"Did Reaper do something illegal?" Topic

Even if a bunch of us hobbyists actually are lawyers.

Not me. I'm "just" a teacher. Merely pointing out that there are a lot of lawyers running about here.

No contract was made. Simple as that. "Limited" has no legal definition. Plus, your purchase wasn't between you and Reaper. Good luck on your suit. (I realize you haven't actually threatened suit.)

My wife has some numbered, certificated, blah blah blah Wizard of Oz plates (she's kind of a nut about that movie). They cost her momma a few hundred dollars a decade or so back to get the whole set. What would her response be to finding out they were re-issuing this supposedly limited set? I asked her. Her reply: "I still have mine, right? Who cares if they re-issue more?"

Collectibles are only valuable to those who collect them. Try selling your favorite comics to a dealer. If you get 40% of list, you're a better salesman than I (not saying much there). Same thing here. You paid what it was worth to you, at the time, and were happy – nay, proud, it seems, and we all know what that goes before – with your acquisition. Now it's available for less and you feel foolish. Rather than feel foolish, you choose to be angry at someone else – that's called transference by psychologists, by the way – and then lash out at them in a public forum by making wild accusations of 'illegality.'

Finally, for the record, I have no fiduciary interest in Reaper Miniatures, Inc. Never even met the fellows that run the place, and I only own a few of their figures, with little plan to purchase many more. It just irked me that you went off on someone else for what is, essentially, your miscalculation of the value of a supposed collectible.

Hmm, didn't realize so many lawyers were on board here, or reaper employees.

While I can't speak to who may or may not be a Reaper employee, at least one of those who has replied to you IS a practicing attorney.

Bottom line though is, regardless of the profession of those on these boards, how much further is the OP towards any kind of resolution. Has he attempted to contact Reaper himself? Has what effectively amounts to him asking for free legal advice gotten him results? My suggestion is that if he wants to pursue that route, he needs to employ legal counsel.

While I've not yet been in a situation where I've needed the services of a lawyer in my life, I would assume that one would be able to explain their situation and have the lawyer decide whether or not to take the case at no or little cost.

Not trying to create another argument, just suggesting that the man hire legal aid if he feels Reaper has acted in violation of law. I don't think it is that shocking of a concept.

@Sororitas

If you didn't want to hear what people had to say perhaps you should not come on a board throwing accusations around about a reputable company. Your stance is foolish at best and at worst moronic. Reaper entered into no contract with you or anyone else. Perhaps a little self reflection would do you better then coming onto a board and ranting in an attempt to get whatever satisfaction you feel is somehow due to you.

Well it appears that few wargamers trust the term "Limited" or any other term that suggest that a figure will have "Limited" production.

Regardless of Reaper's right to do this:

Who will now trust Reaper?

Who will believe the

About a dozen

claim for the new resin Sophie?

Perhaps we should just wait till they next issue them?

In these hard times trust has a value

It is earned and it is worth money from a loyal customer base.

Despite the Reaper fanboys that have rushed to Reaper's support I now know what a Reaper figure is worth.

I will buy it from Ebay when it less than full price!

Well, let me see here, in this thread I've been told that I'm out of line, bent out of shape, over reacting, bad judgement and stifling, all because I ask a simple question about advertising principles. So basically, what I'm hearing from many of you is that the mini can be labeled as limited without any consequence. Does this hold true for item description as well, If I state it's 70mm and it's only 28. If I state it's a pirate and it's a lizardman. I do want to write reaper a letter. Just wanted some advice first. I like to think there is still integrity in certain industries.

I really can't imagine why anyone has ever bought a "Sophie".

Easy enough. The same reason I buy any figure; it is something I like and want to paint. I can't imagine why I'd buy Napoleonic figures, but I don't simply dismiss the interests of those who do.

I never said people shouldn't buy them, just that I doubted their investment value and I couldn't figure out why they sell.

With the Napoleonics, it's a pretty easy jump to the idea that the buyer would use them in Napoleonic wargames. More of a stretch for my imagination, with the "Sophies".
-Kle.

I still think Reaper did something illegal here.

You're entitled to think what you want, but in this case, you are demonstrably, incontrovertably wrong.

