Change in GW "Terms of Trade"
Neal Catapano
following statement:
I did receive a call yesterday from a Games Workshop V.P. (ie. very official
source). Below is the facts of the call as I saw them, at this time you are
certainly free to draw your own conclusions.
The call was a polite courtesy call to let me know in person that a letter
was going out to all retailers describing a change in Games Workshop's
'Terms of Trade'. According to them, Games Workshop is disturbed by the
infringement of copyrights on their intellectual property so rampant on the
internet. Therefore to protect their IP GW will be closing the internet to
all uses of their intellectual property except for a handful of permitted
images. Also effective July 15th, no stores besides their own will be
permitted to sell GW products on the internet. The caller was adamant that
this has nothing to do with the discount levels. He gave me a number to
call with further questions and said I had to decide to comply or that I had
90 days to liquidate my GW inventory. Others who received the call were
informed of a GW buyout plan if they wanted to liquidate their inventory
back to GW.
I was rather shocked at the time and did not ask all of the questions I
should have, accordingly I will be calling GW again today. Mail Order is
'permitted', tho I am not sure what that means. Does that mean I can take
phone orders only? Can I list products for sale in a simple sentence
format? Are all shopping carts now unacceptable or just ones with pictures
and GW sales copy?
I am leaving my own conclusions out of this for a moment but I will say
this. It is my opinion that if permitted this will affect every one of the
manufacturers in our industry. Wiz Kids has often crusaded against internet
discounting, WOTC has railed against it as well. If GW closes down the
internet channel, I believe that every manufacturer in this industry will be
pressured to do as GW has done or they will be seen by independent stores as
'unsupportive of the hobby'.
This decision also seems to be entirely without legal precedent, and has far
reaching implications FOR EVERY BUSINESS SELLING EVERY PRODUCT ON THE NET.
Can a company shut down a legitimate mode of commerce in the United States?
This decision is far bigger than the Wargaming Hobby, it has serious
ramifications.
I will be talking to GW today to get further details on exactly how they
want this to work. Rest assured we are very concerned with the situation
and will post more details as they come available.
Thank you very much for your kind support.
Neal Catapano
TheWarStore.com
Kurt
> The call was a polite courtesy call to let me know in person that a
> letter was going out to all retailers describing a change in Games
> Workshop's 'Terms of Trade'.
When you begin trading with GW, are you supposed to sign a contract with
them that clearly states their terms of trade? And if so, is there any
mention of them being able to alter their terms at will?
I'm a little fuzzy in this area, fortunately never having had to deal with
the evil that is Games Borgshop in that way.
--
K *Kill the nospam to reply*
Ghetto style: finding six of your friends to help you roll a pensioner
because you're all too pissweak to manage it on your own. Even with guns.
-- RGMW outtake
Blackheart
wrote:
>It was twenty years ago today, Neal Catapano taught the band to play
>
>> The call was a polite courtesy call to let me know in person that a
>> letter was going out to all retailers describing a change in Games
>> Workshop's 'Terms of Trade'.
>
>When you begin trading with GW, are you supposed to sign a contract with
>them that clearly states their terms of trade? And if so, is there any
>mention of them being able to alter their terms at will?
>
>I'm a little fuzzy in this area, fortunately never having had to deal with
>the evil that is Games Borgshop in that way.
it's generally a legalese thing that appears in small type at the
bottom of most contracts here in the states that they can be changed
"with or without notice"
Donovan Niewoehner
what neal@thewarstore thinks about this" then I got to the end of the post
and saw who wrote it... oh.
Well, it looks like GW is in the wrong free market.
--donovan
Vanguard
wars...@optonline.net says...
Well isn't that just marvy...
They can do it, they just don't understand what it's going to cost them.
If I read this correctly it WILL allow them to dictate the terms if and
when they do re-instate online retailing.
I don't think anyone else will follow suit. No one has a marketing
department that so obviously has their collective heads up their asses
as far as GW's does.
Van
Artemis Black
"Neal Catapano" <wars...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:VBSma.5097$MB4.1...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> Due to a flood of emails requesting verification I have decided to make
the
> following statement:
>
<snipped>
Other comments to follow later depending on further facts but I'll assume
that you weren't the only large discount retailer to get such a call so I
wonder what the others are saying about it?
Regardless of their business practises I think a big hope in the 'Who's
going to fight it' department may be New Wave? Surely their GW sales have
to be subsidising their ability to carry so many lines (Or pretend to carry
them ;) )
Anyone who follows more forums than I heard anyone else speak out like Neal?
-------------------------
Artemis
Artemis Black's - Sci-Fi & Fantasy Miniatures at Discount Prices
http://www.artemisblacks.co.uk
Kurt
>>I'm a little fuzzy in this area, fortunately never having had to deal
>>with the evil that is Games Borgshop in that way.
>
> it's generally a legalese thing that appears in small type at the
> bottom of most contracts here in the states that they can be changed
> "with or without notice"
>
Microshaft had that. Every time they changed their ISP rates we'd get a
whole slew of pissed off people complaining about their EULA and whatever,
and it specifically says in that the rates and terms can be altered.
incrdbil
wrote:
>I don't think anyone else will follow suit. No one has a marketing
>department that so obviously has their collective heads up their asses
>as far as GW's does.
WizKids. WotC.
Carlo1999
Well, it could REALLY hit them harder in the purse than they
think...they will loose all those distributors marketing for them and
buying all that product the fact is that their will not be 100%
conversion of those web customers to other channels...its an
interesting move on their part (interesting = heads up their butts,
short term thinking)
The fact is the business model that Microsoft follows is possible
because all the "bad will" and bad PR they generate is offset by the
fact that they have NECESARY BUSINESS PRODUCTS, ie MICROSOFT PRODUCTS
MAKE PEOPLE MONEY. And that is a pretty good incentive. GW makes
(albeit very cool) useless toys. What will it take for a slick
company to slip in with equally cool or cooler stuff and open up to
internet and crush GW on volume through diversity of channels? It
won't take much if GW keeps doing things that piss off their customers
like they do. You can't play so ruthless in a closed hobby
community...these games are not mass market appeal and never will be.
How well did the most commercially viable LOTR GW game do? There were
stacks of it at 50% at Barnes and Noble last time I went...
ave...@spam.sux.ev1.net
everyone can use it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello,
I represent the (gaming group/store) of (region/city/university/etc.)
called (name of store/name of group). In light of your new policy
regarding Intellectual Property rights, we have chosen to protect
ourselves from future actions by Games Workshop, both legally and
morally. We will no longer allow any Games Workshop piece of
Intellectual Property to be displayed in our (store/club), including
posters that we may obtain through official Games Workshop sources or
artwork depicting any Games Workshop item, concept or process.
Furthermore, all Games Workshop products will no longer be displayed
in our (store/club) as there is artwork on the boxes that is clearly
the Intellectual Property of Games Workshop. We will also remove any
such items from our (store/club)'s inventory lists, as several of the
words, such as 'eldar' are clearly the trademarked and copyrighted
Intellectual Property of Games Workshop, and not some author who wrote
about hobbits.
In addition to the changes listed above, we will no longer allow Games
Workshop products to be played in our (store/club) as the display of
the boxed artwork or contents or the reading of the rules aloud may
violate Games Workshop's Intellectual Property rights. As
modifications and paint jobs could also go against the designated look
and feel of Games Workshop imagery, no Games Workshop model may be
displayed in our (club/store). Misinterpretations of Games Workshop's
rule sets could also be construed as a violation of Games Workshop's
Intellectual Property rights, not to mention a violation of the spirit
and the letter of the rules. As a result, no Games Workshop game may
be played in our (store/club). Nor will rules discussions of Games
Workshop products be tolerated at our (store/club). To protect us
from further action, we will also refuse entry to anyone in possession
(to the best of our knowledge) of a Games Workshop item, including
apparel, as Games Workshop might not be so tolerant of our
(members/clients), some of whom aren't attractive, have long hair,
facial hair, or might on occasion need a bath being associated with
their Intellectual property. However, we will not police these items
in an effort to make sure that they are only in the hands of the tall,
blond-haired and blue-eyed.
We may decide to allow the possession, discussion, and play of certain
Games Workshop products that are no longer in production, as they were
superior products produced by a game company that seemed to appreciate
its clients and fans, not an over-blown, micro-managed, money-driven
miniatures company that still believes it is a game company. Only
those games without any plastic miniatures that are playable right out
of the box would be allowed, in any case.
Thank you,
(name)
(owner/president)
(additional names of members)
George
<snip>
Good luck. This is unbelevable, just saw this on Slashdot(I wonder,
will we see the first USENET slasdhotting?)...
Well... I was planning on an Imperial Guard army.. Debating whether or
not I should drop that plan entirely in protest or rush to get it from
decent folks like you before the deadline.
I know one thing... Never again will I purchase any GW products
firsthand(except the possible rush purchase of IG). Even if it somehow
costs more, I'll get it from ebay rather than firsthand with my money
going to GW...
George
> company to slip in with equally cool or cooler stuff and open up to
> internet and crush GW on volume through diversity of channels? It
Welcome I-Kore. The minis might not be as well sculpted as GW, but they
are cleanly done(less detail, but what detail there is is very precisely
done). Many of them could do well as 40k minis in a pinch.
Neal- Last I saw you don't stock them, but you might want to look into
the I-Kore stuff... The Void line is theres, I don't know if they put
out anything else. They could save your business if GWs BS is as bad as
it appears and they don't realize how stupid they are being.
Robert Singers
> The fact is the business model that Microsoft follows is possible
> because all the "bad will" and bad PR they generate is offset by the
> fact that they have NECESARY BUSINESS PRODUCTS, ie MICROSOFT PRODUCTS
> MAKE PEOPLE MONEY.
WHAT???? You can buy Microsoft software anywhere and everywhere. They even
give heaps of software away and have special schemes for charities. GW's
model is nothing like Microsoft's. If they were the same then GW would be
selling to every possibly outlet at discounted prices saturating the market.
--
Rob Singers
RGMW FAQ Maintainer. See it @ http://www.rgmw.org
Send submissions to submissions at rgmw dot org changing the obvious.
"I present to RGMW....the real life model for StrongBad." (c) Inc 2003
Artemis Black
"George" <gewor...@spammers.optonline.must.net.die> wrote in message
news:Tjkna.21060$MB4.6...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
They also make Celtos (Decent miniatures with a strange tendency to carry
'huge' weapons) and Xyston (15mm range).
I believe they also have a paint system.
fog
>
> "George" <gewor...@spammers.optonline.must.net.die> wrote in message
> news:Tjkna.21060$MB4.6...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> > > (albeit very cool) useless toys. What will it take for a slick
> > > company to slip in with equally cool or cooler stuff and open up to
> > > internet and crush GW on volume through diversity of channels? It
> >
> > Welcome I-Kore. The minis might not be as well sculpted as GW, but they
> > are cleanly done(less detail, but what detail there is is very precisely
> > done). Many of them could do well as 40k minis in a pinch.
> >
> > Neal- Last I saw you don't stock them, but you might want to look into
> > the I-Kore stuff... The Void line is theres, I don't know if they put
> > out anything else. They could save your business if GWs BS is as bad as
> > it appears and they don't realize how stupid they are being.
> >
>
> They also make Celtos (Decent miniatures with a strange tendency to carry
> 'huge' weapons) and Xyston (15mm range).
>
> I believe they also have a paint system.
...and free rules downloads.
--
b
r.g.m.w. FAQ at www.rgmw.org - Just read the damn thing.
"I love it when you're masterful." -- DJ Jizzy Bear
"Flee, the Stoic Riders of Saim-Hann are upon us!
Our bolters are no match for their good posture!" -- Blue Raja
"The fact that it even needs to be said to you at all only highlights
the reasons why so many of the Regs here use the top of your head
as a urinal puck." - Myrmidon (to, of course, Erik Setzer)
"I know you miss the Wainwrights, Bobby, but they
were weak and stupid people--and that's why
we have wolves and other large predators."
-- Gary Larson, The Far Side
sargeb
Vanguard <VanSPA...@tds.net> wrote in message news:<MPG.19064496f...@news.tds.net>...
> In article <VBSma.5097$MB4.1...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>,
> wars...@optonline.net says...
> > Due to a flood of emails requesting verification I have decided to make the
> > following statement:
(snipped)
Myrmidon
rsin...@finger.hotmail.com, Robert Singers shouted out the following
words of wit...
> Carlo1999 simpered meekly
>
> > The fact is the business model that Microsoft follows is possible
> > because all the "bad will" and bad PR they generate is offset by the
> > fact that they have NECESARY BUSINESS PRODUCTS, ie MICROSOFT PRODUCTS
> > MAKE PEOPLE MONEY.
>
> WHAT???? You can buy Microsoft software anywhere and everywhere. They even
> give heaps of software away and have special schemes for charities. GW's
> model is nothing like Microsoft's. If they were the same then GW would be
> selling to every possibly outlet at discounted prices saturating the market.
>
Umm, Rob - Carlol999 is saying that UNLIKE GW - Microsoft gets away with
having stuff that is considered by many to be very expensive and seemingly
over priced at times BECAUSE end users can MAKE MONEY (legally) utilizing
MS software to create a saleable product of their own. End users rarely
make money (legally) by purchasing GW products to use in creating a
saleable product of their own. (There aren't that many folks making money
by painting and reselling GW figures when one considers the over all
number of gamers who buy and paint their own minis.) I do believe that's
the difference he's trying to point out. He's not saying GW is good, he's
just pointing out where MS gets away with a questionable business model
that GW wants to copy.
Myr
--
#1582. I think they call it Warhammer "40K" because that is how
much you are going to have to make per year in order to play.
