You're referring to something I had edited out of my post, before you quoted me. But, fair enough, I wrote it - and I think it's still correct.

Regarding the edited out bit: I didn't see it was edited out when I hit the quote button. It was still there as I was typing my reply. I wasn't playing gotcha after you edited.

I figured as much. It's cool, man.

Regarding the reply to beatty from easternking: He is talking about asmodee's stance and who they are catering to. If the lgs's make their money by magic games and not miniature games as beatty argued, then what's the value in doing what asmodee is doing? They aren't really helping the lgs if the lgs doesn't really make it's money (most of it) from miniature gaming sales but rather from magic sales. Hardly an attack on beatty.

Well, it's obvious that this post is coming with the policy shift in the context, but the sarcastic post is misplaced. Beatty is in favor of the policy, because he - like me - greatly values the FLGS, which is where he and I met and know one another from. (Now if he would actually get his butt out and play some Armada...)

This will help, because it will create less of an opportunity cost to FLGSs to support mini games. It will make mini games (more) profitable for FLGSs.

You're referring to something I had edited out of my post, before you quoted me. But, fair enough, I wrote it - and I think it's still correct.

Regarding the edited out bit: I didn't see it was edited out when I hit the quote button. It was still there as I was typing my reply. I wasn't playing gotcha after you edited.

I figured as much. It's cool, man.

Regarding the reply to beatty from easternking: He is talking about asmodee's stance and who they are catering to. If the lgs's make their money by magic games and not miniature games as beatty argued, then what's the value in doing what asmodee is doing? They aren't really helping the lgs if the lgs doesn't really make it's money (most of it) from miniature gaming sales but rather from magic sales. Hardly an attack on beatty.

Well, it's obvious that this post is coming with the policy shift in the context, but the sarcastic post is misplaced. Beatty is in favor of the policy, because he - like me - greatly values the FLGS, which is where he and I met and know one another from. (Now if he would actually get his butt out and play some Armada...)

This will help, because it will create less of an opportunity cost to FLGSs to support mini games. It will make mini games (more) profitable for FLGSs.

I get that, I really do... but I question the truth of it overall.

We were told by ffg last year at gencon that armada was their biggest selling game to date.

This was also during the time that there were deep discounts (core set for $65 online).... now at my local game shop, the core set didn't sell out until after the summer was almost over (like in september if I remember right). While a single anecdotal example proves nothing, I do wonder if the majority of sales didn't come from online. In addition to that, people who bought the game online, then brought it in to the game shop to play against others. There will be less of this with ffg and other asmodee games as they sell less total games and apparently asmodee is fine with this as per that interview.

Also, with asmodee dictating that a business can not supplement in store sales with a web shop that also sells their games is going to hurt those flg's who did get some money from online sales. The either/or sales method just stifles business creativity and hurts the flgs and ultimately us, the customers.

Sure. Like I said above, right now I don't really have need to go since I have 6-8 people whom I've shown Armada to and we hold our own game nights at our houses. I understand that that's different for people who don't have a large pool of gamer nerds as friends who may need to rely on the LGS model more. If we strike out into the world to play Armada it'll likely be at a store that also sells food/drink; I have most of what I need for Armada so I'd rather some good coffee or beer.

So, this is a social structural issue. If your social network is one where you have a lot of what is called bonding social capital (people who are already a group engaged in an activity that bonds the group together). For you, all you need is to get the components. For you, online retail is great.

For a lot of us, the game is something that we use to meet other people and have fun interactions with. We are building bridging social capital (building ties between people who are not yet strongly connected), and using the game as a platform to do so. The FLGS provides a neutral location in which to do that. Without the FLGS, we don't have that rallying place. Unless we have that already-existing group, we don't have a reason to play, because we don't have people to play with.

I think FFG understands this, and they realize that our society is becoming less bonded - or, at least, the people who would enjoy their games tend to be more like the people who need to bridge, because bonded people are less likely to get into sci-fi games to begin with.

This sums up where I'm coming at this discussion from perfectly. I don't know a lot of people who are interested in this sort of thing and it can be difficult to get them together since we're all busy folks.

I have tried. . . Tried so hard to figure out how a miniature based gaming cafe would work but it just doesn't coalesce in my mind or on paper. . . Wargames take so much time where as many board games do not. Not to mention table space needed, mats, etc.

I get that, I really do... but I question the truth of it overall.

We were told by ffg last year at gencon that armada was their biggest selling game to date.

This was also during the time that there were deep discounts (core set for $65 online).... now at my local game shop, the core set didn't sell out until after the summer was almost over (like in september if I remember right). While a single anecdotal example proves nothing, I do wonder if the majority of sales didn't come from online. In addition to that, people who bought the game online, then brought it in to the game shop to play against others. There will be less of this with ffg and other asmodee games as they sell less total games and apparently asmodee is fine with this as per that interview.

Also, with asmodee dictating that a business can not supplement in store sales with a web shop that also sells their games is going to hurt those flg's who did get some money from online sales. The either/or sales method just stifles business creativity and hurts the flgs and ultimately us, the customers.

Well, we really don't know - because we don't have the big picture that Asmodee has, and you may be right - Asmodee may be acting irrationally. It's entirely possible.

