The price of a miniature

[Artemis Black]

A premium in pricing terms is 'a sum of money or bonus paid in addition to a regular price'. So if the regular price of a 28mm metal solider is a pound or two, and yours cost a fiver, you are charging a premium. There may be people charging even more of a premium than you, but that doesn't mean you're not.

Your argument is that it's not a premium because I am comparing apples with oranges - fantasy miniatures are so much higher quality than historical miniatures that a fiver for a metal fantasy miniature is just the norm or at the low end. So I am wrong to compare a Copplestone or Hicks figure for £1.50, with a 'Kev' figure for £5. Even though they are both small lumps of metal cast in the likeness of a person, one is in a different category from the other. As you can tell, I don't agree with you. In your view, the Kev figure is so far superior and takes so long to sculpt it justifies the premium. In my view, it's not and it doesn't. Like I say, it's utterly subjective. Like others have said - it's worth what you're prepared to pay for it. Which was all the original questioner asked!

If something costs more to produce and therefore ends at a higher price it is 'not' premium pricing. If somethings is artificially increased in price well above the difference in production costs 'that' is premium pricing. What you seem to be using the phrase to mean is simple 'more expensive', that is incorrect.
Trying, imo disingenuously, to categorise them both as 'lumps of metal' is silly.

And just in case someone thinks I'm ducking the question. Yes, I believe you are wrong to compare those two things. Paul Hicks imo is one of, if not the, best historical sculptor in the business. Personally I'd place him above the Perry's. However you have to put historical in there as I wouldn't say the sentence without it.

I have a suspicion that Paul probably could sculpt figures that would put him in the top ranks of non-historical sculptors but I also have a suspicion it would take him longer, therefore cost more and thus wouldn't be anything his normal clients would be interested in.

Copplestone's day has passed. Nothing wrong with that, I assume he's sculpting in the same style because it maintains his audience. But it's oldschool now and I'm not into that.

If you asked me to list the top 20 sculptors in the world none of them would be historical sculptors, also none of them would be able to produce as many figures per week as historical sculptors. Again, not a coincidence.

[Brandlin]

So toy soldiers are not like cornflakes but they are like craft beer?

Yes.

Because craft beer is a niche, low volume, relatively high cost and high price product.

Cornflakes are nearer a commodity, high volume, low margin.

The markets are different. Therefore they are marketed DIFFERENTLY.

Miniatures are far more akin to a craft beer, though you might argue that the market doesn't sustain a similar margin.

Your sandwich analogy is again incorrect. Of course if I fancy a bread based snack product I'd happily buy a wrapped sandwich. I may even have the choice of whether it's a simple cheap cheese sandwich or a more expensive prawn salad.

Those products are wrapped appropriately to keep them fresh, and a certain amount of branding is required because they are predominantly impulse buys and are usually fighting for shelf appeal next to other sandwich brands and snack products.

I may spend a little more because I want the prawn. I wouldn't however pay a little more for an equivalent cheese sandwich because the manufacturer has included a helpful 8 page booklet in every pack explaining how to serve the sandwich, what other snack items I'm allowed to eat it with and the rules on how to determine if this cheese sandwich would win in a fight with other sandwiches.

Also miniatures are not sandwiches, because in general terms and I would argue for the vast majority of miniature sales they are not sharing shelf space with other miniatures and fighting for impact and shelf appeal.

These are all very simple market characteristics.

Different products in different markets require different marketing approaches. Some miniature companies (in fact many small companies in general) don't understand this.

The simple bottom line is that this is a barely viable market. It's characteristics are high production cost, niche interest, low volume sales AND high price sensitivity, but with high brand loyalty. That's unusual.

You need to market in a way that meets those needs. Those characteristics are not going to be met through packaging and shelf appeal. Nor are they met by high cost independent brick and mortar stores with all the overheads they bring.

As in all things, we buy what we like and feel we are getting value for. My comments are that often there are companies that are incurring significant additional expense on items that do NOT enhance that value, or that is significantly eroding their margins without adding commensurate value. Those companies would be more profitable if they were to address those issues. They could then chose whether to pass that on to their customers in terms of reduced pricing or more and better product, or in many instances they could take the slightly enhanced profitability and actually make a living.

