# GW Scrapping Metal?



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

From BoLS:



> Word is going around that the trucks have left the station... The era of GW and metal is going, going gone....
> 
> Word today is that truckloads containing literally metric tons of metal miniatures have pulled away from GW HQ, headed for a date with a furnace. The entire stock is to be smelted down and sold off on the metals markets.
> 
> ...


Now take this with salt as when I looked last there weren't models missing, but that may change. Right now it's unclear if the metal models for ranges that aren't being updated at the moment will be handed over to FW as part of the rumored merger of the two sides of the house into a single entity or if they're being dropped completely. Heck it's not even clear if this has actually happened yet, so please keep the torches and pitchforks to a minimum.


----------



## imm0rtal reaper (Jul 15, 2008)

If, and this is a big if mind you, they are indeed getting rid of all their metal and selling it off, that screams to me that they want cash fast. In addition to canning the regional managers and the like it seems like they are trying to get/save as much money as they can so the full year report is healthier. 

I personally still think they are looking to sell and are trimming themselves in preperation.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

I disagree with you Reaper, but mostly because the option of slowly phasing it out costs more for GW than a smelt and sell does. Those metal models take up extremely valuable warehouse space, and really the only other options for GW are to sell the models via a sale (resulting in them carrying this merchandize that hasn't really been moving for a couple of years now) for an unknown amount of time until it finally manages to sell or throw it in the rubbish bin. Selling the White Metal is honestly the smartest move they could make here assuming they are dropping metal completely. It frees up space, and gives them a much more predictable return on their initial investment.

Also, despite GW's sales being down this last year they aren't exactly hurting on cash. They've been floating a pretty large Retained Earnings account for a while which meansbthey don't have to run out and get loans or look for more investors when they have a slump. They can't run on it forever, but it's a safety net I noticed some months ago that likely helps them stay on relatively financially solid ground when things don't look their best.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

Who writes this shite???? Metal got shit canned back in 06 when the prices went from $3 to $10 and stayed there(well apart from in 2011 when they peaked at $15 and we got fine cast).
Even if GW happened to be sitting on metric tons of metal models(which i seriously doubt) it hardly means we are suddenly going to be missing huge swathes of products if they decided to cash in the metal as scrap, most of the products in the GW range are now plastic and those that are not are resin, very few metal products remain and those that do are priced accordingly.


----------



## Einherjar667 (Aug 23, 2013)

GW stores their stock of miniatures at their HQ? And not a manufacturing/distribution warehouse?


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

Einherjar667 said:


> GW stores their stock of miniatures at their HQ? And not a manufacturing/distribution warehouse?


they had this crazy idea of having the HQ and the manufacturing and distribution all in the same place,fools!


----------



## humakt (Jan 2, 2008)

Einherjar667 said:


> GW stores their stock of miniatures at their HQ? And not a manufacturing/distribution warehouse?


It may surprise you that its actually the same place.

I'm not sure how valuable the metal used by GW is when sold on the whole sale market. Its an alloy that is probably not in particularly high demand anywhere. Its not like a big lump of steel or aluminium that can be used easily in manufacturing industry.


----------



## Einherjar667 (Aug 23, 2013)

My point is, the image depicted is such that these giant trucks are hauling off the entire range of metal minis from a big giant GW building, when surely they have distribution centers overseas (Like here in the US), etc. that house these items. In order to recall them all to be trucked off from their HQ, they'd ACTUALLY have to disappear from the website as GW can't sell a product that's been hauled off to their HQ for termination.

If that makes any sense.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

humakt said:


> It may surprise you that its actually the same place.
> 
> I'm not sure how valuable the metal used by GW is when sold on the whole sale market. Its an alloy that is probably not in particularly high demand anywhere. Its not like a big lump of steel or aluminium that can be used easily in manufacturing industry.


well white metal is around 80%+ tin and in 2006 most of the world banned the use of lead based solders leading to the electronics industry looking for a safe alternate metal, and they went with tin based solders(which isnt a surprise as the toy industry went with tin to replace lead when it was banned too) so the price of tin which was peanuts at the time more than tripled in a year and has stayed high ever since.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

Einherjar667 said:


> My point is, the image depicted is such that these giant trucks are hauling off the entire range of metal minis from a big giant GW building, when surely they have distribution centers overseas (Like here in the US), etc. that house these items. In order to recall them all to be trucked off from their HQ, they'd ACTUALLY have to disappear from the website as GW can't sell a product that's been hauled off to their HQ for termination.
> 
> If that makes any sense.


pay it no attention, its just internet sensationalism, a GW employee once closed his store so he could take his lunch hour, by the time the internet had finished with the story, all stores were closing down worldwide permanently and GW was going to be internet only and the member of staff had punched an old lady stolen her handbag and had sex with his own mother during his lunch break, and Matt Ward was to blame some how.


