4786
Post by: legoburner
I'd not searched for 'games workshop' on google trends - an index of how much people are searching for given terms. The graph is rather aligned with perceptions of everything else. This is a pretty good measure of GW's popularity because it does not cross over into video game territory and would be largely made up of people already invested in the brand going to their website to purchase stuff:
http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=games%20workshop&cmpt=q
It's more a measure of their web traffic than any business-related data, but still a very consistent slide down.
47598
Post by: motyak
That's really interesting, I hadn't ever thought of checking that out. Thanks lego
9594
Post by: RiTides
Genius, lego! That really is an interesting and stark tend.
116
Post by: Waaagh_Gonads
47598
Post by: motyak
What was released in June 2011? All I can find is that they were leading up to Domination, what else was there?
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
You don't need to do regression analysis on that GW graph to see the general trend.
It supports my view on their financials, which is that the significant price increases in the past few years have not led to any increase in revenue -- i.e. they are simply selling less stuff to fewer customers at higher prices.
Of course what the graph cannot measure is the quality of internet chit-chat about the company. I think we would all agree that the mood on DakkaDakka has become increasingly negative about GW over the past five years.
123
Post by: Alpharius
INFINITY is a little harder to search for especially since Disney released their 'Skylanders' killer...
Any idea on how to effectively use that trend search to get at Infinity the Game by Corvus Belli?
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
I tried searching for Yu Jing on the grounds it is pretty specific to Infinity.
The trend surprisingly is downwards, however perhaps this reflects the introduction of more factions during the period, diluting the importance of Yu Jing which I think was one of five armies at the beginning and two or three new armies have been added.
4786
Post by: legoburner
Infinity is too tough to do as it is too generic.
Here's GW and PP on the same graph (with dakka's most common search term as well):
http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=privateer%20press%2C%20games%20workshop%2C%20dakka%20dakka&cmpt=q
so you can see the relative volumes.
PP is about 8% market share and GW is about 90% still (as of last year), so the graph very roughly tallies with the expected ratio.
44272
Post by: Azreal13
I'm not hugely familiar with the implications of all this, but what could one infer from the fact that the top town in the top location for interest is Nottingham?
77159
Post by: Paradigm
Interesting stuff, though not too surprising. It's fairly obvious in a lot of ways that GW are losing their stranglehold on the market. I'd be interested to see GW vs Mantic.
34906
Post by: Pacific
Interesting thread. I wonder if you would get a better result for PP if you searched for 'Warmachine', although guess there is some comic-book crossover there?
Mantic looks pretty flat-line compared to GW, just because of the sheer volume differential, but if you look at Mantic on their own they are definitely on the upward.
Interesting to note that 2nd most popular country for Mantic searches is Australia - wonder if that's a direct response to GW's pricing strategy there, or simply because Azazelx hasn't added a favourite to his toolbar? 
51769
Post by: Snrub
Jeez. Its MOD city in here. 5 different MODs and an ADMIN.
Dare someone to break a rule... 
Interesting stuff though. Thanks Lego.
35671
Post by: weeble1000
Thanks Lego!
I think it is also important to include "Warhammer" in there too, as I expect GW is more associated with this brand than "Games Workshop."
http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=privateer%20press%2C%20games%20workshop%2C%20dakka%20dakka%2C%20warhammer&cmpt=q
And Warhammer by itself. The trend is broadly similar.
http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=warhammer&cmpt=q
Now, for fun, I did "Imperial Guard" and "Astra Militarum," which in my opinion is a much bigger LOL.
http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=imperial%20guard%2C%20astra%20militarum&cmpt=q
5269
Post by: lord_blackfang
4786
Post by: legoburner
'warhammer' would typically include people who used to like it and want to see what has changed (which also makes up a large chunk of dakka's searches), as well as all of the spinoff videogames and books, whereas 'games workshop' would cover a larger proportion of 'active' gamers and deal more exclusively with the tabletop side of things.
63623
Post by: Tannhauser42
It may be interesting to note that, over the past few years, there have been less and less reasons to actually go to the GW website, unless you just want to purchase something from them. No more Specialist Games, no more hobby articles, no more gaming articles, and even the FAQs are on a different website now.
664
Post by: Grimtuff
 motyak wrote:What was released in June 2011? All I can find is that they were leading up to Domination, what else was there?
This was also the approximate time of GW's "Summer of terror" IIRC. PP conveniently added 10th anniversary bundles to their store at around the same time.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
It is worth understanding that Google Trends is calculated roughly speaking as an average against all search terms, therefore if over 10 years the amount of searching doubles, the amount of searching for Games Workshop could half in comparison while the actual number of searches for Games Workshop stayed at the same level.
Of course we might expect that the more people there are on the internet, the more people would be searching for Games Workshop.
Another possible explanation is that people have moved away from searching for Games Workshop and search for GW instead.
Unfortunately, GW is a relatively common term, so lots of non-Games Workshop items muddy the result.
The "Space Marine" trend line is also interesting.
http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=Space%20Marine&cmpt=q
9969
Post by: Daedleh
As much as I wish the DZ line were accurate, I don't think it is. The upwards trend for Deadzone starts in October 2012, but I don't think it was even announced then. Here is the first official "announcement" (though it is an April Fools joke) that I can find which is 2013. IIRC the first unoffical confirmation was at the Clash of Kings tournament in Feb 2013.
I could've sworn there was a video game called Deadzone released in 2012, which at least the earlier spike would account for, but can't remember what it's called. However, as interest in video games over time dies down, and it wasn't famous enough for me to remember, I suspect that a large portion, if not the majority, of the current trend is Mantics deadzone.
30305
Post by: Laughing Man
You also have the Stephen King novel screwing with that.
9892
Post by: Flashman
This is quite fun...
Skaven are generally more searched for than Necrons (except for November 2011 when the Codex Necrons was released). Who knew?
http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=skaven%2C%20necrons&cmpt=q
By and large though, whatever GW specific term you type in, it's on a downward trajectory.
21196
Post by: agnosto
And the TV series up to about 2007.
4139
Post by: wuestenfux
Well, interesting statistics. Going down on a linear base.
53985
Post by: TheKbob
Most of the other companies are hard to judge as they are private entities relatively closely held to their small sphere of influence. Games Workshop can appear in news articles discussing New Line Cinema deals, video game releases, and financial reports because they are publicly traded. This may be inflating their overall presence in comparison to other war games, but the downward trend may be indicative of something foul.
I really want that financial report.
28365
Post by: OverwatchCNC
9969
Post by: Daedleh
Space Marine was released in September 2011, so yes.
Don't forget that you can change the scale of the graph (top of the page) to better see the trend without the spikes:
http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=privateer%20press%2C%20mantic%2C%20Warmachine%2C%20deadzone%2C%20%2Fm%2F012ywp&date=today%2012-m&cmpt=q
53595
Post by: Palindrome
9 days to go
79243
Post by: Swastakowey
What will the next financial report tell us?
If the company is in decline or if the company has just hit a low point? I dont keep up with this stuff, just wanna know what answers this report may hold.
99
Post by: insaniak
The January report had a definite hit to their bottom line. So the mid-year report will go some way towards establishing whether that was (as Mr Kirby claimed) a one-time aberration from the restructuring of their stores, or the start of a downward slide.
79243
Post by: Swastakowey
Thought so. Should be interesting.
Cheers
2711
Post by: boyd
 insaniak wrote:The January report had a definite hit to their bottom line. So the mid-year report will go some way towards establishing whether that was (as Mr Kirby claimed) a one-time aberration from the restructuring of their stores, or the start of a downward slide.
The period ending in May is their year end. They are a retail company hence the 52/53 week year. Their FY 15 will have a slight bump due to the extra week in the final month of their fiscal year.
47246
Post by: Yonan
Adding "miniatures" as a comparison is *very* interesting. I tried "wargaming" but that probably includes non-tabletop results, though it seems to rise in the "kickstarter" period. "Gaming" in general (video games mainly no doubt) is on the rise. "Board Game" results are static - though the christmas spikes are hilarious.