[Arlequín]

I think you will find that the principle difference between historical and Fantasy/Sci-Fi gamers (I apparently have two hobbies now) is that the former have no 'culture' of paying through the nose for expensive overpriced figures. The latter however do have one of 'almost as good as GW, but half the price'.

 

I'm not convinced by the arguments re pricing and anyone who is running a business and keeping prices down out of the goodness of their heart is doomed to fail. However setting your price to what the market will bear (and indeed the Perrys' market is not Hasslefree's) is quite sensible.

The assessment of whether the price is too high for what you get is for the customer to determine... typically by comparison with competitors. I do wonder what the impact of a 'historical' manufacturer moving into the Sci-Fi/Fantasy field, with the same quality but 'historical' pricing would be.

Not surprisingly the 'historical' company that could have done that chose to conform to the price range of its competition in the Sci-Fi/Fantasy field, when it could have balanced the 'costs' against its bread and butter ranges and sold cheaper. Apparently you can take the man out of GW, but you can't take GW out of the man.

 

[westwaller]

I think this quite an important discussion to be having, because in general we have a lack of understanding of how much stuff costs or should cost because of the market power of large companies and the way they sell a lot of day to day stuff to us very cheaply, either by buying large amounts of stock or by outsourcing production of said items to another country where the labour is cheaper.

Rather than quibble about a few quid (and in most cases still less than a pint) we should support the creative endeavour that goes into the design and production of games and miniatures, so that the industry we love stays healthy and able to produce what we want.

I would agree that in general that there is a lower standard of finish accepted for historical miniatures because for most people, they are by and large 'game pieces'. In fact I believe this is what the Perry twins have said about their products in the past, even so, they are very nicely sculpted game pieces. However, I would personally pay a few quid more for their products if the the finish were a bit nicer, and I didn't have to spend so much time cleaning them up!!...

In my experience, with miniatures as with most other things, you gets what you pay for- if I buy cheaper miniatures, the quality is usually a bit lower- often the casting, rather then the design, to be honest. I was shocked when I first started buying historicals at the casting quality compared to the GW stuf I had been buying twenty years earlier, but I do think gw prices are too much.

So in summmary- I am happy to pay more for quality, and to keep the industry healthy, and I don't think five pounds for special miniatures is too much in some cases.

Not a fan of resin stuff though.

[Artemis Black]

I think you will find that the principle difference between historical and Fantasy/Sci-Fi gamers (I apparently have two hobbies now) is that the former have no 'culture' of paying through the nose for expensive overpriced figures. The latter however do have one of 'almost as good as GW, but half the price'.

That's not a stylistic thing. Historical games through the ages have required armies of miniatures. If you made them top quality and charged top dollar you'd be creating a market too small to continue.

Similarly if you decided to make something that only required 10 miniatures, you'd need a way to separate yourself from the existing market. The easiest way to do that, as the customer only needs to buy 10 of them, is to make them considerably better and increase the price.

Also I think if you're making something that's only 'almost as good as GW' you'd better be charging a hell of a lot less than half the price GW's strength hasn't been sculpting quality in many years.

[Captain Blood]

If something costs more to produce and therefore ends at a higher price it is 'not' premium pricing. If somethings is artificially increased in price well above the difference in production costs 'that' is premium pricing. What you seem to be using the phrase to mean is simple 'more expensive', that is incorrect.
Trying, imo disingenuously, to categorise them both as 'lumps of metal' is silly.

Well you're obviously not going to be persuaded, and nor am I. I think you're wrong in your use of the definition, and you think I'm wrong. That's life.

What you're basically saying is that historical stuff is of a lower quality, and that's why fantasy/sci-fi stuff is so much more expensive. What I'm saying is that I can tell that - by and large, for some makers - there's a difference in quality. I just don't think the scale of the differential in price is justified. And that it also comes down to what you like and what you want. You think Copplestone is 'old school' and his day is done. I think that's rot. You think Kev White sculpts are so far superior they justify paying two or three times the price of a Copplestone figure. I disagree. I'm afraid it comes down to subjective taste, choice, and what you're prepared to pay.

I wouldn't ever buy Old Glory figures. I am very happy to pay an extra pound for a Copplestone or Hicks miniature. I can tell the difference.
You see an even bigger quantum leap in quality between a Copplestone or Hicks figure and a Hasslefree figure. I don't. I have many Hasslefree figures. They're very nice. Do I think they're so much better they are worth two or three times the price? No.

