Rock paper Shotgun on Slitherine and pricing.

[wodin]

There are loads of brand new board wargames that come out at the same price or less than one of the high price titles here..and yet think of the production costs of a boardgame over a PC game a boardgame you get a box full of goodies yet you can't even get a printed manual these days with a PC wargame. Go check the price of some of the GMT titles. I have Bloody April here and the box weighs a ton with all the wargaming goodness thats stuffed in it yet it's just as much a "niche" as any game here.

Tim Stone in my opinion is dead on the money. No matter how good the products are from a company they are capable of doing other things wrong..to overlook it because you enjoy their products is just blind fanaticism.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: vonRocko

"warspite1

Back in the 90's I could have bought Third Axis Fourth Ally for £20-£30. Sadly I could not afford it. To buy new now is over $300 or $125 second hand......

Its a niche market we are in and thats the law of supply and demand. "
That is a supply problem, I doubt, with digital downloads, that supply would be a problem for matrix. The games aren't "rare" or hard to find.

warspite1

The rareness of the product was not the point. The fact that we are in a niche market is.

Why can Amazon sell a book about Romania in WWII at those prices? Why don't I ever see books like that in the bargain basement? It was a rhetorical question but of course its because not a lot of people particularly want to read that kind of book...and those that do are willing to pay.

Computer wargames - no not call of duty shoot 'em up stuff, but proper wargames, strategy games etc -that interest the sort of people that frequent the Matrix site can command a higher price (if the Matrix strategy is to be believed). You average spotty youth is not desperate for WITW or WITE2 - he'll take CoD or Sims or Assassins whatever.

I have no reason to disbelieve the Matrix strategy is sound - they are still around (thank goodness) and assume that they know what they are doing. They cannot sell PON at the price they have recently quoted and expect people to buy it, if - as some people are suggesting - they have totally mucked up their research and 95% of people who will buy it already have.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: wodin

There are loads of brand new board wargames that come out at the same price or less than one of the high price titles here..and yet think of the production costs of a boardgame over a PC game a boardgame you get a box full of goodies yet you can't even get a printed manual these days with a PC wargame. Go check the price of some of the GMT titles. I have Bloody April here and the box weighs a ton with all the wargaming goodness thats stuffed in it yet it's just as much a "niche" as any game here.

Tim Stone in my opinion is dead on the money. No matter how good the products are from a company they are capable of doing other things wrong..to overlook it because you enjoy their products is just blind fanaticism.

warspite1

But wodin I am not "ignoring what they do wrong because I enjoy their products".

Where I think Matrix are wrong I say so - and I have mentioned my frustration with EiA many times - but, at the risk of flogging a horse that died, was buried and has thoroughly decomposed by now, I do not see what Matrix are doing differently to any other for-profit company with shareholders and investors to report to. They sell at where the market is. They have every right to do that.

If Matrix thought that every game developed would be worth $1.50 after 3-years, how much longer would they be in this game? I don't know the answer to that for a fact, but I can guess.

[rodney727]

Make no mistake THEY DID NO RESEARCH REGARDING THE MARKET PRICE of this game. They admitted this on that forum. And while it is true that m/s has every right to sell any game at any price they want too. I have other issues I have that I pointed out. As a paying customer I demand much better customer service from them.. I feel like I'm feeding a heard of old goats with banter .

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: vonRocko

"warspite1

Back in the 90's I could have bought Third Axis Fourth Ally for £20-£30. Sadly I could not afford it. To buy new now is over $300 or $125 second hand......

Its a niche market we are in and thats the law of supply and demand. "
That is a supply problem, I doubt, with digital downloads, that supply would be a problem for matrix. The games aren't "rare" or hard to find.

warspite1

The rareness of the product was not the point. The fact that we are in a niche market is.

Why can Amazon sell a book about Romania in WWII at those prices? Why don't I ever see books like that in the bargain basement? It was a rhetorical question but of course its because not a lot of people particularly want to read that kind of book...and those that do are willing to pay.

