Games Workshop Group PLC announces that the Board has today declared a dividend of 20 pence per share. This will be paid on 14 September 2015 for shareholders on the register at 7 August 2015, with an ex-dividend date of 6 August 2015. The last date for elections for the dividend re-investment plan is 21 August 2015.
No surprise there. It'll be curious to read whether or not they deserve to pay a dividend (I'm downloading as I type).
1. Revenue (at constant currency) is essentially unchanged 2. Profit is essentially unchanged (but no GBP 4.5M charge) 3. Gash Generated is a lot 4. EPS bump is good 5. Mail order is king! Holy crap, shows how much more profitable it is. 6. The sky isn't falling. Some people will be very disappointed that GW's imminent bankruptcy is not yet imminent.
It's better than people expected. Which means the folks who didn't sell off their GW will shares will probably be happy. And perhaps the people who think that GW is a mismanaged mess are actually wrong; and possibly, despite them making decisions that may be unpopular with many players or hobbyists, they may be making the right decisions to maximize their profits for their shareholders.
Revenue down a smidgen, operating profit down a smidgen, cash generated up a smidgen.
At first glance a better report than last year's. A lot of cash has gone out of the business, presumably into dividends. Fair enough if they have also invested wisely.
Have to look in detail at the balance sheet etc to get the full story.
Um, yeah, because they didn't have a 4.5 million exception expense this year (iirc it was their website redesign) and they also paid around a million GBP less in taxes. Sales and actual revenue are down.
6. The sky isn't falling. Some people will be very disappointed that GW's imminent bankruptcy is not yet imminent.
It's better than people expected. Which means the folks who didn't sell off their GW will shares will probably be happy.
The sky isn't falling indeed and it is better than expected (for detractors) but not as good as it should be given they more than doubled the pace of releases for their biggest line. Anyone who expected imminent bankruptcy was a fool. I did however expect to see more fatigue from the pace of releases greater than a 3% drop in sales though.
Um, yeah, because they didn't have a 4.5 million exception expense this year (iirc it was their website redesign) and they also paid around a million GBP less in taxes. Sales and actual revenue are down.
Yeah, I mentioned that in my post a few minutes after.
I think, overall, GW should be happy with those numbers.
Also, if you think about it, 16.5m GBP net profit and 25.6m GBP cash generated out of 123.1m GBP revenue... 13.4% net profit is very healthy for a manufacturer/retailer.
By the way Space Marines didn't come out until FY 2016 (they launched June); only Eldar made it into FY 2015.
Regarding fatigue: I think this is an indicator that working the golden goose (read - superfans) is a highly profitable venture. Incidentally, I hope they feel validated that their post-2015 codex releases are the right track and keep going that way **until all the freaking factions are done**.
"Secondly, I will review our product range. We believe this is long overdue: it is time for a resetting of the ranges. Not tweaking here and
there but a top down reassessment. I expect to update you further at the half year. We will aim to continue to deliver outstanding
product and customer service, maintain our Group gross margin and continue to improve our Group stock turn. To be absolutely clear I
will not be reducing the RRP of our products: they are premium priced for their premium quality. I will, however, be looking to offer a
broader range of price points. This is exciting and is for the long term, so I'm not promising when you will see a change. We have
already started the brainstorming in our monthly strategic product meetings. It is early days, but I can already foresee some busy times
ahead."
1) FW moving to the main website publically confirmed, this becomes interesting if it allows ordering to store and removes that ridiculous postage barrier (price is a little steep in my experience considering I've been part of doing more for less in London with companies with proven track records but whatever).
2)
Secondly, I will review our product range. We believe this is long overdue: it is time for a resetting of the ranges. Not tweaking here and there but a top down reassessment. I expect to update you further at the half year. We will aim to continue to deliver outstanding product and customer service, maintain our Group gross margin and continue to improve our Group stock turn. To be absolutely clear I will not be reducing the RRP of our products: they are premium priced for their premium quality. I will, however, be looking to offer a broader range of price points. This is exciting and is for the long term, so I'm not promising when you will see a change. We have already started the brainstorming in our monthly strategic product meetings. It is early days, but I can already foresee some busy times ahead.
Hope you don't play a niche or under-performing 40k army like Sisters or Dark Eldar................or Slaanesh.