84409
Post by: KommissarKarl
 Kilkrazy wrote:It is worth understanding that Google Trends is calculated roughly speaking as an average against all search terms, therefore if over 10 years the amount of searching doubles, the amount of searching for Games Workshop could half in comparison while the actual number of searches for Games Workshop stayed at the same level.
Of course we might expect that the more people there are on the internet, the more people would be searching for Games Workshop.
Another possible explanation is that people have moved away from searching for Games Workshop and search for GW instead.
Unfortunately, GW is a relatively common term, so lots of non-Games Workshop items muddy the result.
The "Space Marine" trend line is also interesting.
http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=Space%20Marine&cmpt=q
I would say that the overwealming majority of new internet users over the past 10 years have come from Africa and Asia, areas where the market for GW goods is poor.
Incidentally the trending for Warhammer 40k is pretty steady. It peaks then dips a bit in 2012 but that's it. If you compare it to Games Workshop, they both appear to be trending towards each other. Not sure what to make of that. Maybe the ip is keeping the lore side of it alive as the wargaming interest dwindles.
32159
Post by: jonolikespie
Africa and Asia? What makes you think that?
Almost all of the new games on the market seem to be Europe or the US, and we know from ICV2 that the US is on the rise.
Surely its not entirely a matter of people who are only now accessing the internet driving these trends.
34242
Post by: -Loki-
Infinity the Game seems to match the interest in the game I've seen grow over the years. it also matches their website URL and the only real way to get a hit on their website. But obviously, it does still cross with the dongle game. http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=infinity%20the%20game
23558
Post by: zedmeister
369
Post by: Koppo
Forge World looks pretty flat (with a slight downward trend at the end) showing that it may be isolated from the general GW trend.
I keep wondering if FW could exist as a separate entity from GW? They have the fans, their own production base (but in a GW building), own sculptors, painters writers etc.
494
Post by: H.B.M.C.
 Koppo wrote:I keep wondering if FW could exist as a separate entity from GW? They have the fans, their own production base (but in a GW building), own sculptors, painters writers etc.
You tell me. But the truth is you can use these graphs to prove anything.
55015
Post by: The Shadow
This is really interesting, thanks for sharing, Lego!
I'd never actually heard of Google Trends before, quite an interesting little tool to use actually.
40344
Post by: master of ordinance
Thanks Lego, this is something to see.
In 9 days we will see what bearing it has.
78655
Post by: melkorthetonedeaf
 H.B.M.C. wrote: Koppo wrote:I keep wondering if FW could exist as a separate entity from GW? They have the fans, their own production base (but in a GW building), own sculptors, painters writers etc.
You tell me. But the truth is you can use these graphs to prove anything.
Clearly, people are having less fun, while dying slowly of asphyxiation is relatively stable over time.
I really love Google trends. I was trying to find out why my area was considered a "dead zone" for Privateer Press some time ago, and this would have been a nifty thing to use.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
 jonolikespie wrote:Africa and Asia? What makes you think that?
Almost all of the new games on the market seem to be Europe or the US, and we know from ICV2 that the US is on the rise.
Surely its not entirely a matter of people who are only now accessing the internet driving these trends.
What he is saying is that the growth in internet use has been happening in China and Africa, since Europe and the Americas have been relatively well wired for years.
Chinese and Africans don't search for Games Workshop, but they do search for "Fluffy kittens", "Sex" and so on. Therefore GW's share of the total number searches has declined.
There is possibly something in this, however if you look at the trend for Games Workshop for UK only, it is definitely heading downwards.
7680
Post by: oni
Please note (as Lego has mentioned a few times now) using the term "warhammer 40,000" or similar will skew the results as they pertain to our interests. Generally we're only interested in the tabletop game. Data that includes the term 'warhammer 40,000" or similar will include results for all of the video games. You can easily see this by the MASSIVE search spike in late 2004 - This is when the original Dawn of War game was released.
Tannhauser42 wrote:It may be interesting to note that, over the past few years, there have been less and less reasons to actually go to the GW website, unless you just want to purchase something from them. No more Specialist Games, no more hobby articles, no more gaming articles, and even the FAQs are on a different website now.
While true and I understand what your meaning, this data is based on Google searches and does not reflect specific website hits.
[edit]
I think we also need to take into account social media trends, the natural spread of information and gravitation to specific online outlets for our content. Meaning, that as time has progressed we've needed Google less and less. We've all gradually moved to using online forums or other media outlets such as blogs to get our warhammer content.
If you wanted to know how to paint Orks, would you Google it? No, you'd come to Dakka or another forum or I'd look for a tutorial on YouTube. If you wanted to know the latest news about Warhammer 40K, would you Google it? No, you'd go to BoLS or similar. We're an informed group that no longer relies on Google to find information for our hobby.
752
Post by: Polonius
insaniak wrote:The January report had a definite hit to their bottom line. So the mid-year report will go some way towards establishing whether that was (as Mr Kirby claimed) a one-time aberration from the restructuring of their stores, or the start of a downward slide.
I'd add that this would be the start of a downward slide in profits. The downward slide in sales is many years old now, isn't it?
48614
Post by: Welsh_Furey
9892
Post by: Flashman
'Ork' isn't a GW specific term even when it's spelt with 'k' (though neither is 'Necron' to be honest). And judging from some of the highlighted news events, 'Ork' may mean something else entirely in other languages.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
 oni wrote:Please note (as Lego has mentioned a few times now) using the term "warhammer 40,000" or similar will skew the results as they pertain to our interests. Generally we're only interested in the tabletop game. Data that includes the term 'warhammer 40,000" or similar will include results for all of the video games. You can easily see this by the MASSIVE search spike in late 2004 - This is when the original Dawn of War game was released.
Tannhauser42 wrote:It may be interesting to note that, over the past few years, there have been less and less reasons to actually go to the GW website, unless you just want to purchase something from them. No more Specialist Games, no more hobby articles, no more gaming articles, and even the FAQs are on a different website now.
While true and I understand what your meaning, this data is based on Google searches and does not reflect specific website hits.
[edit]
I think we also need to take into account social media trends, the natural spread of information and gravitation to specific online outlets for our content. Meaning, that as time has progressed we've needed Google less and less. We've all gradually moved to using online forums or other media outlets such as blogs to get our warhammer content.
If you wanted to know how to paint Orks, would you Google it? No, you'd come to Dakka or another forum or I'd look for a tutorial on YouTube. If you wanted to know the latest news about Warhammer 40K, would you Google it? No, you'd go to BoLS or similar. We're an informed group that no longer relies on Google to find information for our hobby.
Google is the way I search for blogs and forums about stuff. Basically, Google is the way I search for anything online. I use Google Maps to search for stuff geographically.
I even use Google to look up the Games Workshop webstore. I type in Games Workshop, hit 'search' and it pops up as the first result.
Perhaps I am just old fashioned. I don't bother a lot with bookmarks any more because it is a tedious bore keeping them organised and lots of sites don't automatically update from their bookmark to the latest version of the site.
320
Post by: Platuan4th
Loving that Warhammer Online spike for Tzeentch.
9892
Post by: Flashman
I'm loving that he colour coded the trend lines more or less correctly
132
Post by: bbb
 Flashman wrote:
I'm loving that he colour coded the trend lines more or less correctly
Looks like elves win the battle of the fantasy races. Love the yearly December spikes...
http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=dwarf%2C%20ogre%2C%20goblin%2C%20orc%2C%20elf&cmpt=q
47412
Post by: slowthar
oni wrote:
[edit]
I think we also need to take into account social media trends, the natural spread of information and gravitation to specific online outlets for our content. Meaning, that as time has progressed we've needed Google less and less. We've all gradually moved to using online forums or other media outlets such as blogs to get our warhammer content.
If you wanted to know how to paint Orks, would you Google it? No, you'd come to Dakka or another forum or I'd look for a tutorial on YouTube. If you wanted to know the latest news about Warhammer 40K, would you Google it? No, you'd go to BoLS or similar. We're an informed group that no longer relies on Google to find information for our hobby.
Uh... what? If I want to paint an ork, i'm going up to my browser bar on chrome and typing "painting orks." Why would I bother combing a bunch of websites manually? That's what search engines are for!