Computer wargames - no not call of duty shoot 'em up stuff, but proper wargames, strategy games etc -that interest the sort of people that frequent the Matrix site can command a higher price (if the Matrix strategy is to be believed). You average spotty youth is not desperate for WITW or WITE2 - he'll take CoD or Sims or Assassins whatever.

I have no reason to disbelieve the Matrix strategy is sound - they are still around (thank goodness) and assume that they know what they are doing. They cannot sell PON at the price they have recently quoted and expect people to buy it, if - as some people are suggesting - they have totally mucked up their research and 95% of people who will buy it already have.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: rogo727

Make no mistake THEY DID NO RESEARCH REGARDING THE MARKET PRICE of this game. They admitted this on that forum. And while it is true that m/s has every right to sell any game at any price they want too. I have other issues I have that I pointed out. As a paying customer I demand much better customer service from them.. I feel like I'm feeding a heard of old goats with banter .

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: vonRocko

"warspite1

Back in the 90's I could have bought Third Axis Fourth Ally for £20-£30. Sadly I could not afford it. To buy new now is over $300 or $125 second hand......

Its a niche market we are in and thats the law of supply and demand. "
That is a supply problem, I doubt, with digital downloads, that supply would be a problem for matrix. The games aren't "rare" or hard to find.

warspite1

The rareness of the product was not the point. The fact that we are in a niche market is.

Why can Amazon sell a book about Romania in WWII at those prices? Why don't I ever see books like that in the bargain basement? It was a rhetorical question but of course its because not a lot of people particularly want to read that kind of book...and those that do are willing to pay.

Computer wargames - no not call of duty shoot 'em up stuff, but proper wargames, strategy games etc -that interest the sort of people that frequent the Matrix site can command a higher price (if the Matrix strategy is to be believed). You average spotty youth is not desperate for WITW or WITE2 - he'll take CoD or Sims or Assassins whatever.

I have no reason to disbelieve the Matrix strategy is sound - they are still around (thank goodness) and assume that they know what they are doing. They cannot sell PON at the price they have recently quoted and expect people to buy it, if - as some people are suggesting - they have totally mucked up their research and 95% of people who will buy it already have.

warspite1

But if that is true - and reading the responses by Matrix it would appear they were unaware of the $1.50 and similar sales - whilst that is surprising, that is of no interest to me.

As I say, the question for Matrix is will they be able to move PON at their new price or not - only time will tell, but that's up to them. I am neither an investor or employee of Matrix - I have enough problems of my own to worry about without concerning myself with Matrix sales strategy [;)]

[Challerain]

ORIGINAL: rogo727

Make no mistake THEY DID NO RESEARCH REGARDING THE MARKET PRICE of this game.

I believe they said they priced it the same as it was on the AEGOD site. Why does it matter what it was being sold for on other sites by a different company. Even Johan came on here and didn't realize how cheap they were selling it on Gamersgate.

And I guess I am in the very minority on not really caring how the Easter dale went. 10% of of everything isn't bad.

No company is perfect. Verizon FIOS was rated the top cable company in the US, but if you go to the forums there are lots of people complaining.

[Rtwfreak]

But I don't want to be a guinea pig or paying beta tester either.

But, in essence you are just that when you buy a game retail brand new release day or even week or month. You're a paying beta tester to find them the bugs and ctd's and all that other stuff and you or some other smucks if not you pay the full price to be just that. In my line of business we like to call it "invisible residue" you can't see it before you buy it but it's there and you "know" it's there. Yet, you go ahead and buy it anyway knowing full well there's going to be issues and flaws for months to come.

[Sarge]

ORIGINAL: Perturabo

Too bad that NWS no longer sells Matrix Games games.

I’m still trying to figure out how the bean counters figured this benefits Matrix ? they couldn’t have asked for better (FREE) advertisement or endorsement for that matter……NWS was always plugging Matrix new releases across the community why cut them out ?

I ‘ve spent a boatload more on matrix titles at NWS then I ever have at the Matrix store, many I wouldn’t have even bothered with despite the discount pricing NWS, same as with GMT HPS.

good luck with it..........[8|]

[barkman44]

Because you asked your question after his post and I stated what I said because you apparently did not
understand the principles of the free market.
We do dictate the price of products.