- Eric Noland
# 1082. Pound for pound I can buy cocaine cheaper than
raise a Warhammer army
- Roy Cox
http://www.PetitionOnline.com/gwprice/
****
RGMW FAQ: http://www.rgmw.org
Or...
Ed Reed
> (albeit very cool) useless toys. What will it take for a slick
> company to slip in with equally cool or cooler stuff and open up to
> internet and crush GW on volume through diversity of channels? It
> won't take much if GW keeps doing things that piss off their customers
> like they do. You can't play so ruthless in a closed hobby
> community...these games are not mass market appeal and never will be.
> How well did the most commercially viable LOTR GW game do? There were
> stacks of it at 50% at Barnes and Noble last time I went...
The trick here is that Games Workshop DEPENDS on the physical market
process. Most Warhammer 40K is played in stores that have play areas
set up. People buy the game so that they can play it in the store-
I've never played a game in my house and probably never will, because
I don't have the room. The store, in turn, sets aside a place for me
to play so that I'll buy the stuff from them. If everybody buys their
GW stuff online for less than the store can charge, then nobody needs
to waste money buying at the store, and suddenly the store sees no
reason to have that space available for people to play in (Or, if
they're too focused on GW products, they go belly-up). Result:
Nobody has a place to play, they stop buying GW products online, end
of GW.
Perhaps the stores could make money charging people to play, but I
doubt it. I understand GW's reasoning here- they HAVE to protect the
revenue stream of individual, physical hobby stores, or their own
revenue stream dies.
Robert Singers
> He's not saying GW is good, he's just pointing out where MS gets away
> with a questionable business model that GW wants to copy.
Microsoft's business model isn't questionable. It's successful. GW also
isn't trying to copy it. MS saturates every vendor channel and has reduced
it's involvement in it being a vendor for product to anyone but really big
accounts.
This whole thread about GW removing Internet vendor channels to just itself.
Microsoft does the opposite.
So tell me again how the comparision stacks up again.
Dan405
"Neal Catapano" <wars...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:VBSma.5097$MB4.1...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
the
> following statement:
>
> I will be talking to GW today to get further details on exactly how they
> want this to work. Rest assured we are very concerned with the situation
> and will post more details as they come available.
> Thank you very much for your kind support.
> Neal Catapano
> TheWarStore.com
>
>
Surely this is just going to cost GW money? They're not going to sell as
much stuff now as they did before, surely? Is there any chance of this
happening to the UK? I think its against the law here (thank the lord for
brussels for once...)?
Dan
Blue Raja
news:14d091dc.03041...@posting.google.com...
<snip>
> Most Warhammer 40K is played in stores that have play areas
> set up.
What are you basing that on?
--
The Blue Raja
"This may come as a shock to many in the US, but it is possible to travel
outside national borders..." - Phil Bowles
RGMW FAQ - By order of Yoda Bob
http://www.rgmw.org
smithdoerr
"Robert Singers" <rsin...@finger.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9360731C51077rsingers@IP-Hidden...
> Carlo1999 simpered meekly
>
> > The fact is the business model that Microsoft follows is possible
> > because all the "bad will" and bad PR they generate is offset by the
> > fact that they have NECESARY BUSINESS PRODUCTS, ie MICROSOFT PRODUCTS
> > MAKE PEOPLE MONEY.
>
> WHAT???? You can buy Microsoft software anywhere and everywhere. They
even
> give heaps of software away and have special schemes for charities. GW's
> model is nothing like Microsoft's. If they were the same then GW would be
> selling to every possibly outlet at discounted prices saturating the
market.
It's not their business models that are the same, it's that they both
generate ill will. Microsoft gets away with it because they produce
products that are actually useful.
--
-smithdoerr
Robert Singers
> It's not their business models that are the same, it's that they both
> generate ill will. Microsoft gets away with it because they produce
> products that are actually useful.
OK I'll let you away with that. However most of the ill will directed at
Microsoft is irrational where as against Games Workshop it's almost entirely
for rational reasons.
fog
> The trick here is that Games Workshop DEPENDS on the physical market
> process. Most Warhammer 40K is played in stores that have play areas
> set up. People buy the game so that they can play it in the store-
> I've never played a game in my house and probably never will, because
> I don't have the room.
So, you're basing this assumption solely on your experience. What makes
you think that this is the majority of people?
> The store, in turn, sets aside a place for me
> to play so that I'll buy the stuff from them. If everybody buys their
> GW stuff online for less than the store can charge, then nobody needs
> to waste money buying at the store, and suddenly the store sees no
> reason to have that space available for people to play in (Or, if
> they're too focused on GW products, they go belly-up). Result:
> Nobody has a place to play, they stop buying GW products online, end
> of GW.
Actually, you've got this reversed.
First of all, if a store owner is so short-sighted as to invest so fully
into GW and not have other gaming materials in stock, then they've made
a grave error. Diversity is the key to survival in today market.
Secondly, GW should not give a rat's ass where the money comes from.
Whether they get their revenue from B&M or on-line, their profit margin
will still be the same. If GW were truly concerned with protecting B&M
stores, they would lower their wholesale pricing policies and
retail discount limits and allow more store owners to take advantage of
stocking their shelves with items they need and *not* what GW *requires*
them to purchase.
Third: In *my* decades of gaming and wargaming experience, the people
I've played with have nearly all been existing friends and associates
who have either shown an interest or had existing knowlege and
experience. You also fail to realize that most B&M's are small local
stores that just make ends meet, with no extra room for in-house gaming.
The amount of extra sales that have to be made in order to support such
open space is not condusive to a store owner's own bottom line.
Finally, I'll also point out to you that many people who wargame do not
live near a GW store or independant retailer. On-line stores and mail
order are their only easy means of obtaining minis and other gaming
materials. So now, in order to buy a GW product, those people have to
do their on-line shopping directly from GW at full price. Thereby GW
reaps at least twice the profit they normally would since they didn't
have to sell their goods through another on-line store.
Gee, thanks for protecting those B&M's, GW.
> Perhaps the stores could make money charging people to play, but I
> doubt it. I understand GW's reasoning here- they HAVE to protect the
> revenue stream of individual, physical hobby stores, or their own
> revenue stream dies.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Somebody remind me to show this to Mr. Reed when GW
starts shutting down indies to protect in lieu of selling only directly
through their own B&M's and mail order. I'm sure a healthy dish of crow
served with a gallon of reality will console him when he finally
discovers the truth about GW's practices.
Ed, if you truly believe anything that you wrote in this thread, you
have some serious gullability issues that need addressing as quickly as
possilbe. If you don't believe me, then e-mail me. I've got some prime
ocean front property in Kansas and you seem to be just the person I've
been looking for to sell it to.
Marshall Dragoo
> Ed Reed, (er...@izap.com) wrote...
> > The trick here is that Games Workshop DEPENDS on the physical market
> > process. Most Warhammer 40K is played in stores that have play areas
> > set up. People buy the game so that they can play it in the store-
> > I've never played a game in my house and probably never will, because
> > I don't have the room.
>
> So, you're basing this assumption solely on your experience. What makes
> you think that this is the majority of people?
>
mine. This assumption is invalid, IMHO. Oh, BTW, Butch, hi!. I needs
to speak with you on private. Thanks.
> > The store, in turn, sets aside a place for me
> > to play so that I'll buy the stuff from them. If everybody buys their
> > GW stuff online for less than the store can charge, then nobody needs
> > to waste money buying at the store, and suddenly the store sees no
> > reason to have that space available for people to play in (Or, if
> > they're too focused on GW products, they go belly-up). Result:
> > Nobody has a place to play, they stop buying GW products online, end
> > of GW.
>
> Actually, you've got this reversed.
>
> First of all, if a store owner is so short-sighted as to invest so fully
> into GW and not have other gaming materials in stock, then they've made
> a grave error. Diversity is the key to survival in today market.
>
Amen. Can you say, WARMACHINE?!!!?
> Secondly, GW should not give a rat's ass where the money comes from.
> Whether they get their revenue from B&M or on-line, their profit margin
> will still be the same. If GW were truly concerned with protecting B&M
> stores, they would lower their wholesale pricing policies and
> retail discount limits and allow more store owners to take advantage of
> stocking their shelves with items they need and *not* what GW *requires*
> them to purchase.
>
This smells like what it is, them getting more greedier by the month.
My gaming dollars will be going on other companies stuff, except when
the LOTR figs go in the discount bin. Fantasy Rules, anyone?
> Third: In *my* decades of gaming and wargaming experience, the people
> I've played with have nearly all been existing friends and associates
> who have either shown an interest or had existing knowlege and
> experience. You also fail to realize that most B&M's are small local
> stores that just make ends meet, with no extra room for in-house gaming.
> The amount of extra sales that have to be made in order to support such
> open space is not condusive to a store owner's own bottom line.
>
Pat can attest to this, we are soooo lucky to have as much game space
at Comic Quest as we do. But with most B&M shops, Butch's statement is
true.
> Finally, I'll also point out to you that many people who wargame do not
> live near a GW store or independant retailer. On-line stores and mail
> order are their only easy means of obtaining minis and other gaming
> materials. So now, in order to buy a GW product, those people have to
> do their on-line shopping directly from GW at full price. Thereby GW
> reaps at least twice the profit they normally would since they didn't
> have to sell their goods through another on-line store.
> Gee, thanks for protecting those B&M's, GW.
>
Some gamers live in BFE, and don't have a GW store, or store anywheres
close. MO is their only option.
>
> > Perhaps the stores could make money charging people to play, but I
> > doubt it. I understand GW's reasoning here- they HAVE to protect the
> > revenue stream of individual, physical hobby stores, or their own
> > revenue stream dies.
>
> BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Somebody remind me to show this to Mr. Reed when GW
> starts shutting down indies to protect in lieu of selling only directly
> through their own B&M's and mail order. I'm sure a healthy dish of crow
> served with a gallon of reality will console him when he finally
> discovers the truth about GW's practices.
>
And a cup of STFU to boot. If this practice is allowed to happen, then
GW will start in on the indies next. You can bank on it.
> Ed, if you truly believe anything that you wrote in this thread, you
> have some serious gullability issues that need addressing as quickly as
> possilbe. If you don't believe me, then e-mail me. I've got some prime
> ocean front property in Kansas and you seem to be just the person I've
> been looking for to sell it to.
Understands why GW is called the 'evil empire'. Proof positive of
their actions. I've also got some prime beachfront property in SoCal
I'd like to sell as well. Maybe go for a 2 fer 1 deal? Don't try to
defend these greedy bastards. I like their minis, but I am starting a
loving hate for these assclowns. They care nothing for the gamers that
play their game, just the bottom line. They've spouted their own shit
for so long, they've believed it. Well, as Butch has said, reality may
just bite them in the ass. When their profits are cut drastically,
then maybe, they'll learn. I sure wish Hasborg would buy these
fuckers. Not showing much love for them as well, but they are best
ones to do it.
Marshall Dragoo
RGMW regular
George
> loving hate for these assclowns. They care nothing for the gamers that
Several comments on Slashdot were of the sort "GW's creative arm rocks,
but the legal/management sections are pure unrepentant evil". Pretty
much sums up how I feel about them and probably
how most of the newsgroup feels about them.
E Holmes
> > I will be talking to GW today to get further details on exactly how they
> > want this to work. Rest assured we are very concerned with the
situation
> > and will post more details as they come available.
> > Thank you very much for your kind support.
> > Neal Catapano
> > TheWarStore.com
> >
> >
>
> Surely this is just going to cost GW money? They're not going to sell as
> much stuff now as they did before, surely? Is there any chance of this
> happening to the UK? I think its against the law here (thank the lord for
> brussels for once...)?
My question is how has the recent increase in price in the U.S. affected
GW's sales? If people are still buying at the inflated prices.... Does
anyone have any idea?
Ed
Ed Reed
> you think that this is the majority of people?
>
relevant sampling of randomly selected gamers. I base it on my own
experience because it's the only information I have. I know very few
gamers who play 40K in their homes, and quite a few who play in one of
the several independant stores in Silicon Valley that have space (and
tables, and terrain) set aside for just that purpose. The stores (I
can think of four within a few miles of here) organize tournaments,
offer painting courses, and frequently have a staff member available
to teach new players the game. (In addition they often wind up acting
as unofficial referees).
> First of all, if a store owner is so short-sighted as to invest so fully
> into GW and not have other gaming materials in stock, then they've made
> a grave error. Diversity is the key to survival in today market.
>
Absolutely. Most stores will not go under just because they failed to
take in a decent revenue from GW products. They will, however, see no
profit in encouraging people to play GW games if they don't sell
enough of the product. If the online market can undercut their
prices, then they make less money. That money is their incentive to
provide space for gaming.
> Secondly, GW should not give a rat's ass where the money comes from.
Oh, I think they should. They need the B&M stores to promote their
product and ensure that the next generation of gamers wants to play
40K. (Or Warhammer Fantasy, or whatever...)
> Third: In *my* decades of gaming and wargaming experience, the people
> I've played with have nearly all been existing friends and associates
> who have either shown an interest or had existing knowlege and
> experience.
That existing knowledge came from somewhere. People have to get
started, and it's easier to do that in a B&M store than online,
becuase 40K is, ultimately, a physical activity. (Not strenuous, but
physical).
> You also fail to realize that most B&M's are small local
> stores that just make ends meet, with no extra room for in-house gaming.
> The amount of extra sales that have to be made in order to support such
> open space is not condusive to a store owner's own bottom line.
In my experience, that's not true. I know of several stores in my
area which sponsor in house gaming. I live in Silicon Vally.
Legends, Neutral Ground, Gamekeeper, and the local GW store all do.
(In point of fact, every gaming store I frequent has in house gaming.
