That sounds crazy, but it's not. When you are #1 making a consumer product, having a credible and newsworthy competitor is not a bad thing, and can have an overall positive effect in growing the market.
I have no doubt in my mind that GW is largely responsible for creating the ecosystem today that allows other miniature companies to flourish, by pushing the hobby into mainstream consciousness. However, not having a similar sized competitor means that most of the marketing effort to maintain the industry's size (for their own good, as well as for the smaller players) rests firmly on their shoulders. It can be only good for GW for Privateer Press to become a much larger player, for instance, and start having a more major retail presence (say, on the way to an IPO). This creates news and has a much larger chance of being picked up by mainstream media, much like the age old DC / Marvel rivalry.
Interesting. I was browsing through game theory concepts (such as the Nash Equilibrium) when I stumbled upon two opposite but tandem principles that would illustrate the DC/Marvel model, and would be necessary for GW to flourish in this manner. Product Differentiation in combination with Hotelling's Law.
Hotelling's Law states that in an industry it is beneficial to a company to make their product or service as similar as possible to their competitors in order to secure an equal share of the market. In this case I wouldn't argue for Privateer Press or another miniature company to copy the look and feel of GW models, but focus on creating a similar business model. For instance: sprues containing multiple models for a unit, legal experts with a massive budget, individual paint line, *large scale battle.
*Other miniature companies and even other players try to persuade players to convert to a game system that uses fewer models and is more of a skirmish set. This can be done and is a prime example of Product Differentiation, but it takes a damned lot of work. If your customer is looking for a product it's easier to provide them with it than convince them to try something else.
A small company making a similar system to GW's has theoretical potential to grow to ~50% of the market. That's a lot of growth potential, albeit at a cost to GW's market share. It's risky of course, and would require some significant investment, but if a foothold could be established then it would only take time and a keen ear to eventually secure a large portion of the market.
The other factor, Product Differentiation, takes the form in the models and superficial rules. Your objective is to provide a system that is in the same vein as your competitor, but populate it with small and somewhat insubstantial differences that appeal to your market. Do you have a gothic theme, a soviet theme, or a vietnam theme? GW did something ingenious by giving each army it's own theme, which appealed to a larger audience. A true competitor would have to provide armies with clearly defined themes, though they don't have to be the same themes. (superficial change) These superficial changes are how a company outmaneuvers their competitor.
Take cell phone providers. Verizon, AT&T, etc. They all provide the same services, but the differences lie in the service plans (how many minutes, how much texting, how much data, etc.) and which phone models are sold are what dictate their growing market shares. They all provide phones, and smartphones, and all sell texting, data, and calling minutes but in different increments and in different packages. (AT&T is killing themselves by NOT keeping a similar infrastructure for signal availability compared to other service providers, and I believe this could be their death knell if they don't shore it up soon.)
Something phone service providers have done that would happen between GW and a competitor is drum up interest. Speculation, advertisement, and competition. An advertisement by a competitor that boosts it's customer base will boost the GW customer base. People introduced to miniatures learn about other miniature companies as well. Any GW advertisements will increase their customer base, but their competitor as well. Given, the company making the advertisement tends to get more of the market share, but it still helps their competitor. Since both companies will
have to advertise to stay relevant and compete against each other, they will both contribute to new customer growth.
GW should stop trying to stomp the crap out of every company that is close to theirs, and instead laud them. Invite the competition and then prove how their product is superior in
small ways.