"Secondly, I will review our product range. We believe this is long overdue: it is time for a resetting of the ranges. Not tweaking here and
there but a top down reassessment. I expect to update you further at the half year. We will aim to continue to deliver outstanding
product and customer service, maintain our Group gross margin and continue to improve our Group stock turn. To be absolutely clear I
will not be reducing the RRP of our products: they are premium priced for their premium quality. I will, however, be looking to offer a
broader range of price points. This is exciting and is for the long term, so I'm not promising when you will see a change. We have
already started the brainstorming in our monthly strategic product meetings. It is early days, but I can already foresee some busy times
ahead."
Baragash wrote:
Hope you don't play a niche or under-performing 40k army like Sisters or Dark Eldar................or Slaanesh.
In context, he seems to be saying that he will consider releasing cheaper options for some models. and possibly some more expensive ones. Does not look like dropping 40k factions is hinted at.
In the dropping-support sense they have already reviewed the hel out of their range (epic, BFG, WFB).
The important bit; everything else is just fluff and management doublespeak.
Over the full year, it's down a tiny amount. However, given that the first 6 months was significantly lower, the last 6 months outperformed the same period in the prior year.
1) FW moving to the main website publically confirmed, this becomes interesting if it allows ordering to store and removes that ridiculous postage barrier (price is a little steep in my experience considering I've been part of doing more for less in London with companies with proven track records but whatever).
This is such a wonderful thing. If it can be ordered via FLGS (through web orders) they will get, like tens of thousands out of some peeps.
123,5 -> 119,1
That is small? That's actualyl another step into getting small.
The effect of these non-core activities and the continuing effects of unfavourable exchange rates mean that our reported sales show declines in retail (-
4.6%) and trade (-6.3%). Mail order growth was 3.9%.
Considering how hard GW blitz the 2nd half of the year with rapid releases and with 7th Edition dropping at the start of the fiscal year to have continued sales drops is not a great sigh for their long term gameplan. They are quick to stamp out any notion of price drops because that apparently sounds like corporate heresy to them.
1) FW moving to the main website publically confirmed, this becomes interesting if it allows ordering to store and removes that ridiculous postage barrier (price is a little steep in my experience considering I've been part of doing more for less in London with companies with proven track records but whatever).
Interesting and good news. The stupid postage actively puts me off purchasing. Every now and then maybe once, twice a year I'll have enough to justify spending enough to get free postage, but I won't indulge in the odd impulse buy.
1) FW moving to the main website publically confirmed, this becomes interesting if it allows ordering to store and removes that ridiculous postage barrier (price is a little steep in my experience considering I've been part of doing more for less in London with companies with proven track records but whatever).
This is such a wonderful thing. If it can be ordered via FLGS (through web orders) they will get, like tens of thousands out of some peeps.
The people spending thousands get free shipping anyway, so there's no barrier there. It will mean a pretty significant boost in smaller purchases though .
1) FW moving to the main website publically confirmed, this becomes interesting if it allows ordering to store and removes that ridiculous postage barrier (price is a little steep in my experience considering I've been part of doing more for less in London with companies with proven track records but whatever).
This is such a wonderful thing. If it can be ordered via FLGS (through web orders) they will get, like tens of thousands out of some peeps.
The people spending thousands get free shipping anyway, so there's no barrier there. It will mean a pretty significant boost in smaller purchases though .
Where does this leave the whole "I don't support GW, I give my money to FW" "you know its the same company?" stuff that was going on elsewhere?
To be absolutely clear I will not be reducing the RRP of our products:
"You're not much good to me alive, are you, GW?"
All they have to do is repackage some stuff into smaller, cheaper, or larger cheaper bundles, and they can create cheaper prices without seemingly reducing prices. Also, stop raising prices, and inflation will gradually erode the price barrier. If there was any inflation anyway, ATM the UK has gone to zero inflation again.
Where does this leave the whole "I don't support GW, I give my money to FW" "you know its the same company?" stuff that was going on elsewhere?
It doesn't affect it. The money will still report to FW.
