Thommy H:
you have answered your own question...Ah, I see what you mean. You could have saved time if you'd explained that in your first post.
we are in no way representative of popular opinion...
metro_gnome:
one cannot build a big enough hat from tin foil… i know… i’ve tried…
my apologies thommy… I thought my meaning clear…
Willmark:
Here’s the thing that boggles the mind for me. Chaos Dwarfs as they are right now are the perfect opportunity for making money, again as is. As is stands (from GW’s perspective) they can make a ton of money. Right now we have shown that you can create a chaos dwarf army with their current range. In fact a chaos dwarf player has to by from several ranges. In fact I’d argue that it would be interesting to compare how much a CD player had to spend in order to assemble an army.
Thats the burn, with next to no support GW is making money from existing lines of models. I work for two fairly large companies and I got to tell you this is a dream situation. I would love to have a revenue stream from minimal/no effort. Even better would be further revenue from products that I already had in existence.
Think about it if you were GW which would you rather have dwarfs selling to dwarf players or dwarfs selling to both dwarf and CD players? By extension just how many CD players would have chosen or bought dwarfs with the intention of playing dwarfs? By our actions we have shown we want something different are willing to pay/play something different
Or to put it another way why piss off fans that by definition are loyal and willing to spend more money then the average player? Because in order to assemble a CD army you have to cross so many different product lines.
GW seems to be trying their hardest to alienate their customers. I’m a perfect example. I have the cash to spend. Had they produced a CD army I would have bought it . They didn’t so I had to do it myself. They misses their window of opportunity with me. So if they abolish the army am I going to say "Oh well, all that hard work down the drain, I guess I just go buy army
Thommy H:
Here’s a question though: as much as we’ve bought, how much of it did you buy from GW directly? And, if you played a different army, how much more would you have bought from them?
See, the way I see it, even if I had bought the Dwarf Thunderers, the Night Goblins and the Hellcannon that feature in my army from GW (I didn’t - I got them all cheaper from ebay), I’d have bought more stuff from them if I was playing Dwarfs, Orcs and Goblins or Chaos, because that would have been much easier and my collection wouldn’t be spread out over different (some of them discontinued) ranges. I’d have just ploughed money directly into GW, instead of looking for alternatives.
As weird as it sounds, innovation is actually a threat to their business model. I bet there’s a few guys here who discovered other figure manufacturers as a result of trying to find Chaos Dwarf stuff, and look at Ishkur’s resin torsos - they’re his conversions, and he’s not selling them, so no harm no foul, but I’d bet money GW wouldn’t be too impressed to see it. It’s quite possible that GW might see the Chaos Dwarf community as a group that are spending less money on GW products than other collectors, because we’re scouring ebay and converting our own models and buying from other manufacturers. It would, after all, be much better for them if we just fell into line and collected Tomb Kings or Lizardmen.
I know it’s pessimistic, but the sad fact is that GW may not want to support the Chaos Dwarf community. They no doubt assume that our disposable income would be neatly transferred to another army if we stopped doing Chaos Dwarfs - I know that isn’t true in my case though.
EDIT: You already made some of the above points in your edited post, Willmark, but never mind.
Willmark:
Yeah Sorry Thommy couldn’t get it all typed in time! 
I’d offer up the hunt for cheaper alternatives is yet another problem. GW has multiple issues going on right now. I’d say that Chaos Dwarfs are the last of their problems. Spiraling costs, shrinking customer base are another. Increase competition with computer games is another.
You make a good point about disposable income. In fact it is something that GW should be deathly afraid of. If they cancel CDs is not like I’m going to rush out and start another army, after all what incentive do I now have to support GW? In fact one of the things that GW seems to miss is that there is now more competition for those dollars the ever before. And with the high cost and barriers of entry adding more to what is already a time consuming and expensive hobby isn’t going to win them any favors.