48614
Post by: Welsh_Furey
Flashman wrote:
'Ork' isn't a GW specific term even when it's spelt with 'k' (though neither is 'Necron' to be honest). And judging from some of the highlighted news events, 'Ork' may mean something else entirely in other languages.
ork is GW specific now if I said orc I would agree with you bur ork is copyrighted by GW the spelling makes a big difference
53595
Post by: Palindrome
Operational Record Keeping has been copyrighted by Games Workshop? GW's 'copyrights' are so full of holes that they could be used to strain pasta, as the CHS copyright case has made clear.
60791
Post by: Sean_OBrien
For the general concern about GW's searches being diluted...you can do geographic areas instead of global searches. While the BRIC countries are expanding (and even African countries are coming online) most Western countries have had fairly substantial internet access for the last decade.
Trend is still largely downwards when you look at the core regions (and non-existent in many areas they could potentially expand into).
84409
Post by: KommissarKarl
Kilkrazy wrote: jonolikespie wrote:Africa and Asia? What makes you think that?
Almost all of the new games on the market seem to be Europe or the US, and we know from ICV2 that the US is on the rise.
Surely its not entirely a matter of people who are only now accessing the internet driving these trends.
What he is saying is that the growth in internet use has been happening in China and Africa, since Europe and the Americas have been relatively well wired for years.
Chinese and Africans don't search for Games Workshop, but they do search for "Fluffy kittens", "Sex" and so on. Therefore GW's share of the total number searches has declined.
There is possibly something in this, however if you look at the trend for Games Workshop for UK only, it is definitely heading downwards.
Conversely, 40k is actually going up in the UK ( source), though Fantasy appears to have collapsed. I don't know what, if anything, to conclude from this.
44272
Post by: Azreal13
I'm not sure a graph that describes a line that finishes at a lower point on it's Y axis than it starts can be considered a trend of 'up?'
84409
Post by: KommissarKarl
 azreal13 wrote:I'm not sure a graph that describes a line that finishes at a lower point on it's Y axis than it starts can be considered a trend of 'up?'
That's because trends are taken from the data as a whole rather than the first and last data points. The graph clearly shows an upward trend in 40k search queries.
44272
Post by: Azreal13
No, it shows spikes and troughs. Currently, or at least the most recent result, is at one of, if not the, lowest points within the scope of the graph.
If you drew a mean line through the graph, then maybe, considering I'm writing this without being able to see it, you could get slightly above flat. Maybe. Slightly.
EDIT
Nope.
34906
Post by: Pacific
It is slightly tilting up if your left chairlegs are a couple of mm smaller than the right side..
84409
Post by: KommissarKarl
azreal13 wrote:No, it shows spikes and troughs. Currently, or at least the most recent result, is at one of, if not the, lowest points within the scope of the graph.
If you drew a mean line through the graph, then maybe, considering I'm writing this without being able to see it, you could get slightly above flat. Maybe. Slightly.
EDIT
Nope.
Uhhh. I would say this is definitely an upward trend :
 .
*shrug* if you can't see it then so be it.
Interesting to note that the 6th edition release appears to have been slightly less popular than the 5th edition release, in terms of interest anyway.
34243
Post by: Blacksails
Yeah, at best its flat.
Hardly up.
47412
Post by: slowthar
KommissarKarl wrote: azreal13 wrote:No, it shows spikes and troughs. Currently, or at least the most recent result, is at one of, if not the, lowest points within the scope of the graph.
If you drew a mean line through the graph, then maybe, considering I'm writing this without being able to see it, you could get slightly above flat. Maybe. Slightly.
EDIT
Nope.
Uhhh. I would say this is definitely an upward trend :
*shrug* if you can't see it then so be it.
Interesting to note that the 6th edition release appears to have been slightly less popular than the 5th edition release, in terms of interest anyway.
If you download the .CSV and take the averages of each year:
2004: 38.25
2005: 29.46
2006: 21.77
2007: 21.46
2008: 23.23
2009: 23.75
2010: 24.92
2011: 34.56
2012: 30.49
2013: 28.02
2014: 27.14
...so I suppose if you're claiming it "trends up" you should specify a time frame.
60791
Post by: Sean_OBrien
Your Google appears to be broken...
1
84409
Post by: KommissarKarl
It was the UK results I was referring to.
60791
Post by: Sean_OBrien
Missed that part...
However, the topic is sliding down for the UK only:
http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=%2Fm%2F0mbr2&geo=GB&cmpt=q
Even more to that point though would be if you look to at the cause of those spikes. Warhammer Chess, Space Marine video game, the 40K MMO...
GW's big contribution was blip "B" for the Storm of Vengeance (and no doubt people trying to figure out what they were doing with it).
17923
Post by: Asherian Command
forge world +250%
forgeworld +190%
games workshop paint +110%
games workshop forum +80%
game workshop +40%
games workshop online +40%
I laughed at this alot.
Forgeworld is higher than GW in terms of being searched out.
44272
Post by: Azreal13
Well, that does dovetail with my perception that people who are overtly and vocally critical of GW often have less of a problem with the way Forgeworld tends to do things.
Somewhat pisses on the chips of the idea that the "negs" are a vocal minority and not representative of the wider community, it would appear that, in fact, that Dakka is at least somewhat reflective of the community as a whole.
17923
Post by: Asherian Command
azreal13 wrote:Well, that does dovetail with my perception that people who are overtly and vocally critical of GW often have less of a problem with the way Forgeworld tends to do things.
Somewhat pisses on the chips of the idea that the "negs" are a vocal minority and not representative of the wider community, it would appear that, in fact, that Dakka is at least somewhat reflective of the community as a whole.
I know tons of people who share dakka's beliefs.
84409
Post by: KommissarKarl
azreal13 wrote:Well, that does dovetail with my perception that people who are overtly and vocally critical of GW often have less of a problem with the way Forgeworld tends to do things.
Somewhat pisses on the chips of the idea that the "negs" are a vocal minority and not representative of the wider community, it would appear that, in fact, that Dakka is at least somewhat reflective of the community as a whole.
Sorry where are you getting your evidence for this from?
99
Post by: insaniak
Really? Looks to me more like it dipped in 2006, took 5 years to creep back up to just below where it started, and has remained fairly level since. Automatically Appended Next Post:
Who is 'dakka'?
There's no single, community mindset here.
17923
Post by: Asherian Command
insaniak wrote:
Really? Looks to me more like it dipped in 2006, took 5 years to creep back up to just below where it started, and has remained fairly level since.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Who is 'dakka'?
There's no single, community mindset here.
I feel like there is. There is a very large common dislike for GW.
44272
Post by: Azreal13
KommissarKarl wrote: azreal13 wrote:Well, that does dovetail with my perception that people who are overtly and vocally critical of GW often have less of a problem with the way Forgeworld tends to do things.
Somewhat pisses on the chips of the idea that the "negs" are a vocal minority and not representative of the wider community, it would appear that, in fact, that Dakka is at least somewhat reflective of the community as a whole.
Sorry where are you getting your evidence for this from?
As much as I'd like to have a conversation with you about the blindingly obvious, I suspect a signed confession from Kirby himself would be insufficient evidence that something was rotten in the state of Workshop for you, so I'll save myself the time and energy and not engage.
Besides, my pizzas ready! 
99
Post by: insaniak
There are certainly some posters who dislike GW, or various aspects of what they do. That's a very general description of a very wide range of different opinions, though... and if you read any single thread about GW you'll find people offering both positive and negative opinions.
Having some posters, even if they're a majority, with a given opinion does not make that an opinion of 'Dakka'... because 'Dakka' is just a venue for the community to share their opinions.
17923
Post by: Asherian Command
insaniak wrote:
There are certainly some posters who dislike GW, or various aspects of what they do. That's a very general description of a very wide range of different opinions, though... and if you read any single thread about GW you'll find people offering both positive and negative opinions.
Having some posters, even if they're a majority, with a given opinion does not make that an opinion of 'Dakka'... because 'Dakka' is just a venue for the community to share their opinions.