My take-away from the whole thing is that they seem to be doing alright. "Reported sales fell by 3.5% to £119.1 million for the year" isn't great, and indicates a reduction in buyers, especially in the indy space (6.x% decline). The report makes mention that they've been bad at recruiting and aim to do something about it, but their entire approach seems to be to open more stores and give the managers huge targets.
Also interesting to note that the stock is managed automatically from Nottingham, so store managers don't even deal with stock, and that there are ~7000 indy traders worldwide. It'll be interesting to track how that changed.
Also; rolling the none-core stuff into the core sales really hides what's going on.
0.1m increase in licensing revenue, despite all that work isn't great either.
Where does this leave the whole "I don't support GW, I give my money to FW" "you know its the same company?" stuff that was going on elsewhere?
I think that was more along the line of rewarding good behaviour with hard cash. I know that's what I think either way - FW put out some quality products in my view - the books and models together. So I spend my cash there. GW rarely tempts these days, so my cash doesn't follow. If FW get integrated with the main site but still put out a quality product then I will continue to reward good behaviour.
As I write the world is tumbling in chaos around us. Pundits discover they cannot predict elections, the Americans ride to the rescue of world football (thank you, Uncle Sam), Sunderland escape relegation, again, the UK will split up into its consistent parts, it will leave Europe; and yet we struggle on. Babies get born, the rain falls the sun shines and the plants grow, our chickens keep laying, and Games Workshop still employs over 1,500 people, supporting 1,500 families all over the globe, making the best miniatures money can buy, providing one of the best investments in our owners' portfolios, and having a great deal of fun doing it.
Interesting that he admits to failing with growth, and that a lot of indies have dropped them, though he blames it on disruption from the changes:
One bit of the GMP remains stubbornly unrealised – sales growth. We knew that the huge infrastructure changes we have been making these last few years (and are still making, we have just signed off on a new ERP system) would be disruptive, so we are not surprised that many trade accounts across Europe no longer trade with us.
Forge World mail order store. To protect our sales we are building a new Forge World mail order store on the same platform
and hosting environment as our Citadel mail order store and migrating all products and imagery. It is on track with a
scheduled go live date in the summer of 2015. It will cost £1.1 million.
Consolidating everything into one place makes store orders more likely
I also notice the investment into the studio and new tooling is pretty big (27.7 million).
That's a lot of investment in new products, apparently the reason for the 3% price rise, so I'm wondering exactly what they are doing.
The mention of an overhaul of their product range makes me wonder if we will see not only everything in plastic from now on but also could be hinting at an entire replacement of the Warhammer fantasy line of minis.
Or possibly more Heresy plastic than we thought? FW going onto the main website / in store would tie in nicely with that.
ahzek wrote: Forge World mail order store. To protect our sales we are building a new Forge World mail order store on the same platform
and hosting environment as our Citadel mail order store and migrating all products and imagery. It is on track with a
scheduled go live date in the summer of 2015. It will cost £1.1 million.
So.. . Not actually combining onto the main store .. Just using the same gakky webcart software and hosting on the same server .
"Secondly, I will review our product range. We believe this is long overdue: it is time for a resetting of the ranges. Not tweaking here and
there but a top down reassessment. I expect to update you further at the half year. We will aim to continue to deliver outstanding
product and customer service, maintain our Group gross margin and continue to improve our Group stock turn. To be absolutely clear I
will not be reducing the RRP of our products: they are premium priced for their premium quality. I will, however, be looking to offer a
broader range of price points. This is exciting and is for the long term, so I'm not promising when you will see a change. We have
already started the brainstorming in our monthly strategic product meetings. It is early days, but I can already foresee some busy times
ahead."
Baragash wrote:
Hope you don't play a niche or under-performing 40k army like Sisters or Dark Eldar................or Slaanesh.
In context, he seems to be saying that he will consider releasing cheaper options for some models. and possibly some more expensive ones. Does not look like dropping 40k factions is hinted at.
In the dropping-support sense they have already reviewed the hel out of their range (epic, BFG, WFB).
Of course, how we interpret "resetting of the ranges" is entirely a matter of opinion. As someone with about 10 years of experience of range planning I know what my money is on though And actually, from a professional point of view, I do think that they have range bloat, though I think that is an ill-considered side effect of a poor overall product strategy (that is, basically cutting everything back and relying on 40k).
