Prev: Re: [OT] Regional Idiom Next: Re: [OT] Regional Idiom

Club 100 ghurka's: that second failed batch

From: Frits Kuijlman <frits@k...>
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 09:09:15 +0200
Subject: Club 100 ghurka's: that second failed batch

Just to start a small discussion, and maybe to try again...

The first batch of club100 ghurka's went very well. Even Jon is
producing them now, so there is some commercial viability in
them. However, as far as I can remember far less then the current
club100 limits were required to get the project started.

I made an attempt at a second batch, but that was a miserable
failure:-) So, why was this the case?
- The wrong figures were proposed?
- Too many figures were proposed?
- People want to buy finished figures, but do not want to commit to
  something they don't know will ever be there?
- Not enough publicity?

I suspect the second option. I see the same thing with games at
Columbia Games and GMT. They languish a long time, and only when
numbers are starting to get significant there is a quick increase to
the required limit.

Publicity is probably also a problem. We could humbly ask Nic and Jon
to place references with the currently available ghurkas.

So, I am willing to try again, but to get this to work we have to
limit the number of proposed entries in the club100. We also have to
work with the condition that one entry will get 4 variants.

I am interested in a prone figure(that is, laying on his belly) with a
sniper rifle. This would probably mean one entry with prone figures:
sniper, spotter, rocket launcher. Things like that.

There are already some poses present: standing, walking,
kneeling. This means we can probably ask for an entry with heavy
weapons, or one with more 'normal' infantry. All can be variants of
current poses.

Nic can probably comment on what is doable/allowable.

So, is there anybody else interested in trying for more ghurkas again?

Cheers,
	Frits
-- 
Frits Kuijlman					    frits2@cistron.nl
Delft, The Netherlands
The next Murphy Mania will be in Spring 2005, and not in Autumn 2004.

Prev: Re: [OT] Regional Idiom Next: Re: [OT] Regional Idiom