So if you missed out on the imperial agent Crane rank you can pick it up on miniature market for 20$, i find this very wrong since it is a free model being sold by a retailer, but for those who miss out it is another chance to get a limited availability model. CB should do something about those rare bonus models being sold by retailers crap like this is why other companies don't do the bonus model thing.
True i never liked much the preorder exclusive crap CB pulls it is a cheap marketing tactic to boost sales, which is not the problem here, the fact that a free model CB did not charge a cent is sold by the retailer.
should be sold with whatever remaining Pre-order stock they have, selling it own its own is just a dick move
How recently did they put those up? That was the preorder bonus for Angel's 2nd book, right? Have they just been sitting on those minis for a year and a half?
not sure how long have they sold it, i was just checking the page for the next month preorder and pick up the tunguska starter, when i saw the agent from angels book and the KHD druze from HS n3
The answer is a definite yes largely because of a combination of the wording of your question and the substantial implications of a "no" answer. If you think no is an appropriate answer then you ALSO by extension believe that individual gamers should not have the right to resell limited edition models that are also their own personal property, effectively demanding that actually none of us are allowed to truly own items bought from CB and CB should be permitted to eternally control what we do with items they exchange for money. And at that point we live in a dystopian future where CB shuts down the used miniatures market entirely by just telling you what you are allowed to do with the collection of models you have provisionally rented off them.
the difference between selling a second hand item and presumably withholding a product from your customers to split and resell is vast
Its the same as shops splitting multi packs of snacks, it's poor form but given the wooliness of the exclusivity of the LE Joan from Cb/Ag I don't begrudge this one being sold on.
First of all, who says they "withheld" it? Is that the thing you think makes price fixing OK? What if they are attempting to recoup costs for an item that they failed to sell stock of initially? Is it OK then? Seems like a kinda... shallow and emotive difference at best... What then if an individual buys more than one, gasp maybe even two or three of a limited time only item? Are they cheating or "withholding" the product from another customer? How is that different to them buying one and selling it later without intending to? What if they did that all along intending to sell one later on? Oh my god what if they did that intending to sell BOTH later on! How can you police that? How can you tell the difference? Why SHOULD you tell the difference? What number what scale what degree of impossible to determine intent is the appropriate boundary to initiate price fixing and mechanisms of artificial market scarcity previously considered as detrimental to consumer rights and a functional economy? And how is that different to a store that bought these items choosing to sell those items, that they own by law, by whatever means they can manage to, or by whatever means they deem most profitable? How do you plan to police such finicky differentiation? What possible law could you write that would appropriately differentiate in a way that didn't trample consumer rights, shut down retailers, and sabotage what little free markets manage to do right? Do you understand why recommended retail prices are a thing and very specifically restricted to a mere recommendation if even that? There is a long history of law and social/economic thought behind why most modern nations do not permit sellers to dictate the pricing and usage of the items they have sold to others. If you throw that out the window you basically have no rights as an owner of property and the basic premise of free market theory can no longer function to efficiently deliver what people want at prices they can afford.
i think you don't understand why there is NOT FOR SALE written on those models they are intended as a reward for preorders only it is not like the books are unavailable or out of print no retailer pay even a cent for those models, i'm all for them making money but selling models intended as rewards is just wrong and a bad business practice.
I hope you never read the EULA on your phone contract, music download or any other digital product. I want to add that GW dropped almost 10 years of litigation into trying to stomp on retailers for doing things like split box, and 2nd hand sales. I don't like what MM has done here, it has defiantly ensured that I wont support them as it feels like trying to just cheat CB, who provided the miniatures free of charge out of some much deserved revenue for amazing model.
They aren't exactly doing it with recent miniatures - there is no separate brawler listing - if you want that, you have to buy some of their stock of books. If, in a year, they still have a pallet of books+minis that nobody bought... I'm 100% in favor of them trying to move the miniature for whoever wants it.
It's there because the original seller wants to break modern economics for their own benefit, and the best that they can legally do is print some words on the product that are unenforceable by law in most countries. Pretty much the same on EULAS on digital and information products, only with the proviso that corporate corruption of international legal systems has made digital products the forefront of the collapse of free market economics and consumer rights because apparently they think the cover of "digital stuff is special!" is enough. But even there... they've barely gotten any theoretical enforcability and mostly haven't actually demonstrated it because of the questionable legal status and sheer impracticality of doing so. Also those models are not free. Nothing that you get exclusively with something you pay for is free. The cost is included in paying for the other thing. No, "preorder bonus" doesn't change that. That just means effectively a price hike for the other thing.
@Eldritch you'd be surprised. The vast majority of contents in EULAs are enforceable, and most of the "not for sale separately" also come with written deals regulating their sales and specifying the consequences of breaking them. Again, harder to prove but pretty damned clear legally. Most of all, what this signifies is that the company selling them is breaking a written agreement with the producing company which for you as a customer translates to shittier guarantees.
Pre-order exclusives are a dirty tactic in videogames, and normalizing them in miniature gaming sets a bad precedent. Trying to apply pressure so people are forced to pick your product up sight unseen or risk "missing out" never leads anywhere good. So I can't say I much mind seeing them go up after the initial pre-order period, and obviously their rarity will fetch them a higher price than a run-of-the-mill mini. I can't see a problem with selling these things after the fact whether you do it as a retailer or as a private seller. At the end of the day, it is a physical product, the retailer paid to have it shipped to them. I don't know the original arrangement under which these minis were given out. Perhaps MM had more minis than books and were sitting on a small stock of them with no real logical way of moving them. If this is the case, selling them off (as they are literally collectors items due to the scarcity of them) seems just fine regardless of what CB's intentions for them was (and since CB's intention was to get people to pre-order the book sight unseen, I find it hard to sympathize). Personally though? I'd rather we see pre-order minis die off in general, because going to a pre-order bonus model is a pretty underhanded and anti-consumerist business practice and one I don't need polluting most of my hobbies.