Interesting, but I know a bunch of gamers. All being white and middle class. Clearly that is a large demographic. ( please know I am being sarcastic)
This does not prove it all. But I made a generalization. Just by watching and talking with friends all of who were five year veterans or so, just quit and said we aren't going to buy anymore was kind of a clear sign that something was wrong.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
azreal13 wrote:Well, that does dovetail with my perception that people who are overtly and vocally critical of GW often have less of a problem with the way Forgeworld tends to do things.
Somewhat pisses on the chips of the idea that the "negs" are a vocal minority and not representative of the wider community, it would appear that, in fact, that Dakka is at least somewhat reflective of the community as a whole.
Well, if "the community" is defined as people who go online to research and discuss games, DakkaDakka must be somewhat representative as it is one of the largest wargames sites particularly when considering ones that concentrate on Warhammer games. (The Miniatures Page is much larger, but it concentrates on Historicals.) This is English language only of course. There may be some huge sites in French, Spanish and so on that I don't know about.
Presumably there are people who don't discuss or follow their hobbies online but we have no way of accounting for them with Google Trends.
Going back to the graph topic, the general trend for 40K in the UK seems to me to be slightly more up than flat, but the trend for Warhammer 40,000 is down. Probably people are typing 40K instead of 40,000. IDK what the overall trend is if you combine these sets of figures.
Of course the UK is 60% of the Warhammer market so there could be a slight up trend here and a more serious down trend in other countries leading to an overall downwards trend.
GW themselves must know how many unique visitors and page impressions, etc. they get on their new web store site. As far as purchasing goes, it doesn't matter if people aren't searching for Games Workshop or 40K or whatever as long as enough customers actually go and buy stuff. They also can measure the number of unique purchasers at their retail shops by tracking the card data for purchases, which is necessary for charging people's account. (Cash sales excepted, of course.)
47246
Post by: Yonan
Any chance of a forum subsection traffic chart KK? Won't prove anything but always interesting.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Legoburner is the person to ask about that sort of detail.
47246
Post by: Yonan
But he might burn all my lego if I anger him : ( You don't get a name like that without putting a lot of plastic to the torch!
4786
Post by: legoburner
The forums are not easily distinguished in terms of read traffic, so it is not something I can get with much ease or accuracy. Post counts are easy enough to use, but they have their own inaccuracies. Google trends accounts for a lot of variables, so it makes a stronger argument to primarily use them.
63973
Post by: Furyou Miko
insaniak wrote:
There are certainly some posters who dislike GW, or various aspects of what they do. That's a very general description of a very wide range of different opinions, though... and if you read any single thread about GW you'll find people offering both positive and negative opinions.
Having some posters, even if they're a majority, with a given opinion does not make that an opinion of 'Dakka'... because 'Dakka' is just a venue for the community to share their opinions.
I would say that "Dakka's Opinion" would be expressed as a ratio rather than an integer.
4412
Post by: George Spiggott
Do these Google results take into account an, for want of a better phrase, internet inflation. In that more people are searching for a given thing because more people have the internet (and or are using Google more than another search engine)?
27987
Post by: Surtur
 George Spiggott wrote:Do these Google results take into account an, for want of a better phrase, internet inflation. In that more people are searching for a given thing because more people have the internet (and or are using Google more than another search engine)?
From what I can tell, they factor in from an all time high number of searches. So for instance, in the OP, it started at it's highest point with 100% and everything else is simply a percentage of that high number. This would mean that the number of searches for GW in a given time period are approximately 25% of what they were. So it is not reflective of a expanding internet, but if you were to factor in "inflating internet" then they would be going down ever more as the searches for GW would be an even smaller number compared to it's population share that would be projected. Factoring this into other google trends could mean trouble for some of them too, as it would mean that level graphs were actually decreasing their share.
I may be wrong on this though because Google contradicts what the graph means when they describe it. They first say the graph is based on the number of searches but then that a decreasing graph does not mean the total number of searches is declining, so I don't know. Unless they just mean the total number of times it has been searched in it's existence, in which case duh.
84409
Post by: KommissarKarl
George Spiggott wrote:Do these Google results take into account an, for want of a better phrase, internet inflation. In that more people are searching for a given thing because more people have the internet (and or are using Google more than another search engine)?
Yes, which is why trends are different world-wide vs individual companies.
84409
Post by: KommissarKarl
Incidentally, this is GW compared to it's rivals (in the UK):
Also 40k compared to competitors:
From these stats it doesn't look like any of these large competitors are exactly rocketing ahead, except x wing, which I don't think directly competes with 40k ( ymmv).
This is the USA version, for anyone interested:
10193
Post by: Crazy_Carnifex
I notice an increase in the frequency of X-wing around the point that the game was actually released.
52675
Post by: Deadnight
Karl, can yo add 'infinitythegame' , 'malifaux' and 'dystopian wars' to that list of yours? Also 'hordes' - remember, warmachine is only half of the privateer press portfolio. That would give a more complete picture of the 'big' names.
Overall traffic seems to suggest flames, warmachine, and x wing make up half the internet traffic currently, gw mskes up your other half.. Of those reported terms at least. In the us, it seems to compose slightly less than half the traffic.
Interesting all the same. Thanks fir putting it up.
84409
Post by: KommissarKarl
Crazy_Carnifex wrote:I notice an increase in the frequency of X-wing around the point that the game was actually released.
The term "x wing" was already in use for various things in the Star Wars universe.
Deadnight wrote:Karl, can yo add 'infinitythegame' , 'malifaux' and 'dystopian wars' to that list of yours? Also 'hordes' - remember, warmachine is only half of the privateer press portfolio. That would give a more complete picture of the 'big' names.
Well I couldn't include Infinity since there have been a number of computer games of that game in recent years. As for the others -
Hordes is too generic and its popularity appears to be unrelated to the tabletop game. Even with Warmachine it appears as though there's no correlation between the spikes on the graph and releases in-game, the way that there is with warhammer 40k. Can someone who's followed Warmachines for the past few years comment on this? Specifically were there any big releases May 2008, May 2010 and July 2013?
Overall traffic seems to suggest flames, warmachine, and x wing make up half the internet traffic currently, gw mskes up your other half.. Of those reported terms at least. In the us, it seems to compose slightly less than half the traffic.
Aye by the fact that warmachines/flames of war have remained at more or less constant does make the "the other games are expanding at gw's expense" theory look pretty wobbly. If there is a surge in interest in other games, then it's not happening on the internet.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Comparison of 40k armies -
No idea why Eldar is so popular.
General 40k terms-
Interesting how the Imperial knight pops up once the rumours started circulating, then skyrockets when it's released.
Oh, and the Horus Heresy is now as popular than the Imperial Guard -
35671
Post by: weeble1000
I really don't understand this view that X-Wing doesn't compete 'directly' with 40K. In the strictest definition, technically no, but only by a virtually irrelevant technicality. It is a popular table top Wargame enjoyed by the same demographic and competes for the same hobby dollars and the same time.
In most cases an xwing sale eats the sale of another Wargame.
21196
Post by: agnosto
Weeble, it's the normal human tendency to apply handwavium when something doesn't support opinion or argument. By stating that xwing is non-competitive with GW games, such individuals may focus on other aspects of their argument. It's blindingly obvious to most that one wargame competes for consumer money with other wargames. I certainly have a "hobby budget" not a "warhammer" and separate "xwing" budget.
47367
Post by: Fenrir Kitsune
 agnosto wrote:Weeble, it's the normal human tendency to apply handwavium when something doesn't support opinion or argument. By stating that xwing is non-competitive with GW games, such individuals may focus on other aspects of their argument. It's blindingly obvious to most that one wargame competes for condumer money with other wargames. I certainly have a "hobby budget" not a "warhammer" and separate "xwing" budget.
+1
The amount of times I see "oh, thats historical models, they are non-competitive with GW games"
Used to buy all GW/. Now buy lots of things including many historicals and no GW at all. Its the same hobby money, not some special "other" hobby budget!
7361
Post by: Howard A Treesong
MtG competes with my GW money and money for any other miniatures company. I can't afford MtG and heaps of miniatures. Everyone has limited disposable income, everything competes with everything else for my attention.
84409
Post by: KommissarKarl
weeble1000 wrote:I really don't understand this view that X-Wing doesn't compete 'directly' with 40K. In the strictest definition, technically no, but only by a virtually irrelevant technicality. It is a popular table top Wargame enjoyed by the same demographic and competes for the same hobby dollars and the same time.