----------



## Einherjar667 (Aug 23, 2013)

bitsandkits said:


> pay it no attention, its just internet sensationalism, a GW employee once closed his store so he could take his lunch hour, by the time the internet had finished with the story, all stores were closing down worldwide permanently and GW was going to be internet only and the member of staff had punched an old lady stolen her handbag and had sex with his own mother during his lunch break, and Matt Ward was to blame some how.


Ahahaha, alright then, noted.


----------



## venomlust (Feb 9, 2010)

bitsandkits said:


> pay it no attention, its just internet sensationalism, a GW employee once closed his store so he could take his lunch hour, by the time the internet had finished with the story, all stores were closing down worldwide permanently and GW was going to be internet only and the member of staff had punched an old lady stolen her handbag and had sex with his own mother during his lunch break, and Matt Ward was to blame some how.


DAMN YOU WAAAAAARD!

I still barely even know why we hate him. "We" because I wanna be cool too.


----------



## Veteran Sergeant (May 17, 2012)

It's also fairly likely that Games Workshop has a stock of older models that it was disposing of due to lack of sales making them more valuable as scrap than as product. 

Bear in mind this doesn't mean that _all_ the figures had to have been sold. It may just be parts of the stock. This is a company that for almost 20 years made metal models. So the stock being scrapped could be _anything_, but not necessarily _everything_. 

Either way, it shouldn't be shocking. They stopped producing new metal products years ago if I'm not mistaken, and even converted a fair amount of it to resin. Doesn't anybody remember what the last new metal miniature was? 

I wonder about the future of the ranges that are still all-metal. Especially if Finecast really is about to die like we've been hearing.


----------



## Einherjar667 (Aug 23, 2013)

Veteran Sergeant said:


> It's also fairly likely that Games Workshop has a stock of older models that it was disposing of due to lack of sales making them more valuable as scrap than as product.
> 
> Bear in mind this doesn't mean that _all_ the figures had to have been sold. It may just be parts of the stock. This is a company that for almost 20 years made metal models. So the stock being scrapped could be _anything_, but not necessarily _everything_.
> 
> ...


Not to divert the topic, but what does finecast dying entail? This isn't the first time I've heard this. Are those models being replaced by a different material, or disappearing from the range? What's the story?


----------



## darkreever (Apr 3, 2008)

venomlust said:


> I still barely even know why we hate him.


Because there are still a shockingly large number of people who seem to believe that when a codex has his name on it, that he and he alone wrote all of the fluff. That no one else helped, proof-read, gave idea's, or disagreed.

Since, you know, thats totally how it works...


----------



## Veteran Sergeant (May 17, 2012)

darkreever said:


> Because there are still a shockingly large number of people who seem to believe that when a codex has his name on it, that he and he alone wrote all of the fluff. That no one else helped, proof-read, gave idea's, or disagreed.
> 
> Since, you know, thats totally how it works...


The especially funny part about the Mat Ward hate is that 90% of the 5th Edition Space Marine Codex is a copy/paste job from the 4th Edition C:SM and the 2nd Edition Codex: Ultramarines. People want to act like Mat Ward suddenly invented the idea of the Ultramarines being the best. The Ultramarines have been the best for 20 years, lol. The back cover of Codex: Ultramarines (1995) calls them "The greatest of all Space Marine Chapters", and it was written by Rick Priestley and Jervis Johnson, who are basically the creators of 40K. 

The Ultramarines have pretty much _always_ been the best (since 2nd Edition is the start of the modern canon for 40K). Players who get upset about the Ultramarines are typically the funniest of nerd-ragers, because it's the most illogical thing possible in the hobby to be angry that a different color of plastic toy soldiers is considered better than _your_ favorite color of plastic toy soldiers in an entirely fictional universe. Especially since the fluff behind _why_ the Ultramarines are so good is actually fairly well written.




Now, complaints about the changes to the Necron fluff, and some of the more ridiculous stuff in Codex: Grey Knights might be warranted. Though you make a good point. Ward may not have actually written any or all of that.


----------



## locustgate (Dec 6, 2009)

Veteran Sergeant said:


> The especially funny part about the Mat Ward hate is that 90% of the 5th Edition Space Marine Codex is a copy/paste job from the 4th Edition C:SM and the 2nd Edition Codex: Ultramarines. People want to act like Mat Ward suddenly invented the idea of the Ultramarines being the best. The Ultramarines have been the best for 20 years, lol. The back cover of Codex: Ultramarines (1995) calls them "The greatest of all Space Marine Chapters", and it was written by Rick Priestley and Jervis Johnson, who are basically the creators of 40K.
> 
> The Ultramarines have pretty much _always_ been the best (since 2nd Edition is the start of the modern canon for 40K). Players who get upset about the Ultramarines are typically the funniest of nerd-ragers, because it's the most illogical thing possible in the hobby to be angry that a different color of plastic toy soldiers is considered better than _your_ favorite color of plastic toy soldiers in an entirely fictional universe. Especially since the fluff behind _why_ the Ultramarines are so good is actually fairly well written.


This is why my favorite toy soldiers aren't human (officially).


----------



## Svartmetall (Jun 16, 2008)

venomlust said:


> DAMN YOU WAAAAAARD!


----------



## Bindi Baji (Apr 23, 2009)

venomlust said:


> DAMN YOU WAAAAAARD!
> 
> I still barely even know why we hate him. "We" because I wanna be cool too.


Don't forget he also co-wrote that fox song with Ylvis............


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

I hear ward discovered Bieber while visiting Canada


----------



## Einherjar667 (Aug 23, 2013)

I just heard Justin Bieber for the first time today


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

bitsandkits said:


> Who writes this shite???? Metal got shit canned back in 06 when the prices went from $3 to $10 and stayed there(well apart from in 2011 when they peaked at $15 and we got fine cast).
> Even if GW happened to be sitting on metric tons of metal models(which i seriously doubt) it hardly means we are suddenly going to be missing huge swathes of products if they decided to cash in the metal as scrap, most of the products in the GW range are now plastic and those that are not are resin, very few metal products remain and those that do are priced accordingly.


Metal never completely went away, they just stopped releasing _new_ models in it when Finecast hit (up until then we still saw the occasional metal release, mostly for character models prior to Finecast).

And what you seem to be overlooking is about half of the Fantasy range is metal, Sisters are all metal (save for the Rhino/Immolator kit) and anything that isn't Catachan, Cadian or a tank for IG is metal (Vostroyans, Iron Guard, Tallarn, ect). So yeah, there are still a *lot* of metal models in the ranges and they aren't all getting an update from what we can tell in the near future so it is a concern for some people if GW pulls metal models completely in the near future without a replacement of some kind (which with the lack of new Finecast releases looks like we won't be seeing that as a possible solution). 

As for the validity of the rumor, it's a rumor. If it was news I'd post it as such instead. No I don't know the original source, and honestly I don't really care because most of the time the arguments over validity of a source are just ways for people to avoid dealing with ideas they don't like and it's silly. It's a rumor, take it with a healthy amount of salt and see how it plays out before you go shooting it down as fake.


----------



## Mokuren (Mar 29, 2011)

Aside from the mention of truckful of miniatures leaving HQ to never return, I thought GW scrapping metal was already pretty much confirmed? Maybe in smaller quantities and not with entire convoys carrying unsold sister models away to the burner, but it's no news that they've been moving as far away from metal as possible and were going to abandon it entirely sooner or later.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Mokuren said:


> Aside from the mention of truckful of miniatures leaving HQ to never return, I thought GW scrapping metal was already pretty much confirmed? Maybe in smaller quantities and not with entire convoys carrying unsold sister models away to the burner, but it's no news that they've been moving as far away from metal as possible and were going to abandon it entirely sooner or later.


GW scrapping metal is a given, the question though has always been when. The assumption that most have had was that all the metal models would be in Finecast or plastic before it happened, but this may in fact be incorrect. For anyone whose army is made of metal models (and there is no sign of a release in the near future) it's a legitimate concern if metal gets scrapped completely with no replacement as it could be the death of that army.


----------



## Bindi Baji (Apr 23, 2009)

I think this happened with some of the specialist games last year,
not convinced it'll happen with others until they are close to replacements or at least a long term plan for them, time will tell


----------



## serphangel (Feb 1, 2014)

I myself despise working with finecast resin. I have no issues with resin itself just finecast, poor quality. I do like working with metal having been a collector of 40k since '94 but I don't miss the chipping or rub on the paint work. I would personally be very happy to see the whole GW range in plastic or FW quality resin.


----------



## Adramalech (Nov 10, 2009)

This isn't a rumour, nor is it news. GW has slowly been phasing metal out for a long, long time now. This process was hastened a few years back with the skyrocketing material cost for manufacturing white metal miniatures, whereupon Games Workshop came up with the stop-gap measure of Citadel Finecast. The recent trend, though, indicates that all new WHFB and WH40k miniature releases moving forward will be in plastic.

If, however, you meant that they'll simply stop selling their metal miniatures, then I find that very unlikely. I wouldn't be surprised if they squatted sisters, even if their sales data from Dark Eldar should have showed them that all sisters and other, older armies need is some shiny new plastics and a codex that makes them playable again.