[parusski]

I like homemade strawberry-banana ice cream.

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: barkorn45

Because you asked your question after his post and I stated what I said because you apparently did not
understand the principles of the free market.
We do dictate the price of products.

So, why did the dealer turn me down when I offered $1,000 for a 2013 Mustang GT500? Or even a 2009? Being that we dictate the price of products?

[Hertston]

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

So, why did the dealer turn me down when I offered $1,000 for a 2013 Mustang GT500? Or even a 2009? Being that we dictate the price of products?

'We' = plural and 'me' = singular. The 'market' assumes the existence of the former. In this case, your $1000 is rejected because the dealer is reasonably confident somebody else will offer more and can afford to leave the car unsold until they do. In the unlikely event the car remains unsold at a higher price, your $1000 will become increasing attractive. Don't hold your breath, though [;)]

Things get messy selling games online because, unlike that Mustang, there is to all intents and purposes an infinite supply of the product. So, sticking with your scenario, the dealer could sell you the Mustang for $1000 and then sell the identical car to a dozen other people unlucky enough not have spotted the car when you did for $50k apiece. Which, oddly enough, is a rather better analogy to PoN than I thought it would be!

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: Hertston

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

So, why did the dealer turn me down when I offered $1,000 for a 2013 Mustang GT500? Or even a 2009? Being that we dictate the price of products?

'We' = plural and 'me' = singular. The 'market' assumes the existence of the former. In this case, your $1000 is rejected because the dealer is reasonably confident somebody else will offer more and can afford to leave the car unsold until they do. In the unlikely event the car remains unsold at a higher price, your $1000 will become increasing attractive. Don't hold your breath, though [;)]

Things get messy selling games online because, unlike that Mustang, there is to all intents and purposes an infinite supply of the product. So, sticking with your scenario he could sell you the Mustang for $1000, and then sell it to a dozen other people for $50k apiece. Which, oddly enough, is a rather better analogy than I thought it would be!

I am well aware of the difference. OK, so *we* go and do try it? Why cant' we? It's either a free market or it isn't


We don't have the control of the market some think we have. Especially such a narrow one as this. Cut the price too low, and they can decide that it just isn't worth it to continue. Either supporting the old as well as making new ones

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: parusski

I like homemade strawberry-banana ice cream.

warspite1

What the......????

Why did you have to go and say that?? Here we are having a perfectly reasonable debate about Matrix pricing policy, economics and the free market and you have to go and toss in that highly incendiary, trolling remark.

I don't know who you think you are parusski but you need to watch your step with your strawberry-banana ice cream %^&* - and then compounding the crime by throwing the "homemade" grenade into the mix. Your getting ahead of yourself and now your ego's writing cheques your body can't cash.

I expect better of you and remind you to read Ambrose's 1924 tour-de-force:

How mentioning homemade strawberry-banana ice-cream on internet forums can lead to global disaster. Ambrose. S (1924) CRA Publishing.

[Sarge]

I’m starting to get an idea why David H leaving Matrix was never announced, many here have been supporting Matrix and Company for a decade + and understood their strategy /pricing . It’s becoming exceedingly tuff to make that argument with the current library of Slitherine and Matrix titles.

“We” are a small owner/operated “niche” hobby publisher was understandable back in the lean early days , this policy or argument is no longer valid to me or should be to anyone that’s been around to see the evolution of this company, hell I remember the days I would pick up the phone and just shoot the $hit with David. I understand that atmosphere is gone but also understand along with that is any pricing leverage imho ………………….. it wasn’t just the game I was purchasing , it was a small hobby store and the people involved I was investing in.

freemarket has nothing to do with it, I expect to pay a premium at “mom ‘n pops” , honestly I no longer see Matrix storefront in that light ………………………….just saying

[jday305]

I have just read the comments on this post as I have been somewhat busy over the last few days. So here is my two cents worth. As a small business owner that provides a service as it's main source of revenue, you match your prices based on what the local market will tolerate. If your prices are towards the high end then your compitition will look more attractive to your likely customers. If your prices are at the low end then the customer base will filter towards using you; depending on such elements as the quality of your provided service and name recognition. Matrix may also be fishing to see how much interest there is in their products before evaluating whether to alter cost. As a new member of this forum and Matrix games, I have to say that price will only make me question buying a matrix game if the customer reviews are more towards the negative end. If the reviews show a high customer satisfaction, then I will consider buying regardless of the cost. I usually will be one of those who wait 3-6 months before buying a new title regardless of the cost or seller just to get this feedback.

