"Advance Order: Space Marines; Orks; Imperial Guard [40K]" Topic

The Dreadies look nice. I need 3 or 4 of them. Shouldnt the price of the plastic sets been less than the metal ones though? Too bad.

Shouldnt the price of the plastic sets been less than the metal ones though?

Why? There's no "should" about it.

Disregarding the particular price points of GW products, when you buy a miniature, you're really paying for the design, not the raw materials.

I wonder how they've made the chimera kit easier to put together… it was pretty simple to begin with.

A fool and his money…

Agreed the new orky stuff looks good, may have to get some of them.

This updated kit is now more straightforward to assemble than before

How?!

Is it preassembled with flashy lights?

I mean seriously, it was two halves for the hull, two halves for the tracks and bob was your paternal sibling…

our most detailed plastic kit to date

Of course it is, all designers and processes tend to improve over time , oh no wait…the minotaurs…bah…

Love the orks though, and relish the thought of the killa kans stomping all over some poor kids space marines, as I laugh maniacally at his tears(yes, i am that pathetic…)

This updated kit is now more straightforward to assemble than before

How?!

Well, just from looking at the sprue, the extra sections and hatches on the hull sides are now integrated with the main hull piece, the road wheels don't need to be all glued in place (there used to be 24 to glue in the old Chimera kit!), the rear door is no longer a separate piece, the turret doesn't have to be glued through the top of the hull and will now lock into place like the Leman Russ one has for years and, if they've carried on with the current way of doing them, the track pieces will probably be numbered by the order they need to be glued in place.

Well, you did ask… :)

Given the number of these things I've assembled over the years, just integrating the wheels into the hull sections is worthy of at least a small fanfare.

I love the look of GW's plastic models but I still miss the wieght of lead. I wonder if I could glue lead shot inside of it?

Shouldnt the price of the plastic sets been less than the metal ones though?

Why? There's no "should" about it.

The plastic sets should be cheaper than the metals, especially as this was the claim originally made by GW.

Disregarding the particular price points of GW products, when you buy a miniature, you're really paying for the design, not the raw materials.

Raw materials do factor in the final price, along with other things, such as design, but GW as a fantasy/sci-fi figure manufacturer could charge anything they want to a "captive" audience. Contrast this with producers of historical sculpts and kits.

It's also simple supply and demand too. They are the only ones who make 'these' models, so anyone who wants them has to pay the price that is set for it. So they take the costs that they have to pay and then toss in the mark-up (ie profit) and cha-ching, that is the price.

Whether or not you want to pay for it… that's your call.

I'm glad to hear about the new Chimera kit. That was a pain in the a@@ to assemble. Anything that makes it simpler is welcome.

Guinny's right on the assembly thing – those Chimera kits were far more fiddly than they needed to be. Nice to see a more user-friendly version, although I'll reserve final judgement till I've actually put one together.

I am toying around with buying a couple boxes of killa kans for future converting possibilities, before they get more expensive

Agreed on the design, looks far simpler (through probably less things to add to the bits box :( )

As for the price issues, I don't think the prices are that bad when compared to similar sized plastic kits from say, Airfix.

And the new orky stuff looks very nice!

The killa kans look like they will be a hoot. The son and I will have fun putting them together and playing with them.

The plastic sets should be cheaper than the metals, especially as this was the claim originally made by GW.

If that's what they said, then that's different. When did they say that, though?

Raw materials do factor in the final price, along with other things, such as design, but GW as a fantasy/sci-fi figure manufacturer could charge anything they want to a "captive" audience. Contrast this with producers of historical sculpts and kits.

That's not the same thing. All I'm saying is, a plastic miniature "shouldn't" need to be cheaper than an otherwise equivalent metal one just because it's plastic.

Hobbybox, you're correct on the lack of extras; if the Basilisk and Chimera kits are anything like the Leman Russ Demolisher and Hellhound kits, you won't get the accessories sprue; that's now mail-order only.

Andrew:
They'd said that when they first began to heavily invest in plastics production. It was in a past investors report.

Ooooo stompy! Those Ork dreads and Killa Kans look great. Gonna have to add to the dread mob…the mekboyz will be pleased.

The first plastic regiment WD had that commenta few times. It was said that the step was for a whole unit in a box would be cheaper as plastic is so cheap. That is part of the idea for "big" unit gaming of the newer rules.

No offense to those who think plastic should be cheaper, but I have a great model shop nearby and the 1/48 and 1/35 scale kit prices are just as eye-opening as well. It doesn't seem to be just necessarily GW, but the industry as a whole.

If given the choice, I will take the plastic kit over metal as I have yet to plastic glue my fingers together and the bond is much more secure!
Larry

Freeman, I am just saying they sold us on the idea of cheaper units then did the opposite.

Personally I like converting metal with plastic parts, just not a fan of the bait and switch they did over time.

I could get 16 figures plus metal command bits for a lot less than 10 all plastic kits today.

>No offense to those who think plastic should be cheaper, but I have a great model shop nearby and the 1/48 and 1/35 scale kit prices are just as eye-opening as well. It doesn't seem to be just necessarily GW, but the industry as a whole.