Those which do not rarely seem to acquire a regular customer base, and
die off quickly.)
> Finally, I'll also point out to you that many people who wargame do not
> live near a GW store or independant retailer.
Most major cities have at least one gaming store located somewhere
within their metropolitan area. (I'd even go so far as to say that
probably ALL major cities in the US and UK have a least one.
Gamekeeper in particular is fairly ubiquitous in many parts of the
US.) GW is choosing to make life harder on the few who live far from
any large city in order to improve things for the many who live in or
near a city. That's not perfect, but from a numbers point of view, it
makes sense.
>
> BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Somebody remind me to show this to Mr. Reed when GW
> starts shutting down indies to protect in lieu of selling only directly
> through their own B&M's and mail order. I'm sure a healthy dish of crow
> served with a gallon of reality will console him when he finally
> discovers the truth about GW's practices.
>
Currently, GW protects indies over their own stores. Independant
stores in CA get new GW products BEFORE the official GW stores get
them. This is deliberate.
> Ed, if you truly believe anything that you wrote in this thread, you
> have some serious gullability issues that need addressing as quickly as
> possilbe. If you don't believe me, then e-mail me. I've got some prime
> ocean front property in Kansas and you seem to be just the person I've
> been looking for to sell it to.
>
You might make your point more effectively if you confined yourself to
the topic at hand. There's plenty of people on USENET who can sling
insults, but precious few who can debate.
At any rate, GW has a long history of going out of their way to
promote in-store gaming. This is a logical extension of that policy,
and while you may think that it's a bad policy, they've had some
success with it thus far. Time will tell who is right.
Kurt
expendable, especially the gherkins like Morley and Thrope.
--
K *Kill the nospam to reply*
To whom it may concern - clinical studies have shown that 89.3% of those
surveyed suggested that you might wish to try inserting a saguaro cactus
into one or more of your bodily orifices.
-- RGMW outtake
incrdbil
<the_blue_ra...@iprimus.com.au> wrote:
>"Ed Reed" <er...@izap.com> wrote in message
>news:14d091dc.03041...@posting.google.com...
><snip>
>> Most Warhammer 40K is played in stores that have play areas
>> set up.
>
>What are you basing that on?
GW's increasing proaganda efforts? (or the communal hive of fanboys is
putting this same lineout on various forums all at the same time with
the 'we're just helping the poor little B&M's)
incrdbil
Warning: GW stores, tournaments, or other
official sanctioned events may cause brain damage. Research
shows that you must be pretty F***ing stupid to pay full retail
in their stores or through their mail order to these price gouging bastards.
jimwork
> department that so obviously has their collective heads up their asses
> as far as GW's does.
>
Last time I checked, Games Workshop had no marketing department. I'm just saying.
jim
jimwork
> because all the "bad will" and bad PR they generate is offset by the
> fact that they have NECESARY BUSINESS PRODUCTS, ie MICROSOFT PRODUCTS
> MAKE PEOPLE MONEY. And that is a pretty good incentive. GW makes
> (albeit very cool) useless toys. What will it take for a slick
> company to slip in with equally cool or cooler stuff and open up to
> internet and crush GW on volume through diversity of channels?
*** Consider Lionel Trains. They prohibit discounting by only
providing their premium limited editions to stores that don't
discount. These things are only sought out by hard-core train gurus,
and cost a ton to boot, but stores who want to deal with them abide by
their rules. Why doesn't another slick train company just set up and
undercut them?
More to the point, it is irrefutable that we all got into this hobby
in a store. Nobody sees this stuff online and says, "Hey! Cool! I'm
gonna buy me an army!" (Here follow posts from people who claim to
have done just that...)
My point is, since Games Workshop has been in the hobby business of
wargaming for more than 25 years now, they probably have some idea of
how best to sell/market/hype their product, and assuming that they are
stupid/mean/evil or whatever is kind of silly. They know us, they
know you, they know our market, and they do it well all over the
world, not just here in the US.
I was Neal's GW rep for a while, and he is a very nice guy, and always
seemed happy to do business with me. I hope that the WarStore sticks
around, if for no other reason than that Neal is just a fun guy.
In the end, though, the best thing for my hobby is to have Games
Workshop products sold in stores, with painted miniatures and raging
battles on display, so that new people can discover a hobby I've
enjoyed so much for 15 years.
Please note that I am no longer employed by Games Workshop. I am a
college student now, and I just wanted to say that I wholeheartedly
support this change, esp. as it's being done for exactly the right
reasons.
jim work
jimwork
> into GW and not have other gaming materials in stock, then they've made
> a grave error. Diversity is the key to survival in today market.
*** Which is why Games Workshop stores carry such a diverse line of...
oh, wait a second...
> Secondly, GW should not give a rat's ass where the money comes from.
> Whether they get their revenue from B&M or on-line, their profit margin
> will still be the same.
*** And if that were the aim, then clearly they would employ your
logic and follow your thinking. They must be considering things from
a different angle. Perhaps they hope that if people can't buy their
stuff online, they will spend their money, instead, at their local
retail store.
> If GW were truly concerned with protecting B&M
> stores, they would lower their wholesale pricing policies and
> retail discount limits and allow more store owners to take advantage of
> stocking their shelves with items they need and *not* what GW *requires*
> them to purchase.
*** Games Workshop's minimum orders, stock requirements, etc., exist
for a reason: to specifically ensure that a store carries a good line
of product so that a customer can confidently walk in and know he will
find what he is looking for. At a recent exchange at my local store,
"I'm looking for a Bret. Sorceress. Where are they?"
"We don't have any."
"Oh. Are you getting any?"
"Nobody around here plays Bretonnians."
Think about that for a second.
> Third: In *my* decades of gaming and wargaming experience, the people
> I've played with have nearly all been existing friends and associates
> who have either shown an interest or had existing knowlege and
> experience. You also fail to realize that most B&M's are small local
> stores that just make ends meet, with no extra room for in-house gaming.
> The amount of extra sales that have to be made in order to support such
> open space is not condusive to a store owner's own bottom line.
*** Again, Games Workshop stores provide a good counter-example. Your
claim is that stores that give up space to gaming will not be able to
sell product, while the GW stores all devote most of their space to
gaming, and sell buckets of product.
> > Perhaps the stores could make money charging people to play, but I
> > doubt it. I understand GW's reasoning here- they HAVE to protect the
> > revenue stream of individual, physical hobby stores, or their own
> > revenue stream dies.
>
> BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Somebody remind me to show this to Mr. Reed when GW
> starts shutting down indies to protect in lieu of selling only directly
> through their own B&M's and mail order. I'm sure a healthy dish of crow
> served with a gallon of reality will console him when he finally
> discovers the truth about GW's practices.
*** In England, where you can't throw a rock without hitting a GW
retail store (there are 400+ Games Workshop stores... just in
ENGLAND!!), your theory would lead one to believe that there are no
independent retailers.
Finally, I will say that you have this evil thing on the brain.
They're not out to get you. It's not a conspiracy. It's a hobby, and
it's a fun one.
Right?
jim
Old Bear
<snip>
> > BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Somebody remind me to show this to Mr. Reed when GW
> > starts shutting down indies to protect in lieu of selling only directly
> > through their own B&M's and mail order. I'm sure a healthy dish of crow
> > served with a gallon of reality will console him when he finally
> > discovers the truth about GW's practices.
> >
> Currently, GW protects indies over their own stores. Independant
> stores in CA get new GW products BEFORE the official GW stores get
> them. This is deliberate.
>
> > Ed, if you truly believe anything that you wrote in this thread, you
> > have some serious gullability issues that need addressing as quickly as
> > possilbe. If you don't believe me, then e-mail me. I've got some prime
> > ocean front property in Kansas and you seem to be just the person I've
> > been looking for to sell it to.
> >
> You might make your point more effectively if you confined yourself to
> the topic at hand.
Then you came to play on the wrong pitch. Anybody that can't go lateral here
and get back on stream quickly will get torched, if only for a lack of
imagination. You're better taking your hits on the chin and swinging back
rather than whining.
There's plenty of people on USENET who can sling
> insults, but precious few who can debate.
There's precious few who can insult properly.
--
Old Bear
RGMW Drama Queen 2003. [blame Singers]
War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and
degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is
worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to
fight; nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety; is a
miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so
by the exertions of better persons than himself. - John Stuart Mills
Old Bear
"jimwork" <jimwo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1ba242b0.03041...@posting.google.com...
> > The fact is the business model that Microsoft follows is possible
> > because all the "bad will" and bad PR they generate is offset by the
> > fact that they have NECESARY BUSINESS PRODUCTS, ie MICROSOFT PRODUCTS
> > MAKE PEOPLE MONEY. And that is a pretty good incentive. GW makes
> > (albeit very cool) useless toys. What will it take for a slick
> > company to slip in with equally cool or cooler stuff and open up to
> > internet and crush GW on volume through diversity of channels?
>
> *** Consider Lionel Trains. They prohibit discounting by only
> providing their premium limited editions to stores that don't
> discount. These things are only sought out by hard-core train gurus,
> and cost a ton to boot, but stores who want to deal with them abide by
> their rules. Why doesn't another slick train company just set up and
> undercut them?
>
> More to the point, it is irrefutable that we all got into this hobby
> in a store.
I started *wargaming* before GW existed. As such your credibilty vanishes
aloing with the argument you propose. back to the drawing board...
Old Bear
<snip>
> Finally, I will say that you have this evil thing on the brain.
> They're not out to get you.
You are quite right. I rather think its the loot they are interested in.
Kurt
> More to the point, it is irrefutable that we all got into this hobby
> in a store. Nobody sees this stuff online and says, "Hey! Cool! I'm
> gonna buy me an army!" (Here follow posts from people who claim to
> have done just that...)
>
This is nothing less than a total fabrication. I don't know anyone who has
gotten into gaming via online stores, but I know that clubs generate a lot
of new players, particularly the ones that hold conventions, and you can
never discount the influence that existing gamers have on their friends.
They might go to a store for their first figures but the store had
absolutely no influence on their start in gaming.
Jimi
> wargaming for more than 25 years now, they probably have some idea of
> how best to sell/market/hype their product,
The current collection of GW 'owners' have not been in business with GW for
the last 25 years. Please learn some company history.
> I was Neal's GW rep for a while, and he is a very nice guy, and always
> seemed happy to do business with me. I hope that the WarStore sticks
> around, if for no other reason than that Neal is just a fun guy.
It will - it just wont be selling GW stuff.
> In the end, though, the best thing for my hobby is to have Games
> Workshop products sold in stores, with painted miniatures and raging
> battles on display, so that new people can discover a hobby I've
> enjoyed so much for 15 years.
And what happens when the nearest GW-selling store is 2+ hours away, as is
the situation many US gamers are in?? How many gamers will actively travel a
4 hour round trip to get a blister or two??
Jimi
40k3 Mailing List - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k3/
My Ebay Auctions - http://members.ebay.co.uk/aboutme/astronomican/
Jimi
> in a store.
I actually got into wargaming long before GW was even a business plan - and
that was via a model shop where I bought and used Airfix kits for said
wargaming!! My first taste of anything GW was via mail ordere from their
pokey shop down south. My first taste of a GW store was when the Newcastle
(NE England) store opened many moons ago - I was 17th in the queue.
incrdbil
>
>*** And if that were the aim, then clearly they would employ your
>logic and follow your thinking. They must be considering things from
>a different angle. Perhaps they hope that if people can't buy their
>stuff online, they will spend their money, instead, at their local
>retail store.
That's if they have a local retail store.
Some of these stores have such loyalty that people are switching
system rather going to some nearby GW crackhouse.
>for a reason: to specifically ensure that a store carries a good line
>of product so that a customer can confidently walk in and know he will
>find what he is looking for. At a recent exchange at my local store,
Not that it would have anything to do with monopolizing inventory,
shelf space, or facing products down the throat that people just don't
want.
>
>*** Again, Games Workshop stores provide a good counter-example. Your
>claim is that stores that give up space to gaming will not be able to
>sell product, while the GW stores all devote most of their space to
>gaming, and sell buckets of product.
you've been to a GW mall shop? I dount it, from the above assumption.
incrdbil
>
>More to the point, it is irrefutable that we all got into this hobby
>in a store. Nobody sees this stuff online and says, "Hey! Cool! I'm
>gonna buy me an army!" (Here follow posts from people who claim to
>have done just that...)
And we are supposed to assume that they must be lying, because you are
a paragon of truth?
Let's see, I started gaming in the 80's, and didn't move to a town
with a game store in it (other than college, when I didn't play) until
1994. I guess I really wasn't playing before then, I was just
imagining it.
>
>
>I was Neal's GW rep for a while, and he is a very nice guy, and always
>seemed happy to do business with me. I hope that the WarStore sticks
>around, if for no other reason than that Neal is just a fun guy.
Ah, a former GW sales rep.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Well, goodbye credibility. We'vbe got a professional liar on our
hands.
>
>In the end, though, the best thing for my hobby
It's not your hobby, jackass.
is to have Games
>Workshop products sold in stores, with painted miniatures and raging
>battles on display, so that new people can discover a hobby I've
>enjoyed so much for 15 years.
Wargaming does not need GW stores. There is no GW hobby either.
>
>Please note that I am no longer employed by Games Workshop. I am a
>college student now, and I just wanted to say that I wholeheartedly
>support this change, esp. as it's being done for exactly the right
>reasons.
. You might not work for them, but you are still their bitch.
fog
>
> "Ed Reed" <er...@izap.com> wrote in message
> news:14d091dc.0304...@posting.google.com...
> > fog <f...@rgmw.org> wrote in message
> news:<MPG.1907f3f4c...@News.CIS.DFN.DE>...