I think (and my FLGS store owner acknowledges) that getting the Core Set into people's hands as easily as possible is good for all concerned. It's the little taster of prack that you give to unsuspecting souls to get them addicted. It's the threshold that you want to lower in order to get people in the door. If you can buy the Core for $65 online or at the Big Box Store, then the FLGS can get you as a customer for the expansions (and drinks, and add-on sales).

Now, maybe FFG can accomplish that with a form of subsidy to the core set that FGLSs and online retailers can both benefit from. Not knowing the true cost of the Core Set, maybe there is already a bit of a subsidy in the MSRP in the form of a lower profit margin for FFG, I don't know.

I do see what you're saying about business creativity being stifled in terms of telling FLGSs that they can't be a declared hybrid store. I have not yet fully contemplated through what impact that is going to have. I think it's just to prevent online retailers from pretending to be FLGSs by having a nominal storefront.

Still, I think that when Asmodee looks at the channels where their growth comes from, I think they've made an intelligent choice for reasons stated previously (social network effects).

And I think Asmodee has worked out a way to increase their own profits, by removing a discount that should be going to the end user.

Now they get to look like heroes, will trying to save FLGS in the process, yet you and many other store owners have categorically stated Miniature games are the worst areas for sustainable profit, and take the most space in a store, so who in fact are Asmodee helping here with these changes? because you cannot have it all ways, if Miniature gaming is profitable for shops, and it is that that keeps them going and not MG and other CCGS, and more traditional board games, then great, but I have to ask, does this money you are (Asmodee) taking from the consumer mean they are going to actively invest in making sure people who do not have access to a LGS, get access to one, are they going to use this money to make the market grow? are they going to get stores open? because game shops were in decline long before Asmodee decided they needed to save the gaming world.

The reality is, it will have little to no impact on the profitability on virtually all LGS, because so little of the revenue is generated by Asmodee products, and that most people like me, will still order online, so what should be a cheaper cost to me, and other online shoppers, because online shops do not have the same overheads or operating costs, meaning they do not need to add so much onto a product to recoup the operating costs of a store, is instead going to be taken by Asmodee and put in their own pocket, its a win win for them, they look like they are doing good, and directly increase the cut of money they get from online retailers, at the expense of online shoppers.

I mean that is basically what is being argued here.

A store has certain costs to run, so X amount is added to a product on its shelves to help it be a profitable business, standard fare, how shops have always worked, before Online shopping.

An Online store has certain costs to run, but as a general rule of thumb, they are lower, so the value added onto a product to keep the online store profitable is lower = Saving for the customer.

And you guys are arguing that in fact Asmodee are doing a great thing, by removing that saving from the customer, and I cannot get my head around it.

You know, I really like this blog post. It goes over what game stores look like for profit margins.

...yet you and many other store owners have categorically stated Miniature games are the worst areas for sustainable profit, and take the most space in a store...

Nope - haven't said that. We've just said that mini games take more space than card games do. There's an opportunity costs that currently favors card gamers. Asmodee is trying to reduce that opportunity cost. I think you may need to step away from thinking so 'categorically'.

(Reiryc, see this is where I am coming from when I say mischaracterized.)

And I think Asmodee has worked out a way to increase their own profits, by removing a discount that should be going to the end user.

because you cannot have it all ways, if Miniature gaming is profitable for shops, and it is that that keeps them going and not MG and other CCGS, and more traditional board games, then great, but I have to ask, does this money you are (Asmodee) taking from the consumer mean they are going to actively invest in making sure people who do not have access to a LGS, get access to one, are they going to use this money to make the market grow? are they going to get stores open? because game shops were in decline long before Asmodee decided they needed to save the gaming world.

We must live in different microcosms. Are game shops in decline? Maybe where you are located. Where I am, they're popping up all over the place. Some thrive, others don't. The competition does a great job of helping the good ones thrive, but they do have opportunity costs.

So, the front line is where FLGSs are between success and failure. My location (Portland) is not there, but the FLGSs here do have choices to make: reserve table space for mini games or for MtG players. If Asmodee helps customers have less of an opportunity cost in buying from the FLGS, then FLGSs have an incentive for catering (more) to mini gamers.

Could you tell me where you are located? That would help me get a sense of where you're coming from.

...instead going to be taken by Asmodee and put in their own pocket, its a win win for them, they look like they are doing good, and directly increase the cut of money they get from online retailers, at the expense of online shoppers.

What other motive should Asmodee have than lining their own pockets? I think we are in disagreement over their horizon. Are they short-term greedy or long-term greedy? You clearly think they're short-term greedy with a fig leaf rationale, whereas I think there's something to what they're saying.

...yet you and many other store owners have categorically stated Miniature games are the worst areas for sustainable profit, and take the most space in a store...

Nope - haven't said that. We've just said that mini games take more space than card games do. There's an opportunity costs that currently favors card gamers. Asmodee is trying to reduce that opportunity cost. I think you may need to step away from thinking so 'categorically'.

(Reiryc, see this is where I am coming from when I say mischaracterized.)