In most cases an xwing sale eats the sale of another Wargame.
If it is competing then it's not doing it very well. Look at the graph - xwing goes up in popularity, no immediate or obvious impact on 40k.
32159
Post by: jonolikespie
KommissarKarl wrote:weeble1000 wrote:I really don't understand this view that X-Wing doesn't compete 'directly' with 40K. In the strictest definition, technically no, but only by a virtually irrelevant technicality. It is a popular table top Wargame enjoyed by the same demographic and competes for the same hobby dollars and the same time. In most cases an xwing sale eats the sale of another Wargame.
If it is competing then it's not doing it very well. Look at the graph - xwing goes up in popularity, no immediate or obvious impact on 40k.
Yep, x wing is doing a terrible job of competing in Google trends. Fantasy Flight Games CEO was recently talking about how they where seeing huge growth and X wing blisters wont stay on the shelves if you glue them there. GW is power shrinking and despite how fast it appears they are selling out of Stormclaw boxes a ton have been allocated to stores so that looks better than it is. We do know it took them forever to sell through only 2,000 copies of the limited edition 7th ed book.
84409
Post by: KommissarKarl
jonolikespie wrote:KommissarKarl wrote:weeble1000 wrote:I really don't understand this view that X-Wing doesn't compete 'directly' with 40K. In the strictest definition, technically no, but only by a virtually irrelevant technicality. It is a popular table top Wargame enjoyed by the same demographic and competes for the same hobby dollars and the same time.
In most cases an xwing sale eats the sale of another Wargame.
If it is competing then it's not doing it very well. Look at the graph - xwing goes up in popularity, no immediate or obvious impact on 40k.
Yep, x wing is doing a terrible job of competing in Google trends. Fantasy Flight Games CEO was recently talking about how they where seeing huge growth and X wing blisters wont stay on the shelves if you glue them there.
GW is power shrinking and despite how fast it appears they are selling out of Stormclaw boxes a ton have been allocated to stores so that looks better than it is. We do know it took them forever to sell through only 2,000 copies of the limited edition 7th ed book.
Since we're in a thread about google trends, mind using some of them to back up your point? Since it is actual, y'know, data, rather than baseless assertions?
32159
Post by: jonolikespie
KommissarKarl wrote: jonolikespie wrote:KommissarKarl wrote:weeble1000 wrote:I really don't understand this view that X-Wing doesn't compete 'directly' with 40K. In the strictest definition, technically no, but only by a virtually irrelevant technicality. It is a popular table top Wargame enjoyed by the same demographic and competes for the same hobby dollars and the same time.
In most cases an xwing sale eats the sale of another Wargame.
If it is competing then it's not doing it very well. Look at the graph - xwing goes up in popularity, no immediate or obvious impact on 40k.
Yep, x wing is doing a terrible job of competing in Google trends. Fantasy Flight Games CEO was recently talking about how they where seeing huge growth and X wing blisters wont stay on the shelves if you glue them there.
GW is power shrinking and despite how fast it appears they are selling out of Stormclaw boxes a ton have been allocated to stores so that looks better than it is. We do know it took them forever to sell through only 2,000 copies of the limited edition 7th ed book.
Since we're in a thread about google trends, mind using some of them to back up your point? Since it is actual, y'know, data, rather than baseless assertions?
My entire point was Google trends proves nothing more than what people are searching Google for.
This thread: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/589125.page seems to suggest that FFG are doing very well for themselves since the launch of X wing.
The fact that it took GW a month or so to sell out of the only 2,000 LE copies of the 7th ed book, and that in oz Dyst Wars 2.0 seems to have outsold 7th ed by a wide margin through non GW retailers in Oz both suggest that GW is not.
(Not to mention all the other stuff going on with them, closing HQs for entire continents can't be a sign of anything but a company shrinking.)
84409
Post by: KommissarKarl
jonolikespie wrote:KommissarKarl wrote: jonolikespie wrote:KommissarKarl wrote:weeble1000 wrote:I really don't understand this view that X-Wing doesn't compete 'directly' with 40K. In the strictest definition, technically no, but only by a virtually irrelevant technicality. It is a popular table top Wargame enjoyed by the same demographic and competes for the same hobby dollars and the same time.
In most cases an xwing sale eats the sale of another Wargame.
If it is competing then it's not doing it very well. Look at the graph - xwing goes up in popularity, no immediate or obvious impact on 40k.
Yep, x wing is doing a terrible job of competing in Google trends. Fantasy Flight Games CEO was recently talking about how they where seeing huge growth and X wing blisters wont stay on the shelves if you glue them there.
GW is power shrinking and despite how fast it appears they are selling out of Stormclaw boxes a ton have been allocated to stores so that looks better than it is. We do know it took them forever to sell through only 2,000 copies of the limited edition 7th ed book.
Since we're in a thread about google trends, mind using some of them to back up your point? Since it is actual, y'know, data, rather than baseless assertions?
My entire point was Google trends proves nothing more than what people are searching Google for.
Uh, how old are you? What people are googling = what people are interested in. If I want to look up x wing, I'll go to google and type in "x wing". If I'm interested in 40k, I'll go to google and put in "warhammer 40k". If people aren't googling FFG or Warmachine, it means they aren't interested in it.
Though I do admire your audacity in the face of evidence that utterly disproves your point 
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
 Fenrir Kitsune wrote: agnosto wrote:Weeble, it's the normal human tendency to apply handwavium when something doesn't support opinion or argument. By stating that xwing is non-competitive with GW games, such individuals may focus on other aspects of their argument. It's blindingly obvious to most that one wargame competes for condumer money with other wargames. I certainly have a "hobby budget" not a "warhammer" and separate "xwing" budget.
+1
The amount of times I see "oh, thats historical models, they are non-competitive with GW games"
Used to buy all GW/. Now buy lots of things including many historicals and no GW at all. Its the same hobby money, not some special "other" hobby budget!
The thing is there are plenty of people who play only GW and don't play any other wargames. I mean GW is their first and only game. They may in time go on to other games or perhaps simply drop out of wargames, but at the moment they only want to play GW.
These are the people for whom historical figures and other wargames are not competition for GW.
32159
Post by: jonolikespie
KommissarKarl wrote: jonolikespie wrote:My entire point was Google trends proves nothing more than what people are searching Google for.
Uh, how old are you? What people are googling = what people are interested in. If I want to look up x wing, I'll go to google and type in "x wing". If I'm interested in 40k, I'll go to google and put in "warhammer 40k". If people aren't googling FFG or Warmachine, it means they aren't interested in it.
Though I do admire your audacity in the face of evidence that utterly disproves your point
You seem to be entirely missing my point. I don't give a crap what people are googling. You suggested that X wing was not competing very well with GW because more people where googling 40k than it.
I understand perfectly that more people have googled X wing than 40k.
My point was that X wing is selling more and more product as time goes on. GW is selling less year on year.
44272
Post by: Azreal13
KommissarKarl wrote: jonolikespie wrote:KommissarKarl wrote: jonolikespie wrote:KommissarKarl wrote:weeble1000 wrote:I really don't understand this view that X-Wing doesn't compete 'directly' with 40K. In the strictest definition, technically no, but only by a virtually irrelevant technicality. It is a popular table top Wargame enjoyed by the same demographic and competes for the same hobby dollars and the same time.
In most cases an xwing sale eats the sale of another Wargame.
If it is competing then it's not doing it very well. Look at the graph - xwing goes up in popularity, no immediate or obvious impact on 40k.
Yep, x wing is doing a terrible job of competing in Google trends. Fantasy Flight Games CEO was recently talking about how they where seeing huge growth and X wing blisters wont stay on the shelves if you glue them there.
GW is power shrinking and despite how fast it appears they are selling out of Stormclaw boxes a ton have been allocated to stores so that looks better than it is. We do know it took them forever to sell through only 2,000 copies of the limited edition 7th ed book.
Since we're in a thread about google trends, mind using some of them to back up your point? Since it is actual, y'know, data, rather than baseless assertions?
My entire point was Google trends proves nothing more than what people are searching Google for.