(Yes, technically I did just make an appeal to authority )
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: "In July 2015, we relaunched Warhammer Fantasy to broad acclaim ‘Warhammer: Age of Sigmar’."
Broad acclaim? Wouldn't have called it that.
GW local had more people in on launch day than I've seen for ages, and they were buying. Lot of people at my club have bought Age of Sigmar that have not bought GW for years. Local FLGS has been selling it and the new products well. Your personal experience may be different but don't make the mistake of assuming that the super small niche of haters on the internet are actually and kind of real world representation. I expect GW's 15-16 to look a lot better, and if plastic Heresy happens then Q3/4 will get a super boost, same with Forgeworld going easier to order with less postage charge.
Pricing, I still honestly do not think they are overpriced. I'd like them to be cheaper (who wouldn't) but they are actually broadly similar to what you get say in a malifaux box (or more in many cases) with more customisation. Mantic are not actually much cheaper and I personally think their models are rubbish quality and rubbish design in of themselves. Took me about 2 hours to clean up my AoS starter, it took longer to do my now gone Deadzone faction starter as it was junk.
I honestly think GW have laid some good foundations for their future buisness, they now need to do likewise to 40K rapidly, or do it using Heresy. There will always be a market for a premium product.
To be here next year we have to do what all our customers want, not just a noisy few, and find a way of making money doing it.
So they have heard the feedback from the forums but thats just whiny naysayers. It'll be interesting if they actually start doing market research or if they still assume that they know best what the majority actually wants.
£1.1 million budget to roll on a new product line into the website is a huge spend. It theory you could get away with creating a new container and batch creating the products from the exising descriptions & phots, then giving access to the FW team to the backend same as the GW mail order trolls, should take a couple of interins a week at most with some testing at the end. Sounds like they are completely revamping the backend of FW and I wouldn't be surprised if we don't see regional pricing added in as well.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: "In July 2015, we relaunched Warhammer Fantasy to broad acclaim ‘Warhammer: Age of Sigmar’."
Broad acclaim? Wouldn't have called it that.
GW local had more people in on launch day than I've seen for ages, and they were buying. Lot of people at my club have bought Age of Sigmar that have not bought GW for years. Local FLGS has been selling it and the new products well. Your personal experience may be different but don't make the mistake of assuming that the super small niche of haters on the internet are actually and kind of real world representation.
As long as you don't make the mistake of calling people who are making valid criticisms of a product "haturz"...
TwilightSparkles wrote: Mantic are not actually much cheaper and I personally think their models are rubbish quality and rubbish design in of themselves. Took me about 2 hours to clean up my AoS starter, it took longer to do my now gone Deadzone faction starter as it was junk.
You had me up to here. Can you find any example where Mantic isn't much cheaper than GW?
At a skim of wayland games, 5 new AoS infantry mini's cost £30, but I get can 15 Palladin cavalry for the same money.
And that's discounting the £30 Dwarf starter army set, because it's ancient.
Sure, GW figures tend to be nicer than Mantics, but the price differential is enormous.
To be here next year we have to do what all our customers want, not just a noisy few, and find a way of making money doing it.
So they have heard the feedback from the forums but thats just whiny naysayers. It'll be interesting if they actually start doing market research or if they still assume that they know best what the majority actually wants.
£1.1 million budget to roll on a new product line into the website is a huge spend. It theory you could get away with creating a new container and batch creating the products from the exising descriptions & phots, then giving access to the FW team to the backend same as the GW mail order trolls, should take a couple of interins a week at most with some testing at the end. Sounds like they are completely revamping the backend of FW and I wouldn't be surprised if we don't see regional pricing added in as well.
The pricing of the website stuff always sounds mental until you realise that Kirby's wife (qualified private trainer) is in charge of it. With a salary of about £120k/year.
TwilightSparkles wrote: GW local had more people in on launch day than I've seen for ages, and they were buying.
My friend's local GW was empty the day of release and the gamestore right next to it was packed to the brim selling the new Magic expansion all day long.
The point I'm making is that anecdotal evidence isn't.
The preamble is still the most amazing part of all this. But GW seem to be doing alright from the figures.
I do worry that "reorganisation of our ranges" means "completely scrapping LOTR/The Hobbit" though. They are the miniatures from GW I really appreciate.