>
> <snip>
>
> > > BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Somebody remind me to show this to Mr. Reed when GW
> > > starts shutting down indies to protect in lieu of selling only directly
> > > through their own B&M's and mail order. I'm sure a healthy dish of crow
> > > served with a gallon of reality will console him when he finally
> > > discovers the truth about GW's practices.
> > >
> > Currently, GW protects indies over their own stores. Independant
> > stores in CA get new GW products BEFORE the official GW stores get
> > them. This is deliberate.
Uh huh... and who told you this?
> > > Ed, if you truly believe anything that you wrote in this thread, you
> > > have some serious gullability issues that need addressing as quickly as
> > > possilbe. If you don't believe me, then e-mail me. I've got some prime
> > > ocean front property in Kansas and you seem to be just the person I've
> > > been looking for to sell it to.
> > >
> > You might make your point more effectively if you confined yourself to
> > the topic at hand.
My point was made rather emphatically.
> Then you came to play on the wrong pitch. Anybody that can't go lateral here
> and get back on stream quickly will get torched, if only for a lack of
> imagination. You're better taking your hits on the chin and swinging back
> rather than whining.
>
> There's plenty of people on USENET who can sling
> > insults, but precious few who can debate.
If you think I'm slinging insults, you need to grow much thicker skin.
Your attitude is nothing short of major Fanboyishness. Pull yourself
away from GW's tit and think for yourself for just a moment.
> There's precious few who can insult properly.
That said, I *was* toning it down for Ed since I've been likened to "the
Auntie of RGMW."
Jimi
I bet he kept his red shirt, nailed it to the ceiling, and wanks furiously
whilst lying on his bed whilst gazing lovingly at it. Fanboyism - taking
love to a whole new level.
Vanguard
jimwo...@yahoo.com says...
> > The fact is the business model that Microsoft follows is possible
> > because all the "bad will" and bad PR they generate is offset by the
> > fact that they have NECESARY BUSINESS PRODUCTS, ie MICROSOFT PRODUCTS
> > MAKE PEOPLE MONEY. And that is a pretty good incentive. GW makes
> > (albeit very cool) useless toys. What will it take for a slick
> > company to slip in with equally cool or cooler stuff and open up to
> > internet and crush GW on volume through diversity of channels?
>
> *** Consider Lionel Trains. They prohibit discounting by only
> providing their premium limited editions to stores that don't
> discount. These things are only sought out by hard-core train gurus,
> and cost a ton to boot, but stores who want to deal with them abide by
> their rules. Why doesn't another slick train company just set up and
> undercut them?
> More to the point, it is irrefutable that we all got into this hobby
> in a store. Nobody sees this stuff online and says, "Hey! Cool! I'm
> gonna buy me an army!" (Here follow posts from people who claim to
> have done just that...)
I've been wargaming for roughly 23 years or so. Truth to tell games that
were much more involved and logical than 40K. I played my first "store"
game last year AFTER a buddy of mine got me to play quite a few games in
my garage on a table I built.
But hey, we're all lying it seems. At least according to you.
>
> My point is, since Games Workshop has been in the hobby business of
> wargaming for more than 25 years now, they probably have some idea of
> how best to sell/market/hype their product, and assuming that they are
> stupid/mean/evil or whatever is kind of silly. They know us, they
> know you, they know our market, and they do it well all over the
> world, not just here in the US.
Bzzzt...they see the dollar signs...they are deliberatly SHRINKING the
channels they move their product through. That dosn't make sense to
anyone.
>
> I was Neal's GW rep for a while, and he is a very nice guy, and always
> seemed happy to do business with me. I hope that the WarStore sticks
> around, if for no other reason than that Neal is just a fun guy.
>
Ah, a former GW emplyoee, that's not a big shocker now.
> In the end, though, the best thing for my hobby is to have Games
> Workshop products sold in stores, with painted miniatures and raging
> battles on display, so that new people can discover a hobby I've
> enjoyed so much for 15 years.
>
Lets see....There are NO games workshop stores in my area. Plenty of
indies though. One of which was getting fed up with GW last year.
This'll probably turn him right off. I play for the most part in my
garage with a group that may not all be GT players, but they make the
game FUN. I prefer that to people who toss a mini across the room and
stomp off or scream CHEESE every five minutes while you are stomping
them with an army that's deliberatly hadicapped.
> Please note that I am no longer employed by Games Workshop. I am a
> college student now, and I just wanted to say that I wholeheartedly
> support this change, esp. as it's being done for exactly the right
> reasons.
>
We belive you, really....and the Iraqi information minister was right
all along too.
Shill.
Van
fog
Considering that you were Neal's GW rep, means that you,
a) once worked for GW
b) still work for GW
I'd like to know which before this conversation goes much further. In
either case (I'm guessing b), it seems your brain-washing has been a
total success.
> > First of all, if a store owner is so short-sighted as to invest so fully
> > into GW and not have other gaming materials in stock, then they've made
> > a grave error. Diversity is the key to survival in today market.
>
> *** Which is why Games Workshop stores carry such a diverse line of...
> oh, wait a second...
And *why* are they prohibiting indy on-line sales again?
> > Secondly, GW should not give a rat's ass where the money comes from.
> > Whether they get their revenue from B&M or on-line, their profit margin
> > will still be the same.
>
> *** And if that were the aim, then clearly they would employ your
> logic and follow your thinking. They must be considering things from
> a different angle. Perhaps they hope that if people can't buy their
> stuff online, they will spend their money, instead, at their local
> retail store.
Right. And have those fuckards ever considered that the nearest
retailer to me is 70 miles away? Or that the nearest GW store is 90+
miles away from me? Do they consider that I work a full time job and
don't have time to "bop on down" to my local games store and pick up a
couple minis? DID THEY CONSIDER THAT, FOR ME, WHIPPING OUT MY CREDIT
CARD, CONNECTING TO THE INTERNET AND BUYING THEIR FUCKING PRODUCT JUST
MIGHT BE MY ONLY VIABLE OPTION? DID THEY CONSIDER THAT WITHOUT THAT
OPTION, I'LL DAMN WELL DIE BEFORE I BUY ANYMORE OF THEIR SHIT!! DID
THEY FUCKING CONSIDER THAT???
> > If GW were truly concerned with protecting B&M
> > stores, they would lower their wholesale pricing policies and
> > retail discount limits and allow more store owners to take advantage of
> > stocking their shelves with items they need and *not* what GW *requires*
> > them to purchase.
>
> *** Games Workshop's minimum orders, stock requirements, etc., exist
> for a reason: to specifically ensure that a store carries a good line
> of product so that a customer can confidently walk in and know he will
> find what he is looking for. At a recent exchange at my local store,
>
> "I'm looking for a Bret. Sorceress. Where are they?"
> "We don't have any."
> "Oh. Are you getting any?"
> "Nobody around here plays Bretonnians."
>
> Think about that for a second.
Wow. Looks like some lazy fuck didn't want to make a sale. Maybe he's
in the wrong business.
> > Third: In *my* decades of gaming and wargaming experience, the people
> > I've played with have nearly all been existing friends and associates
> > who have either shown an interest or had existing knowlege and
> > experience. You also fail to realize that most B&M's are small local
> > stores that just make ends meet, with no extra room for in-house gaming.
> > The amount of extra sales that have to be made in order to support such
> > open space is not condusive to a store owner's own bottom line.
>
> *** Again, Games Workshop stores provide a good counter-example. Your
> claim is that stores that give up space to gaming will not be able to
> sell product, while the GW stores all devote most of their space to
> gaming, and sell buckets of product.
That's nothing like what I said and your claim is laughable. I've been
to GW stores. Minis line the walls, redshirts hunch over their next
victim like vultures encircling that next bit of carrion they come
across. In-house gaming and even the space for it was practically nil.
> > > Perhaps the stores could make money charging people to play, but I
> > > doubt it. I understand GW's reasoning here- they HAVE to protect the
> > > revenue stream of individual, physical hobby stores, or their own
> > > revenue stream dies.
> >
> > BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Somebody remind me to show this to Mr. Reed when GW
> > starts shutting down indies to protect in lieu of selling only directly
> > through their own B&M's and mail order. I'm sure a healthy dish of crow
> > served with a gallon of reality will console him when he finally
> > discovers the truth about GW's practices.
>
> *** In England, where you can't throw a rock without hitting a GW
> retail store (there are 400+ Games Workshop stores... just in
> ENGLAND!!), your theory would lead one to believe that there are no
> independent retailers.
So, what's your point and how does this even relate to *anything* I've
stated above?
> Finally, I will say that you have this evil thing on the brain.
> They're not out to get you. It's not a conspiracy. It's a hobby, and
> it's a fun one.
>
> Right?
Right. It *is* a hobby. It's *NOT* the GW hobby. And GW is *NOT*
doing any favors for itself, right now.
estarriol
> >
> > More to the point, it is irrefutable that we all got into this hobby
> > in a store.
>
>
> I started *wargaming* before GW existed. As such your credibilty vanishes
> aloing with the argument you propose. back to the drawing board...
>
that later gave up carrying GW stuff because they opened a GW shop just up
the road, so where should my loyaties lie, the shop that I started in and no
longer finds it viable to carry fantasy/wargames figures or the GW shop that
saw the local market created by another shop and decided to cash in?
--
estarriol
still not sure if I should be buying more GW stuff......
Rob Singers
wisdom
> More to the point, it is irrefutable that we all got into this hobby
> in a store. Nobody sees this stuff online and says, "Hey! Cool! I'm
> gonna buy me an army!" (Here follow posts from people who claim to
> have done just that...)
I live in NZ. Where the hell do you think I see Foundry, Shadowforge,
Reaper, or Eureka minatures? I certainly don't see them in shops. What
I do see is GW. Guess what. I'm no longer buying it. I'm buying the
other companies I mentioned.
How the hell do you think I got 30 Alternative Armies Free Company
Crusaders. Actually they were bought via Mail Order pre the take of the
Internet. But the point is the same. The relevance. They were my first
minis not bought for a RPG.
I got into the hobby playing with friends who bought their minis mail
order before GW had a presence in the country.
I've never played in a shop.
You seem to be about as bright a ex-GW employee as Pan Loaf. All I can
say is run along moron any stay here for you is likely to be unpleasant.
Rob Singers
wisdom
> There's precious few who can insult properly.
Go boil your head.
Rob Singers
> That said, I *was* toning it down for Ed since I've been likened to "the
> Auntie of RGMW."
Did you bring cookies?
Rob Singers
wisdom
> You might make your point more effectively if you confined yourself to
> the topic at hand. There's plenty of people on USENET who can sling
> insults, but precious few who can debate.
Hey moron. First point. This isn't a debating society. Second Point. We
get to choose if we want to debate. In closing - get a clue.
Old Bear
"Rob Singers" <rsin...@finger.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9362EF6CB...@202.20.93.13...
> Old Bear startled all and sundry by ejaculating the following words of
> wisdom
>
> > There's precious few who can insult properly.
>
> Go boil your head.
I'm never speaking to you again...
<sob>
Robert Williams
> And what happens when the nearest GW-selling store is 2+ hours away, as is
> the situation many US gamers are in??
I predict GW will be opening a lot more shops in the US in future, negating
this.
Rob
Jimi
GW has a naughty habit of using Indie-retailers to build up business then GW
swoops in and opens a store nearby.
Marshall Dragoo
> > > And what happens when the nearest GW-selling store is 2+ hours away, as
> is
> > > the situation many US gamers are in??
> >
> > I predict GW will be opening a lot more shops in the US in future,
> negating
> > this.
>
> GW has a naughty habit of using Indie-retailers to build up business then GW
> swoops in and opens a store nearby.
>
them. They(GW) won't open a store in BFE, though.
Marshall Dragoo
RGMW regular
Jimi
> them. They(GW) won't open a store in BFE, though.
GW supplies the goods, GW watchs the database figures, it doesnt take an
artificially-intelligent redshirt to see which areas have a good retail of
GW stuff. Then *bang*, up pops a GW store. GW doesnt care about the number
of indie-retailers, it just wants to know what areas are profitable and ripe
for them to move in.
SUPrUNown
> > In the end, though, the best thing for my hobby is to have Games
> > Workshop products sold in stores, with painted miniatures and raging
> > battles on display, so that new people can discover a hobby I've
> > enjoyed so much for 15 years.
>
> And what happens when the nearest GW-selling store is 2+ hours away, as is
> the situation many US gamers are in?? How many gamers will actively travel
a
> 4 hour round trip to get a blister or two??
>
hobby shop that deals in GW figs is in Winnipeg, which is an EIGHT HOUR
DRIVE ONE WAY. I *maybe* get into a store to see anything GW once or twice a
year, and when I do drive the 16-hour return trip, hitting gaming stores is
usually not high on my list of priorities. However, for the past five years
I have lived up here, I have ordered lots of GW stuff on-line. I have
ordered through GW Mail Order before, but I choose not to do so anymore for
these reasons...
1) every order I have ever placed with them was WRONG. I've ordered from
them about 6 times in the past 14 years, and every order has been screwed
up, either missing blisters, to sending the wrong item, to once sending me
an Epic Imperial Guard box when I had asked for a 40K-size Imperial Guard
box. And although they all eventually got sorted out, one took 2 returns,
three reshipments and SIX MONTHS to sort out.
