Spartan business model

[Fracas]

there has been a lot of grumbling about spartan, at least on line
1. hard to get on shelves
2. failed deliveries of announced items
3. introduction of new games at the expense of old
4. failure to maintain product lines, at least with DW, FsA, FsPf

while i understand at heart SG is a model companies making money from models rather than rules
but shouldn't this mean they maintain and update new rules for new models, as well as non-in-game reasons to buy models? like background books, novels, campaign, etc

IMO this is something GW did very well, provided you with all the reasons possible to buy new models: fluff, rules, cool; their problem was continuous price increase per standard model as well as with ever larger/more complex models
i am not starting a rumor but when i look at spartan's path, its future doesn't look too rosy for me
and using a kickstarter format to generate more funds to maintain a core product line, to me also seem shaky (and being cynical, allow then to be vague about new product availability with their announcement, yet "responsive" to surveyed fans comments)

like what i did with the other SG, specialist games, i am buying models i really like while they are still available

[Charbe86]

There doesn't seem to be any effort to increase the player base for their core games.  They also seem to be heading away from naval gaming, which seems to be where they have the least competition.

[Dakkar]

Adding onto this discussion with recent news...

Pound is back up against the dollar, a trend that may well continue.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/pound-to-dollar-exchange-rate-sterling-makes-strong-gains-as-donald-trump-heads-for-us-election-a3390791.html

So in the States, we never really saw the weaker pound lead to price drops for Spartan stuff, at least not enough that I really perceived it. In fact, I think there was a currency conversion fee on my last order - I'll need to verify, but that's what I recall seeing.
So there's business practice change #1 for US customers => Either set US Dollar prices, or give us some consistency in Pounds to Dollars.

Last bit isn't really a business practice, so much as the urgency for better Retailer outreach.
Colorado Min Wage increase was approved yesterday, which means our LGS will see immediate increased costs for the staff wages. And that long before any increased customer spending makes its mark (if it does at all).
This means slow-selling games, niche games, etc will be "on the bubble" for the LGS - and Spartan falls into that category.

This may have happened in many locales, so Spartan isn't just challenged to impress us, the players and Vanguards. They must also give their remaining LGS outlets a renewed reason to stock them.

I'd hate to see Spartan go the way of Crocodile Games...

[Ryjak]

The only "local" store I know which carries SG products has stopped buying/stocking product; they're offering a discount to encourage people to help clear out their SG inventory and make room for other products.

X-Wing seems like the most successful miniature wargame today.  A big part of it is the very popular IP, but I'd say the CCG business model is a large factor as well.  This model strongly encourages players to buy one of everything to get the cards, and is a proven way to sell product.  Coupled with a a Tournament circuit which is trying to emulate Magic's system, as well as quality pre-painted models, and you end up with a game firing on all cylinders.

Long term, though, I don't see how they can sustain this business model.  Every release has the potential to unbalance the game into non-competitiveness (which will ruin the Tournament scene), and I haven't seen FFG really do anything to "patch" existing rules.  Further, they've hit a soft wall with the IP, and are running out of source material they can use for new products.

That said, I expected GW to collapse years ago, and it still hasn't happened... mostly due to momentum.

SG has none of these advantages though, so I can only see it falling away like many others.

[Dakkar]

The only "local" store I know which carries SG products has stopped buying/stocking product; they're offering a discount to encourage people to help clear out their SG inventory and make room for other products.

With the somewhat LGS hostile initial KS announcement, then half-hearted and vague LGS option amendment to that KS, I fear our local outlets may go that way as well. :-/

I played Bab-5 for years after Mongoose tanked it, so I'm guessing I'd keep at least a fleet or three regardless. But I'll be mighty disappointed all-round.

It's fortunate for SG that the Battlefleet Gothic re-launch is still a good ways off... if the Blood Bowl reactions are anything to go by. Our LGS did a Small Business Saturday Sale, coupled with the BB release (which sold out), and improved their one-day sales record by over 25%. SG is offering poor incentive compared to stuff like that.

[Charbe86]

I wonder how much buisness they're missing out on by not having a core of fluff for they're games.  I know it gets brought up a lot that it would be nice to have more fluff, but it would also create great buisness opportunities, GW for example has the black library, numerous PC games, and several good RPG games. 

FSA would be great for an RTS, I believe the homeworld engine is still open source, and a space sim, a genre that has nearly died out. 

DW would be fantastic as a CIV style TBS or 4X, as well as being a great, and unique, setting for novels. 

The best part is, once the initial core of fluff is built, Spartan wouldn't have to devote any of their scarce recources to these projects, while broadening the market for their core games. 

[Dakkar]

they're missing out on by not having a core of fluff for their games

Its a shame too, because for a while they had Craig Gallant of the D6 Generation podcast writing their fluff, and it was good. But they never sustained that enough to make a difference in the core materials.

GW has ALWAYS survived for a few main reasons - they pay the concept and full image artists first, the sculptors second, the writers third, and THEN worry about rules and other fiddly bits.

[Ryjak]

Nothing says you can't make a solid game first, and then flesh it out with artwork and stories.   I'm sure someone with more gaming experience could site at least one example.

[Fracas]

Imo the four legs needed for miniature game success are:
1. Appeal of the mini ( quality of the sculpt and story / fluff associated)
2. Accessibility of the mini ( pocket book affordability and shelf availability)
3. Playability of the mini ( rules and gaming format)
4. Responsiveness of the mini maker

SG have deficiency in the first three