----------



## Shandathe (May 2, 2010)

Well, FWIW... The entire Specialist range is completely gone except for rulebooks and FAQs. They had a decent number of spare models (though nothing in it's entirety) still for sale before. This includes Blood Bowl, which still had a fairly large selection last time I checked, and given the upcoming Blood Bowl 2 this IS rather surprising to me. Though I suppose there's still time to come up with plastics to sell when it hits.

Potentially related, though it's been a while now since I ordered any, I could swear the price of some Sister models has gone up. Tried to dig up one of the old posts complaining about the prices but no luck so far.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Sister prices in the US haven't changed.


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

bitsandkits said:


> pay it no attention, its just internet sensationalism, a GW employee once closed his store so he could take his lunch hour, by the time the internet had finished with the story, all stores were closing down worldwide permanently and GW was going to be internet only and the member of staff had punched an old lady stolen her handbag and had sex with his own mother during his lunch break, and Matt Ward was to blame some how.


I remember Gav Thorpe mentioning this. Except his version was bland and lacked any real substance. Naturally, I lash-whipped all the details together then pulverised it with 9 plasma cannon shots.


----------



## Veteran Sergeant (May 17, 2012)

Adramalech said:


> I wouldn't be surprised if they squatted sisters, even if their sales data from Dark Eldar should have showed them that all sisters and other, older armies need is some shiny new plastics and a codex that makes them playable again.


It's not really that simple. The Dark Eldar were born because people converted them up all the time before 3rd Edition. In fact, a few "Chaos Eldar" units were high-placers in Golden Demon contests. So there was a demand for Chaos Eldar, which gave birth to the Dark Eldar. The fact that the army sucked tapered that demand, but the demand was still inherent in the player base. 

Sisters, on the other hand, were produced at a time when essentially everything in 40K was metal, and failed to generate significant interest or sales. Which other army came out at approximately the same time, consisted of only a limited number of metal models and weren't even a usable tabletop army? Necrons.

The reality is that the Dark Eldar and Necrons sold models, so they got updated. They didn't sell models _because_ they got updated. Necrons and Dark Eldar obviously sold a lot better once they were heavily competitive and all/mostly plastic. But it didn't happen in a vacuum. People were interested in the Necrons and Dark Eldar, and _not_ interested in the Sisters of Battle, for a variety of possible reasons. 

GW is a business, and it's entirely likely that up until this point, there just haven't been enough assets (creative and capital) to justify updating the Sisters of Battle a third time. They only have so many artists, writers and sculptors, as well as only so much money allotted for new molds. It isn't like GW just hasn't figured out how to make money, lol. The most convincing theory is that they just keep getting bumped to the back of the line, because while they could turn a profit on a revamped plastic Sisters of Battle line, they could make a _larger_ profit using that time and money to make a new "X" army that has proven itself to market well amongst the game's target demographics.


----------



## Adramalech (Nov 10, 2009)

Veteran Sergeant said:


> It's not really that simple. The Dark Eldar were born because people converted them up all the time before 3rd Edition. In fact, a few "Chaos Eldar" units were high-placers in Golden Demon contests. So there was a demand for Chaos Eldar, which gave birth to the Dark Eldar. The fact that the army sucked tapered that demand, but the demand was still inherent in the player base.
> 
> Sisters, on the other hand, were produced at a time when essentially everything in 40K was metal, and failed to generate significant interest or sales. Which other army came out at approximately the same time, consisted of only a limited number of metal models and weren't even a usable tabletop army? Necrons.
> 
> ...


The demographics of 3rd edition do not necessarily reflect the demographics of today. Aesthetic changes, fluff changes, price point changes, and the slow transition from metal to plastic mean that the game is a whole different beast now than it was back when sisters were originally released, and even the barest bit of thinking will tell you that some older players have left because they don't like one or more of those changes, and new players have come on board because they do like one or more of those changes. Demand for Dark Eldar rose when they got their update. Demand for sisters could also rise if they got updated (properly updated. not this WD dex and a few bundles of existing minis rubbish)

Did it cross your mind at all that the reason no one wants to touch Sisters is that they're almost an all-metal army in the dawn of an age of armies that are all-plastic, and that their codex makes them highly uncompetitive in comparison to other, newer armies? They don't compete because GW won't give them a chance, not vice-versa.


----------



## Bindi Baji (Apr 23, 2009)

Orochi said:


> I remember Gav Thorpe mentioning this. Except his version was bland and lacked any real substance. Naturally, I lash-whipped all the details together then pulverised it with 9 plasma cannon shots.


