
Loading comments...
Post a new comment
Comments by IntenseDebate
Reply as a Guest, or login:
Go back
Connected as (Logout)
Not displayed publicly.
Connected as (Logout)
Not displayed publicly.
Posting anonymously.
"Why Does GW Keep Making Units With No Models?!?"
2011-04-13T23:30:00+10:00
AbusePuppy
AbusePuppy|Painting/Modelling|
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
SandWyrm · 729 weeks ago
A few years ago players complained that GW wasn't providing enough variety in their books. Now we have variety, but they complain that models don't exist for some units. Well, screw them. I like converting. It's part of the friggin' hobby. If you don't like it, go play Heroclix or some other prepainted collector-game.
TheKingElessar 71p · 729 weeks ago
Guestivus · 729 weeks ago
It's harder if you're looking for something like Eldar or Dark Eldar say, which have some pretty distinctive stylings, and in the case of the former, not THAT much in terms of bits that you can add on smoothly. Or even Tau, but at least there many sci-fi battlesuit options are available, and their vehicle aesthetic could find similarities less... ornate science fiction hovertanks.
TheKingElessar 71p · 729 weeks ago
dynath · 729 weeks ago
Desc440 · 729 weeks ago
Guestivus · 729 weeks ago
Not to mention, I have a hard time conceiving of a universe in which things like Scibor or CHS are going to run GW out of money. Not to mention, it's still up in the air as to whether any laws have been broken - GW just throws it's weight around, but it hasn't actually faced a challenge yet until CHS got pro bono defense.
karnstein · 729 weeks ago
Now regarding wracks and scourges: The old models are plain fugly and 99% of the conversions failed in my humble opinion. They either didn't capture the new artwork/idea behind scourges, for example just replicating the look of the old ed3 scourges using new plastic warriors and wings from other sources. Or they involved some serious conversion/Green Stuff skills. And not everybody has those skills, regardless of his motivation to field such units (themed flesh cult, cookie cutter min/max wrack-troop choices)
I -for example- fail at doing anything beyond filling gaps with GS and there isn't any model around (GW and 3rd party) that would work as a substitute. So for me not getting wracks done is a stupid move...
Mark99 · 729 weeks ago
SandWyrm · 729 weeks ago
doomicon · 729 weeks ago
Budget and earnings. GW has to stay within a budget (even slash it at times), to meet projected earnings to investors. Believe me, if they had any remote idea how well Thunderwolves or Tervs would sell, they would've definitely have produced them over the aforementioned units. Look at the GK box set, that is exactly where GW wants to go... Minimum investment, Maximum profit. One box set to meet multiple troop choices.
Not putting limits on Codex authors (great business decision), allows them the opportunity to make better future decisions on models to produce. Since it's obvious they've made poor decisions in the past, that cost them potential revenue. What better way to assure good production decisions than see what players will use and pay for, before actually investing the money? Don't expect these unit profiles to change all that much in the future (if GW is smart).
I can assure you, "gives converters something to do", it is not anywhere on GWs Goal list for any Fiscal Year. This is just a byproduct of poor business decisions, Legion of the, 'Damn(ed) these models won't sell' AND/OR good business decisions, the limited restrictions placed on codex authors (good business decision).
Remember they are a business, their goal is to make money, period! Any decisions they make are to support that one any only goal. The better job they do at making money, the better we are for it, as that means they are meeting our gaming needs.
Dobi · 728 weeks ago
Sure, creating new models are pricy and time-consuming and they do not know, how it will sell, but hell, it that's the truth, why are they making Pyrovores in the first place? GW does model making for a living. This is the thing they do! I think it's a big hard to believe that they cannot afford doing the thing they are making money of...
doomicon · 728 weeks ago
Had GW made the decision say a year or so ago, to use those resources to produce Thunderwolves, it probably would've pushed back the release dates of Dark Eldar and Grey Knights. They'll make more money the second quarter of this year on Grey Knights, than they would if they had pushed it back and released Thunderwolves. Hence, you get grey knights and not TWs ;-)
TheRhino · 729 weeks ago
Metal models, however, are cheaper to make moulds for. Spin casting requires far less machinery, and the process of making the vulcanized rubber moulds is significantly cheaper than CNC milling. Problem here is that the price of tin has skyrocketed in the last 5-10 years, so it's harder to make a profit on the end product when so much money is tied into the materials.