Do I care that they take two or three times the hours to sculpt? No. I'm the customer. I judge things objectively on the price and subjectively on the quality and make a purchasing decision or not. I don't care about how long it took to make, how difficult it was, or the maker's circumstances. Not my concern. You wouldn't expect, much less accept that from a manufacturer or trader in almost any other line of business. So why do wargames traders think it should make a difference to their customers?

You're also repeatedly characterising 'historical' gamers as undiscerning people who buy and play with big units of identical rank and file. That's not the way it is with many of the 'historical' gamers on this forum, and it's not the way it is in the world of historical figure manufacturing any more. Hasn't been for a long time.

[Artemis Black]

I do wonder what the impact of a 'historical' manufacturer moving into the Sci-Fi/Fantasy field, with the same quality but 'historical' pricing would be.

Why would it need to be a historical manufacturer? They don't have magic abilities

To be the same quality they'd need to hire better sculptors (or pay the existing sculptors more so they could take longer and produce better pieces). That costs money. As does higher quality moulding and casting.

If you pay more money out for something but don't increase the price the end result usually isn't pretty.

[Artemis Black]

Well you're obviously not going to be persuaded, and nor am I. I think you're wrong in your use of the definition, and you think I'm wrong. That's life.

It's not 'my' definition, it's 'the' definition of the phrase - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premium_pricing

What you're basically saying is that historical stuff is of a lower quality, and that's why fantasy/sci-fi stuff is so much more expensive. What I'm saying is that I can tell that - by and large, for some makers - there's a difference in quality. I just don't think the scale of the differential in price is justified. And that it also comes down to what you like and what you want. You think Copplestone is 'old school' and his day is done. I think that's rot. You think Kev White sculpts are so far superior they justify paying two or three times the price of a Copplestone figure. I disagree. I'm afraid it comes down to subjective taste, choice, and what you're prepared to pay.

I wouldn't ever buy Old Glory figures. I am very happy to pay an extra pound for a Copplestone or Hicks miniature. I can tell the difference.
You see an even bigger quantum leap in quality between a Copplestone or Hicks figure and a Hasslefree figure. I don't. I have many Hasslefree figures. They're very nice. Do I think they're so much better they are worth two or three times the price? No.

Do I care that they take two or three times the hours to sculpt? No. I'm the customer. I judge things objectively on the price and subjectively on the quality and make a purchasing decision or not. I don't care about how long it took to make, how difficult it was, or the maker's circumstances. Not my concern. You wouldn't expect, much less accept that from a manufacturer or trader in almost any other line of business. So why do wargames traders think it should make a difference to their customers?

I absolutely accept that in many businesses? Everyone does. How difficult and expensive something is to make is a huge factor in many industries that the consumer is aware of.

If I buy a chair for functions sake only then all I care about is that it's in the shape of a chair and won't all apart. If however I'm looking for a chair that is 'aesthetically' pleasing then I can easily tell that some products have had a lot more hours of work put into them than others and that is reflected in the price point. I'll then subjectively decide whether or not the end result is worth the price to me, but that initial recognition that something took longer to make is not subjective at all.

(Also the newest Copplestone release was £3 for a single figure, not multiples less than £5, that's not even twice the price)

You're also repeatedly characterising 'historical' gamers as undiscerning people who buy and play with big units of identical rank and file. That's not the way it is with many of the 'historical' gamers on this forum, and it's not the way it is in the world of historical figure manufacturing any more. Hasn't been for a long time.

I don't believe I characterised anyone that way. My characterisation is that historical gamers need a lot more minis in general so have different goals in mind when shopping. That doesn't make them even remotely "undiscerning". I am abolutely positive that if some rich guy decided to have one of the world's best sculptors create a thousand different napoleonic figures at the quality of top end sci-fi/fantasy minis and sell them for low end historical prices that they would sell through the roof. If I thought historical gamers were undiscerning then that quality wouldn't make a difference, which is obviously nonsense.

However that company isn't making any money so other than a vanity project it simply isn't happening.

[Silent Invader]

Regarding premium pricing, IMO it is a definition that can be applied to Hasslefree product because the company is essentially selling the skill of one sculptor.

Given the prior link to Wikipedia, I'll drag out their definition .....

