With trade, deficits, and tariffs pushed to the forefront, thoughts turn toward the effect on wargamers brought about by any such policy changes. Already, the boardgame industry is feeling the impact of these supply chain changes. How many miniatures wargamers are subject to the tug of international trade arrangements outside of currency fluctuations on international purchases?
To gain some insight into this question, I turn to the WSS 2024 Great Wargaming Survey (GWS) for possible answers. Fortunately, there is a relevant question added into the 2024 GWS. That question asks,
When you make a purchase online, do you regularly make purchases outside your home country?
The word "regularly" could be open to interpretation. I answered this question in the affirmative. When I make purchases, these purchases are regularly from international vendors. While I frequently purchase figures from international vendors, delivered cost definitely enters into the calculation. Now, many foreign manufacturers retain online vendors in a wargamer's home country from which orders can be placed. Foreign goods are still purchased but these goods are imported and then sold through domestic channels. To me, these purchases would not qualify as "online purchases outside of your home country."
Of the 5,995 survey responses, Figure 1 illustrates a roughly 50/50 mix of "Yes" and "No" responses. Slightly more survey respondents keep their regular online purchases to domestic vendors.
 |
Figure 1 |
This view does not provide much in the way of interesting insight, though, does it? We end up with a coin flip between having regular foreign purchases or not. More exploration is warranted. In this analysis, two familiar attributes are singled out for further examination. These attributes are Primary Interest and Location.
Primary Interest
With the Fantasy/Sci-Fi genre having seemingly more domestic points of sale opportunities (at least in the USA), analysis turns to examining foreign purchases by a wargamer's primary interest. As in past analyses, primary interest includes three groupings: Fantasy/Sci-Fi, Historical, and Mixed. If the Fantasy/Sci-Fi genre has more domestic points of sale, then differences ought to appear between groups.
Looking at Figure 2, wargamers having either Historical or Mixed primary interests still show about a 50/50 mix of regular foreign purchases. Focusing on Fantasy/Sci-Fi, here, a difference is seen. Of those respondents having a primary interest in Fantasy/Sci-Fi gaming, only 40% regularly purchase from foreign sources. Results seem to support (well, at least not dismiss) the notion that this genre has more domestic points of sale.
 |
Figure 2 |
LocationWhen diving into the results with an eye toward a wargamer's home location or home country/region, Figure 3 highlights a remarkable result.
 |
Figure 3 |
While the USA/Canada still sees a split leaning toward regular online foreign purchases (53.6%) over domestic (46.4%) online purchases, foreign purchases comprise only 16.4% in the UK/Ireland respondents. For the Rest of World (non-UK/North America), about 70% of online purchases are directed toward foreign vendors. Of course, if total sales are included, a different picture may emerge.
To me, this is an unexpected result. With the disparity between UK and non-UK foreign trade, where are non-UK wargamers sending much of their foreign business? Seeing that roughly five in six UK/Ireland wargamers do not make online foreign purchases regularly, is making a leap to infer that UK/Ireland vendors are the primary source for miniatures worldwide a step too far? If true and these sample results hold for the larger population, the UK may be the center of the wargaming trade. What are the implications of any increased trade restrictions or costs on the hobby, in general, and to UK vendors in particular? While UK wargamers may not be significantly affected by international trade, UK vendors and miniatures wargamers outside of the UK could experience some turbulence.
Will the 2025 GWS provide a clearer picture to answers to these questions when it rolls out in August? Perhaps the 2025 survey could aid in addressing these topics by adding a question on the foreign country of purchase? At least then we would know the direction of trade flow. Likewise, a question asking about relative frequency of foreign purchases comparing 2024 to 2025 might be insightful.
More questions remain on evaluating spending tendencies from the 2024 results, but those answers remain for another time and another analysis.