And I think Asmodee has worked out a way to increase their own profits, by removing a discount that should be going to the end user.

because you cannot have it all ways, if Miniature gaming is profitable for shops, and it is that that keeps them going and not MG and other CCGS, and more traditional board games, then great, but I have to ask, does this money you are (Asmodee) taking from the consumer mean they are going to actively invest in making sure people who do not have access to a LGS, get access to one, are they going to use this money to make the market grow? are they going to get stores open? because game shops were in decline long before Asmodee decided they needed to save the gaming world.

We must live in different microcosms. Are game shops in decline? Maybe where you are located. Where I am, they're popping up all over the place. Some thrive, others don't. The competition does a great job of helping the good ones thrive, but they do have opportunity costs.

So, the front line is where FLGSs are between success and failure. My location (Portland) is not there, but the FLGSs here do have choices to make: reserve table space for mini games or for MtG players. If Asmodee helps customers have less of an opportunity cost in buying from the FLGS, then FLGSs have an incentive for catering (more) to mini gamers.

Could you tell me where you are located? That would help me get a sense of where you're coming from.

...instead going to be taken by Asmodee and put in their own pocket, its a win win for them, they look like they are doing good, and directly increase the cut of money they get from online retailers, at the expense of online shoppers.

What other motive should Asmodee have than lining their own pockets? I think we are in disagreement over their horizon. Are they short-term greedy or long-term greedy? You clearly think they're short-term greedy with a fig leaf rationale, whereas I think there's something to what they're saying.

So you think it's ok to for them to take the saving that should be going to the shopper, to go into their own pockets?

Business are in the business of making money, yes? that means they will do what ever they can to increase profit margins, and dress it up in the nicest possible light, I mean he even says in that video, we don't want our customers to get used to paying less, so regardless of whether you need to add X value or not because of overheads, we don't agree, we will take that cash for ourselves, and people are here arguing and defending this action, and that is what I am struggling to get my head around. Bottom line, they do it for themselves and not us.

...yet you and many other store owners have categorically stated Miniature games are the worst areas for sustainable profit, and take the most space in a store...

Nope - haven't said that. We've just said that mini games take more space than card games do. There's an opportunity costs that currently favors card gamers. Asmodee is trying to reduce that opportunity cost. I think you may need to step away from thinking so 'categorically'.

(Reiryc, see this is where I am coming from when I say mischaracterized.)

And I think Asmodee has worked out a way to increase their own profits, by removing a discount that should be going to the end user.

because you cannot have it all ways, if Miniature gaming is profitable for shops, and it is that that keeps them going and not MG and other CCGS, and more traditional board games, then great, but I have to ask, does this money you are (Asmodee) taking from the consumer mean they are going to actively invest in making sure people who do not have access to a LGS, get access to one, are they going to use this money to make the market grow? are they going to get stores open? because game shops were in decline long before Asmodee decided they needed to save the gaming world.

We must live in different microcosms. Are game shops in decline? Maybe where you are located. Where I am, they're popping up all over the place. Some thrive, others don't. The competition does a great job of helping the good ones thrive, but they do have opportunity costs.

So, the front line is where FLGSs are between success and failure. My location (Portland) is not there, but the FLGSs here do have choices to make: reserve table space for mini games or for MtG players. If Asmodee helps customers have less of an opportunity cost in buying from the FLGS, then FLGSs have an incentive for catering (more) to mini gamers.

Could you tell me where you are located? That would help me get a sense of where you're coming from.

...instead going to be taken by Asmodee and put in their own pocket, its a win win for them, they look like they are doing good, and directly increase the cut of money they get from online retailers, at the expense of online shoppers.

What other motive should Asmodee have than lining their own pockets? I think we are in disagreement over their horizon. Are they short-term greedy or long-term greedy? You clearly think they're short-term greedy with a fig leaf rationale, whereas I think there's something to what they're saying.

Mischaracterization: I think in this post he mischaracterized. In the previous post I don't think he did as I reached the same conclusion. Just because there is mischaracterization here, doesn't mean it was there previously. Fair?

How can it be that game shops are thriving where you are and popping up? How is it possible that game shops are doing so well when all we hear about is how the online stores are so dang cheap that the game shops can't compete? Clearly, they must be doing something else right (in addition to people such as yourself who buy almost exclusively from them) to be thriving. I know one of game shops you go to (owned by a lady if I recall) thrives and it should. It clearly provides space and other things beyond shelf space for games and good on them for doing it. That's good business acumen and they are being rightfully rewarded as are you the customer.

I think that's the point easternking and other's have made. That the game shops, not all of course, but many can and do thrive even with online shopping and that asmodee isn't really doing anything to help the lgs and in the end will just hurt the customer and ultimately itself.

And this as I mentioned above doesn't make them any money because they take that money you spent to get into the league and they put it into the prizes at the end. So again your playing there makes no profit for them.

Now a separate gaming Cafe/Bar is probably the next big thing to come but the. Their sales will be from food and drinks which is a whole other business venture in itself. And they will cater to the Board gamers over Miniature players because of space issues. I've looked at this idea and honestly when space is a commodity Miniature Games are the worst business venture to cater to. Along with them also being the most temperamental customers too.

Sounds great, so stores are losing out because they cannot compete with online sellers of miniatures, yet the stores don't really want the miniature gamers because they take up to much room/tempremental? I mean this is so much win, maybe you can let FFG/Asmodee know? that they are the worst business venture to cater to?