[Ron]

Interesting topic and I think the RPS article is spot on - there has been a noticeable shift with this publisher since Slitherine bought Matrix. Perhaps nostalgia on my part but it no longer feels part of a wargaming community, but simply business.

I see people keep interchanging Matrix with Slitherine. Matrix is no more, Slitherine bought them out. There is a new emperor - Slitherine Group.

I love AGEOD, they make some great games; I bought PON upon release, it is not one of them. I think Johan in the Pricing thread nailed it on the reasons why.

Ian McNeil's comments on people valuing games more if they pay more, intent to forcibly shutdown the ability to purchase said game from elsewhere (monopoly), perception of demos and outlets like Steam are frankly bizarre imo. Slitherine's intent and attack not too long ago to go after 'someone' who dared give negative reviews of one of their games was distasteful. They are not one of the good guys in my book.

I think people are beginning to see the elephant in the living room

[wodin]

Have to agree Ron sadly. When some of the old guard (check some of the join dates) are starting to have issues..something is up...

Funny their perception of Steam..yet do I see Panzer Corps up on greenlight..surely hypocrisy.

ORIGINAL: Ron

Interesting topic and I think the RPS article is spot on - there has been a noticeable shift with this publisher since Slitherine bought Matrix. Perhaps nostalgia on my part but it no longer feels part of a wargaming community, but simply business.

I see people keep interchanging Matrix with Slitherine. Matrix is no more, Slitherine bought them out. There is a new emperor - Slitherine Group.

I love AGEOD, they make some great games; I bought PON upon release, it is not one of them. I think Johan in the Pricing thread nailed it on the reasons why.

Ian McNeil's comments on people valuing games more if they pay more, intent to forcibly shutdown the ability to purchase said game from elsewhere (monopoly), perception of demos and outlets like Steam are frankly bizarre imo. Slitherine's intent and attack not too long ago to go after 'someone' who dared give negative reviews of one of their games was distasteful. They are not one of the good guys in my book.

I think people are beginning to see the elephant in the living room

[U2]

I have no problems with the pricing of PON, Slitherine/Matrix pricing in general (old/new titles), nor have I noticed a less friendly company since Slitherine took over. The above has seen both companies grow which has meant many titles for our hobby to enjoy.

I do understand that they are making more money than they otherwise would have with the current pricing model but I don't care. I continue making the guys in U2 even richer as well. I enjoy what they do and I pay for it.

[rodney727]

This is very interesting. Can someone point me in the right direction about the personal attack as I would love to see slitherines customer service skills put to the test. Again when you have the CEO as your main customer service relations guy you have major problems.

ORIGINAL: Ron

Interesting topic and I think the RPS article is spot on - there has been a noticeable shift with this publisher since Slitherine bought Matrix. Perhaps nostalgia on my part but it no longer feels part of a wargaming community, but simply business.

I see people keep interchanging Matrix with Slitherine. Matrix is no more, Slitherine bought them out. There is a new emperor - Slitherine Group.

I love AGEOD, they make some great games; I bought PON upon release, it is not one of them. I think Johan in the Pricing thread nailed it on the reasons why.

Ian McNeil's comments on people valuing games more if they pay more, intent to forcibly shutdown the ability to purchase said game from elsewhere (monopoly), perception of demos and outlets like Steam are frankly bizarre imo. Slitherine's intent and attack not too long ago to go after 'someone' who dared give negative reviews of one of their games was distasteful. They are not one of the good guys in my book.

I think people are beginning to see the elephant in the living room