Benjamin · 729 weeks ago
Think about this for a second...what was the old GW website like...you could buy any bit from just about any kit at about anytime you wanted...the new site came up and now the only bits you can buy are the ones that upgrade what you already have...nothing special there...
This plan is freakin brilant...and I am glad someone else sees what I am talking about...
maddoc · 729 weeks ago
WookieeGunner · 729 weeks ago
With the stat card model (not saying GW should go with it, just using it as an example) every army gets something all the time, so the "I'm a blah player" is still trickling in their money by buying things before the Internet has gotten a chance to vote it up or down. By going to the wave sales model (release the codex with missing models and then release those missing models through the life of the codex) GW can keep its codex based system and still get the trickle form of purchases.
sinsynn 106p · 729 weeks ago
We hope you're enjoying our latest satellite site, 3++ is the New Black.
If you like what you read here, be sure to visit our MAIN PAGE, which can be found at: http://www.belloflostsouls.net/
Tired of boring old 'strategy' articles? Hate 'modeling' and 'hobby' advice?
There's many more unsubstantiated opinion pieces there!
wisdom like silence · 729 weeks ago
GOOSE · 729 weeks ago
Wait, what?
sinsynn 106p · 729 weeks ago
but whatever...
Maybe instead of THIS nonsense, Abuse Puppy- who normally writes just about THE BEST TYRANID ARTICLES EVER, ANYWHERE, could have written something about how 'Nids can 'adjust' to GK (Less MC's and reliance on Tervigons and Hive Guard- more Deathleaper and swarm-style lists, for starters).....
Rather, we get this- 'theorizing on GW business strategy' BoLS styled piece, which helps the Hobby how?
It doesn't....it just gets 'clicks and comments,' and contributes nothing but hot air.
That seems to be the direction Kirby has been taking this blog since he started writing for the Bell, and I hope it works out for him.
It just kinda saddens me to see this formerly excellent blog dumbing down the content, and including filler pieces like this, just to retain the odd, stray Sheeple readers that make their way over here from there.
abusepuppy 121p · 729 weeks ago
I didn't write a "how to beat GK" article because I haven't figured out a way to do it; it's that fucking simple. I'm not going to make shit up just so you feel special about your army- I like Tyranids, but I'm not trapped in a delusional dream world where they will always be awesome no matter what happens.
sinsynn 106p · 729 weeks ago
But I got cursed at! I must be special!
Uh, thanx...I guess?
I can only hope that my complaints are striking a chord, and that even if you curse at me, click the 'thumbs down' thingy a million times, or whatever- somehow the current trend will reverse....
No more 'whatever is trending on the Bell' follow up pieces...
("Today they got 300 comments on a 'Counts-As' article! Quick, write something about 'Counts-As'! Or maybe Grey Knights! How many comments on that Grey Knights piece?")
No more 'Stelek Lists- but we changed one thing....Here's an article about it!'
("We took down 'the Quote,' and credit him with the list....think anyone will notice?" Yeah, we do)
Meh, I remember when this site had it's own identity....despite your cursing, Puppy, I'd like to see it return.
Sorry you don't like hearing it.
Comrade · 729 weeks ago
40k fan alright.
I'm... a little confused as to the GK bit. Everyone was, has been, and is still talking about GK. It was a big thing, just like the release before it. Is it a coincidence that BoLS and 3++ were talking about the samething, give that they both follow and cover the same hobby?
abortedsoul · 729 weeks ago
But I got cursed at! I must be special! "
lol pwnt
abusepuppy 121p · 729 weeks ago
Thanks for your contribution, poster!