He's saying that between the two models (game store and Game Cafe) miniature games are in an unhappy medium. Game stores make more profit off card gamers, whereas game cafes will have an interest in catering to board gamers.

I think this means that there is still a place or us to be, but it will have to be in some form of hybrid. Also, we should realize that FLGSs are going out of their way to help us out.

No, I don't think he is trying to misunderstand beatty as actually I thought the same thing.

I have hung out at game stores for years and I watched all types of games come and go, Armada is nothing new to Game Stores. If you don't buy from them they will not order that product and stop all events so they can support a game that does sell. And when organizing an event at game stores the owners know already that Miniature Gamers are the low man on the totem poll. We are less likely to do spontaneous purchases, we want them to carry every single product taking up valuable merchandising space and when we game we use a 6x4 space and we have bags and boxes laying around on all the surrounding tables. And when a gamer blows their top and screams it tends to be the Miniature Gamers that snap. So when it comes to gamers we are not the ideal costumes in any way. So why would they do more for us?

Sit back and think about what the LGS's do to make us happy. Is it worth their effort to do this?

That is my point, we should stop thinking of ourselves as the special costumer and realize we are the difficult costumes they are going out of their way to help. They are offering you a way to build a community at an expense to them for the hope that you will by the next release from them.

So let's stop thinking that they owe us anything, we owe them the respect for what they are doing for us because they can shut down the gaming tables to miniature gamers and spouncer more board games or start a new magic night and they would make just as much money for this off night.

I wonder if this is a sign of how much discount will be available or if it will be less.

http://www.coolstuffinc.com/p/221533

It's before the agreement and it's 25% off. If it becomes less than that post april 1, then ffg is going to lose some sales. I've already heard of a couple people that won't buy it for the asking price of $99.

Mischaracterization: I think in this post he mischaracterized. In the previous post I don't think he did as I reached the same conclusion. Just because there is mischaracterization here, doesn't mean it was there previously. Fair?

Nope, not fair. That earlier post mischaracterized.

Beatty is not saying that FLGSs don't want mini gamers. He's just saying that FLGSs don't make much off mini gamers. He is (I think) exaggerating by saying that they make no profit, but that profit is less than other games because of the lower volume of sales to shelf and floor space.

FLGSs do want mini gamers, otherwise they would not put up with us as generously as they actually do. They just have a rational preference for card-gamers.

But TheEasternKing is characterizing Beatty as saying that "stores don't really want the miniature gamers", which is not what he is saying, ergo: mischaracterization. Just because you agree with TheEasternKing does not mean that TheEasternKing is not mischaracterizing.

How can it be that game shops are thriving where you are and popping up? How is it possible that game shops are doing so well when all we hear about is how the online stores are so dang cheap that the game shops can't compete? Clearly, they must be doing something else right (in addition to people such as yourself who buy almost exclusively from them) to be thriving. I know one of game shops you go to (owned by a lady if I recall) thrives and it should. It clearly provides space and other things beyond shelf space for games and good on them for doing it. That's good business acumen and they are being rightfully rewarded as are you the customer.

Because location matters. FLGS stores can thrive here in Portland, but they mostly do so off MtG dollars. They could thrive even better and offer more floor-space and attention to mini games if they had lower opportunity costs to doing so.

And this is Portland. We're extraordinarily hospitable to this sort of geekiness. Stores that can thrive here may not thrive elsewhere.

I think that's the point easternking and other's have made. That the game shops, not all of course, but many can and do thrive even with online shopping and that asmodee isn't really doing anything to help the lgs and in the end will just hurt the customer and ultimately itself.

That may be your point, but you're not addressing the question of opportunity cost and competing gamers.

And this as I mentioned above doesn't make them any money because they take that money you spent to get into the league and they put it into the prizes at the end. So again your playing there makes no profit for them.

Now a separate gaming Cafe/Bar is probably the next big thing to come but the. Their sales will be from food and drinks which is a whole other business venture in itself. And they will cater to the Board gamers over Miniature players because of space issues. I've looked at this idea and honestly when space is a commodity Miniature Games are the worst business venture to cater to. Along with them also being the most temperamental customers too.

Sounds great, so stores are losing out because they cannot compete with online sellers of miniatures, yet the stores don't really want the miniature gamers because they take up to much room/tempremental? I mean this is so much win, maybe you can let FFG/Asmodee know? that they are the worst business venture to cater to?

He's saying that between the two models (game store and Game Cafe) miniature games are in an unhappy medium. Game stores make more profit off card gamers, whereas game cafes will have an interest in catering to board gamers.

I think this means that there is still a place or us to be, but it will have to be in some form of hybrid. Also, we should realize that FLGSs are going out of their way to help us out.

No, I don't think he is trying to misunderstand beatty as actually I thought the same thing.

To clarify my point I am saying that having us talk about what game stores or gaming cafes should do with their business is kind of moot because we are their worst customers compared to other gamers. We spend less at the store than all the other types of games and we take up most of the space when we have game night or a tournament. For a game store to support Miniature Gamers they literally go out of their way to support US.