Uh, how old are you? What people are googling = what people are interested in. If I want to look up x wing, I'll go to google and type in "x wing". If I'm interested in 40k, I'll go to google and put in "warhammer 40k". If people aren't googling FFG or Warmachine, it means they aren't interested in it.
Though I do admire your audacity in the face of evidence that utterly disproves your point
I'm interested in Scuba diving, going on holiday, buying a car, buying a house, buying a Thunderhawk Gunship.
Do you know how much money I've actually spent on any of those things in the last... 4 years? Despite spending time online looking at them all.
Zero.
This is not "evidence" it is an interesting talking point, but it does not give any clear indication in the relative performance of any of the things in question in real life.
320
Post by: Platuan4th
Azrael nails it. Interest =/= participation or purchases and is far from indication of actual success.
123
Post by: Alpharius
 Platuan4th wrote:Azrael nails it. Interest =/= participation or purchases and is far from indication of actual success.
Yes, exactly.
Also, "Infinity the Game" is what to search for on Google.
Interesting that we can't figure out how to zero in on X-Wing as a game, but we can safely exclude Infinity?!?
44272
Post by: Azreal13
X Wing Miniatures is what yields best results on eBay for me....
99
Post by: insaniak
weeble1000 wrote:I really don't understand this view that X-Wing doesn't compete 'directly' with 40K. In the strictest definition, technically no, but only by a virtually irrelevant technicality. It is a popular table top Wargame enjoyed by the same demographic and competes for the same hobby dollars and the same time. .
For me, it's not direct competition because it's a completely different type of game. If I wanted an alternative to 40K, I wouldn't look at a starship battles game. I would look for another 28-ish mm ground-warfare game that allows for battles of a similar size to 40K. I would look at x-wing if I was looking for a starship battles game.
Which, yes, means that I don't really consider, say, Infinity or Warmahordes to be direct competition with 40K either... They're smaller skirmish games.
So far as I'm aware, there really isn't any directly comparable alternative to 40K on the market at the moment (which is a large part of the reason that I've kept playing it as long as I have). Just other, different types of games that you can play instead.
21196
Post by: agnosto
insaniak wrote:weeble1000 wrote:I really don't understand this view that X-Wing doesn't compete 'directly' with 40K. In the strictest definition, technically no, but only by a virtually irrelevant technicality. It is a popular table top Wargame enjoyed by the same demographic and competes for the same hobby dollars and the same time. .
For me, it's not direct competition because it's a completely different type of game. If I wanted an alternative to 40K, I wouldn't look at a starship battles game. I would look for another 28-ish mm ground-warfare game that allows for battles of a similar size to 40K. I would look at x-wing if I was looking for a starship battles game.
Which, yes, means that I don't really consider, say, Infinity or Warmahordes to be direct competition with 40K either... They're smaller skirmish games.
So far as I'm aware, there really isn't any directly comparable alternative to 40K on the market at the moment (which is a large part of the reason that I've kept playing it as long as I have). Just other, different types of games that you can play instead.
That's making an assumption that you, as a hobbyist and gamer, are only interested in 28-30mm, large-scale battles. It's been my experience, YMMV, that most gamers have more varied taste and buy into several systems. As GW prices rise to absurdium( tm) levels, consumers evaluate what the worth of GW's product is to them. When faced with a value choice between a minimum $85 investment every time an edition changes for just the rules and a $55-$60 investment for army books when these are updated, there is less value in the game. To me, again YMMV, the whole point in having a miniature wargame is to have miniatures not blow my entire hobby budget on the rules. As has been stated, other companies seem to "get" this and manage the prices and/or options for acquiring the rules for their games accordingly; however, it appears that GW is either unwilling or unable to consider such options.
That said, I agree on your point as to "direct" competition between 40k and other games (except maybe Mantic's Warpath but this is still in its infancy) but these other systems ARE in direct competition with GW for consumer dollars. The more I spend on other games because I recognize the inherent value in spending less on rules, the less I spend on GW which translates into an overall lowering in how often I search for GW-related content. Take this on an industry-wide scale and you see what is actually happening, a general growth in wargaming that is spread out over a diverse number of small-medium sized firms.
As far as trends go. I would say that if you took the overall growth in search queries for these other games and added them together, you might arrive at the difference in GW's decline and the industry's growth. I'm just guessing here and have no hard evidence but it wouldn't surprise me if that were the case.
87250
Post by: Inquisitor Bob
I think a lot of people haven't considered the people who aren't googling GW franchises... Or get their information somewhere else...
I know neither my friends nor myself had had to google GW etc for a very long time because we know where to find it..
All this really tells me is there is a measurable decline in initial interest from new users...
Whether that translates to less interest in general and by how much is up for debate...
60791
Post by: Sean_OBrien
insaniak wrote:weeble1000 wrote:I really don't understand this view that X-Wing doesn't compete 'directly' with 40K. In the strictest definition, technically no, but only by a virtually irrelevant technicality. It is a popular table top Wargame enjoyed by the same demographic and competes for the same hobby dollars and the same time. .
For me, it's not direct competition because it's a completely different type of game. If I wanted an alternative to 40K, I wouldn't look at a starship battles game. I would look for another 28-ish mm ground-warfare game that allows for battles of a similar size to 40K. I would look at x-wing if I was looking for a starship battles game.
Which, yes, means that I don't really consider, say, Infinity or Warmahordes to be direct competition with 40K either... They're smaller skirmish games.
So far as I'm aware, there really isn't any directly comparable alternative to 40K on the market at the moment (which is a large part of the reason that I've kept playing it as long as I have). Just other, different types of games that you can play instead.
If - by a narrow definition you are talking about games which have rules and miniatures from the same manufacturer...I would agree. If you are talking about rules alone...not at all. There are dozens of systems which are available that feature reinforced platoon sized battles (infantry and vehicles).
Some of them are strictly designed for that scale (so they function at the task much better than 40K) while others are skirmish games that have had vehicles added to them (so they function in many ways the same as 40K). The threads have covered them enough to not go back over them again - but in most cases you can even continue to use your current 40K armies with the new ruleset and expand from there using other companies miniatures for different and new factions.
Once people get over the hang up of buying rules and miniatures from the same company - their options open up dramatically. The best rules I have ever played have been from companies that don't even produce miniatures to begin with (and as a result - their rules have to be better in order to actually sell on their own merits). Automatically Appended Next Post:  Inquisitor Bob wrote:All this really tells me is there is a measurable decline in initial interest from new users...
Whether that translates to less interest in general and by how much is up for debate...
I fail to see how there can be any debate. Fewer new people means less interest - even if the only way old players stopped playing is when they die off. GW has been around long enough that a lot of their initial user base is leaving the hobby due to the attrition of the grim reaper (with no mention of those leaving for school, family, work and other obligations). If they can not get new blood, the interest in the game will dry up.
87250
Post by: Inquisitor Bob
insaniak wrote:weeble1000 wrote:I really don't understand this view that X-Wing doesn't compete 'directly' with 40K. In the strictest definition, technically no, but only by a virtually irrelevant technicality. It is a popular table top Wargame enjoyed by the same demographic and competes for the same hobby dollars and the same time. .
For me, it's not direct competition because it's a completely different type of game. If I wanted an alternative to 40K, I wouldn't look at a starship battles game. I would look for another 28-ish mm ground-warfare game that allows for battles of a similar size to 40K. I would look at x-wing if I was looking for a starship battles game.
Which, yes, means that I don't really consider, say, Infinity or Warmahordes to be direct competition with 40K either... They're smaller skirmish games.
So far as I'm aware, there really isn't any directly comparable alternative to 40K on the market at the moment (which is a large part of the reason that I've kept playing it as long as I have). Just other, different types of games that you can play instead.
I would suggest, in my opinion, it is indeed direct competition in the proffesional definition.
Whilst there is a micro-examination case in the strictest (but only definable by the seperate micro-entities) sense, you must remember that the product is sold at thee same venues, with the same legslation in all countries, and aiming its initial interest campaigns at the same consumers.
And to add my own experience to it, my local book-bowl gamers are always trying to get cross-gamers ore to Xwing.. So there is further premis for identical consumer marketin.