Kirby 118p · 729 weeks ago
I and the rest of 3++ don't copy shit from other places. Counts-as was an issue raised surrounding Vince's models, had nothing to do with BoLS and things like this have cropped up on 3++ before. 5th ed in general, 5th ed books, Swedish Comp, Dutch Comp, Forumitis, etc. It's not like we've suddenly started putting out opinion pieces all of a sudden, nor are they taking up the majority of the posts.
If Stelek has posted a list similar to something I was going to post, I'm not going to change one thing. I'll more than likely not talk about it as it's pointless. If they are similar concepts or a concept I discuss which relates to something else in the post, ya it gets a link. Some of my lists look strikingly familiar to Stelek's and he hasn't always posted them first.
I also want to point out you only comment on the opinion or editorial pieces and you often have a very strong opinion which is against the grain of what most other people believe. Nothing wrong with that but complaining about those pieces when you never comment on the tactics or gameplay articles yet bitch about there not being enough of them seems two-faced. If you want those type of articles, contribute to them rather than complaining on a different article in an inflammatory way.
Puppy has never indicated either of these past two articles are correct but his opinion. I believe he made this quite clear. I hope he will do a more in-depth article on GK v Nids after he's had some more games with them. I agree with his premise that Nids have a hard time against GK. I don't think it's auto-lose by any stretch of the means but it is a difficult match-up. His previous post focused on looking at just one side of that analysis and his opinion. He made this very clear.
You're entitled to your opinion but there are ways to go about expressing it which don't get you such negative feedback.
sinsynn 106p · 728 weeks ago
(somehow it's more dramatic all in caps, no?)
Anyway, I'm done 'whining like a little b*tch,' since I'm afraid our friend the Puppy here may have an embolism.
(the cursing? Kinda unnecessary, Puppy....)
Kirby 118p · 728 weeks ago
Roland Durendal · 728 weeks ago
now, how bout we get back to friendly discourse and drink a few pints of Fosters and eat some nutella while we surf the Great Barrier Reef and chase sheilas around.
PS, did I miss any Aussie stereotypes with that Kirbz :p
Desc440 · 728 weeks ago
The clear cut proof that Aussies are all nuts.
Kirby 118p · 728 weeks ago
Desc440 68p · 728 weeks ago
Lurking Horror · 728 weeks ago
Oh, and Vegemite isn't made from nuts - its made from a yeast extract that is a byproduct of beer brewing :)
We're happy little Vege-mites here in Oz!
N.I.B. · 729 weeks ago
abusepuppy 121p · 729 weeks ago
You honestly think this? That GW doesn't try to figure out how well new models will sell?
>I hate converting, I don't want to spend hours and good money for a model, only to ruin it.
Your choice, obviously, but I don't think you're in the majority here. It's not like it's terribly hard to convert a Tervigon- Scything Talons in place of front "legs", done.
N.I.B. · 729 weeks ago
>You honestly think this? That GW doesn't try to figure out how well new models will sell?
GW doesn't develop a new model with the assumption that it will be a loss.
I hate converting, I don't want to spend hours and good money for a model, only to ruin it.
>Your choice, obviously, but I don't think you're in the majority here. It's not like it's terribly hard to convert a Tervigon- Scything Talons in place of front "legs", done.
You think I who preferes a real Tervigon/Tyrrannofex/Harpy instead of a badly disguised Carnifex is in a minority? Well, you're entitled to an opinion even if you're wrong of course.
Dobi · 728 weeks ago
Although maybe it is not so had to make a Tervigon-like something from a Carnifex, but hell, then we could all go and play papercraft as well because it is much easier to write "Tervigon" on a piece of paper and put in on a base. Or we could use a soap for it... Sure, I'm exaggerating here, but I guesst it's not the minority of players who think that every single model and option that is in the codex should be available as a model...