I have hung out at game stores for years and I watched all types of games come and go, Armada is nothing new to Game Stores. If you don't buy from them they will not order that product and stop all events so they can support a game that does sell. And when organizing an event at game stores the owners know already that Miniature Gamers are the low man on the totem poll. We are less likely to do spontaneous purchases, we want them to carry every single product taking up valuable merchandising space and when we game we use a 6x4 space and we have bags and boxes laying around on all the surrounding tables. And when a gamer blows their top and screams it tends to be the Miniature Gamers that snap. So when it comes to gamers we are not the ideal costumes in any way. So why would they do more for us?

Sit back and think about what the LGS's do to make us happy. Is it worth their effort to do this?

That is my point, we should stop thinking of ourselves as the special costumer and realize we are the difficult costumes they are going out of their way to help. They are offering you a way to build a community at an expense to them for the hope that you will by the next release from them.

So let's stop thinking that they owe us anything, we owe them the respect for what they are doing for us because they can shut down the gaming tables to miniature gamers and spouncer more board games or start a new magic night and they would make just as much money for this off night.

Fair enough... and appreciate the post--well said.

Myself, I generally buy the big box stuff online, the $50-$100 stuff.

If online wasn't available to get some of these games at 30% or more off the retail, I probably wouldn't have bought in at all and just would have stuck with my pc gaming hobby that I've been doing for the past 30ish years. I don't demand anything from the game shop and have demo'ed armada several times, ia several times and was a judge at 1 armada tournament. The reward I was given for doing these things and for the "money I've made him" was to receive all the ships/squadrons from wave 2 that I didn't win at sullust (I split these with my co-judge). So even with my online purchases, I was able to generate income for the store owner.

Asmodee's policy wasn't in effect and it has been a win/win/win for ffg, the store owner, and for others that have gotten involved in these games.

My point here is that there is more than one way to help make store's profitable and asmodee isn't helping in a meaningful way. They just have the appearance of helping.

I would absolutely love more spaces like the one described by the poster. I would also be more than happy to pay a cover charge to use the space. I have models, games, and friends to play with, but organising the space is an issue. Also time, but you can't buy time...

and yes I was being a bit hyperbole making my point but I was making from the point of view of a LGS's view if gamers did most of their purchases online. We are not hated but they love the Magic players much much more. (Magic the Gathering literally built the game store industry as we know it today, it took the games out of the hobby shops and book stores and made it profitable for actual game stores to exist. Without Magic there wouldn't be enough profit to stay open.)

Wow, rereading my posts I realize my grammar sucks today. What I get for typing fast while at work.

Mischaracterization: I think in this post he mischaracterized. In the previous post I don't think he did as I reached the same conclusion. Just because there is mischaracterization here, doesn't mean it was there previously. Fair?

Nope, not fair. That earlier post mischaracterized.

Beatty is not saying that FLGSs don't want mini gamers. He's just saying that FLGSs don't make much off mini gamers. He is (I think) exaggerating by saying that they make no profit, but that profit is less than other games because of the lower volume of sales to shelf and floor space.

FLGSs do want mini gamers, otherwise they would not put up with us as generously as they actually do. They just have a rational preference for card-gamers.

But TheEasternKing is characterizing Beatty as saying that "stores don't really want the miniature gamers", which is not what he is saying, ergo: mischaracterization. Just because you agree with TheEasternKing does not mean that TheEasternKing is not mischaracterizing.

How can it be that game shops are thriving where you are and popping up? How is it possible that game shops are doing so well when all we hear about is how the online stores are so dang cheap that the game shops can't compete? Clearly, they must be doing something else right (in addition to people such as yourself who buy almost exclusively from them) to be thriving. I know one of game shops you go to (owned by a lady if I recall) thrives and it should. It clearly provides space and other things beyond shelf space for games and good on them for doing it. That's good business acumen and they are being rightfully rewarded as are you the customer.

Because location matters. FLGS stores can thrive here in Portland, but they mostly do so off MtG dollars. They could thrive even better and offer more floor-space and attention to mini games if they had lower opportunity costs to doing so.

And this is Portland. We're extraordinarily hospitable to this sort of geekiness. Stores that can thrive here may not thrive elsewhere.

I think that's the point easternking and other's have made. That the game shops, not all of course, but many can and do thrive even with online shopping and that asmodee isn't really doing anything to help the lgs and in the end will just hurt the customer and ultimately itself.

That may be your point, but you're not addressing the question of opportunity cost and competing gamers.

Some stores want miniature gamers, some do not.

I still don't see easternking as mischaracterizing beatty by the post that easternking quoted. I also got, before I even read easternkings comments that beatty implied that miniature gamers weren't wanted. That I agreed with easternking was incidental. We will have to agree to disagree on that point.

Regarding stores thriving: There is currently a 'golden age' in board gaming. Many stores are doing quite well and many are not. Yes, location is certainly a part of it, but it isn't all there is. Good business acumen and delivering a product that people want on top of offering games for sale also contribute. Asmodee's policy is going to help little to none at all since, even as you say, MtG is where the money is at.

Regarding opportunity cost: I think I have addressed this in other posts.

Cover charges I'm kinda meh about.

Paying into a league or a campaign though with prize support from the FLGS is my preferred method.

And this as I mentioned above doesn't make them any money because they take that money you spent to get into the league and they put it into the prizes at the end. So again your playing there makes no profit for them.

Now a separate gaming Cafe/Bar is probably the next big thing to come but the. Their sales will be from food and drinks which is a whole other business venture in itself. And they will cater to the Board gamers over Miniature players because of space issues. I've looked at this idea and honestly when space is a commodity Miniature Games are the worst business venture to cater to. Along with them also being the most temperamental customers too.

Sounds great, so stores are losing out because they cannot compete with online sellers of miniatures, yet the stores don't really want the miniature gamers because they take up to much room/tempremental? I mean this is so much win, maybe you can let FFG/Asmodee know? that they are the worst business venture to cater to?

If your LGS supports your game seriously consider purchasing some of your products there. If they don't don't bother buying your products there. My stores have supported my hobbies (I have more than one game in my closet) so I am a loyal costumer for most of my purchases. That said if I find a fantastic deal online every now and then I will purchase online but if I am only saving $5 I would rather spend that extra $5 at my LGS's.

But take it how you will, you are free to your opinions. And yes I was being hyperbole in making my point but I wasn't looking to insult Miniature Gamers either since I own about 6 different miniature games myself.

It was not so much you (apologies) as Asmodee that have got my goat on this one.

I cannot see how this change is positive for shop owners, it is a step back, because the shops that are thriving near me, do both, they sell via a store, and they sell via their own website, now Asmodee just made them take a giant step back, and split the business again.

And for arguments sake, lets say there is a 50/50 split between shop purchases, and online purchases, with this one change they just increased net revenue 50% x what ever % value they increase Online retailers costs to, and they aren't pumping that back into FLGS, it's going right into their own pockets, and bottom line, that is a saving that should be in the consumers pockets, Asmodee are now rewriting the rules, no longer do decreased overheads mean less to pay for the customer, it means we will put the direct cost up so you save nothing, we make more, because we sell a luxury product, and we think its worth X amount, even though X amount to date has always included the overheads of the retailer selling our product, now it does both ways.

Businesses have gotten into a really nasty habit of looking at a market or area of said market and saying we are losing that much every year, the reality is they aren't directly losing anything, just could be earning more if they get into it, they tried hell for leather to get a cut of the 2nd hand games market (console/pc) because in their own words it was a multi billion dollar industry they were losing out on every year.

That is like you buying a car, and when you go to sell it, the car maker deciding he deserves a cut because he made it, even though he has been paid for it already, and I will never accept such things as being the norm, or acceptable, or swallow it with a smile on my face.

Asmodee are not trying to help LGS, they are not trying to help the consumer, they are trying to make a profit, and the sooner people around here stop telling us "it's all fantastic" the better.

Will not argue that point at all.

Well I said my peace, hope everyone has a good Saint Patrick's Day.

I still don't see easternking as mischaracterizing beatty by the post that easternking quoted. I also got, before I even read easternkings comments that beatty implied that miniature gamers weren't wanted. That I agreed with easternking was incidental. We will have to agree to disagree on that point.

I'm fine letting the contention of mischaracterization rest. However, I do think that if you are not seeing what I'm talking about, you may not be understanding the point I'm making (which is why I've been belaboring the point. It's not because I have some urge for jihad on TheEasternKing.

Regarding stores thriving: There is currently a 'golden age' in board gaming. Many stores are doing quite well and many are not. Yes, location is certainly a part of it, but it isn't all there is. Good business acumen and delivering a product that people want on top of offering games for sale also contribute. Asmodee's policy is going to help little to none at all since, even as you say, MtG is where the money is at.

Regarding opportunity cost: I think I have addressed this in other posts.

Of course all those other things matter. Nobody is saying that location is everything.

I really want to understand your point here. I don't recall you addressing the opportunity cost question (but that may just be a question of my dementia), and what you say about the categorical choice between mini games and MtG highlights that my point may have been lost.

Should I draw a production possibilities curve (and maybe an Edgeworth box) to model what I'm talking about? (I hope not to sound pedantic when I'm saying this. I certainly don't intend to.)

Asmodee are not trying to help LGS, they are not trying to help the consumer, they are trying to make a profit, and the sooner people around here stop telling us "it's all fantastic" the better.

Is Asmodee going to make more money off of it - well, of course, that's their intent. They're not trying to hide that at all. They've made a calculation. In part, that calculation is made in terms of price elasticity. They're guessing that their product does not have that much price elasticity. That you may gripe about the price, but when the time comes you'll pony up all the same (and, if not you and Reiryc specifically, then enough others). To the degree that's true, they're doing the intelligent thing.

The other part is the stated notion that FLGSs have advertising and networking value that online stores don't. You guys clearly don't buy that argument, but I'm guessing that's because you live in a very different environment than Beatty and I do. It's also the case that FFG exists in a community much like the one that Beatty and I do - gentrified (or gentrifying) urban areas with nerds, geeks, and hipsters, who want to play some games with people they barely know after Sunday brunch.

So, if you're an online shopper who probably doesn't use an FLGS, yes, you're losing out on this deal. (Pray they don't alter it any further.) As someone who does use FLGSs, and has my social circle around a number of them, they are much more valuable to me, I do see it as a win. It remains to be seen if the second rationale - which benefits FLGSs and people who patronize FLGSs - is one that holds.

By the way, in terms of Core Sets, I think I agree with you and Reiryc for reasons already mentioned.