Premium pricing (also called image pricing or prestige pricing) is the practice of keeping the price of a product or service artificially high in order to encourage favorable perceptions among buyers, based solely on the price.[1] The practice is intended to exploit the tendency for buyers to assume that expensive items enjoy an exceptional reputation or represent exceptional quality and distinction. A premium pricing strategy involves setting the price of a product higher than similar products. This strategy is sometimes also called skim pricing because it is an attempt to “skim the cream” off the top of the market. It is used to maximize profit in areas where customers are happy to pay more, where there are no substitutes for the product, where there are barriers to entering the market or when the seller cannot save on costs by producing at a high volume.

Note the references to the lack of substitutes and barriers to entry, both of which are features of being (primarily) the output for and of Kev's sculpting.

Simplistically, it doesn't necessarily matter how much time Kev takes to sculpt a mini but it matters that it has been sculpted by Kev. Personally, I'm a Kev fan and I (generally) buy his ladies to adapt/convert for characters in my historical projects. In fact the 'civilians' for my current GoT project include (I think) 4 or 5 HF. These are all relatively old models for which the sculpting and mastering costs must long since have been covered.

Taking this a stage further, if the argument is that it's not premium pricing because it's the higher cost of Kev's product visualisation, development and mastering that sets the mini at a higher price, then as soon as that product investment is repaid, if there isn't a commensurate price reduction then the product becomes premium priced (because it is priced higher than a similarly moulded mini that contains a similar amount of metal and a similar amount of other variable costs, etc, versus the cheaper comparator that has also had its visualisation, development and mastering costs repaid).

A counter to this argument, and it's essentially the one taken by GW, is that higher operating costs (such as a store network to maintain and build a brand) mean that there isn't the profit margin to counter the tag of premium pricing.

Both theoretically and practically my recent purchases from HF are seen by me as being premium priced, which I'm happy with 'cos I likes 'em an' wants 'em.

 

[Elbows]

There are several things I think we can all agree on.

1) If your business model requires that you charge "X" for something and people don't buy it, your business model is poor and you should reconsider it.
2) We, as consumers, have the ultimate vote: our dollarbucks.  If you disagree with the price of things, don't buy them, and the impact will be felt by the producer.
3) Making toy soldiers is a tough business regardless of the scale of your endeavors.
4) If you can charge a premium and get away with it, good for you.  Hell, people pay 10x, 20x, 30x the normal asking price for pieces of clothing because of a stupid name on a label...there's no logic to what people will pay, or how much.
5) If you want to sell massed metals it seems the majority of folks here will pay a "couple of quid", or a "couple of dollars" for a single 28mm human scaled figure.

Manufacturers are well aware they can't force anyone to buy their product.  Even if with "we spend X to produce Y, so we charge Z", if the consumer thinks the price is too high, they won't purchase.  Likewise as consumers we can't force a manufacturer to price or sell things at a cost we love (short of voting with our money, but shutting down every toy soldier producer is probably not the best option!).

 

[Artemis Black]

Regarding premium pricing, IMO it is a definition that can be applied to Hasslefree product because the company is essentially selling the skill of one sculptor.

Given the prior link to Wikipedia, I'll drag out their definition .....

Note the references to the lack of substitutes and barriers to entry, both of which are features of being (primarily) the output for and of Kev's sculpting.

Simplistically, it doesn't necessarily matter how much time Kev takes to sculpt a mini but it matters that it has been sculpted by Kev. Personally, I'm a Kev fan and I (generally) buy his ladies to adapt/convert for characters in my historical projects. In fact the 'civilians' for my current GoT project include (I think) 4 or 5 HF. These are all relatively old models for which the sculpting and mastering costs must long since have been covered.

Taking this a stage further, if the argument is that it's not premium pricing because it's the higher cost of Kev's product visualisation, development and mastering that sets the mini at a higher price, then as soon as that product investment is repaid, if there isn't a commensurate price reduction then the product becomes premium priced (because it is priced higher than a similarly moulded mini that contains a similar amount of metal and a similar amount of other variable costs, etc, versus the cheaper comparator that has also had its visualisation, development and mastering costs repaid).

A counter to this argument, and it's essentially the one taken by GW, is that higher operating costs (such as a store network to maintain and build a brand) mean that there isn't the profit margin to counter the tag of premium pricing.