2) with the rise of on-line stores, I have been able to get everything I
want cheaper than through GW. In the first years when I ordered through Mail
Order, I did it straight from UK to Canada, and it was still cheaper than
buying it in stores, and I could pick whatever I wanted, instead of buying
what the stores near me had. Now, I can order whatever I want, but it's
cheaper to buy it through on-line retailers. I might still use GWMO for
archives stuff, but the older stuff they carry gets smaller and smaller
every day, and what can I say? eBay is a godsend. 8)
If GW were to ban on-line distributors from selling their stuff, chances are
I would never buy another GW item new, and would still rely on eBay for
purchases. After all, I've only been screwed over once in almost 100
transactions on eBay, but in the 6 orders I had with GWMO, they went 0 for
6. And their online prices are getting too steep for my blood. Right now, I
pretty much have enough troops for anything I need to build for my Space
Marine army, and while I might need some vehicles, I would rather invest in
some cheap plasticard and build them myself, than order them at their
extravagant prices through GWMO.
--
****** SUPrUNown ******
matr...@mts.net
...when i am king
you will be
first against the wall...
fog
> fog startled all and sundry by ejaculating the following words of wisdom
>
> > That said, I *was* toning it down for Ed since I've been likened to "the
> > Auntie of RGMW."
>
> Did you bring cookies?
Yup. Just strained them from the kitty litter for you ;p
--
GW, this one is for you
....................../´¯/)
....................,/¯../
.................../..../
............./´¯/'...'/´¯¯`·¸
........../'/.../..../......./¨¯\
........('(...´...´.... ¯~/'...')
.........\.................'...../
..........''...\.......... _.·´
............\..............(
..............\.............\...
b
r.g.m.w. FAQ at www.rgmw.org - Just read the damn thing.
"Flee, the Stoic Riders of Saim-Hann are upon us!
Our bolters are no match for their good posture!" -- Blue Raja
"I know you miss the Wainwrights, Bobby, but they
Marshall Dragoo
<entire post not snipped for emphasis>
And GW's point is their protecting the B&M shops? Bullshit, if I ever
heard it. This person here is a prime example of a gamer with no shops
even close to him. Online sales are a need for these type of people,
and GWMO are bloody incompetent. If their service didn't suck, if
their prices were tolerable, then maybe, just maybe more people would
use their site. But that is not meant to be.
The communist bullshit of taking away business from shops who do good
business is flat wrong. But what do they care? They want the
uninformed, quick shot purchase, and as Kurt put it, to fuck off. They
could care less about adult gamers who have jobs, and money. They want
the disposable income of kids, who don't have to worry about bills. My
point is, did they think about this, or did some spineless blob of a
bloodsucker think this out and thought it was a good idea? If GW had
any decent business sense, they wouldn't be doing this. Proof that
they seem to be thinking short-term, than long-term. If they weren't
so big, they could go under with this shit, but I doubt they will.
Marshall Dragoo
RGMW regular
jimwork
> >claim is that stores that give up space to gaming will not be able to
> >sell product, while the GW stores all devote most of their space to
> >gaming, and sell buckets of product.
>
> you've been to a GW mall shop? I dount it, from the above assumption.
>
>
*** Umm... worked in one, actually, and of course I've visited quite a
few. Note that above i pointed out that I used to be Neal's GW rep.
I took it that this would make it clear that, at some point in my
life, i must have worked for Games Workshop.
jim
jimwork
least person has made a crack involving my orgasms, so pardon me if
there's a limit to how much credibility I lend to the proposed
"arguments".
I'm just saying.
Again for the record, I do not work for Games Workshop. I used to.
Many of the people that do are my friends. Calling them names
("fuckhead", etc.) is at the least rude, as these are a group of very
nice people that you haven't even met. Knock it off.
Games Workshop listens to its customers and to its independent
retailers. After just years of listening to non-stop whining, they
brought back Blood Bowl. Does anybody remember that? Stores were
telling us that the could sell Blood Bowl hand over fist, if it were
only available. People at cons told us that they loved Blood Bowl and
wished that they could play it. So it was re-released.
This was done only because everyone asked for it (plus, it is a pretty
sweet game), rather than because Games Workshop hates you.
Make convincing, decisive arguments, and make (or post) them in places
where Games Workshop people can hear (or read) them. It will make a
difference.
I wouldn't insult them at the same time, though. Sort of cuts your
argument out from under you.
Plus, at least one of you is a pickle-sniffer.
jim
jimwork
*** And someone else suggested that it is not "my" hobby. I'm not
sure (that's not true, I'm absolutely sure) if you mean that Games
Workshop doesn't constitute a hobby in and of itself (that Warhammer
is a hobby separate from, say historical gaming).
My hobby is the Games Workshop hobby of fantasy wargames. I don't
play anything else, as i've got not much desire to, as Games Workshop
is just cool and well-thought-out and has great figs. All of this was
true before (and, in fact, WHY) I worked for them.
jim
Kurt
>> Right. It *is* a hobby. It's *NOT* the GW hobby.
>
> *** And someone else suggested that it is not "my" hobby. I'm not
> sure (that's not true, I'm absolutely sure) if you mean that Games
> Workshop doesn't constitute a hobby in and of itself (that Warhammer
> is a hobby separate from, say historical gaming).
>
It's a load of shit. GW provides one corner of the wargaming market, sadly
though its second-rate systems have dominated it.
> My hobby is the Games Workshop hobby of fantasy wargames. I don't
> play anything else, as i've got not much desire to, as Games Workshop
> is just cool and well-thought-out and has great figs. All of this was
> true before (and, in fact, WHY) I worked for them.
>
So GW invented fantasy games, and is still the only one about?
Interesting. It's funny how the only people who keep calling GW games well
thought out are the ones who refuse to try anything else. I'd probably
think vomit tasted pretty good if I'd never eaten anything else.
incrdbil
>Okay, so far, I've been called a liar, brain-washed, a fanboy, and at
>least person has made a crack involving my orgasms, so pardon me if
>there's a limit to how much credibility I lend to the proposed
>"arguments".
welcome to usenet. Get used to it, or don't let the door hit you in
the ass on the way out.
>
>Again for the record, I do not work for Games Workshop. I used to.
>Many of the people that do are my friends. Calling them names
>("fuckhead", etc.) is at the least rude, as these are a group of very
>nice people that you haven't even met. Knock it off.
There's only so much we can do.
Would these by the incompetent rulzboyz, or other patheticly desperate
pimping retailers for their bonus, sales folk. Tell us, and at least
we can use more appropriate descriptize terms instead of the generic
ones you seem troubled by.
>
>Games Workshop listens to its customers and to its independent
>retailers.
they hear the -kaching- noise. Attention span drops off after that.
After just years of listening to non-stop whining, they
>brought back Blood Bowl. Does anybody remember that? Stores were
>telling us that the could sell Blood Bowl hand over fist, if it were
>only available. People at cons told us that they loved Blood Bowl and
>wished that they could play it. So it was re-released.
>
>This was done only because everyone asked for it (plus, it is a pretty
>sweet game), rather than because Games Workshop hates you.
Hmm They invest small money in Fanatic, and make money from it after
being told 'hey, you'll make money from this'. That's supposed to be
the equivalent of Mother Theresa's lifetime of work or something?
>
>Make convincing, decisive arguments, and make (or post) them in places
>where Games Workshop people can hear (or read) them. It will make a
>difference.
No it won't. Hurting GW sales is the only thing that makes a
difference.
Warning: GW stores, tournaments, or other
official sanctioned events may cause brain damage. Research
shows that you must be pretty F***ing stupid to pay full retail
in their stores or through their mail order to these
GW, this one is for you
incrdbil
>> >*** Again, Games Workshop stores provide a good counter-example. Your
>> >claim is that stores that give up space to gaming will not be able to
>> >sell product, while the GW stores all devote most of their space to
>> >gaming, and sell buckets of product.
>>
>
>*** Umm... worked in one, actually, and of course I've visited quite a
>few. Note that above i pointed out that I used to be Neal's GW rep.
>I took it that this would make it clear that, at some point in my
>life, i must have worked for Games Workshop.
Well, considering how your statement above loosk like complete
bullshit to anyone who's visited one of those pisshole mallshops, I
was wondering perhaps they didnt unchain you from your desk very much.
But yes, I know you were Neals sales rep for a time. He's had a
few--they usually get rid of them once they start trying to really
work with Neal and establish a good relationship.
>
>jim
Warning: GW stores, tournaments, or other
official sanctioned events may cause brain damage. Research
shows that you must be pretty F***ing stupid to pay full retail
in their stores or through their mail order to these
GW, this one is for you
incrdbil
>
>My hobby is the Games Workshop hobby of fantasy wargames.
Your hobby is wargaming. GW makes a line of games within that hobby,
but it is not a seperate hobby. Anyone who thinks that there is such a
thing as "The GW Hobby" is an utter fucktard.
> I don't
>play anything else, as i've got not much desire to after my brains were turned to jelly
>after the indoctrination period, as Games Workshop
>is just cool in pulling off mind altering experiences combining massive drugs and brainwashing that
>erased the desire to play some other rules eet that is actually well-thought-out rules and has great figs.
fixed your post.
millsnat
> > GW makes
> > (albeit very cool) useless toys. What will it take for a slick
> > company to slip in with equally cool or cooler stuff and open up to
> > won't take much if GW keeps doing things that piss off their customers
> > like they do. You can't play so ruthless in a closed hobby
> > community...these games are not mass market appeal and never will be.
> > How well did the most commercially viable LOTR GW game do? There were
> > stacks of it at 50% at Barnes and Noble last time I went...
>
> The trick here is that Games Workshop DEPENDS on the physical market
> process. Most Warhammer 40K is played in stores that have play areas
> set up. People buy the game so that they can play it in the store-
> I've never played a game in my house and probably never will, because
> I don't have the room. The store, in turn, sets aside a place for me
> to play so that I'll buy the stuff from them. If everybody buys their
> GW stuff online for less than the store can charge, then nobody needs
> to waste money buying at the store, and suddenly the store sees no
> reason to have that space available for people to play in (Or, if
> they're too focused on GW products, they go belly-up). Result:
> Nobody has a place to play, they stop buying GW products online, end
> of GW.
>
> Perhaps the stores could make money charging people to play, but I
> doubt it. I understand GW's reasoning here- they HAVE to protect the
> revenue stream of individual, physical hobby stores, or their own
> revenue stream dies.
I would tend to think that most of warhammer 40k played would be done
at home. I enjoy terrain creation and scenery modeling as much as the
minitures themselves. In five years of the hobby, I've played a grand
total of 2 games in-store.
The point made about people buying less in stores due to online
selling is valid, but I belive most physical stores provide something
that online stores cannot, and that is the atmosphere; Talking with
other people with similar armies, looking at display cases, and making
purchases with instant gratification (even though at a higher price),
etc. I do about 95% of my purchasing online, but I rarely pass up the
opportunity to visit my nearest physical store (about an hour and a
half drive).
I don't believe this move on the part of GW will improve their online
store sales, as I figure most people are going to look for
alternatives (ebay) rather than simply start paying higher model and
shipping costs in a poorly laid out web site.
Bottom line is this new policy might mean I have to pay more to get
the same minitures. I do think the minitures have craftsmanship and
detail that warrants their price, but I do not like the feeling I'm
being cornered into whatever sales strategy GW decides to throw at me.
Going from many choices to only a few is never a good thing for the
consumer.
Oh, and the comparison with Microsoft. I agree that Microsoft can
peddle its crappy software because everyone uses it and some people
love it. Some people love warhammer 40k, but not everyone plays it.
Anton Svärd
"incrdbil" <incr...@spammebabyflinthills.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:3ea86ed5...@news.flinthills.com...
> On 24 Apr 2003 15:12:15 -0700, jimwo...@yahoo.com (jimwork) wrote:
>
> >
> >My hobby is the Games Workshop hobby of fantasy wargames.
>
> Your hobby is wargaming. GW makes a line of games within that hobby,
> but it is not a seperate hobby. Anyone who thinks that there is such a
> thing as "The GW Hobby" is an utter fucktard.
Actually I can't see why this term upsets you so much. The GW hobby is a
subcategory of the tabletop wargaming hobby, which in turn is a subcategory
of the wargaming hobby. If you're a GW hobbyist, that makes you a specific
kind of wargamer.
Some people may think the GW hobby is the only wargaming hobby (as
encouraged by GW), but that doesn't mean that there is a problem with the
term itself.
In fact, as far as wargaming is concerned, I think I am a GW hobbyist
myself, as I haven't played any other wargame in ages.
/Anton
--
Pigs are fer eatin' - not fer sittin' on.
P Bowles
<kur...@nospam.optushome.com.au> writes:
>It was twenty years ago today, jimwork taught the band to play
>
>>> Right. It *is* a hobby. It's *NOT* the GW hobby.
>>
>> *** And someone else suggested that it is not "my" hobby. I'm not
>> sure (that's not true, I'm absolutely sure) if you mean that Games
>> Workshop doesn't constitute a hobby in and of itself (that Warhammer
>> is a hobby separate from, say historical gaming).
>>
>It's a load of shit. GW provides one corner of the wargaming market, sadly
>though its second-rate systems have dominated it.
Have you noticed that GW hasn't referred to any of its products as 'wargames'
for, oh, about a decade? Many wargamers dislike GW and the GW fanboys don't
wargame - what else is needed to constitute a separate hobby?
>> My hobby is the Games Workshop hobby of fantasy wargames. I don't
>> play anything else, as i've got not much desire to, as Games Workshop
>> is just cool and well-thought-out and has great figs. All of this was
>> true before (and, in fact, WHY) I worked for them.
>>
>So GW invented fantasy games, and is still the only one about?
>Interesting. It's funny how the only people who keep calling GW games well
>thought out are the ones who refuse to try anything else.
When you're talking to a former redshirt, what do you expect?