(Not to mention WYSIWYG here...)
Desc440 · 729 weeks ago
Robbie · 729 weeks ago
Seriously though, excellent article. Much better than what I've seen on the rest of the net.
lexingtonnet 110p · 729 weeks ago
Two kinda minor points, though -
1) The models you note as being useless are all, importantly, metal. Metal spin molds are a *lot* less expensive than plastic injection molds - like, by an order of magnitude or two. There's still mediocre units released in plastic, but it's far fewer by comparison. This probably isn't a coincidence.
2) "Gaps" in lines has been an issue with GW since *forever*. There wasn't a Land Raider kit for the entirety of 2nd Edition, and the 3rd Edition Marine Codex had been out for some years before it finally hit. Orks *never* got a Skarboyz unit, despite the fact that they were probably the best infantry choice in the 3rd Edition Ork book. The Wave Serpent came out, what, eight or nine years after the Falcon kit? A lot of these sorts of things were fixed by the end of 4th Edition, but that left GW with little to do besides update aging sculpts. So, now we've got an era where lots of new units get added to a Codex, but don't see their model for a while. Comparatively, we're still better off than we were back when I started the game, and the only Greater Daemon available for sale was the GUO. :P
TheKingElessar 71p · 729 weeks ago
Guestivus · 729 weeks ago
lexingtonnet 110p · 729 weeks ago
TheKingElessar 71p · 729 weeks ago
George · 729 weeks ago
Desc440 · 729 weeks ago
I'd love to have a single entry that combines veterans of all kinds and would have all the options of both squads. Would be more awesome and more reflective of the fluff portraying SM veterans as fighting with whichever weapon they feel like.
abusepuppy 121p · 729 weeks ago
It's not like current Vets are exactly crippled for their weapon choices. I mean, look at their weapon options for crying out loud- Sternguard get Heavy Flamers (the only infantry in the codex!), Las, Missile, Melta, Combi, Plasma, etc, etc, and Vanguard likewise on their end of things. The only thing you can't do is mix melee and ranged specialties extensively (aside from the Sarge), and honestly all that does is stop you from building a bad unit.
Desc440 · 729 weeks ago
abusepuppy 121p · 728 weeks ago
Heck, why not simply meld ALL Space Marine units into a single unit called "Some Space Marines in a Squad" and give it options for Terminator Armor, Veteran Status, Jump Packs, etc? I bet if you spend fifty or a hundred hours you could create a set of codependencies that would allow you to "build" any SM unit from the basic Marine chassis.
There is a reason they don't do that.
Desc440 · 728 weeks ago
Second, "Because the more you mix options like that, the more difficult you make designing a codex"
That's one entry. Hardly that difficult. There's nothing that is inherently so powerful about Sternguards and Vanguards that combining them would create some sort of super-unit.
Bro_Lo 82p · 728 weeks ago
Desc440 · 728 weeks ago
As far as differing specialisations between vets part of Stern or Vans, gotta remember that one of the core principles of the Space Marines is flexibility. That's why a recruit is first a dev, than an assaulter, and when they have proven that they are proficient in both ranged and assault warfare, they get a spot in a Tactical Squad. So it's reasonable to assume that the 1st company warriors would be even more well versed in that creed, thus be able to fight as both a Sternie or Vanguard. Naturally, dependant on the Chapter, this could be restricted. In the case of the BA, for example, they might be limited to only assault Veterans.
Lurking Horror · 728 weeks ago
I was under the impression (being that I started playing/reading in 2nd Ed) that all the reserve companies were of the same standing, and that it wouldn't be uncommon for new battle brothers to serve stints in all of them...
Desc440 · 728 weeks ago
As for "different experiences", to simply be in the Tactical squads, you have had to prove your worth as both a Dev and an Assaulter. One of the key concepts of the SM is flexibility. Ergo, it makes perfect sense that vets be able to do both assault and shooty.