Considering them seperate industries is like saying macdonalds and Burger King are different because there are two groups that don't like the competitions sauce.
35671
Post by: weeble1000
insaniak wrote:weeble1000 wrote:I really don't understand this view that X-Wing doesn't compete 'directly' with 40K. In the strictest definition, technically no, but only by a virtually irrelevant technicality. It is a popular table top Wargame enjoyed by the same demographic and competes for the same hobby dollars and the same time. .
For me, it's not direct competition because it's a completely different type of game. If I wanted an alternative to 40K, I wouldn't look at a starship battles game. I would look for another 28-ish mm ground-warfare game that allows for battles of a similar size to 40K. I would look at x-wing if I was looking for a starship battles game.
Which, yes, means that I don't really consider, say, Infinity or Warmahordes to be direct competition with 40K either... They're smaller skirmish games.
So far as I'm aware, there really isn't any directly comparable alternative to 40K on the market at the moment (which is a large part of the reason that I've kept playing it as long as I have). Just other, different types of games that you can play instead.
This is why the two are note technically, by the strictest definition, direct competitors. But A) when people say the two aren't direct competitors, they usually mean that they don't compete (directly or not), and B) splitting the tiny TTG fantasy wargame market that fine is impractical. Once you've parsed TTG down into the fantasy and wargame categories you've narrowed it down to a rather tight niche.
Nobody is buying an X-Wing miniature to play 40K and vice versa. However, plenty of consumers freely substitute the X-Wing game for the 40K game, regardless of the differences in the scale/genre. Rarely does a gamer come into the market looking specifically for a 28mm squad level table top miniatures sci-fi/fantasy wargame and choosing from amongst the available options. In my experience it typically doesn't work like that, especially not with the bigger players in the market. You might find Pike and Shotte because you are looking specifically for a new game that covers that particular period of time, and one game is just about as good as another as the models easily cross over to new systems.
Mainstream TTG fantasy wargames don't recruit players like that. GW recruits by pushing the fluff and word of mouth. By an overwhelming percentage (including FLGS worldwide and the internet) that word of mouth involves dual exposure to the products of GW and its biggest competitors. The fluff is out there competing with other sci-fi/fantasy universes, such as Star Wars, in the form of novelizations right next to each other on book shelves, video games right alongside one another, etc.
In competing for new customers GW is fighting tooth and nail with X-Wing. In competing to maintain existing customers, and the hobby dollars of existing customers, GW is fighting tooth and nail with X-Wing. The way GW operates, every single dollar spent by a GW customer on X-Wing is very dangerous as it whittles down interest in and commitment to GW's products. This has implications for not merely sales today, but to GW's marketing.
53985
Post by: TheKbob
 Alpharius wrote: Platuan4th wrote:Azrael nails it. Interest =/= participation or purchases and is far from indication of actual success.
Yes, exactly.
Also, "Infinity the Game" is what to search for on Google.
Interesting that we can't figure out how to zero in on X-Wing as a game, but we can safely exclude Infinity?!?
Unless there's a disconnect in my reading comprehension, but thanks to Disney, Infinity the Game is drastically skewed right now.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/andyrobertson/2014/07/24/disney-infinity-guardians-of-the-galaxy/
39188
Post by: Bullockist
insaniak wrote:weeble1000 wrote:I really don't understand this view that X-Wing doesn't compete 'directly' with 40K. In the strictest definition, technically no, but only by a virtually irrelevant technicality. It is a popular table top Wargame enjoyed by the same demographic and competes for the same hobby dollars and the same time. .
For me, it's not direct competition because it's a completely different type of game. If I wanted an alternative to 40K, I wouldn't look at a starship battles game. I would look for another 28-ish mm ground-warfare game that allows for battles of a similar size to 40K. I would look at x-wing if I was looking for a starship battles game.
Which, yes, means that I don't really consider, say, Infinity or Warmahordes to be direct competition with 40K either... They're smaller skirmish games.
So far as I'm aware, there really isn't any directly comparable alternative to 40K on the market at the moment (which is a large part of the reason that I've kept playing it as long as I have). Just other, different types of games that you can play instead.
I think your definition of things is a little narrow. I like gardening and am setting up aqua culture , now by your definition these two things aren't in direct competition for my money, whereas in reality they are. Spend more on gardening = spend less on aqua culture. I view them as part of the same thing , creating food.
Miniature gaming is in competition with miniature gaming not large scale 28mm gaming competes against large scale 28 mm gaming . I don't know any gamers that play one game.
I'll leave it at that before I say what I really think.
99
Post by: insaniak
 Bullockist wrote:I think your definition of things is a little narrow. I like gardening and am setting up aqua culture , now by your definition these two things aren't in direct competition for my money, whereas in reality they are. Spend more on gardening = spend less on aqua culture. I view them as part of the same thing , creating food.
That's because you're interested in both of those things.
If someone is interested specifically in 28mm ground-based wargame, and not particularly interested in space battles, then a ground based game and a space battle game are not in competition... because the latter is simply not a consideration for that person.
Not everyone is interested in the entire pantheon of miniature wargaming. And so those games that lie outside their field of interest are not competing for those players' hobby dollars. Automatically Appended Next Post: weeble1000 wrote: Rarely does a gamer come into the market looking specifically for a 28mm squad level table top miniatures sci-fi/fantasy wargame and choosing from amongst the available options. .
Which is why I prefaced my comment with 'For me...'. I'm perfectly willing to accept that I might be the outlier here.
But the scope and the setting of the game is a very large part of the attraction for me. Flames of War, for example, might be a fantastic game, but aside from the awesomeness inherent in teeny tiny tanks, it holds no interest for me because I'm just not particularly interested in historical games (War at Sea being the exception there, because warships are cool).
So despite often being touted as an alternative to 40K, for me it simply isn't. Regardless of how disillusioned I may be with 7th edition 40K, I'm not going to look at Flames of War as a viable alternative.
Similarly, I enjoy Warmahordes... but as a different game, not as a replacement. I don't play it instead of playing 40K. I play it when I feel like playing a skirmish game.
34906
Post by: Pacific
I think a lot of people are interested in the pantheon of gaming Insaniak, or at least to the point where you must acknowledge that some people will have spent money on X-Wing that they might otherwise have spent on 40k.
Although, in some cases there is the argument that as 40k/WFB become more and more expensive, require more miniatures to play and a greater commitment of time to learn all of the rules and keep the convoluted supplements together, this makes players less likely to look at or pick up another game. If you're already spending 2 hours a night painting up the new unit that the new DLC has just made competitive, looking at YMDC to find out how an ambiguously written rule is meant to be played, then you're not going to have that much time to look at anything else.
99
Post by: insaniak
 Pacific wrote:I think a lot of people are interested in the pantheon of gaming Insaniak, or at least to the point where you must acknowledge that some people will have spent money on X-Wing that they might otherwise have spent on 40k.
I never said otherwise. I was just pointing out why some people (in this case myself, specifically) don't view it as direct competition. Again, that wasn't intended to represent a universal viewpoint, just my own.
37755
Post by: Harriticus
Don't worry GW assured me this is just a temporary fad used by nerds and weirdos. None of this is important.
84409
Post by: KommissarKarl
jonolikespie wrote:KommissarKarl wrote: jonolikespie wrote:My entire point was Google trends proves nothing more than what people are searching Google for.
Uh, how old are you? What people are googling = what people are interested in. If I want to look up x wing, I'll go to google and type in "x wing". If I'm interested in 40k, I'll go to google and put in "warhammer 40k". If people aren't googling FFG or Warmachine, it means they aren't interested in it.
Though I do admire your audacity in the face of evidence that utterly disproves your point
You seem to be entirely missing my point. I don't give a crap what people are googling.
Then why are you in this thread? You clearly have the same mentality as GW if you don't think the internet is relevent
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Azreal13 wrote:
I'm interested in Scuba diving, going on holiday, buying a car, buying a house, buying a Thunderhawk Gunship.
Do you know how much money I've actually spent on any of those things in the last... 4 years? Despite spending time online looking at them all.
Zero.
This is not "evidence" it is an interesting talking point, but it does not give any clear indication in the relative performance of any of the things in question in real life.