If you think they did something wrong, then that's merely a matter of opinion and all opinions are pretty much equal. However, illegal is a matter of law, and a simple true/false proposition.
-Kle.

So my question to everyone now is Soroitas now guilty of libel?

As to your comment about the difference between 28mm and 70mm, now you are just plain WRONG!

Those of you, who chose to insult me or my judgement can also choose to do so. I still think Reaper did something illegal here.

Except to say that you were suckered, I did not insult, but now you make me want to.
Before you accuse them of doing something illegal, please cite a law that they "may" have broken…

Sorry to resurrect a topic that should be left to die, but there needs to be a small point of clarification here:

Black Tower said:

…claim for the new resin Sophie?

If I understand it right, the 12 or so Resin Sophies that they sold this past Reapercon were not "new" as in "newly cast up" but rather were "new" as in a bunch of ones from the original casting run were found sitting in a box or closet somewhere at Reaper.

So the resin Sophie situation is entirely different than the 5th Anniversery Sophie set. Reaper finding and selling those is really no different than a collector or store who bought from the original run unloading their collection. And I guarantee you that most collectors or stores would have sold at a much higher price.

Concerning the resin Sophie model, we uncovered/discovered 27 of them. 8 were sold and 4 given away leaving 15.

Concerning the "Reaper" employees in this thread, I am the only one I know of.

Concerning the box set. E-bay/secondary market pricing or values are not my concern. My concern is to provide miniatures to fans, not miniatures to e-bay resellers. We do things to help make things special for fans, like only selling things during ReaperCon. Want to hate us? Be my guest, it's a long line. Have extra time on your hands? Send me some hate mail, believe me, I will answer it…

Best
Ed Pugh

Realistically if they wanted not to tick customers off they would add to the sculpt – like an extra dagger, a skull or a 3rd boob….

If it's illegal, how is it that GW has done it for years?

"Sales" are probably the most commonly abused form of advertising in any country. In the UK the regulating authority is tiny and under funded and rarely takes any companies to court, as they cannot afford to do so. It isn't a criminal offence so unless the regulatory body does anything then it is down to a wealthy individual pursuing a court case, unlikely.

This doesn't stop it still being illegal though, it just means that you rarely get prosecuted for it. It is also very difficult to prove retrospectively, so you need to be alerted to a company breaking the regulations, then set a watch on the company, then hope they breach the regulations again. Either that or have an internal whistleblower who has kept very good records.

A big carpet chain got done for this last year after a substantial number of complaints prompted the body to place an agent in the company itself for over a year. They were fined a few thousand pounds…. I imagine that you can understand how that sort of fine is not exactly a dramatic stick to beat off other companies form doing similar "sales" patterns. Off the top of my head you have to have had the item on sale for 6 months minimum at the "full price" to be able to offer a sales price based from that figure, so if it was $100 USD for 6 months, then you could have a sale of 25%-off priced at $75. USD

If I state it's 70mm and it's only 28.

That's called scale creep. Reverse scale creep, I suppose, as the tendency for years has been to call something 25mm and it actually be closer to 28 or 30mm, being larger than advertised rather than smaller.

Reader Name 001
You seem a bit confused over what is and what isn't a criminal offence in the UK.

If something isn't criminal you can't be prosecuted although an injured (financially or physically) party may bring a civil action.

And you are wrong that misrepresentation in a sale is not a criminal offence – see 'The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008' made as a result of the European 'Unfair Commercial Practices Directive', which effectively repealed and replaced the Trade Descriptions Act 1968 with more powerful criminal sanctions available against traders who do things like pretending something has been on sale at a higher price when it hasn't.

Certainly the various Sale of Goods Acts give consumers contractual civil protections against unfair trading practices as well, but breaches of the 'The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008' are criminal not civil.

Of course you are right that not many actions are brought but that is a political will problem – you can legislate as much as you like- but if you allow cuts to continually be made in the funding of Trading Standards departments around the country, people quickly get the message about whose side you are really on.
I cannot claim any knowledge of US consumer protection law – although my impresion is (probably wrongly) that there isn't any.

shrugs/me

cant say as im arsed frankly Gridiron.

Either way it would be illegal in the UK, so the answer to the OP would have been "yes".