By the way, I just pre-ordered Star Wars: Rebellion at my FLGS (which is why I was silent for an hour). I paid $17.99 for it, and had the option of only handing over $7.99.

(It's a longer story, and rest assured, I did pay the FLGS's MSRP-15%, but there were other things going on. It's just fun to say that I paid $17.99 for the MSRP $100 game.)

This is going to boil down to two camps of people. Those that tend to buy/sell games online , and those that buy/sell their games in the retail store.

At the end of the day FFG is the only one with the data available to make any sort of judgement. Right now, they appear to be at least willing to try using their pricing to push customers from one to another. They are also the only ones with the data to measure the effectiveness of their strategy.

The grand irony though: FFG just released the smallest, cheapest wave that I can remember in any of their games. Sure other games have had small releases, but they had something coming up the pipeline. The physical game stores that I deal with are likely to put an even lower priority on Armada for the time being, since this wave is not going to result in several large orders.

I still don't see easternking as mischaracterizing beatty by the post that easternking quoted. I also got, before I even read easternkings comments that beatty implied that miniature gamers weren't wanted. That I agreed with easternking was incidental. We will have to agree to disagree on that point.

I'm fine letting the contention of mischaracterization rest. However, I do think that if you are not seeing what I'm talking about, you may not be understanding the point I'm making (which is why I've been belaboring the point. It's not because I have some urge for jihad on TheEasternKing.

Regarding stores thriving: There is currently a 'golden age' in board gaming. Many stores are doing quite well and many are not. Yes, location is certainly a part of it, but it isn't all there is. Good business acumen and delivering a product that people want on top of offering games for sale also contribute. Asmodee's policy is going to help little to none at all since, even as you say, MtG is where the money is at.

Regarding opportunity cost: I think I have addressed this in other posts.

Of course all those other things matter. Nobody is saying that location is everything.

I really want to understand your point here. I don't recall you addressing the opportunity cost question (but that may just be a question of my dementia), and what you say about the categorical choice between mini games and MtG highlights that my point may have been lost.

Should I draw a production possibilities curve (and maybe an Edgeworth box) to model what I'm talking about? (I hope not to sound pedantic when I'm saying this. I certainly don't intend to.)

Asmodee are not trying to help LGS, they are not trying to help the consumer, they are trying to make a profit, and the sooner people around here stop telling us "it's all fantastic" the better.

Is Asmodee going to make more money off of it - well, of course, that's their intent. They're not trying to hide that at all. They've made a calculation. In part, that calculation is made in terms of price elasticity. They're guessing that their product does not have that much price elasticity. That you may gripe about the price, but when the time comes you'll pony up all the same (and, if not you and Reiryc specifically, then enough others). To the degree that's true, they're doing the intelligent thing.

The other part is the stated notion that FLGSs have advertising and networking value that online stores don't. You guys clearly don't buy that argument, but I'm guessing that's because you live in a very different environment than Beatty and I do. It's also the case that FFG exists in a community much like the one that Beatty and I do - gentrified (or gentrifying) urban areas with nerds, geeks, and hipsters, who want to play some games with people they barely know after Sunday brunch.

So, if you're an online shopper who probably doesn't use an FLGS, yes, you're losing out on this deal. (Pray they don't alter it any further.) As someone who does use FLGSs, and has my social circle around a number of them, they are much more valuable to me, I do see it as a win. It remains to be seen if the second rationale - which benefits FLGSs and people who patronize FLGSs - is one that holds.

By the way, in terms of Core Sets, I think I agree with you and Reiryc for reasons already mentioned.

By the way, I just pre-ordered Star Wars: Rebellion at my FLGS (which is why I was silent for an hour). I paid $17.99 for it, and had the option of only handing over $7.99.

(It's a longer story, and rest assured, I did pay the FLGS's MSRP-15%, but there were other things going on. It's just fun to say that I paid $17.99 for the MSRP $100 game.)

Good grief... how do you quote specific parts of a person's comments on this forum? I'm so used to [-quote] [-/quote] and that doesn't work or I'm unable to get it to work (without those dashes of course).

I do understand the point you're making. I just didn't agree with it. Maybe because you know beatty personally you could see something from what he wrote that I didn't see, I don't know. But yes, I do see how arrived at your conclusion at what he meant and I also don't think you're wrong for getting that to that conclusion. I just arrived at a different one as did EK.

As far as opportunity cost: I'm not an economics guy and I had to use my google kung fu in order to make sure I understood what that was. However, I didn't realize it broke down into implicit and explicit costs. I believe that what will happen is that they are going to produce too many cores and expansions and that these will sit unpurchased longer because less people will buy cores. As the guy in the video put it, he would rather people just buy 2 games as opposed to 12. Yet I'd be surprised if their manufacturing process could respond as quickly to the diminishing sales that may come from increased online costs to the consumer to slow down production in time to account for those lesser sales. I'm looking at the upcoming and I see a ton of items that are in production or awaiting reprint.

Earlier I addressed that I believed there would be less sales of games due to an increase in cost. I didn't reflect how this would affect ffg/asmodee in the sense that they have money invested in product that isn't moving. I addressed it as lost sales only.