In Matt Wards version the employee built a tesla cannon and wiped out GW HQ, at least that's what forums tell me





Veteran Sergeant said:


> The reality is that the Dark Eldar and Necrons sold models, so they got updated. They didn't sell models _because_ they got updated. Necrons and Dark Eldar obviously sold a lot better once they were heavily competitive and all/mostly plastic. But it didn't happen in a vacuum. People were interested in the Necrons and Dark Eldar, and _not_ interested in the Sisters of Battle, for a variety of possible reasons.



GW are aware that the poor sale of SOB is linked to all metal models, as it was with DE before them.
Dark Eldar were almost completely stagnant in sales before the recent-ish update.
Necrons probably shouldn't be linked to the other two as they have had plastic troops for a good while now.



Veteran Sergeant said:


> GW is a business, and it's entirely likely that up until this point, there just haven't been enough assets (creative and capital) to justify updating the Sisters of Battle a third time. They only have so many artists, writers and sculptors, as well as only so much money allotted for new molds. It isn't like GW just hasn't figured out how to make money, lol. The most convincing theory is that they just keep getting bumped to the back of the line, because while they could turn a profit on a revamped plastic Sisters of Battle line, they could make a _larger_ profit using that time and money to make a new "X" army that has proven itself to market well amongst the game's target demographics.


SOB have been a long term plan just as other fully or near fully metal armies have been and it's been something like 2 years between each of these armies being updated because of the work involved in completely updating an army


----------



## Veteran Sergeant (May 17, 2012)

Adramalech said:


> Did it cross your mind at all that the reason no one wants to touch Sisters is that they're almost an all-metal army in the dawn of an age of armies that are all-plastic, and that their codex makes them highly uncompetitive in comparison to other, newer armies? They don't compete because GW won't give them a chance, not vice-versa.


Did it cross your mind that the Necrons were once an all-metal army too? 

You're thinking too short term here, and that is why you fail. The Sisters are a product that is fifteen years old. What is happening now is the direct result of what happened in the past. These things don't happen in a vacuum. They never competed saleswise, at any point, even when they were on a relatively even footing. Do you know how ridiculously expensive it used to be to play Imperial Guard? lol. _Every_ army was all metal at one point except the Space Marines. That's not an excuse for why the Sisters didn't sell models. 

They don't have plastics _now_ because they were never valuable enough to spend the time and money on to make them for. Again, this is a company that functions with limited resources. And those resources have to be used where they are the most likely to produce the most return on investment.




Bindi Baji said:


> SOB have been a long term plan just as other fully or near fully metal armies have been and it's been something like 2 years between each of these armies being updated because of the work involved in completely updating an army


There hasn't been a new Sisters of Battle miniature for ten years. Should tell you something. There's technically been a new Squat model more recently than that, lol.


I don't have anything personal against the Sisters of Battle. But the "Sisters failed because they never got plastics" is a myth circulated by fans who don't understand product life cycles and business. The reality is the Sisters failed _twice_ before plastics were even a common thing, so they never got plastics of their own. Like I said, GW could probably turn a profit if they made plastic Sisters. But thus far it has been deemed more likely that they could make more money using those resources to make something else.


----------



## Adramalech (Nov 10, 2009)

Veteran Sergeant said:


> Did it cross your mind that the Necrons were once an all-metal army too?
> 
> You're thinking too short term here, and that is why you fail. The Sisters are a product that is fifteen years old. What is happening now is the direct result of what happened in the past. These things don't happen in a vacuum. They never competed saleswise, at any point, even when they were on a relatively even footing. Do you know how ridiculously expensive it used to be to play Imperial Guard? lol. _Every_ army was all metal at one point except the Space Marines. That's not an excuse for why the Sisters didn't sell models.
> 
> ...


I realize that this debate is a bit intense for you, but if you can't participate without resorting to ad-hominem attacks, I'm going to have to ask that you leave the conversation and come back when your tone is a bit less hostile. That said...

Bindi and I have already covered nearly every point you just brought up. We are not, nor were we ever, talking about why they didn't sell four score and seven years ago, because the game has changed, the models have changed, and the player base has changed. Ergo, sales data from 3rd ed IS NO LONGER RELEVANT. We're talking about why they're not selling NOW, and they're not selling NOW because their codex is uncompetitive and their entire model range is incredibly dated and, aside from this vehicle or that, entirely metal, very much like the Dark Eldar's range before their 5th-ed update. Hobbyists want nice-looking (preferably plastic) models over dated-looking models, and power gamers want competitive armies to play with over uncompetitive armies. Ergo, SoB lose out to other armies in sales. Ergo, Dark Eldar lost out to other armies in terms of sales before their 5th-ed update. It is very easy to see that if sisters got some TLC in the form of a nice, moderately competitive new codex, and a few new plastic boxes, that they would sell MUCH, MUCH better than they currently do.