Alex · 729 weeks ago
If I can force you guys buy a Trygon and a Carnifex to make that stupid Tervigon, $$$ see those dollar signs? Now that you all have your kit-bash Tervigon, guess what? I'm going to release the real model, are you going to buy it when people laugh at your stupid kit-bashed model? If you buy it, more $$$. I just made you buy 3 models for that 1 stupid Tervigon. Isn't that awesome? Hell yeah. If you don't, I still made you buy 2 models for 1. What if you just buy a Carnifex for that Tervigon? That is still good, consider they may be over stock on that model which not as good. Consider the rule "whatever was good in the last codex will get nerf in the new codex." I would fucking run my company like that, too. Guess what? Some people keep bitching all day, yet, other people will still buy them.
Seriously, it's all business. GW is not stupid making money. All that bitching, what's the solution here? Get a better high pay job. Not really, 40k is not an expensive hobby.
I don't run GW, but I fucking support them. Guess I'm retarded. I throw my money at GW. Shit, I should be like some people just download free stuff all day. Being Cheap and not support your hobby.
Don't play golf if you don't have the money to buy a set of nice clubs.
Desc440 · 729 weeks ago
abusepuppy 121p · 729 weeks ago
Only because they decided that for themselves. They could do quite well as a game company, I think. (Considering how many Vypers I see in use, I don't think they were sitting on a huge stock of them, even prior to the release of the Venom.)
Most people didn't convert a Tervigon out of a Trygon + Carnifex, they only used the 'Fex. GW would have made more money off a Tervigon kit (presumably US$60, like the other big kits), minus the cost of the mold, of course. And GW didn't "make" anyone buy anything.
If GW isn't stupid about making money, why did they make the Pyrovore? All of the "GW is super-brilliant at gouging players" arguments seem to ignore their colossal fuckups.
Alex · 729 weeks ago
It doesn't hurt to give you more or new reasons to buy more Vypers. By the way, that's cool Vypers are popular in Australia. More power to you.
Where did you get the statistic regarding "most people didn't convert a tervigon with trygon + fex?" Anyway, even they don't kit-bash the 2, forcing you guys to buy 1 fex, and then the real tervigon is still a good deal. Upsale FTW! Of course they didn't make anyone buy anything, you can proxy lego all day long to play this game. That would be stupid if my logo is "I make you buy my model to play my game." -_-;; A lot of stuff don't have to said out loud. It's like McDonald advertise my burgers make fat people. Yeah....
I would love to see that Tervigon kit go for $60 before tax? Awesome!
LOL, they made Pyrovores. Damn that model is so sexy to me. I couldn't resist it. I had to trash the old biovore models and get 6 Pyrovores and green stuff the shit out of them as replacement. I'm retarded like that. By the way, have you ever seem movie where they put some fat chicks with some skinny ok-looking girl to make that skinny girl stands out more? So if I compare Pyrovore with a Trygon, Pyrovore being the fat chick. Uh-oh, more Trygon sale.
My advise to you is take some marketing classes, and then it will make sense to you.
I can understand some hardcore gamers don't like to spend time modeling or kit-bashing models. Well... Too Bad.
@Desc440
Bring the tranquilizer gun please!
Guestivus · 729 weeks ago
All I got was a bunch of yelling and no real commentary whatsoever.
Alex · 729 weeks ago
Not going to say this is a great article, nor an awful one on the record; simply pointing out some of the marketing point of view that he is not getting. He just want GW release all the good models at once so we can all have them, and that is understandable in a hobbyist's POV, but in reality, there are more to it: If I release so much, you will suddenly spend too much. Sure, a short boon, but in a long term is no wise. It's best to release them in waves and slow. If you still wonder why, take marketing class.
Guestivus · 728 weeks ago
Nowhere did Puppy say they SHOULD release the good models and forget the bad ones, or that he didn't convert models relevant to his needs, or that, generally, hardcore gamers don't convert models they want. All he was saying was, that of the models that are released, some are crappy, and of the unreleased, some are good.