One of the things that really bugs me about all this is that FFG produces my favorite games and I really enjoy their rules sets, production values and so on. If the price goes up too much, then they are limiting what I am willing to spend enjoying their products. I know they want to increase the 'value' of their products but i don't think this is the way to go about it. I won't play a game more because it costs $100, I'll play it more because I enjoy it. If I paid $100 on a game I didn't really enjoy, then I'd be pretty resentful that I didn't get that game for say $70 as I could have online prior to this move by asmodee.

Anyways, I also believe in the community concept and as I addressed in this thread, I've done a lot to build up the armada community (although I haven't played in about 2 months) and did most of my purchases online. I don't think there is only 1 way to build that community but asmodee is doing their part to push in that direction.

Good grief... how do you quote specific parts of a person's comments on this forum? I'm so used to [-quote] [-/quote] and that doesn't work or I'm unable to get it to work (without those dashes of course).

Bwahahaha! I am the quote master!

(But this forum really doesn't make it easy.)

I do understand the point you're making. I just didn't agree with it. Maybe because you know beatty personally you could see something from what he wrote that I didn't see, I don't know. But yes, I do see how arrived at your conclusion at what he meant and I also don't think you're wrong for getting that to that conclusion. I just arrived at a different one as did EK.

As far as opportunity cost: I'm not an economics guy and I had to use my google kung fu in order to make sure I understood what that was. However, I didn't realize it broke down into implicit and explicit costs. I believe that what will happen is that they are going to produce too many cores and expansions and that these will sit unpurchased longer because less people will buy cores. As the guy in the video put it, he would rather people just buy 2 games as opposed to 12. Yet I'd be surprised if their manufacturing process could respond as quickly to the diminishing sales that may come from increased online costs to the consumer to slow down production in time to account for those lesser sales. I'm looking at the upcoming and I see a ton of items that are in production or awaiting reprint.

Well, anyway, Beatty has made his own point. Let's just leave it at that. I also don't have a degree in economics, though I've been exposed to enough of it that I probably have more of it than your average Econ BA. That doesn't mean that I'm right, just because I have some sheep's skin. I may be wrong.

I was not making allusions to implicit/explicit opportunity costs. At least, I don't think so. I'm thinking of the costs an FLGS faces. Obviously, it's not as simple as this: FLGSs try to make as much space available to those who want to come play games in their establishments. But they face marginal decisions. Do they invest the floor space in a really awesome minis table, or in some cheap fold-out Rubbermaid tables on which you can play MtG. (My locals have both, but they may have to decide on the next one, or to reallocate.) So, the opportunity cost of the next gaming table is not just the cost of buying that table, but the non-opportunity to have that space occupied by the other table. (One of my locals has some 4x4 pieces of plywood with 2x4s nailed on the back so they can sit on the Rubbermaid tables without sliding.)

If they don't see high volumes x profit margins on minis products, compared to the larger amount of space that minis gaming tables take up, they're going to go full-bore Rubbermaid, rather than as many minis tables as they have.

On the production possibilities curve, they're going to invest in more of the MtG and less in the minis. all of a sudden, I can't host a 16-person X-Wing tournament anymore, because they can't make the table space anymore. They'd have liked to have done so, but they had to rationally choose for MtG.

Now, if they get a boost in sales volume, because several former online purchasers decided - *you know what, when I got a 30% discount on the expansions, I just couldn't justify not buying from CSI. Now that the discount is only 10%, I should really just pony up and spend that money to at FLGS.* Now the FLGS is making more bank on the expansions, because he has an increased volume of sales.

From the FLGSs perspective, all of a sudden minis are making her/him more money - you know what, let's get those 4x4s and nail some 2x4s to them, and have that 16+ person tournament. Or, better still, compete with that other FLGS by getting more awesome minis tables than those other FLGSs have. Also, let's get more air freshener to get some of the 'Eau de MtG' outta here.

The point being - it's not make bank or bust, it's do the things that help mini games thrive or give up on them. We certainly have a few stores that gave mini games a try and gave up. (It's really fine, we have more than enough, but we're still a bit crunched for space against the MtG players.)

One of the things that really bugs me about all this is that FFG produces my favorite games and I really enjoy their rules sets, production values and so on. If the price goes up too much, then they are limiting what I am willing to spend enjoying their products. I know they want to increase the 'value' of their products but i don't think this is the way to go about it. I won't play a game more because it costs $100, I'll play it more because I enjoy it. If I paid $100 on a game I didn't really enjoy, then I'd be pretty resentful that I didn't get that game for say $70 as I could have online prior to this move by asmodee.

Yeah, that's part of their luxury-product argument. They may have a point there, but they may not. I'm not sanguine on that aspect of their case. The core of the argument is that you're not going to Professor/Admiral Nelson* out of here, if you can't get the 30% discount anymore. You're going to bite the bullet and buy the same stuff at the 15% discount (or whatever).

Their hope is that when you're grumping your way over to the FLGS to buy some Armada in person, you run into someone else buying some Armada. You decide to throw down a game in front of the kids playing MtG. You gripe about how much Armada costs, and the MtG kid not only laughs at you, but asks if he can play with you, because your game is cheaper than he is. You say that you would like to play with him, but he really has to bathe first.

Anyway, that's the argument.

*I'm coining that as a verb.