Though, that last bit, I can at least somewhat agree with. GW probably has been prioritizing other, more profitable projects over sisters. Otherwise, we'd have seen a fuckton of shiny new plastic sisters and a codex that makes them playable already.


----------



## Bindi Baji (Apr 23, 2009)

Veteran Sergeant said:


> I don't have anything personal against the Sisters of Battle. But the "Sisters failed because they never got plastics" is a myth circulated by fans who don't understand product life cycles and business. The reality is the Sisters failed _twice_ before plastics were even a common thing, so they never got plastics of their own. Like I said, GW could probably turn a profit if they made plastic Sisters. But thus far it has been deemed more likely that they could make more money using those resources to make something else.


The only part of your post that is correct is your ability to quote,
well done on that.


----------



## Veteran Sergeant (May 17, 2012)

Adramalech said:


> I realize that this debate is a bit intense for you, but if you can't participate without resorting to ad-hominem attacks, I'm going to have to ask that you leave the conversation and come back when your tone is a bit less hostile. That said...


Wait, wat?

_You_ made this conversation hostile with the "Did it occur to you" bullshit like I'm somehow too dumb to grasp your concept. I just called you out on it. :laugh: Typical 40K troll action. Insult others, get fed back own medicine, get butthurt about it and cry foul. 



> Bindi and I have already covered nearly every point you just brought up. We are not, nor were we ever, talking about why they didn't sell four score and seven years ago,


And this is the problem. Games Workshop is a _business_. Historical sales data _is important_. 


> because the game has changed, the models have changed, and the player base has changed.


Support needed. The game, customer demographics, and models are effectively the same now as they were back when the Sisters were introduced. Only now everything is plastic instead of everything being metal. If Sisters didn't sell when everything was metal, why will they sell when everything is plastic? Is there something magical about plastic that inherently sells models? 



> It is very easy to see that if sisters got some TLC in the form of a nice, moderately competitive new codex, and a few new plastic boxes, that they would sell MUCH, MUCH better than they currently do.


 You are correct, it is very easy to see. Which is why I never argued that. Pay attention. The reason why Sisters haven't gotten the new models is not because they wouldn't sell, it is because they wouldn't sell as well as _something else_. 

If you understand that, then why are you even arguing with me? Plastic Sisters of Battle kits and a competitive codex would be profitable. But not profitable _enough_ to gain priority over a new release of Space Marines, or a new release of Orks, or a new release of Imperial Guard, or a new release of Eldar, or a new release of Grey Knights, etc. The Eldar are _still_ using Finecast Aspect Warriors, and they are a core army. If the Eldar can't get a wave of plastic Banshees or Scorpions, it's obvious that the model ranges are prioritized by profit potential. 

There are "X" number of sculptors. There are "Y" number of projects. Y>X. 

That's all I said _from the beginning_. It's not as simple as "should have showed them" if they gave them models, they'd sell. That's suggesting that Games Workshop has simply neglected a model range because they're too stupid to look at their own data and figure out how to make money. There's a _reason_ behind everything. And the reason behind why the Sisters of Battle have been allowed to flounder is ridiculously obvious. There's not a significant enough profit potential seen in them. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but this is first semester economics level stuff here. Opportunity costs versus potential profit margins. Given the basic concept that a single unit box of ten Sisters of Battle will generate the same approximate revenue as a box of ten Eldar Aspect Warriors, or a box of ten Chaos Space Marines, what will generate the most individual unit sales? Then you look at the total number of sculptors you have, and the total amount of money set aside for capital investment (molds), and prioritize. 

If Sisters of Battle sold well in their first two iterations, then they would have been higher in priority. If the Necrons had the same basic number of figures, but got their own Codex, why? The Sisters of Battle were guest-stars in their own codex in 3rd Edition (Witch Hunters). Why? You didn't even need to have any Sisters to play that army. So why do Necrons get a full codex of their own, but Sisters don't? Some ridiculous plan to intentionally sabotage their own product, or perhaps because Sisters sold less models than Necrons, so there was an attempt to try and shore up the model range by expanding it to include inquisitors and even bolster it with a well-selling army like Imperial Guard. Obviously it didn't work since the last new Sister came out a decade ago. 

So sure, could they release an uber-Sisters codex to stimulate demand? I guess. That doesn't seem like it fixes anything, lol. Games Workshop is fairly greedy, and they're definitely obsessed with short-term goals over long-term, but that seems a bit out of the realm of possibility. Realistically, we've seen what their interest in Sisters has been based on their actions. They're not interested in trying to stimulate sales of Sisters anymore. They released two not-codexes for them, one in White Dwarf (which gets produced anyway so carries a zero-cost), and one in electronic-only format (which is low-cost, especially since the rumor is they just recycled fluff that had been meant for the WD release but eliminated due to space considerations). 