LOTR is getting scrapped anyway. Seemingly to be replaced by plastic H/H stuff. It was dead from the start - the Goblin Town LE box still hasn't sold out, and you can buy all 3 films on DVD now.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I don't think 40K is getting Age of Sigmar'd.
Horus Heresy on the other hand...
One of the most trusted rumors guys has said 40k is basically getting sigmar'ed. Now we have a financial report that says they are revaluating their range.
It's over. Done. Pack it in. That's polite corporate bs talk.
They'll gak out as much codices and anything else they possibly can before they go the sigmar route just to milk the old fans one last time. Then kick them out on their way to their new fanbase. That simple really.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I don't think 40K is getting Age of Sigmar'd.
Horus Heresy on the other hand...
One of the most trusted rumors guys has said 40k is basically getting sigmar'ed. Now we have a financial report that says they are revaluating their range.
It's over. Done. Pack it in. That's polite corporate bs talk.
They'll gak out as much codices and anything else they possibly can before they go the sigmar route just to milk the old fans one last time. Then kick them out on their way to their new fanbase. That simple really.
IIRC Hasting (or Harry) didn't said that, only that codex would be a thing of the past within the next 2 years. While I think that GW might have plans to sigmarify 40k, i'm pretty sure that these plans will only be enacted if the sales for AoS are way better than what the sales of fantasy were. Another reason to hope that AOS turns into the biggest financial failure in the miniature world since age of ragnarok (weirdly enough, both of these abominations have pretty much the same name)
GW have been only making minor changes to the WH40K rules for 2 decades and it still outperforms any other tabletop wargame by a factor of 10. I just can't see them changing that.
Baby and bath water come to mind.
I take a consolidation of their ranges to be more pocket money type products and less duplication. By that I mean no more tactical and assault boxes for each and every SM Chapter and more accessory sprues.
The only change I can see in WH40K is they might biggerise certain ranges (say SM/Orks) to differentiate then from others products. But that's a guess.
notprop wrote: GW have been only making minor changes to the WH40K rules for 2 decades and it still outperforms any other tabletop wargame by a factor of 10. I just can't see them changing that.
Baby and bath water come to mind.
They'd only been making minor changes to WFB for decades too.
notprop wrote: GW have been only making minor changes to the WH40K rules for 2 decades and it still outperforms any other tabletop wargame by a factor of 10. I just can't see them changing that.
Baby and bath water come to mind.
They'd only been making minor changes to WFB for decades too.
Yeah but that wasn't selling. Since its release WH40K has always been far more popular than WHFB.
And anyway how do you Sigmarise WH40K? Sigmarisation seems to be the introduction of a Space Marine archetype to Fantasy, they already did this when they made the game!
I'm skeptical that they will do to 40K what they did to Fantasy battle. To do that would mean having the entire universe over-run by chaos and "reset", new factions introduced and made central to the background while old central players were erased, and a scale/basing change.
The only thing I could possibly see them introducing is a Warscroll type approach to rules and perhaps the removal of points, but I think they'd be wise to see how that went down profits wise before doing anything of the sort. Warscrolls for 40K could be pretty decent IF they are pointed appropriately.
The Horus Heresy line might be a savior for GW though- they'll be wondering why the hell they didn't do it sooner.
"Secondly, I will review our product range. We believe this is long overdue: it is time for a resetting of the ranges. Not tweaking here and
there but a top down reassessment. I expect to update you further at the half year.
Sounds like a reference to dropping Hobbit/LotR in favor of HH.
notprop wrote: Yeah but that wasn't selling. Since its release WH40K has always been far more popular than WHFB.
And anyway how do you Sigmarise WH40K? Sigmarisation seems to be the introduction of a Space Marine archetype to Fantasy, they already did this when they made the game!
Don't change the background, but change the rules, army book releases and way of boxing models up.
angelofvengeance wrote: I'm kinda glad that Mr Rountree didn't come out with the same nonsense statements that Tom Kirby often spouted.
Kevin Rountree is CEO, not chairman. So the author of the Chairman's preamble has not changed.
My bad- I missed the preamble lol. This bit in particular, I had a good chuckle at.
