Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (
More info?)
"Myrmidon" <ImNot@home.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1cfe1d8be505174a98a56b@news-server.woh.rr.com...
> In article <3fipcuF82lf1U1@individual.net>, Spack,
> news@worldofspack.co.uk Varfed out the following in Timo speak...
>>
>> "Jody Hodgson" <jody.hodgson@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>> news:IzNke.72$a5.0@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
>> >
>> > "Playa" <hurlgen40k@aol.com> wrote in message
>> > news:1116961636.744068.127620@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>> >>
>> >> . . . and what have you done with the *real* GW?
>> >>
>> >> http://uk.games-workshop.com/chapterapproved/catachan-rules/1/
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Playa
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > Old codex as PDF, uncharacteristic behavour for GW isn't it!
>>
>> Not just old - they've updated it to bring into line with 4th edition and
>> the current IG codex. If they can do it for the catachans, it's looking
>> very
>> likely that the rumours about them doing it for Tau (albeit in print
>> form,
>> not pdf) are not so far fetched after all, which pushes orks/eldar
>> (whichever one was rumoured to be out later this year) back to sometime
>> next
>> year.
>>
>> Dan
>
> One wonders if they've (GW) decided to give Jungle Fighters
> minimal support? Anyone know if / how well the plastic rambos sold, or
> more importantly, how well they've sold once the plastic Cadians came
> out? If they weren't a terribly popular army, then I can understand
> the move. At least GW is giving the Rambo players from 3rd a nod with a
> (FREE!) 4th Ed mini-codex rather than just dropping support all
> together, which is a smarter business and customer P.R. strategy than in
> years past.
>
> As for the Tau, them getting a new update would make my friend
> happy as he's just getting into collecting a Tau army and he's wondering
> how the new Nid Codex will tip the scales in terms of balance.
>
> As for pushing other codex back - why would it of necessity do
> that? Unless they're planning a lot of new minis for each army (which
> they may or may not be doing) I'm not sure why GW couldn't release more
> than one codex at a time - particularly for armys not getting a lot of
> new figures. I can see them wanting to stretch out the fan-fare over
> new minis / army list release (and thus hopefully pimp out more sales).
> But Tau have a fairly 'new' series of figures compaired to other races.
By "pushes back" I didn't mean updating Codex: Tau was delaying the
orks/eldar codex release. What I meant was that to fit into line with GW's
push for 2 xenos and 1 marine codex each year, they would have to release a
xenos codex after BT. By releasing Codex: Tau with a few tweaks, it gives
them a few more months to work on the orks or eldar codex, whichever is
supposed to be next. They keep to their announced "schedule", and get a bit
of breathing space to work on the next big codex.
I guess there are good reasons for not bringing out 2 large releases at the
same time. If say 50% (and I'm plucking this figure out of the air) of the
production is on pumping out new products to coincide with a new codex
release, then pushing 2 at the same time is a bad idea - it leaves no
production capability for continuing to output existing ranges. Then there's
the matter of shelf space (the GW stores near me tend to have more space
allocated to new stuff), and shipping it all out to the stores (double the
number of boxes of new stuff to send out at the same time). Also by
spreading out releases it smooths out the cashflow. I'm no financial or
business expert (I'm not even a financial novice, anyone who sees my
expenditure compared to my income would spot that straight away :\) so I
might be talking complete rubbish.
Dan
an.2005.05.24.23.54.38.491337@sig.invalid...
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram