GW's IP and buying other peoples work

[RWJP]

1 hour ago, Slave to Darkness said:

Blackrock is one of the largest shareholders of GW (5th I think), they dont exactly have a good reputation for a fair few reasons that are not exactly board friendly, so all Im saying is its already started, just a matter of time. 

Yeah that literally means nothing at all. All of GW's largest shareholders are major investment firms. And those major investment firms will be shareholders in thousands upon thousands of companies across the world. Almost every publicly traded company will be in a similar situation.

BlackRock owns approximately 6.3% of GW shares. That doesn't give them a significant stake, nor does it give them control. Nothing has "started" because they can't start anything. 

[Slave to Darkness]

I can counter that, but its off topic. 

[tychobi]

1 hour ago, Scribe said:

 

Thats such a non-starter for me. I couldnt care less about the 'well its a corporation it must make money, all hail capitalism.' argument, but yes selling to some other mega corp would certainly put the IP at risk in my eyes.

I agree.  I will use this knowledge as a predictor of GW behaviour.  I believe that Warhammer40k as an IP can and will survive the parent company following its natural evolution.  I think we share sensibilities but I missed the hyperbolic spin on your earlier statement and disagree about the survivability of 40k as a IP/game/setting/hobby.

[ImperialWarrior]

…so umm…why would the support and endorse their competition?

doing what you describe only encourages more people to enter the 3rd party market and compete more with them, hoping GW would offer them for their sculpts.

 

i would prefer GW go back to their old attitude of encouraging making your own stuff.

[ImperialWarrior]

Also people saying it’s not stealing the IP are just being silly. Yes they are, they just skirt the law SAS closely as possible.

 

if they could sell a dante chapter master of the blood angels proxy mod with that exact title you bet your tushy they would. Since they’re afraid of getting sued they sell ‘Deontae master of the chapter of bloody angels’ with a ‘powerful axe of mortality’ and a ‘pistol of inferno’ and a jet pack and mask of death.

[appiah4]

59 minutes ago, ImperialWarrior said:

Also people saying it’s not stealing the IP are just being silly. Yes they are, they just skirt the law SAS closely as possible.

 

if they could sell a dante chapter master of the blood angels proxy mod with that exact title you bet your tushy they would. Since they’re afraid of getting sued they sell ‘Deontae master of the chapter of bloody angels’ with a ‘powerful axe of mortality’ and a ‘pistol of inferno’ and a jet pack and mask of death.

 

And despite your cynicism there is nothing wrong with that.  The onus is on GW to come up with a model that is better than the competition at a competitive price.  If they can't, as a consumer I could not care less.

[ImperialWarrior]

5 hours ago, appiah4 said:

 

And despite your cynicism there is nothing wrong with that.  The onus is on GW to come up with a model that is better than the competition at a competitive price.  If they can't, as a consumer I could not care less.

It has little to do with the models themselves. 
every single 3rd party I’ve seen has been cheaper.!especially the smaller ones. Not really sure how many would or could survive selling at the same prices as GW

[appiah4]

I fail to get the point of your argument.

[Stitch5000]

22 hours ago, appiah4 said:

BI haven't been buying GW books, and for the most part models, for a long time now.  A printer, some Patreon subscriptions and within months I have 10 times the models in my service than what I would have bought from GW at the same cost.  I have an entire Chaos Space Marines "Kill Team" ready to be printed using exclusively derivative 3rd party models that are way better yet way cheaper than their GW counterparts, and the One Page Rules: Firefight is a way better game than Kill Team. 

This is pretty much just like saying tickets to see Black Sabbath are too expensive so I just go and see covers bands for a similar experience. 

[appiah4]

22 minutes ago, Stitch5000 said:

This is pretty much just like saying tickets to see Black Sabbath are too expensive so I just go and see covers bands for a similar experience. 

No, this is like saying Running Wild is an overrated band that overcharges for their tickets so I may as well go and see Alestorm live instead.

Edited November 2, 2022 by appiah4

[WARMASTER_]

1 hour ago, appiah4 said:

No, this is like saying Black Sabbath is an overrated band that overcharges for their tickets so I may as well go and see Primordial live instead.

Sorry but how does this work in regards to the context of your argument? Your analogy only works if you’re saying GW is to expensive I’ll go buy another cheaper game within the Genre… It doesn’t work for buying cheaper copies of the original 

So cover band was actually a great analogy 

 

 

Edited November 2, 2022 by WARMASTER_

[Domhnall]

 

A cover band does fit the analogy better, as they're playing the same "songs" to go keep the analogy. Now let's go further down this rabbit hole and see where we get to! 

A cover band will be a heck of a lot cheaper for tickets, and if they're good (because nobody will buy tickets for a rubbish cover band), the experience may as good or even better for what you paid for it.  

However, much like a cover band (strap in lads), the cover band can only cover a Band if the Band has material in which to cover. If there is no Band, there is no covers. So the cover band needs the Band to exist and make songs in which to cover and make their own money from. Somebody may go see both the Band and the cover band and enjoy both. Some may only want to go see the original as that's the quintesential experience. Some may only want to go see the cover band because they want a more intimate experience or such like. Do you complain that Iron Maiden sells tickets at a 'high price' when Maiden Scotland (or other local cover band) sells their tickets are vastly reduced prices? Why Does Iron Maiden even exist when somebody can do it cheaper? 

 

The Band have higher overheads, they play larger venues who need paid, they have road crews, staff, buses, planes, the list goes on. And they want to make some money themeselves, because they've put in a lot of effort to do this, and want the rewards. 
The cover band need to pay their small venue, probably load everything in themselves, tune up and travel by themselves, so their costs are low. Maybe they aren't even making any money at all at the end of the day, but they do it in the hopes of doing so in the future (or have other jobs and this is a hobby), and they are just passionate about doing so (or are taking advantage of a market opening). 

Maybe a member of the Band leaves, and starts their own band. They will be able to sell cheaper as they now have lower costs, are starting from scratch, and don't have the market pulling power to charge more. Eventually though, if they get big enough, they would be back in the same position as the Band, and will be charging at the same level (Metallica/Megadeth)

Heck, you could even start your own band with your mates and cover their songs, as long as you don't actually try to sell yourself as the actual Band.

The point is, if the Band exists, cover bands will exist. Without the Band, there can't be covers, otherwise it's originals and that's far more difficult market to break into (You can be a band that has a similar sound, but mileage may vary with that one). The Band can charge a higher premium (too high? That's up to the market) because they came up with this stuff in the first place. Cover bands are cheaper, because they are copying what the band has done. They may put their own spin on a song, make it slightly different, but we all know the song it is trying to be. 

 

I'm not taking a side on this, as each to their own. I am making a long winded post to say (as I usually do in these posts) that each side is valid, each side has a place, and do as you need to do. The only theft, is when you are specifically taking something of value without paying for it (in which I'd say a pdf copy of the rules from the internet is more 'theft' than buying some 3rd party miniatures). 

Edited November 2, 2022 by Domhnall