Dobi · 728 weeks ago
Desc440 · 729 weeks ago
abortedsoul · 729 weeks ago
If GW took the time to work on the balance issues of the models, give everything a place in a competitive army, I believe they would make more money.
Desc440 · 729 weeks ago
Guestivus · 728 weeks ago
Lurking Horror · 728 weeks ago
waffles · 729 weeks ago
Espace · 729 weeks ago
First post here but it got me interested and hopefully I can contribute quite well. Im a Desgin Engineer in a large company, that while not making war gaming models, do make consumer products which require large tooling investments. Also I am an avid wargamer who has been into WH40K and WHFB for over 20 years.
When designing a product using injection moulding there is always the bottom line, large sunk cost in investing in the mould. Now in an intricate mould using several components (3-4 spures in most large model kits) you need to invest in at least 2-3 dupilicates over the course of a product's life(obviously subject to consumer demand). Then there is also, as stated above, the need to have several running at once to maximise production out put. So we can reasonably assume that for each kit GW will have to invest in 12-16 moulds up front. The direct cost for this will be ~£100,000-£250,000. This is before we consider non direct costs such as design, testing and CAD time.
Before anyone pushes the button and orders this anyone in their right mind will assess market demand. No demand, no model. Market demand for GW is a number of factors. Model aesthetic apeal (some people do buy for looks/fluff alone, irrespective of model rules, regardless of internet hate, which will be higher than you suspect), Model rules (what do people think of it, does it fit the style etc, point efficiency) and Cost to Point value ratio (this is also a factor which people with out deep pockets (kids, students and cash strapped parents) consider to allow them to play with the mininum investment, this is a sizeable demographic). There are probably more but these are the main ones I can think of.
The biggest benefit of producing rules before the products is that it is a very effective method of market testing. Yes you may lose sales before you invest in the tooling upon release but at least you invest in the right places. It would only take a few major relaease to flop to put GW under, they are not so large a company that they can absorb £1-£2m of sunk cost losses several times. And let us not forget that there is another investment required, marketing. To market a new product and distribute it to resellers is a massive investment, and not one to be taken lightly.
The other benefit of wave releases, as pointed out above, is more level and consistant cash flow. Any accountant will tell you that they would rather have £100,000 everyday than £700,000 only on one day out 7. Cash flow spikes are dangerous because if one sale disappears then your stuffed but if one "normal" dissappears you are not in such a bad place. Accountants and fininacial types HATE unpredictablily and uncertainty (if anyone is interested there are whole Univeristy degree courses and professional qualifications dedicated to "accounting for uncertainty" or "quantifying the unquantifiable") and when an accountant is worried there is no free cash to spend on proactive developments, which means less sales etc viscous cycle............ This is called liquidity and if a company doesnt have it, they are going to go under sooner or later. This is almost precisely what happend with the banking crisis and is one of the major risks of being a publically listed company (like GW). A lack of proactive investment is THE worst possible outcome for a company like GW and it is what it relies on for people like us to buy more stuff! Basically if GW release waves of products they will get a more stable and consistant cash flow. This is exactly why Apple releases new versions of the same thing, repetitve purchases of essentialy the same product.
I understand completely that we here are all communicating a blogosphere where rules and competiveness is priority number one but that is not everyone's consideration and as people of said GW is a private company and is there to make a profit. I have absolutely no doubt that we will see a release of TWC plastic models in a year or so, if I was GW it will be a multi kit making 3 TWC similar to Juggers
Basically I agree with their buisness model and it is a damn sight better than being able order every component individually (which was awesome for the consumer but terrible for business!). So from my point of view more risk and more new units please and make me models if they work! That way GW will still be here in 2 years time!
PS sorry for the wall of text, im waiting on an image to render!