You've managed to disagree with my post, while at the same time agreeing with everything I say. This seems to be a pattern of yours...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Alpharius wrote: Platuan4th wrote:Azrael nails it. Interest =/= participation or purchases and is far from indication of actual success.
Yes, exactly.
Also, "Infinity the Game" is what to search for on Google.
Interesting that we can't figure out how to zero in on X-Wing as a game, but we can safely exclude Infinity?!?
Very well since you've applied the appropriate term. Warhammer 40k vs Warmachine vs Infinity the game:
edit - since the "alternative games" seem a lot bigger in the usa, here's the same graph as above for the states:
44272
Post by: Azreal13
KommissarKarl wrote:
Azreal13 wrote:
I'm interested in Scuba diving, going on holiday, buying a car, buying a house, buying a Thunderhawk Gunship.
Do you know how much money I've actually spent on any of those things in the last... 4 years? Despite spending time online looking at them all.
Zero.
This is not "evidence" it is an interesting talking point, but it does not give any clear indication in the relative performance of any of the things in question in real life.
You've managed to disagree with my post, while at the same time agreeing with everything I say. This seems to be a pattern of yours...
You've managed to embark on an argument while appearing to have a tenuous grasp of the concepts and facts at hand, which seems to be a pattern of yours..
37147
Post by: Auswin
I work in internet marketing/ social media and do a lot with SEO, so I'd offer my thoughts.
Google trends is a problematic, imprecise way to evaluate companies -- especially when comparing two like GW and PP.
Search traffic typically accounts for one type of user: The uninformed, new searcher looking to garner information. To this end it does show that less new people are search for Games Workshop. This could be due to a lack of interest, it could also be a poor social media strategy that leads to a lack of connection between GW and its product.
With time and following it's natural that search will fall. Ostensibly you've reached your audience and new searches will trail off.
How many 40K players are searching for "Games Workshop" vs. going to Dakka, Faeit, BoLS etc. When you advance your strategy you will see a drop off in search traffic.
Painting a whole picture of a company's internet presence takes a lot more. Essentially it would mean taking the company's site, and cross referencing that data with other search terms. From there it's also about evaluating third party sites.
Here's one small example from Alexa that shows the GW vs. PP in trends is not, in fact, very useful data.
gamesworkshop.com: Global rank 25,846
privateerpress.com: Global rank 151,820
Obviously a lower number is better. In terms of internet interest GW is towering over PP in the most important place: People visiting their site.
It's also interesting to see that PP's international presence is not as healthy and diversified as GW's. Over 30% of PP's traffic comes from Sweden, that's not good. You want to see your traffic spread over multiple countries, ideally equally.
GW is getting 20% from US, 20% from UK and 16.8% from France.
Also, according to Alexa (which is more accurate than trends) GW's search traffic has grown by +9% in the last six months, while PP's has fallen -21%.
What is interesting, however, is that 18% of PP's upstream visits are from Facebook to 4.9% of GW's. That means Games Workshop is handily losing the social media battle right now and an area they need to correct.
The tl;dr version is: Financial reports are obviously more important, but if I'm stepping back and looking at the two companies it's GW who's in a far better position from a web traffic standpoint. That said, they need to fix their lack of social media -- because that helps drive new customers.
I'm hardly a GW apologist, but it seems a lot of people are deriving big conclusions from one piece of search data -- one that's historically quite inaccurate.
9969
Post by: Daedleh
Absolutely agreed with your evaluation, however there's one key aspect missing from your analysis - GWs website is a store with exclusive minis while Privateer Press is not. While PP maintains a small webstore, it is NOT a primary method of getting their miniatures - LGSs are. They also don't have website exclusives (as far as I know, or at least not to the same extent) so there aren't any minis which people HAVE to go to PPs site to acquire. With more and more of GWs stock becoming direct only, it's logical that there are people visiting the GW site to purchase minis that they can't get anywhere else.
Of course we have no idea how many people it is, but I suspect it would significantly effect the overall figures.
44272
Post by: Azreal13
Agreed, Auswin has brought some real insight to the thread.
I'd also add that GW's business model is supposedly "churn and burn," what's the supposed mantra? "Two birthdays and a Christmas?"
If, as Auswin suggests, that there is a drop off in traffic of what could be considered the 'I'll-informed' user, that surely doesn't bode well for the type of customer that GW is going after?
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
GW shut down all their Facebook pages some time last year (?) I don't remember when.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Interestingly though, Games Workshop's ranking on Alexa has clearly declined over the past year.
I suspect the reason is that since they relaunched it as a shop only, people have no reason to visit it except to check a price or buy something. There used to be lots more reasons to look at Games-Workshop.com.
84409
Post by: KommissarKarl
Kilkrazy wrote:GW shut down all their Facebook pages some time last year (?) I don't remember when.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Interestingly though, Games Workshop's ranking on Alexa has clearly declined over the past year.
I suspect the reason is that since they relaunched it as a shop only, people have no reason to visit it except to check a price or buy something. There used to be lots more reasons to look at Games-Workshop.com.
You're going back a bit there. Certainly I remember about 14 years ago (damn I feel old) there were articles from White Dwarf on there, such as they were. IIRC there's not been anything like that for years, certainly I doubt that they would make a significant portion of unique visitors per month. Personally I would explain the drop in rankings as simply being a continuation of the gradual decline in GW's business, as detailed extensively elsewhere. Or if I were being charitable I'd say it's because of the growth of third-party sellers...I think that's being optimistic though
Wish I could get more detailed information on the history of those rankings though. The chart on the site seems to only go back a year, I guess more detailed info is for paid customers only. Still interesting though.
37147
Post by: Auswin
Azreal13 wrote:
If, as Auswin suggests, that there is a drop off in traffic of what could be considered the 'I'll-informed' user, that surely doesn't bode well for the type of customer that GW is going after?
Here's GW's problem though: How are they going after those potential customers? Basically they're a company operating with no advertising, no brand awareness and selling a specialty product. Forget slouching sales, it's miraculous their business model is staying afloat.
Essentially it's the old way of thinking that word of mouth and a brick-and-mortar presence is enough is beyond hilarious, but they're still making money -- somehow. Personally, if I was a bigwig at GW I would be disgusted by the number of people who walk into a GW store every day assuming they sell video games, board games, toys etc. That's not quaint or funny, it's a sign that a lot of people have no clue what you sell.
In 2014 an internet presence is vital and transparency between your brand and consumer is paramount. That's why companies pay big money to have people to run their Twitter and Facebook accounts to engage users. GW leans on enthusiast sites and Facebook feeds to do their own promotion and legwork.
It's always nice to have a product people are so passionate about that they'll create their own content, but ignoring these avenues of brand building is a huge problem down the road. GW should be trying to capitalize on the board game boom to position their product as a graduation from board gaming to miniature wargaming. Their starter set prices need to come down to a price point where they can be seen as an impulse buy, even if that means selling them near-cost. Codex writers and game developers should be engaging in regular Q&A's with the community to foster more open dialog -- which in turn will kill some of the secrecy and cloak and dagger stuff. The Black Library should make some of its back catalog available for free download, or at least section off a space free on the web to learn about the universe.
None of these things will happen, but that's where the company should look.
47246
Post by: Yonan
As has been said elsewhere, GWs policies irritate vets substantially so word of mouth is actively detrimental to them a lot of the time. That has to have a substantial impact now given how important it is in the hobby.
52617
Post by: Lockark
In my experience with GW stores the "right attitude" doesn't mean a nice guy. Most the GW employees are dicks unless your a new customer buying your 1st army.
The right attitude means how good you are at being a yes man to your boss.
123
Post by: Alpharius
Has KommissarKarl given us his analysis of the latest GW financial report, including Kirby's preamble?
70626
Post by: Dakkamite
Alpharius wrote:INFINITY is a little harder to search for especially since Disney released their 'Skylanders' killer...
Any idea on how to effectively use that trend search to get at Infinity the Game by Corvus Belli?
Haha thats the first thing I did too.
"Corvus Belli" has been downward, "Infinity the Game" has been upward. Both, unsurprisingly, have the vast majority of hits in Spain.
|
|