In a way GW is no different then the dinosaurs inhabiting the Music Industry. While the music industry was napping and raking in boat loads of cash P2P popped up and look at where they are now. The record industry treats every file swap as a lost sale. Of course that begs teh question would said individual have bought the song/album in the first place. the answer inst always 100% yes. Carry that over to GW. Is eBay a concern, maybe but not everything that is sold on eBay represents a lost sale to GW. What does represent a lost sale is ignoring what your customers are asking for while the climate/times market changes. All in the face of ever increasing competition from other outlets of discretionary spending. As always YMMV.
Followup, maybe eBay is lost sales but if could go either way.
Thommy H:
Yeah, that’s a good point about the parallels to the record industry. GW’s business model makes a lot of assumptions about customer loyalty - the idea is that once ‘hooked’ on the product (I’m not trying to make a drugs analogy, honest!), the customer is in it for life, and will continue to buy from GW exclusively. I can’t exactly blame them for not promoting other companies, but it wasn’t until a couple of years ago that I even knew other miniature manufacturers existed, and I’ve never heard of a corporation that runs their business as if they exist in a vacuum.
If the Chaos Dwarfs were to be shuffled off and brushed under the carpet, I certainly wouldn’t just start a new army, or even look for a way to represent my current army with different rules. Since I don’t game at a GW store, and I have all the rules I need, I’ll stick with what I have right now, thanks.
This also ties back into the “new Chaos Dwarfs” discussion: if they completely revamped the army, removed many of the units (I’m looking at you, greenskins…) and just reimagined the whole race, I don’t know that they’d even be the same army except in name, so I wouldn’t want to just swap everything over. I mean, imagine if the new Vampire Counts retconned the whole army into a bunch of goth posers or something, or Lizardmen became Chaos mutants - would anyone expect loyalty to a new concept like that?
metro_gnome:
I’m sure necromancer players are just as miffed with the new book as you would be with greenless CDs…
or 3rd ed players were with big hats… armies change players roll with it or move on…
the point is longbeards would not be the target market of a new CD release…
Are you gonna buy brand new CD models when they come out?
or play kick-ass converted army that you spent so much time on?
Personally, I’m gonna play my big hats…
So a CD release garners next to no revenue from the olde skool fans…
and therefore has to be targeted at “kewl” market…
youngsters that buy the army… paint half of it…
and create the secondary market we thrive on…
top that off with Gamers are horribly conservative…
“don’t change my rules, fluff, models, feel, flavor, whatever”…
Backlash is created when anything new hits this market… anything…
Creating a new army (Ogres) caused some of the worst backlash ever…
I doubt they’ll do it again… and they certainly won’t do it for the longbeards…
GW is listening to its customers… and we are running it into the ground…
Willmark:
Its an interesting business model to say the least. I think another factor is they assume they that they are always dealing with12 year olds.
For a cautionary tale the need to look at how wizards lost a good portion of two generations of gamers with 3rd edition and now the march to 4e, the lost me and everyone I know at 3rd. I joke no loyalty to Wizards for the very same reason you mentioned D&D exists in name only. Basically its a pen and paper version of the PC games that are out now.
I also concur with Grim, if CDs are redone they will use it as a chance to redo everything.
Sad thing is I want to like GW, I want to buy their models and games, even if it means that it have to pay a bit more them directly. It seems however that GW doesn’t want my money…
torn:
i dont think ebay is a problem, i think its an advantage. GW are very happy to support any ebay trader who wants to become an independant stockist. in fact they probably make more of a profit than selling from their stores, which have to be a massive drain on profits. most of the time there are 2 staff in a store, 1 painting and 1 harassing the customers. with rent/utilities and everything etc its a very expensive way to get new gamers into the hobby. i think a much better way would be to go back to miniature board games a la heroquest, which got me and so many others of my generation into the hobby.
the only things i ever buy from a store are paints and brushes, and thats only if im passing and need just 1 or 2.
As far as chaos dwarves causing sales among other miniature companies, its their own fault for discontinuing a popular army. if the still had their own range of models we might have been buying those. look at what happened to squats. hasslefree grymm and ollies armies scrunts are absolutely massive model ranges that have grown from the gap squats left in the market.