Desc440 · 729 weeks ago
abusepuppy 121p · 729 weeks ago
This is more or less the assessment I had seen before of the situation (albeit with some different details), but it's good to see that I wasn't just being B.S.'d on the numbers involved.
And yes, bitz ordering was very cool as a service and utterly unsupportable from a business standpoint- better to leave that sort of thing to third-party retailers who are willing to undertake the risk needed and go through the work to collect/distribute the appropriate parts.
Bro_Lo 82p · 728 weeks ago
Please return.
I tried to explain this to somebody on BoLS a while back and he didn't believe the cost in setting up kits and the inability of a company to size of GW to absorb multiple kit/codex failures. I think a lot of people don't realise how big GW isn't and how little money they actually make.
Kirby 118p · 728 weeks ago
Dobi · 728 weeks ago
muggins12 45p · 729 weeks ago
Doesn't really let them off the hook for not having any bone swords and lash whips available, though. That is super annoying.
Dobi · 728 weeks ago
Espace · 728 weeks ago
Muggins12, I completely agree with you and your right I should have factored that in, it is very important to keep you customers interested. The hardest thing for a company like GW is getting their first sale from a new customer. Once you are "into" the hobby it is far easier to generate add on sales and expansions.
If im honest it is one of the things GW has been historically strategically weak on, marketing to people who don't know about WH. Very difficult to do cost effectively (eg tv adds would probably be money down the drain!) to the unwashed masses! Capturing new customers is a difficult strategy and is one which can be detrimental to your loyal fanbase. The thing some people like about this hobby is that it is niche and not main stream.
Thanks again for the kind words guys, Ill keep reading and might sign myself up for an account and take a more active role in the community!
abusepuppy 121p · 728 weeks ago
Partly as a result of this, I think, GW's support for FLGSes is somewhat mediocre- I have not heard (or seen) good things about their tournament structures, they make little event to send promo materials, etc. Privateer and other mini games companies have absolutely blown them out of the water, and it is only the strength of their model line and familiarity that have kept them in the game so far.
Antebellum · 728 weeks ago
I am from Connecticut and went to school in Boston. Right now, the closest GW store is Manhattan, NY. The next closest are in New Jersey and Pennsylvania (north and south of Philadelphia). To put that in terms of those who do not know the northeast U.S. 320 miles from Boston to Philadelphia (220 from central CT) and 220 miles Boston to Manhattan (120 from central CT). GW has essentially said 'bye' to the whole northeast.
At one point (about seven years ago) I knew of three GW stores in Massachusetts and one in Connecticut. They are all gone now. As abusepuppy pointed out, one of their main problems was that only GW models/games were supported. Also, as far as I remember, they only allowed fully (3 color) painted armies/units to play in tournaments. This severely hinders many gamers (including myself) who either paint to a high standard and are slow, don't want to paint, or have bought new things and they have not been painted.
Grand Master Raziel · 719 weeks ago
Grand Master Raziel · 719 weeks ago
The great thing about the plastic SM range is that virtually every bit made for a power armored Space Marine is compatable with any power armored unit. Therefore, kitbashing with PASMs is really easy. I jazz up a lot of Tactical Marines by using Assault Marine arms and legs, and I'm sure everyone who's ever played SMs has used Tac bitz to make themselves a couple Assault Marines with flamers. This being the case, having expensive pewter models (going to be resin now, I suppose) with a limited number of poses for Vanguard and Sternguard seems to make no sense at all. Why would you buy those models when you can jazz up some plastic Tacticals or Assault Marines with extra purity seals and other bling? The Vannies and Sternies are nice minis, but they're not so nice that you can't make equally good minis with the plastic kits, and you can achieve a much broader range of poses with the plastics. I can't imagine GW's actually sold much at all in the way of Vannie and Sternie minis. They'd have been better off investing the resources they put into the Vanny/Sterny minis elsewhere.
abusepuppy 121p · 719 weeks ago
Grovel 61p · 693 weeks ago
Congrats.