Philip Bowles
Kurt
> In article <Xns936859...@210.49.20.254>, Kurt
> <kur...@nospam.optushome.com.au> writes:
>>> *** And someone else suggested that it is not "my" hobby. I'm not
>>> sure (that's not true, I'm absolutely sure) if you mean that Games
>>> Workshop doesn't constitute a hobby in and of itself (that Warhammer
>>> is a hobby separate from, say historical gaming).
>>>
>>It's a load of shit. GW provides one corner of the wargaming market,
>>sadly though its second-rate systems have dominated it.
>
> Have you noticed that GW hasn't referred to any of its products as
> 'wargames' for, oh, about a decade? Many wargamers dislike GW and the
> GW fanboys don't wargame - what else is needed to constitute a
> separate hobby?
>
forgotten that not long ago they were even making "real" wargames with the
little cardboard chits and all.
>>> My hobby is the Games Workshop hobby of fantasy wargames. I don't
>>> play anything else, as i've got not much desire to, as Games
>>> Workshop is just cool and well-thought-out and has great figs. All
>>> of this was true before (and, in fact, WHY) I worked for them.
>>>
>>So GW invented fantasy games, and is still the only one about?
>>Interesting. It's funny how the only people who keep calling GW games
>>well thought out are the ones who refuse to try anything else.
>
> When you're talking to a former redshirt, what do you expect?
>
About the level of drool that we got out of this one.
Andrea Gustasson
> "incrdbil" <incr...@spammebabyflinthills.com> skrev i meddelandet
> news:3ea86ed5...@news.flinthills.com...
> > On 24 Apr 2003 15:12:15 -0700, jimwo...@yahoo.com (jimwork) wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >My hobby is the Games Workshop hobby of fantasy wargames.
> >
> > Your hobby is wargaming. GW makes a line of games within that hobby,
> > but it is not a seperate hobby. Anyone who thinks that there is such a
> > thing as "The GW Hobby" is an utter fucktard.
>
> Actually I can't see why this term upsets you so much. The GW hobby is a
> subcategory of the tabletop wargaming hobby, which in turn is a
subcategory
> of the wargaming hobby. If you're a GW hobbyist, that makes you a specific
> kind of wargamer.
I agree also. My hobby isn't "wargaming". I haven't played _any_ other
wargame. Additionally, I spend more time painting, converting, and
"building" an army than I ever get to spend actually playing it. While I
realize that GW doesn't "own" miniature painting, nor do they provide the
only resource for conversion or the only models available for army
construction, _all_ of these are aspects of my hobby actively promoted by GW
as part of _thier_ (our) wargaming experience.
I don't believe that GW games are the only wargames, nor do I believe they
are the only miniatures. I'm confused, however, why you would insultingly
deny "the GW Hobby." It seems a little akin to saying that Harley Davidson
fanatics aren't into Harley Davidson, but rather into 'biking.'
James.
estarriol
> I agree also. My hobby isn't "wargaming". I haven't played _any_ other
> wargame. Additionally, I spend more time painting, converting, and
> "building" an army than I ever get to spend actually playing it. While I
> realize that GW doesn't "own" miniature painting, nor do they provide the
> only resource for conversion or the only models available for army
> construction, _all_ of these are aspects of my hobby actively promoted by
GW
> as part of _thier_ (our) wargaming experience.
>
games.
> I don't believe that GW games are the only wargames, nor do I believe they
> are the only miniatures. I'm confused, however, why you would insultingly
> deny "the GW Hobby." It seems a little akin to saying that Harley
Davidson
> fanatics aren't into Harley Davidson, but rather into 'biking.'
>
The GW hobby is a marketing ploy intended to deny the existance of any other
wargames hobby by implieing that they are the only providers of that hobby.
--
estarriol
P Bowles
<kur...@nospam.optushome.com.au> writes:
> Have you noticed that GW hasn't referred to any of its products as
>> 'wargames' for, oh, about a decade? Many wargamers dislike GW and the
>> GW fanboys don't wargame - what else is needed to constitute a
>> separate hobby?
>>
>I suppose on that sort of technicality you have me, it's a shame they've
>forgotten that not long ago they were even making "real" wargames with the
>little cardboard chits and all.
Those were decent games; sadly the last lot (Battle for Armageddon and co.)
were Jervis's idea, and he's been relegated to Fanatic. I think the closest we
can expect to a real wargame in the near future is Epic: Armageddon (or more
accurately Space Marine: Armageddon, since it seems to have more in common with
2nd Ed. Epic than E40k).
Philip Bowles
P Bowles
Gustasson" <jeg...@earthlink.net> writes:
>> Actually I can't see why this term upsets you so much. The GW hobby is a
>> subcategory of the tabletop wargaming hobby, which in turn is a
>subcategory
>> of the wargaming hobby. If you're a GW hobbyist, that makes you a specific
>> kind of wargamer.
>
>I agree also. My hobby isn't "wargaming". I haven't played _any_ other
>wargame. Additionally, I spend more time painting, converting, and
>"building" an army than I ever get to spend actually playing it. While I
>realize that GW doesn't "own" miniature painting, nor do they provide the
>only resource for conversion or the only models available for army
>construction, _all_ of these are aspects of my hobby actively promoted by GW
>as part of _thier_ (our) wargaming experience.
>
>I don't believe that GW games are the only wargames, nor do I believe they
>are the only miniatures. I'm confused, however, why you would insultingly
>deny "the GW Hobby." It seems a little akin to saying that Harley Davidson
>fanatics aren't into Harley Davidson, but rather into 'biking.'
An odd choice of analogy, since I would say that those people are into bikes,
just as my father (a fan of a particular brand of small convertible) is into
cars (he likes others as well, of course). Still, it's certainly nothing to get
worked up about. As I've said, I'd question whether GW games can really be
described as wargames - miniatures games, yes, battle games, in that two sides
fight each other, yes. They've certainly grown out of wargames, with the core
WFB ultimately based on 20+ year old Napoleonic systems. But insofar as these
are games primarily devised for entertainment and storytelling rather than
tactics, plausibility or historical accuracy, they aren't really wargames in
any classical sense. No doubt there are plenty of fantasy games out there that
are much the same in this regard, so the 'GW Hobby' isn't GW-exclusive, but it
is a way of distinguishing GW-style fantasy games from 'genuine' wargames, be
they fantasy or historical. Calling it the 'GW Hobby' doesn't imply that GW's
the only manufacturer any more than calling a vacuum cleaner a 'Hoover' implies
that no one else makes vacuum cleaners, except possibly in the minds of GW
staffers.
Philip Bowles
John Hwang
>From: "Anton Svärd" <anton...@telia.com>
>> Actually I can't see why this term upsets you so much. The GW hobby
>> is a subcategory of the tabletop wargaming hobby, which in turn is a
>>subcategory of the wargaming hobby. If you're a GW hobbyist, that
>> makes you a specific kind of wargamer.
More precisely: if you believe in "The GW Hobby", it makes you a specific kind
of gamer.
>My hobby isn't "wargaming". I haven't played _any_ other
>wargame.
That's too bad. There are plenty of other, worthier games out there. I
recommend you look into the cardboard version of OGRE/GEV by Steve Jackson
Games for a starter into something more akin to "normal" wargaming. ASL and
the other AH games are probably too much, too soon, for you.
--
--- John Hwang "JohnHw...@cs.com.no.com"
\-|-/
| A.K.D. F.E.M.C.
| Horned Blood Cross Terror LED Speed Jagd Destiny
Myrmidon
pbo...@aol.com, P Bowles shouted out the following words of wit...
I'll be a lot more interested if it's like 2nd Ed. Epic - I loathed E40K,
and it bombed in a big way in my area. Fortunately I still have a huge
collection of the older Epic stuff and still slug it out using the older
rules, plus some stuff from the first Ed - Vortex missiles, blind
missiles, etc.
Myr :)
--
#1582. I think they call it Warhammer "40K" because that is how
much you are going to have to make per year in order to play.
- Eric Noland
# 1082. Pound for pound I can buy cocaine cheaper than
raise a Warhammer army
- Roy Cox
http://www.PetitionOnline.com/gwprice/
****
RGMW FAQ: http://www.rgmw.org
Or...
Old Bear
"Andrea Gustasson" <jeg...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Btbqa.39971$ey1.3...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> From: "Anton Svärd" <anton...@telia.com>
>
> > "incrdbil" <incr...@spammebabyflinthills.com> skrev i meddelandet
> > news:3ea86ed5...@news.flinthills.com...
> > > On 24 Apr 2003 15:12:15 -0700, jimwo...@yahoo.com (jimwork) wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >My hobby is the Games Workshop hobby of fantasy wargames.
> > >
> > > Your hobby is wargaming. GW makes a line of games within that hobby,
> > > but it is not a seperate hobby. Anyone who thinks that there is such a
> > > thing as "The GW Hobby" is an utter fucktard.
> >
> > Actually I can't see why this term upsets you so much. The GW hobby is a
> > subcategory of the tabletop wargaming hobby, which in turn is a
> subcategory
> > of the wargaming hobby. If you're a GW hobbyist, that makes you a
specific
> > kind of wargamer.
>
> I agree also. My hobby isn't "wargaming". I haven't played _any_ other
> wargame.
That's irrelevant. Playing with toy soldiers has been called wargaming for
quite some time. fantasy wargaming is a sub-genre of wargaming. In effect,
fantasy is a period, like Napoleonics or ACW.
Additionally, I spend more time painting, converting, and
> "building" an army than I ever get to spend actually playing it.
And you imagine this to be unique to the 'GW Hobby' because...?
While I
> realize that GW doesn't "own" miniature painting, nor do they provide the
> only resource for conversion or the only models available for army
> construction, _all_ of these are aspects of my hobby actively promoted by
GW
> as part of _thier_ (our) wargaming experience.
But you just said you weren't a wargamer.
>
> I don't believe that GW games are the only wargames, nor do I believe they
> are the only miniatures. I'm confused, however, why you would insultingly
> deny "the GW Hobby." It seems a little akin to saying that Harley
Davidson
> fanatics aren't into Harley Davidson, but rather into 'biking.'
So a Harley Davidson isn't a motorcycle then?
P Bowles
<Im...@home.com> writes:
>> Those were decent games; sadly the last lot (Battle for Armageddon and co.)
>> were Jervis's idea, and he's been relegated to Fanatic. I think the closest
>we
>> can expect to a real wargame in the near future is Epic: Armageddon (or
>more
>> accurately Space Marine: Armageddon, since it seems to have more in common
>with
>> 2nd Ed. Epic than E40k).
>>
>> Philip Bowles
>
>I'll be a lot more interested if it's like 2nd Ed. Epic - I loathed E40K,
>and it bombed in a big way in my area. Fortunately I still have a huge
>collection of the older Epic stuff and still slug it out using the older
>rules, plus some stuff from the first Ed - Vortex missiles, blind
It seems to have brought back a lot of the old units as individual units
(including unnecessary divisions such as all eight Aspects and all six Khorne
Daemon Engines as separate entities, although fortunately the X hundred Ork
Battlewagon variants seem to have been trimmed a bit). Detachments and
companies are fixed sizes as with the old cards, although there are a variety
of options (IG companies can be given Chimeras or Fire Support units as part of
the company as well as in detachments, Eldar warhosts can upgrade their weapons
platforms to support weapons or War Walkers and so forth), but presented as
lists in a more sensible format. Companies tend to be smaller and cheaper than
in the past, and combined with the greater flexibility will hopefully avoid the
rigid single-tactic formations of Space Marine, and the nuisance of devising
half a dozen or more separate companies from the perhaps overly flexible E40k.
Weapons are individually represented and rolls to hit are made on a model/unit
basis (again, there's been a fair bit of overcompensation compared with E40k -
now a Farseer has different statlines for his shuriken pistol and his
witchblade, though admittedly the pistol doesn't do anything). Aircraft seem
rather complex (haven't read that far in the rules yet) but Titans seem to have
been trimmed - Eldar Titans at least have no weapon options, but must stick
with the ones they come with.
Play is basically alternating units, as with all editions of Epic, but
complicated slightly by 'retaining the initiative' rules (think Blood Bowl).
The morale rules are derived from E40k, which was that system's great strength,
as are the common ranges (15cm small arms, 30cm average and so forth), movement
rates and the firefight/assault rules, and several special rules like artillery
(disrupt weapons, now restricted to the Eldar, can cause damage these days as
well as extra blast markers, but aren't as common).
There aren't many radically new rules, and the most significant is probably the
crossfire rule - which I'm concerned may dominate play too much (a bit like
overwatch in old 40k - a good idea and nice tactic to represent, but it proved
overpowered and made for very dull games). Another change is the division of
weapons into (broadly) anti-personnel (can harm infantry and light vehicles
only) and anti-tank (can hurt vehicles, including light vehicles, and Titans
only), which I've heard is based on the original Adeptus Titanicus/Space
Marine. Light vehicles have some compensation - the War Walker costs no more
than a weapons platform but has twice the firepower, an armour save and better
firefight and assault values. Anyway, most common weapons have both anti-tank
and anti-infantry modes and most are as good against one as the other (IG and
Ork heavy weapons, for instance, are rated AT6+/AP6+, Eldar equivalents 5+/5+).
Overall, I'm looking forward to trying this game (but, being Eldar, I need a
*lot* of weapons platforms and only have enough for a Seer Council - not even
the four necessary for a single Warhost, and no War Walkers). The E40k-style
mission-based scenarios and morale rules will hopefully make it more tactical
than Space Marine, though I'm concerned about the plethora of special rules and
too much detail for the units. If done well, though, this will hopefully
combine the entertainment value of Space Marine shooting-fests with the greater
tactical depth of E40k.
Philip Bowles
Myrmidon
@yahoo.com, jimwork shouted out the following words of wit...