Thommy H:
GW are very happy to support any ebay trader who wants to become an independant stockist. in fact they probably make more of a profit than selling from their stores, which have to be a massive drain on profits.This is true, but think of it in terms of the feedback they receive. GW might ship 300 boxes of Dwarfs to an independent stockist who trades on ebay - at that point, those models are "sold" as far as GW are concerned. The only sales figures they get are based on that initial supplying of the retailer. When GW sell direct from their stores (online included) they can see, first hand, how well a range is selling.
Extend this to the Chaos Dwarfs. Those models were "sold" when they were first released, and the re-sale of the same figures is meaningless to GW. So, while they are happy to encourage ebay sellers who buy their products wholesale, the rest of the ebay sellers are irrelevant, because they're just shifting around product which has already made as much profit as it's going to. And, since no one bought the figures from GW itself (because ebay was cheaper), then there is an argument that buying Chaos Dwarfs on ebay is actually harmful to the cause in a long-term sense. But, as I've said, it's GW's own fault for charging too much on their online store really.
I'm sure necromancer players are just as miffed with the new book as you would be with greenless CDs...I doubt it. There are always complainers, but Vampire Counts are still Vampire Counts. They still have zombies and dire wolves and ghouls in their armies - no one is going to have to overhaul their collection to fit in with the new book. If hobgoblins were removed, I'd have to change a lot of stuff in my Chaos Dwarfs - or, rather, I wouldn't, since I'd just carry on exactly as before.
Willmark:
Metro you bring up a good point. Releasing OK was a bad precedent. Even worse was a revision to Dark Elves in 6th.
As far as target market for a revision, you’re right to a point. I’ll keep playing the army I constructed. I only got to this point because GW didnt have models to support the army. If the had created models they wouldn’t have to consider the fragmentation of the potential customer base. In other words this is entirely of GWs making. By letting CDs exist in limbo for years they have set themselves up to fail one way or the other, all moves now have both good and bad points. To be honest they should have ended CDs in 5th; far to late to do it now. Fluff does even enter into the equation here. GW even when owned and run by gamers was never all that consistent. They let it continue thus they bare the brunt. It comes down to money plain and simple.
As far ad us driving it into the ground, how so?
Even more on topic has anyone called from the UK to see what their response is?
metro_gnome:
There are always complainers, but Vampire Counts are still Vampire Counts.and are chaos marines still chaos marines then?
in fact... yes they are... their lackys are all that have changed...
so you buy more marines... and maybe even buy enough daemons to make one of those armies...
i smell money...
If we demand that GW release a new army, model, book and when they do we complain bitterly that they have...
well we are indeed running the company into the ground by demanding things we don't really want...
we are like a bi-polar girlfriend...
the caveat... which you suggest... and I refuse to accept...
is that we somehow know how to do it better than they do...
and are therefore worth listening to... I am not so sure...
Thommy H:
and are chaos marines still chaos marines then?I never suggested they weren't. The only reason Chaos Dwarfs would be different is because it's been so long since the army was officially supported, and we've had a long time to develop armies based on rules and background that are over a decade old. New Chaos Dwarfs would be almost a totally new army because it's been so long, and that would cause problems for existing collections.
Believe me, I'm the first guy to shout "suck it up" when a new Codex or Army Book comes out and a couple of units have to be shuffled around to fit, but completely rewriting the background and removing certain units (which is not only possible, but probably with a new CD book) would be a problem for a lot of people. How much of the army has to be changed in one fell swoop before it isn't the same army any more?
metro_gnome:
How much changed for CDs from 3rd to 4th?
you are not advocating original concept from the get-go…
infact you are advocating against original concept…
well my point was a fanbase that really wants their army redone…
should favor shrewd marketing decisions over sentimentality…
Chaos Marines over Hobgoblins…
and CSM is a very similar situation…
you have the armored guys that are what the army is supposed to be about…
and you have low armoured lackys… CSM players built their army around those daemons…
new book comes along changes low armoured lackys into something generic…
you can still use them… don’t want to?