If you want to have an intelligent conversation about the business decision-making behind the Sisters of Battle's slow demise, by all means, be my guest. But don't start firing off broadsides and then get upset when you didn't load enough powder. I'm pretty well educated on the subject, and I've worked for years in marketing for a company larger than Games Workshop that also sells exclusively luxury products. 

As far as Bindi is concerned, may want to take another look at what he is saying:


> GW are aware that the poor sale of SOB is linked to all metal models, as it was with DE before them.


The Dark Eldar were initially released with plastics, in an era when plastic troops weren't even available to all armies and the ones that did have them were pretty limited. 

If you played Necrons from 1998-2002, this was your model range.
http://www.solegends.com/citcat2000/c2000p143-02.htm
http://www.solegends.com/citcat2000/c2000p144-02.htm

4 model types, 2 with 1 pose. So I'm not sure what I should be learning from Bindi. That apparently Games Workshop knew the Dark Eldar's sales problems were linked to a cause that didn't exist, lol.


TL,DR: You two have been making _huge_ assumptions about causal relationships, most of which don't seem to be supported by any kind of reasonable application of business or economic theory. Then you've mixed it with arguing points with me I'm not disagreeing with you on.


----------



## Bindi Baji (Apr 23, 2009)

Veteran Sergeant said:


> So I'm not sure what I should be learning from Bindi. That apparently Games Workshop knew the Dark Eldar's sales problems were linked to a cause that didn't exist, lol.


and yet DE barely sold, for a long time their sales were stagnant, 
when they relaunched they sold well,

what does that tell you?

Again I fail to understand why you are including necrons in this conversation as their sales have never hit the lows that DE and SOB have as they have clearly been updated more recently then DE had and SOB have.




Me said:


> GW are aware that the poor sale of SOB is linked to all metal models, as it was with DE before them.


My quote, admittedly not entirely correct but the main reason for both armies downfall is their neglect which is what I was focusing on at the time.



Veteran Sergeant said:


> I'm pretty well educated on the subject


Gasp, you win then.....................


----------



## venomlust (Feb 9, 2010)

I like turtles.











(Just trying to lighten the mood...)


----------



## imm0rtal reaper (Jul 15, 2008)

Simmer down children, don't make daddy get out of his chair and take the belt to you :wink: 

So with metal moving out, what is the replacement. I thought I had (perhaps wrongly) heard that finecast was being phased out. Or at least the current finecast formula. Don't ask me where I heard/read that becuase I couldn't tell you


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

imm0rtal reaper said:


> So with metal moving out, what is the replacement. I thought I had (perhaps wrongly) heard that finecast was being phased out. Or at least the current finecast formula. Don't ask me where I heard/read that becuase I couldn't tell you


I was told this too, although by my local GW manager so I'm not at all sure if it's reliable. On the other hand, the internet said that all resin models are being handed over the Forge World because all the fans are bitching about how Forge World do resin better than GW, which I guess could be a thing. A really beautiful new cast of Abaddon, it could be yours for only £25! Limbs supplied separately at £5 each!


----------



## Bindi Baji (Apr 23, 2009)

imm0rtal reaper said:


> Simmer down children, don't make daddy get out of his chair and take the belt to you :wink:


is it leather?


----------



## Adramalech (Nov 10, 2009)

I'm not a troll. If you had a problem with my tone, you should have told me so. I'm sorry for phrasing that in a way that made you feel like I was condescending to you.

We all have our own reasons for believing what we believe, I believe they've all been adequately stated, and yet we are at an impass. For that reason I'm going to agree to disagree, and bow out before this turns from a somewhat-debate, into an argument proper.

ALSO: I will totally admit that I was arguing a point you were agreeing with me on. I'm just obstinate like that sometimes.


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

Bindi Baji said:


> In Matt Wards version the employee built a tesla cannon and wiped out GW HQ, at least that's what forums tell me


All that survived was the countless Draigo models. Protected from the Tesla by a mystical barrier of Wardian semen, meta-game lore and Fanboy prayers.


----------



## serphangel (Feb 1, 2014)

I was told on Sunday that the finecast line is being transferred to Forgeworld. Forgeworld are changing their resin slightly to polyeurathane and fincast itself is being discontinued.


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

One would assume that even Finecast (of any constitution or formula) is a short fix, anyway.

My prediction is that we will see more single sprue models (like the handful we already have, chaplains etc) that will replace clam-packs et al.

Could be wrong, though!


----------



## Einherjar667 (Aug 23, 2013)

It definitely seems like the single sprue plastics are superior to finecast in material quality. Just finished a nurgle lord, one of the best models ive worked with


----------



## Adramalech (Nov 10, 2009)

Orochi said:


> One would assume that even Finecast (of any constitution or formula) is a short fix, anyway.
> 
> My prediction is that we will see more single sprue models (like the handful we already have, chaplains etc) that will replace clam-packs et al.
> 
> Could be wrong, though!