> Okay, so far, I've been called a liar, brain-washed, a fanboy, and at
> least person has made a crack involving my orgasms, so pardon me if
> there's a limit to how much credibility I lend to the proposed
> "arguments".
>
> I'm just saying.
And with all due respect - failing to provide even the most basic
means of supporting your opinions tends to make folks view you as a
fanboy. I like GW's minis, and some of their gaming materials - but do I
think the company as a whole is doing good things for the gaming industry
and independant retailers? No. To date, GW and it's Reps, along with
fanboys by the dozen have made all manner of claims - but failed to
provide any support that stood up to even the most basic of examination.
>
> Again for the record, I do not work for Games Workshop. I used to.
> Many of the people that do are my friends. Calling them names
> ("fuckhead", etc.) is at the least rude, as these are a group of very
> nice people that you haven't even met. Knock it off.
>
When the Company makes it apparent that the profits are far more
important than the people who help keep the company profitable - the
customers tend to start taking a dim view (to say the least) of the
company as a whole and it's employees - and this surprises you?
> Games Workshop listens to its customers and to its independent
> retailers. After just years of listening to non-stop whining, they
> brought back Blood Bowl. Does anybody remember that? Stores were
> telling us that the could sell Blood Bowl hand over fist, if it were
> only available. People at cons told us that they loved Blood Bowl and
> wished that they could play it. So it was re-released.
>
> This was done only because everyone asked for it (plus, it is a pretty
> sweet game), rather than because Games Workshop hates you.
First off - GW has ROUTINELY made, and then dropped support for a
variety of games. The fact that they brought Blood Bowl - so what? How
many times have they 'brought back' Epic, Necromunda, BFG, and others. I
know many players who refuse to try any of the GW 'spin off' games simply
for the fact that they've seen GW 'hype' the crap out of a new game - only
to have it fall off the radar and get zero support six months later.
And I can definitely tell you were a GW employee - "After just years
of listening to non-stop whining, they brought back Blood Bowl." That
'whining' would be paying customers requesting a product. And to think,
GW brought back the product...
>
> Make convincing, decisive arguments, and make (or post) them in places
> where Games Workshop people can hear (or read) them. It will make a
> difference.
>
Customers already HAVE made decisive arguments - they've obviously
been buying A LOT of product from online discounters. So far it's GW that
has failed to make 'convincing, decisive arguments' that honestly show how
'online stores'...
1. Are damaging GW's IP - the basis of GW's 'We're protecting our IP'
argument.
2. Are unfairly hurting Independant Retailers - the other portion of GW's
'We're helping Independant Retailers' argument.
Which is what GW is claiming as the basis of it's move to kill off online
discounting by restricting stores - particularly discount stores from
using the most successful means of reaching customers.
It's also VERY OBVIOUS that GW profits VASTLY fianancially by killing off
competition online - GW gets full profit from all the items they sell at
the GW online store. The fact that online discount retailers (which are
the Independant Brick & Mortar stores that GW's <ahem> protecting) are
getting a lot more business on line has NOTHING to do with the move. And
of course the fact that GW is planning open lots more US GW (only) stores
- for the <ahem> 'protection' of Indie B&M stores - must have also escaped
your attention.
Sadly, GW and it's supporters have failed to come up with a single honest
reason for killing off online sales. The obvious answer is that GW isn't
satisfied with 'wholesale' profits from it's items. If GW can effectively
kill off on line discounting (by killing off use of the internet for
advertising - which is how the discount stores reach larger customers
bases) and then dominate the market by opening ever more GW GAMES (only)
B&M stores - then they get a much greater return for each product sold.
This after jacking prices 20% this year alone. And US gamers are going to
believe that GW US is listening to our opinions? Right....
Apparently the only thing GW US is interested in is listening to the Ka-
Ching! of Fanboys throwing money blindly at the GW cash-cow.
Myrmidon
St. Jason
>are the only miniatures. I'm confused, however, why you would insultingly
>deny "the GW Hobby." It seems a little akin to saying that Harley Davidson
>fanatics aren't into Harley Davidson, but rather into 'biking.'
So... I have a friend who isn't into motorcycles, he's into "The HD Hobby"?
I got a buddy who doesn't just like the Steelers, he's into "The Steeler
Hobby"?
Oh, and I like Coke better then Pepsi, so I must be into "The CC Beverage
Industry"?
...Personally, I'd love to see what happens if someone went up to a group of
bikers and tried to tell them that they were in the "Harley-Davidson Hobby"...
--
In nominae Santos Iasonvs
"When I die, I want to go like my grandfather, peacefully in my sleep, not
screaming in terror like his passengers did..."
Just FAQ it: http://www.rgmw.org
P Bowles
black...@aol.com.sucks (St. Jason) writes:
>>I don't believe that GW games are the only wargames, nor do I believe they
>>are the only miniatures. I'm confused, however, why you would insultingly
>>deny "the GW Hobby." It seems a little akin to saying that Harley Davidson
>>fanatics aren't into Harley Davidson, but rather into 'biking.'
>
>So... I have a friend who isn't into motorcycles, he's into "The HD Hobby"?
>I got a buddy who doesn't just like the Steelers, he's into "The Steeler
>Hobby"?
>Oh, and I like Coke better then Pepsi, so I must be into "The CC Beverage
>Industry"?
>
>...Personally, I'd love to see what happens if someone went up to a group of
>bikers and tried to tell them that they were in the "Harley-Davidson
>Hobby"...
He'd better hope he had friends who were into the "Hell's Angels Hobby".
Philip Bowles
Rob Singers
words of wisdom
> I don't believe that GW games are the only wargames, nor do I believe
> they are the only miniatures. I'm confused, however, why you would
> insultingly deny "the GW Hobby." It seems a little akin to saying
> that Harley Davidson fanatics aren't into Harley Davidson, but rather
> into 'biking.'
I've never met anyone with a Harly who wasn't into biking. They generally
love Harlies, Nortons, Triumphs, Indians etc. It's either a crap analogy
or points out that monomania isn't normal (or healthy).
--
Rob Singers
RGMW FAQ Maintainer. See it @ http://www.rgmw.org
Send submissions to submissions at rgmw dot org changing the obvious.
"I present to RGMW....the real life model for StrongBad." (c) Inc 2003
St. Jason
>>>are the only miniatures. I'm confused, however, why you would insultingly
>>>deny "the GW Hobby." It seems a little akin to saying that Harley Davidson
>>>fanatics aren't into Harley Davidson, but rather into 'biking.'
>>
>>So... I have a friend who isn't into motorcycles, he's into "The HD Hobby"?
>>I got a buddy who doesn't just like the Steelers, he's into "The Steeler
>>Hobby"?
>>Oh, and I like Coke better then Pepsi, so I must be into "The CC Beverage
>>Industry"?
>>
>>...Personally, I'd love to see what happens if someone went up to a group of
>>bikers and tried to tell them that they were in the "Harley-Davidson
>>Hobby"...
>
>He'd better hope he had friends who were into the "Hell's Angels Hobby".
Or, at least, a couple of friends who are into the "Wilson Hobby". At the very
least, perhaps he should be strongly into the "Nike Hobby" before going to try
out my little experiment...
Niaccurshi
"jimwork" <jimwo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1ba242b0.03042...@posting.google.com...
At the end of the day, here in the UK, it's much harder to find coverage of
any other wargaming system to play and certainly to collect and build up. GW
has a huge blessing on it's side when it comes to background...sources and
inspiration from wherever, it is as diverse as any you'll find...and I
suppose it's a taste thing when yuo say GW miniatures are the best looking
ones.
I'm not going to comment on the ins and outs, pro's and con's of each
company and it's game, but when push comes to shove I'll probably (for th
forseeable future) go with games workshop so that I know if I want a game
then my miniatures aren't going to gather dust until chance comes along to
find a place or group to play.
I'm sure this is all so very different for you merkins, but muh, whatever. I
am having a big old laugh at the idea of people "protesting against" this
stuff and actually thinking they can do anything, however.
--
-Lee
The marxist formerly known as La Grief!
This was my old sig, now it's my new one. Deal with it.
Marshall Dragoo
> Sadly, GW and it's supporters have failed to come up with a single honest
> reason for killing off online sales. The obvious answer is that GW isn't
> satisfied with 'wholesale' profits from it's items. If GW can effectively
> kill off on line discounting (by killing off use of the internet for
> advertising - which is how the discount stores reach larger customers
> bases) and then dominate the market by opening ever more GW GAMES (only)
> B&M stores - then they get a much greater return for each product sold.
> This after jacking prices 20% this year alone. And US gamers are going to
> believe that GW US is listening to our opinions? Right....
>
> Apparently the only thing GW US is interested in is listening to the Ka-
> Ching! of Fanboys throwing money blindly at the GW cash-cow.
>
> Myrmidon
More like the Israelites worshiping the golden calf. It can do no
wrong in a fanboy's eyes. You should check out Dakka, Myr. There are
fanboys over there religiously defending the holy faith of GW's
actions as the Holy Gospel. I guess the brainwashing tactics have
worked to perfection on those souls.
Marshall Dragoo
RGMW regular
Niaccurshi
"Marshall Dragoo" <m_dr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:23c8d8fd.03042...@posting.google.com...
People will brown nose to high heaven if they get it in their minds that
someone is listening that can give them their dream start in "the GW Hobby
business"
Andrea Gustasson
"estarriol" <esta...@blueyonder.jeansNtshirt.co.uk> wrote in message
news:jAbqa.10401$_67....@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
> > I agree also. My hobby isn't "wargaming". I haven't played _any_ other
> > wargame. Additionally, I spend more time painting, converting, and
> > "building" an army than I ever get to spend actually playing it. While
I
> > realize that GW doesn't "own" miniature painting, nor do they provide
the
> > only resource for conversion or the only models available for army
> > construction, _all_ of these are aspects of my hobby actively promoted
by
> GW
> > as part of _thier_ (our) wargaming experience.
> >
> Ummm actually GW do provide the only models for army construction in there
> games.
Actually, this only applies if you plan on playing armies at a GW sanctioned
event. I have four armies, three of which contain non-GW figures. I built
one Wood Elf army strickly for tournaments, but the other three all contain
miniatures from a variety of sources.
James.
Andrea Gustasson
"Old Bear" <keepin...@homeboys.com> wrote in message
news:b8bpff$rij$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
It isn't irrelevant. I was stipulating that my "hobby" is limited to a
very specific and limited subset of what was suggested above. Surely you're
not suggesting that WHFB is not a subset of "wargaming" And surely your not
suggesting that a part of a whole, a subset of a set, is equivilant to that
set? That being said, the fact that I do not participate in any other
subset of the "wargaming" hobby is relevant to me claiming that "wargaming"
is not my hobby, but rather a small and specific subset of that group.
>
> Additionally, I spend more time painting, converting, and
> > "building" an army than I ever get to spend actually playing it.
>
>
> And you imagine this to be unique to the 'GW Hobby' because...?
I don't imagine it is unique, and while I mentioned that below, let me
clarify. These things are aspects of my hobby in the GW tradition. In the
same sense that "giving gifts" is an aspect of Christmas, but is not limited
to Christmas, none of these aspects are limited to GW. That being said, the
collection of aspects together falls into the tradition of the GW Hobby.
Again, there is nothing which limits even this collection of aspects to GW,
only.
> While I
> > realize that GW doesn't "own" miniature painting, nor do they provide
the
> > only resource for conversion or the only models available for army
> > construction, _all_ of these are aspects of my hobby actively promoted
by
> GW
> > as part of _thier_ (our) wargaming experience.
>
> But you just said you weren't a wargamer.
This is just nitpicking. "Wargaming" as put forth originally, was a set
which included GW games. My assertion that I was not a "Wargamer" was a
denial that my hobby was this set, but rather that it was a specific subset
of that catagory.
> >
> > I don't believe that GW games are the only wargames, nor do I believe
they
> > are the only miniatures. I'm confused, however, why you would
insultingly
> > deny "the GW Hobby." It seems a little akin to saying that Harley
> Davidson
> > fanatics aren't into Harley Davidson, but rather into 'biking.'
>
> So a Harley Davidson isn't a motorcycle then?
Never asserted that. What I was suggesting was that there was something
wrong with asserting that a particular subset was equivilant to the set
which it belongs to. The part does not equal the whole.
James.
incrdbil
wrote:
>
>More like the Israelites worshiping the golden calf. It can do no
>wrong in a fanboy's eyes. You should check out Dakka, Myr. There are
>fanboys over there religiously defending the holy faith of GW's
>actions as the Holy Gospel. I guess the brainwashing tactics have
>worked to perfection on those souls.
what, another forum I can be banned from? Cool.
incrdbil
<jeg...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> It isn't irrelevant. I was stipulating that my "hobby" is limited to a
>very specific and limited subset of what was suggested above.
Playing a limited subset of a hobby doesn't suddenly create a new
hobby. so you narrowlly limit your options for no sensible reason.
Fine--have fun the way you want to--but it doesn't make it a unique
hobby.
>set? That being said, the fact that I do not participate in any other
>subset of the "wargaming" hobby is relevant to me claiming that "wargaming"
>is not my hobby, but rather a small and specific subset of that group.
got to lobve how the GW brainwashing has taken affect. "I'm not a
--ewww-- wargamer--I'm a GW hobbysit!"
So you play one certain brand of wargames. You are still a wargamer.
Driving only Fords doesn't make you a 'Forder' ....
>>
>> Additionally, I spend more time painting, converting, and
>> > "building" an army than I ever get to spend actually playing it.
>>
>>
>> And you imagine this to be unique to the 'GW Hobby' because...?
>
>I don't imagine it is unique, and while I mentioned that below, let me
>clarify.
backpedal, you mean.