maybe you’d be better off using them in this brand new army we just made…
or as goblins or gnoblars in one of our other great armies…
seems pretty slick to me…
Thommy H:
How much changed for CDs from 3rd to 4th?That's correct, I'm advocating my concept, represented by the 3,000 pts of models on my shelf. I made no claim to be objective. Although, it's worth pointing out that the 3rd Edition Chaos Dwarfs weren't a coherent race of their own, just a sub-section of the larger Chaos forces with very little background - nor was much invalidated by the 4th Edition army, since all the fluff and models were new.
you are not advocating original concept from the get-go...
new book comes along changes low armoured lackys into something generic...Yes, but they're still there, albeit in a new, more generic, form. It's pretty rare for GW to bring out a new version of an army that outright invalidates big chunks of the old, it's usually just little things, that can still be represented with the new rules. This could happen with the Chaos Dwarfs though because of the extended time frame we're talking about.
you can still use them... don't want to?
metro_gnome:
but if my chaos army had chaos dwarfs in it… isn’t a big chunk of my chaos army no longer valid?
so I can buy into this new army of ridiculous hats and get a pile of… what do they call em? “hobgoblins”…
as well as get enough of the new chaos range to bring that back up to 2K…
the more things change… the more they stay the same…
i could be thrilled about it… cause i get the chance to expand into another army…
or i could be miffed… and go back into my basement and ignore it all…
which one do you think GW should listen to?
Thommy H:
get a pile of... what do they call em? "hobgoblins"...Well, you didn't have to - hobgoblins have never been an essential part of the army.
which one do you think GW should listen to?Again: I make no claim to be objective. Option 1 - the gamer who is happy to take what he is given and change armies if necessary - is a better customer, and GW courts exactly that market. But I'm Option 2, I guess. Thing is, I wouldn't be upset with new, different Chaos Dwarfs, I just wouldn't convert my army to conform to it if the change was too radical. Really, it's a lose-lose situation for me and people like me...
Willmark:
I’m thinking that Tommy and I are in complete agreement. I for one don’t fit Metro’s discription as I’m only advocating a PDF rewrite and a cleanup of the rules that are contradictory. We know what they are. It seems that GW solution from the scant evidence we can draw is this:
Patient (Chaos Dwarf): “Doctor, I have this pain in my neck”.
Doctor (GW): “How long has it been there?”
Patient (Chaos Dwarf) “Oh about 13 years, I’m sure if you give me some some aspirin it will be ok”.
Doctor (GW- not listening) “13 years? Pain in the neck? I’ve got the cure right here”,
Chops off patient’s head, problem solved.
metro_gnome:
Well, you didn't have to - hobgoblins have never been an essential part of the army.well i would've had to buy something...
as my CD units from my Chaos army couldn't possibly make an army on their own...
might as well be hobgoblins as these big hatz look really silly next to my well-crafted marauder CDs...
Option 1 - ... - is a better customer, and GW courts exactly that marketbut Option 2 is neither a customer... nor a market...
he intends to nothing no matter what GW does...
Patient (Chaos Dwarf): "Doctor, I have this pain in my neck".fixed it for you...
Doctor (GW): "How long has it been there?"
Patient (Chaos Dwarf) "Oh about 13 years, I'm sure if you give me some some aspirin it will be ok".
Doctor (GW- not listening) "13 years? Pain in the neck? I've got the cure right here",
*performs surgery that fixes patients neck like it was when he was young*.
Willmark:
Option 2 then begs the question. Just how did he arrive there? [[BFSP]] boxed set. It allows me to add them but at a minimal risk, about the only thing I might waste would be time.
I think you reading a bit too deep, I’m not wistful for the “old days” whatever those were I think I’d just rather see the problems ironed out. Its what I hope for, its not what I believe will happen however.