I can confirm both of those guesses, actually. It's been GW's plan for a while to replace metals with plastics, and finecast was, as you thought, a stop-gap measure.


----------



## Bindi Baji (Apr 23, 2009)

serphangel said:


> I was told on Sunday that the finecast line is being transferred to Forgeworld. Forgeworld are changing their resin slightly to polyeurathane and fincast itself is being discontinued.


This has been doing the rounds for just shy of a year, 
if this were true it would happen *looks at watch* about lunchtime, maybe 1pm


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

The single plastic models are cool and all but they really dont offer much in the way of value for money or customisation capabilities and the variable prices across ranges genuinely stink of horse poo poo, I would prefer Gw to focus on multipart multipose kits like the chaos terminator lord/empire general instead of the single pose plastics like the last lot of space marine clam packs which are a joke.


----------



## Einherjar667 (Aug 23, 2013)

bitsandkits said:


> The single plastic models are cool and all but they really dont offer much in the way of value for money or customisation capabilities and the variable prices across ranges genuinely stink of horse poo poo, I would prefer Gw to focus on multipart multipose kits like the chaos terminator lord/empire general instead of the single pose plastics like the last lot of space marine clam packs which are a joke.



Indeed the terminator lord kid is one of the best concepts. It ought to be replicated across more armies.


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

bitsandkits said:


> The single plastic models are cool and all but they really dont offer much in the way of value for money or customisation capabilities and the variable prices across ranges genuinely stink of horse poo poo, I would prefer Gw to focus on multipart multipose kits like the chaos terminator lord/empire general instead of the single pose plastics like the last lot of space marine clam packs which are a joke.


I completely agree with you on this. The level of customisation, plus the extras left over that can go toward other miniatures (citing the CTL and how he is compatible with regular Terminators, for example) make the prices charged almost justifiable. 

All the singular plastic packs (other than perhaps the Starter box, limited edition chaplain) have been fairly bland and uninteresting. The new Space marine captain is dire, lazy and completely uninspiring. But, a multi-part plastic box for every individual model would be a big ask - Perhaps special characters, who possess fixed wargear options, could be set scults, whilst the basic commanders etc, like chaos lords, captains, autarchs, could benefit from a multi-part box.


----------



## Einherjar667 (Aug 23, 2013)

Did the SM captain box get replaced with the clam pack completely? I liked the box better. Customization for a lord/HQ in any regard would be a vast improvement over the clampacks, perhaps if the clampacks sell well, they will expand on the CTL type releases. Hopefully, cause I'd love to see a Warrior of Chaos Lord box. (I still think the Nurgle Lord is one of the best)


----------



## afnolte (Jan 28, 2014)

Orochi said:


> All the singular plastic packs (other than perhaps the Starter box, limited edition chaplain) have been fairly bland and uninteresting. The new Space marine captain is dire, lazy and completely uninspiring. But, a multi-part plastic box for every individual model would be a big ask - Perhaps special characters, who possess fixed wargear options, could be set scults, whilst the basic commanders etc, like chaos lords, captains, autarchs, could benefit from a multi-part box.


Is it just me or does the new space marine captain look like the captain from black reach with a few modifications?


----------



## Jacobite (Jan 26, 2007)

Certainly not just you, I would go so far to say (and did when it was released) that the master mini was simply a modification of the CAD or a physical conversion of the AOBR Captain. The pose and sculpt are just too similar for it not be.


----------



## Tawa (Jan 10, 2010)

Yup.
Laziness GW, it isn't all that endearing....


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

the pose of the new captain and AOBR is very similar, but they are very very much there own models.

but i still wouldnt buy the new guy when there is a perfectly acceptable multipart commander available


----------



## Tawa (Jan 10, 2010)

bitsandkits said:


> but i still wouldnt buy the new guy when there is a perfectly acceptable multipart commander available


This.
Why would people even consider buying a mono-pose re-hash when you can do your own thing with the Commander....?


----------



## Chitose (Dec 30, 2012)

To give GW more money and encourage similar works of art?
Oww that hurt my head.


----------



## venomlust (Feb 9, 2010)

Chitose said:


> To give GW more money and encourage similar works of art?
> Oww that hurt my head.


uke:uke:uke:


----------



## Tawa (Jan 10, 2010)

Chitose said:


> To give GW more money and encourage similar works of art?
> Oww that hurt my head.


Did you say that with a straight face? :laugh:


----------



## Chitose (Dec 30, 2012)

Tawa said:


> Did you say that with a straight face? :laugh:


I cringed while typing it and then laughed.


----------