I dunno… 1/48 armour kits by Tamiya range from $18-25, GW Chimera is $40. USD

YMMV I guess…

w.

Retail on the Revell 1:35 BMP-2, a good comparsion model, is $36.50.

Sure, you can go find specific expensive examples, but are representative of most?
I've been looking at some nice RW military kits for my dad and from what I've seen you can get comparable kits for much less than GW stuff.
So I don't think that is a good excuse.

Their stuff is pricey because it can be… because they've succeeded in getting the fanboys to pay for it no matter what they charge. That's all.

Actually, I searched for "1:35 BMP-2 plastic" because it's clearly a good comparison. I didn't search for "cheapest sale price to support my axe grinding." ;)

But that's just silly me providing objective information.

A typical good quality 1/35 kit will go for between $32 USD to $50, with old kits going for under, and a few kits (like Tamiya's Char B1bis for $65) going for above.

The Dragon BMP-2 actually isn't the best comparison, because the kit is something like 20yrs old. In the latest Finescale, the AFV Club M5A1 is going for $45, and the Trumpeter Centauro AC $55. USD

Damon.

Why would you compare GW kits to 1/35 models? They are more similar (scale-wise) to 1/48 kits. As noted before, Tamiyas range from $20 USD to the mid $30s. Hobbyboss and Academy are generally cheaper.

That being said, I have GW stuff along with modified (and unmodified) 1/48--depends upon the look I'm going for in a particular force.

Anyway, as has already been mentioned, GW charges what they think the market will bear. Whether they have hit the right part of the profit curve only they can tell.

For me, they are now out of my acceptable cost range. I bought 4 T-34 by Hobbyboss from Squadron for about $10 USD a piece in December. I'm building them as not-Chimera's (sort of) for my AT-43 Red Blok infantry. the good news is that I will now have 4 76mm guns and turrets I can use for some other project (keep two as turretted weapons for a gunboat maybe, and the other two for artillery, I think).

Rob

Raw materials do factor in the final price, along with other things, such as design, but GW as a fantasy/sci-fi figure manufacturer could charge anything they want to a "captive" audience. Contrast this with producers of historical sculpts and kits.

Historical figures are massively underpriced. Historical gamers are notoriously tight-fisted (I am, at least!) and we grumble and complain and want everything to be priced as it was 25 years ago.

Historical figures in general should really have a 100% increase in price across the line. I wouldn't like it, and I would buy more discriminatingly, but manufacturers would then be more inclined to finish ranges off properly, even those odd, unprofitable units, because they were finally making enough cash to actually pay the bills now and again.

Assuming it is cheaper to produce the models in plastic, they've no obligation or apparently intention to pass that on to consumers :)

That said, I agree that historical vehicle kits are similarly or even more expensively priced for comparable kits.

we grumble and complain and want everything to be priced as it was 25 years ago.

NAIL+HEAD=YOU WIN THE INTERNET! thankyou sir!

I would pay 99p to £1.99 GBP for an amstrad game when the "moaners" were paying 10p for a googolplex of metal mini's in a gold lined box.

I now pay £40.00 GBP to £60.00 GBP for a ps3/xbox360 game, half that for PC, and guess what, prices went up in twenty years for mini's too.

I have finally realised that the GW/FoW bashing is really just "It was better when I was young" trussed up as indignant complaining about price.

And the next person who says "i could get 30 marines for 9.99" well…lets just say I have a voodoo dwarf + a lighter :)

Raw materials do factor in the final price, along with other things, such as design, but GW as a fantasy/sci-fi figure manufacturer could charge anything they want to a "captive" audience. Contrast this with producers of historical sculpts and kits.

Historical figures are massively underpriced.

They're priced based on what a competitively driven market would bear, along with inflation, so not massively underpriced as you erroneously claim. Fantasy manufacturers, especially the ones tying the ranges with a set of rules and possibly official figures only tournaments, could charge what they want to a "captive" audience – GW and Rackham, for instance.

Historical gamers are notoriously tight-fisted (I am, at least!) and we grumble and complain and want everything to be priced as it was 25 years ago.

Those folks tend to be in the DB-whatsit players, as demonstrated here on TMP: no more than £1.00/figure and free rules. I and others have no problem paying $2.00-$3.00 for 28mm infantry, factoring in current inflation rates, but anything higher is taking a for a historical figure maker and borderline for a fantasy marketer. Certainly plastic figures shouldn't be any higher than the metal equivalent and in most cases with a lower price.

Historical figures in general should really have a 100% increase in price across the line.

Leading to 0% profit, especially with competitors offering similar products.

I wouldn't like it, and I would buy more discriminatingly, but manufacturers would then be more inclined to finish ranges off properly, even those odd, unprofitable units, because they were finally making enough cash to actually pay the bills now and again.

If a line's unprofitable, for whatever reason, a manufacturer will not invest or further invest in it no matter what.

On the one hand you have holdouts expecting 1980s prices and drunken sailors on the other side. Both appear to advocate for some kind of collusive price fixing…