> These things are aspects of my hobby in the GW tradition.
there is no GW tradition. Unless the ritual fucking of the consumer
is what you are talkign about.
> That being said, the
>collection of aspects together falls into the tradition of the GW Hobby.
>Again, there is nothing which limits even this collection of aspects to GW,
>only.
therefore, there is no GW hobby, since there is nothign unique to
it--other than all your money goes to one company.
>This is just nitpicking. "Wargaming" as put forth originally, was a set
>which included GW games. My assertion that I was not a "Wargamer" was a
>denial that my hobby was this set, but rather that it was a specific subset
>of that catagory.
So wargaming subsets are derived by manufacturer, not period?
M.F.D.
incrdbil
<la_RGM...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>At the end of the day, here in the UK, it's much harder to find coverage of
>any other wargaming system to play and certainly to collect and build up. GW
>has a huge blessing on it's side when it comes to background
and it explains why it doesn't change much--all of their recent
additions to the background have been of very mixed quality..witht he
average definitely downhill from the work before. Exhaustion of
creativity, I suppose.
>I'm not going to comment on the ins and outs, pro's and con's of each
>company and it's game, but when push comes to shove I'll probably (for th
>forseeable future) go with games workshop so that I know if I want a game
>then my miniatures aren't going to gather dust until chance comes along to
>find a place or group to play.
Welcome to the cult. Not that you could never introduce others to
play--or find somewhere else to play.
that would take..initiative.
>
>I'm sure this is all so very different for you merkins, but muh, whatever. I
>am having a big old laugh at the idea of people "protesting against" this
>stuff and actually thinking they can do anything, however.
Yeah--it's almost as stupid as resisting being robbed and killed by a
much stronger person..what a stupid waste of time! Silly of you to
think you can do anythign about it.
Kurt
>> Those were decent games; sadly the last lot (Battle for Armageddon
>> and co.) were Jervis's idea, and he's been relegated to Fanatic. I
>> think the closest we can expect to a real wargame in the near future
>> is Epic: Armageddon (or more accurately Space Marine: Armageddon,
>> since it seems to have more in common with 2nd Ed. Epic than E40k).
>>
>> Philip Bowles
>
> I'll be a lot more interested if it's like 2nd Ed. Epic - I loathed
> E40K, and it bombed in a big way in my area. Fortunately I still have
> a huge collection of the older Epic stuff and still slug it out using
> the older rules, plus some stuff from the first Ed - Vortex missiles,
> blind missiles, etc.
>
I'm with you on this one, E40K bored me to tears. It had all of the
blandness of playing modern micro armour games with none of the depth.
2nd ed, while fairly broken (especially towards the end with all the
ridiculous things popping up) was still a very fun game, so if it comes
back in that form I'm in.
smithdoerr
"Niaccurshi" <la_RGM...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:pqjqa.13100$9C6.5...@wards.force9.net...
> I'm sure this is all so very different for you merkins, but muh, whatever.
I
> am having a big old laugh at the idea of people "protesting against" this
> stuff and actually thinking they can do anything, however.
<shrug> the last time a British company tried to screw America and
monopolize a market a lot of their inventory ended up floating in Boston
harbor...
--
-smithdoerr
Chris Valera
> >>>I don't believe that GW games are the only wargames, nor do I believe they
> >>>are the only miniatures. I'm confused, however, why you would insultingly
> >>>deny "the GW Hobby." It seems a little akin to saying that Harley Davidson
> >>>fanatics aren't into Harley Davidson, but rather into 'biking.'
> >>
> >>So... I have a friend who isn't into motorcycles, he's into "The HD Hobby"?
> >>I got a buddy who doesn't just like the Steelers, he's into "The Steeler
> >>Hobby"?
> >>Oh, and I like Coke better then Pepsi, so I must be into "The CC Beverage
> >>Industry"?
> >>
> >>...Personally, I'd love to see what happens if someone went up to a group of
> >>bikers and tried to tell them that they were in the "Harley-Davidson
> >>Hobby"...
> >
> >He'd better hope he had friends who were into the "Hell's Angels Hobby".
>
> Or, at least, a couple of friends who are into the "Wilson Hobby". At the very
> least, perhaps he should be strongly into the "Nike Hobby" before going to try
> out my little experiment...
Or the Nissan Driving Experience. Oh wait, that really exists. Like it
or not, GW isn't alone in this.
--Chris
Andrew Gray
Today's Public Service Announcement - a lesson in Teaconomics!
Historically, a stranglehold on the tea market was held by the British
East India company; thanks to mercantilist policies, they essentially
acted as the sole supplier of this exceptionally valuable commodity to
the UK (and, by extension, the world! Muahaha!). High import tariffs
meant that tea produced or sold outside of the Empire was essentially
ignored, and this meant that the market could be comfortably taxed by
London.
Now, the EIC was a large, monolithic, and fundamentally not very good
company. And, in the early 1770s, it was almost ruined. Several things
coincided so that:
1/ It was losing large amounts of trade to black-market competition,
mostly in the colonies, by smugglers avoiding the taxes. Essentially,
they were selling very little tea in NA compared to the market.
2/ The tea market in London had glutted
3/ Their warehouses were full to bursting. Literally. And I don't want
to *imagine* the Thames after a few tons of tea have exploded into it.
So, they thought, and thought, and pulled a few strings... and, scared
that the EIC would go bankrupt, Westminister passed the Tea Act. (As we
see even today, a massive enterprise going bankrupt is something a
country will try hard to avoid. Can we say Chrysler?)
The Tea Act was a fairly smart idea; it said that tea was to be sold in
the Colonies, with no levied taxes or duties when it passed through
London. It was still mercantilist - foreign tea was Not On - but it
essentially meant that:
1/ The EIC could sell its surplus
2/ The EIC would not go bankrupt
3/ London would not lose much money, as it hadn't been collecting the
taxes anyway
and, most cunningly
4/ Because the EIC had both vast surpluses it needed to offload, and an
enormous fleet, it could cut the market price *and* spend very little on
shipping. Essentially, it was actually able to undercut the smugglers.
(The long-term benefits to driving the smugglers out of business was, of
course, clear to London; one of the few sensible decisions it made in
relation to NA after 1750 - once they're gone, you can start taxing
again...)
Plus, as a side-effect,
5/ The colonies got cheaper tea. And without having to add sawdust!
(10/- per lb instead of 20/- per lb; there was a 3d./lb duty in the
colonies now.)
So, all was well.
Except for a minor hitch. To the colonists in NA, the black-market tea
was a useful and profitable part of the economy. This move was seen, in
some circles, as an attack on a somewhat independent-minded group of
entreprenurs by evil monolithic Government (which, in a sense, it was),
and they started kicking up a fuss about it. There was one inspired
interpretation which held that, by inducing Americans to drink more tea,
it was a plan to make people acknowlege the British right to levy taxes
on the colonies... there is a disturbingly large ring of truth to that
one :-)
(This deserves explaining - the first tax to be levied specifically on
the colonies by London appeared in 1765, and after much furore was
withdrawn the next year. There was a boycott; it fizzled out. This was,
again, a specific colonial tax...)
The idea ran that, if the cargo was never unloaded and the ships
returned, no duty would be paid and the principle wouldn't be
established - once the tax was paid, it was de facto in use, and there
was a Principle at stake here. In most ports, the threat of mobs
prevented the EIC from unloading; in Boston, the consignees were not
deterred.
So, the ships docked. To prevent either the cargo being purchased and
duty paid - or the possibility of it being confiscated for non-payment
and sold on anyway, which would still hurt them economically - the
decision was reached to destroy the tea. And, a couple of weeks after
the first ship docked, all three were boarded at night...
You are quite at liberty to choose any analogy you wish to draw, but
note the motives :-)
--
-Andrew Gray
shim...@bigfoot.com
fog
> > least, perhaps he should be strongly into the "Nike Hobby" before going to try
> > out my little experiment...
>
> Or the Nissan Driving Experience. Oh wait, that really exists. Like it
> or not, GW isn't alone in this.
True, but then Nissan doesn't deny the existence of other automobile
manufacturers or the very fact that their product is, indeed, a car, the
way GW does. I'm sure we've all seen T.V. ads in which car "X" has been
compared to cars "Y", "Z" and "AA".
I'm surprised it's taken you this long to get involved in this. Most of
GW's other sycophants have been drooling for at least a week now.
--
GW, this one is for you
....................../´¯/)
....................,/¯../
.................../..../
............./´¯/'...'/´¯¯`·¸
........../'/.../..../......./¨¯\
........('(...´...´.... ¯~/'...')
.........\.................'...../
..........''...\.......... _.·´
............\..............(
..............\.............\...
b
r.g.m.w. FAQ at www.rgmw.org - Just read the damn thing.
"Flee, the Stoic Riders of Saim-Hann are upon us!
Our bolters are no match for their good posture!" -- Blue Raja
"I know you miss the Wainwrights, Bobby, but they
were weak and stupid people--and that's why
we have wolves and other large predators."
-- Gary Larson, The Far Side
Niaccurshi
"incrdbil" <incr...@spammebabyflinthills.com> wrote in message
news:3ea9dc11....@news.flinthills.com...
> On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 00:18:13 +0100, "Niaccurshi"
> <la_RGM...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I'm not going to comment on the ins and outs, pro's and con's of each
> >company and it's game, but when push comes to shove I'll probably (for th
> >forseeable future) go with games workshop so that I know if I want a game
> >then my miniatures aren't going to gather dust until chance comes along
to
> >find a place or group to play.
>
> Welcome to the cult. Not that you could never introduce others to
> play--or find somewhere else to play.
>
> that would take..initiative.
I dunno about you, but the crowd I hang around with haven't exactly got a)
the money to start the hobby or b) the interest. So, kindly, go fuck
yourself, don't see the game makers putting much of an initiative to get
their games pushed even slightly into the limelight either. Ironically most
dont' get heard of unless you take an interest in warhammer and get lead
there by form of this type of newsgroup. Initiative my fucking arse, it's a
set of wargames, and in particular one set thats so damn stupid that they
can't self fucking promote.
> >I'm sure this is all so very different for you merkins, but muh,
whatever. I
> >am having a big old laugh at the idea of people "protesting against" this
> >stuff and actually thinking they can do anything, however.
>
>
> Yeah--it's almost as stupid as resisting being robbed and killed by a
> much stronger person..what a stupid waste of time! Silly of you to
> think you can do anythign about it.
It's a game, get over it, you seem to have a hard on for these other lesser
games anyway, go wank on their boards.
St. Jason
>or not, GW isn't alone in this.
Aha, but Nissan isn't trying to deny that there are other cars out there. They
aren't trying to convince everyone that it isn't "driving", it's "Nissaning".
--
In nominae Santos Iasonvs
"Then let us rekindle our feelings,
forget our despair and our celibate nonsense,
And do it like bunnyrats until the cows come home to roost."
-King Missile, Let's Have Sex
Niaccurshi
"Andrew Gray" <andre...@durham.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:slrnbaju...@compsoc.dur.ac.uk...
> In article <Y6mqa.620228$3D1.340149@sccrnsc01>, smithdoerr wrote:
> >
> > "Niaccurshi" <la_RGM...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:pqjqa.13100$9C6.5...@wards.force9.net...
> >
> >> I'm sure this is all so very different for you merkins, but muh,
whatever.
> > I
> >> am having a big old laugh at the idea of people "protesting against"
this
> >> stuff and actually thinking they can do anything, however.
> >
> ><shrug> the last time a British company tried to screw America and
> > monopolize a market a lot of their inventory ended up floating in Boston
> > harbor...
>
> Today's Public Service Announcement - a lesson in Teaconomics!
>
<el snipio>
> You are quite at liberty to choose any analogy you wish to draw, but
> note the motives :-)
Well I was just going to post that the annalogy isn't at all the same, but
thanks for explaining it better than I ever could.
E Holmes
I know 'true' wargamers don't consider it to be much, but Mage Knight is a
wargame, and is advertised and popular - even so far as to be carried by
Wal-Mart for a short stint. Also, Chainmail was very strongly advertised
and availiable, and it's next incarnation will probably also be. 100
Kingdoms is pushing hard for publicity, but is a very small company right
now. Try doing a Google search, and you will find a number of smaller
gaming companies that are trying to make it big, and are limited only by
resources - which fits loosely into your definition. GW, on the other hand,
has massive resources and minimal advertising (mostly limited to their
magazine), at least here in the U.S.
> > >I'm sure this is all so very different for you merkins, but muh,
> whatever. I
> > >am having a big old laugh at the idea of people "protesting against"
this
> > >stuff and actually thinking they can do anything, however.
> >
> >
> > Yeah--it's almost as stupid as resisting being robbed and killed by a
> > much stronger person..what a stupid waste of time! Silly of you to
> > think you can do anythign about it.
>
> It's a game, get over it, you seem to have a hard on for these other
lesser
> games anyway, go wank on their boards.
I'm sure you will be quite happy the day GW raises your prices for plastic
units from £15 to £19 in one day (for 12 to 20 in a pack, non-mounted), cuts
your packs down to 2 minis for £4-5.50 each for the base troops, raises
prices to £4 for one unit leader, and £10.50 for the commander.
The fact that you are seeing such outrage from Americans should suggest how
serious the problem over here could become. I'm waiting for someone to
stand out front of a GW store in a Minuteman costume, waving a "No Anal
Rapage Without Representation" sign. Or something of the sort. : )
Ed
Blackheart
wrote:
your "flailing-fanboyitis" may keep certain things like "a clue" from
penetrating your thickened cranium. but automobiles and miniature
wargames are -slightly- different situations... as fog and St. Jason
have already pointed out.. but I'm sure little things like facts will
continue to bounce harmlessly off of your slack jaw...
now run along...