Both theoretically and practically my recent purchases from HF are seen by me as being premium priced, which I'm happy with 'cos I likes 'em an' wants 'em.

 

That's a completely different argument, and not much to do with the definition of premium pricing?

Our miniatures aren't priced what they are because they are produced by Kev. In fact if that was the only consideration we 'would' match the Euro style pricing and increase our prices to match the figures done by what I consider to be his sculpting peers of a similar skill level. That 'would' be premium pricing as my primary consideration there would be prestige rather than basic economic factors.

They are priced what they are because I set prices based on a number of factors, all of the important ones being costs to us. Those costs are lower to companies who have different strategies, who employ cheaper sculptors and use cheaper casting methods etc.

Our prices also take into account a reasonable number of years worth of estimated sales. Normally, by the time that has passed, the basic price point has gone up. Which is why our older figures are cheaper (And why when an older figure gets remastered and remoulded it is raised a price point as those costs get folded in). We haven't raised those older prices because, as you mention, a portion of the costs to us have been paid off. We don't need to reduce prices (Although we have done that too, normally by combining into multipacks at a further discount) because the basic price point has moved on and other costs have risen meaning that not increasing the price points too 'is' a reduction.

So again, still not premium pricing.

For the record by the way, my argument is simply because the phrase means something that doesn't apply to us. I wouldn't be arguing if somebody said we were expensive, that's just subjective opinion.

[Arlequín]

Why would it need to be a historical manufacturer? They don't have magic abilities

To be the same quality they'd need to hire better sculptors (or pay the existing sculptors more so they could take longer and produce better pieces). That costs money. As does higher quality moulding and casting.

If you pay more money out for something but don't increase the price the end result usually isn't pretty.

You know we've moved on from Minifigs and Hinchliffe? You mentioned Paul Hicks and the Perrys earlier - I don't think you need to hire better sculptors than these surely?

I'll accept that there are some awful historical ranges around still (and I wouldn't buy them), but it would have to be a 'historicals' company that is used to selling for less for that scenario to work.

As it stands Captain Blood's 'lead blob' comparison does bear up re:Warlord's own historical versus their GoA range - you have one company making both types at different prices. Also historical figures have to be researched... I don't suppose dwarves get overly criticised for missing buttons and the wrong jackets.

The trend in 28mm is shifting towards 'Sci-Fi/Fantasy' sized 'skirmish' games (Lion Rampant, Flying Lead etc) and has been for a while. The old big games are beginning to become a relative rarity and now tend to be done in 3, 6, 10, or 15mm.

Even 'cheap' 28mm plastics haven't reversed that trend. As I suspect is the case with 'Zombie games' some people preferred to buy a box or two of plastics, for the unit price of four metal figures to create their 'zombie horde'. Whether they went for metal survivors, or went plastic, you are in a far better position to tell me.

A 28mm 'historical' skirmish game and a 'Modern/Sci-Fi/Fantasy' skirmish game use the same numbers of figures, which would imply that individuals are purchasing equivalent numbers of figures per person, yet the historical skirmisher pays 50-25% of the price of the other.

Anyway... I'm off to write an e-mail to the CEO of Ferrari to complain about their unfair pricing structure. Why can't I have one for the price of a Ford Focus?

 

[Sangennaru]

I do wonder what the impact of a 'historical' manufacturer moving into the Sci-Fi/Fantasy field, with the same quality but 'historical' pricing would be.

They did: frostgrave soldiers. Brilliant kit, made with the quality of perrys kits - more or less - and i personally (that i'm used to the quality of RGB or Hasslefree) i wouldn't spend my time painting those. To be fair, there's plenty of cheap options for fantasy too, but the difference of the product is evident, as Artemis says.
Of course it's all subjective, but i agree there's no "premium price" or "you're paying for the brand" anywhere. The % margin is quite limited, and probably lower than for historical waves of lead.

[Gibby]

You think Copplestone is 'old school' and his day is done. I think that's rot.

Completely agree with you here. It is obviously a subjective matter but I'd take a nicely sculpted, deep detailed Copplestone model any day.

This has been an interesting thread to read and I hope it continues. It's pertinent to the hobby and I enjoy reading people's opinions regardless of how circular it can be. Getting to know how fellow LAFers feel about various hobby issues is part of the community feel.

[OSHIROmodels]

I bought some figures earlier.

Didn't bother looking at the price