I do not often talk about our products, partly because I think they speak eloquently for themselves, and partly because it is important for everyone to remember (that’s owners, customers and staff) we are a business. We need to be here next year if you want more of the exquisite models we make. To be here next year we have to do what all our customers want, not just a noisy few, and find a way of making money doing it. This year, though, is an exceptional year. Not only have we just opened a wonderful new visitor centre on time and under budget (take a bow, Tony) we have also relaunched Warhammer.
A noisy few is putting it lightly. There's a great deal of improvements GW need to make in the way they operate. Rules writing in particular.
Herzlos wrote: The chairmans preamble is great, Kirby is nuts:
As I write the world is tumbling in chaos around us. Pundits discover they cannot predict elections, the Americans ride to the rescue of world football (thank you, Uncle Sam), Sunderland escape relegation, again, the UK will split up into its consistent parts, it will leave Europe; and yet we struggle on. Babies get born, the rain falls the sun shines and the plants grow, our chickens keep laying, and Games Workshop still employs over 1,500 people, supporting 1,500 families all over the globe, making the best miniatures money can buy, providing one of the best investments in our owners' portfolios, and having a great deal of fun doing it.
Interesting that he admits to failing with growth, and that a lot of indies have dropped them, though he blames it on disruption from the changes:
One bit of the GMP remains stubbornly unrealised – sales growth. We knew that the huge infrastructure changes we have been making these last few years (and are still making, we have just signed off on a new ERP system) would be disruptive, so we are not surprised that many trade accounts across Europe no longer trade with us.
I'll say one thing about Tom Kirby - his preambles are things of legend on this forum
You may have noticed that my signature is lasy year's preamble.
Somebody needs to compile these into one document, sell copies and use the funds to support dakka
Rountree seems way more reasonable than Kirby, which is highlighted spectacularly when you compare Kirbys preamble to Rountrees writing in the report itself...
I don't see how anyone would think that they're about to Age of Sigmar-ify 40k though. Fantasy was a failing product that desperately needed dramatic changes because no one was buying it. 40k on the other hand is the most successful miniature game in the world. See the difference?
Mymearan wrote: Rountree seems way more reasonable than Kirby, which is highlighted spectacularly when you compare Kirbys preamble to Rountrees writing in the report itself...
I don't see how anyone would think that they're about to Age of Sigmar-ify 40k though. Fantasy was a failing product that desperately needed dramatic changes because no one was buying it. 40k on the other hand is the most successful miniature game in the world. See the difference?
Warhammer branding
We have taken the decision in the year to rebrand our stores ‘Warhammer’. It is what our customers call us. This will be rolled out
progressively, as and when we open new or refurbish our existing stores. At the year end date we had 13 Warhammer branded stores.
Thirdly, we must grow the number of customers we have. We have been underperforming here in recent years, mainly on account of
our focus on the value based initiatives of converting our loss making stores to profitable ones and restructuring our sales businesses to
take out duplicate and unnecessary costs. My aim is to:
1. Open more of our own stores, mostly in our proven one man store format, in greenfield cities in North America and Continental
Europe. Our retail sales managers all have ambitious goals for 2015/16. I am also working closely with our manager for Asia to open
more stores in Japan, Singapore and Hong Kong. We do believe we can establish our Hobby business in Asia, but this isn't going to
happen overnight. My global goal is to open 30 stores (net) in 2015/16. If we achieve our first initiative it may well be many more
I'm also proposing a trial in a few high footfall locations, like the one we opened in April 2015 on Tottenham Court Road, London. It is a
multi-man format store with an extended (more expensive) shop fit: mainly new till format, mobile tills, better use of merchandising
space, new web terminal (to access our broader range) and next day stock delivery to the store for in-store orders. The store has been
branded ‘Warhammer’ instead of ‘Games Workshop’. I believe that this store format can support the additional investment as such
stores are uniquely placed to service a higher number of customers, often lots of tourists. My aim is to pilot, on a smaller scale, one
each in Boston, Sydney, Munich, Paris and Copenhagen in the year ahead. I don't intend to move our overall retail strategy away from
one man stores; these will be exceptional stores. The only differences to our one man store format will be the additional rent and
property related costs and the additional capital investment. We can flex the staffing levels.
Years ago they did have a "superstore" in Manchester which was similar to this set up.
2. Open more stockist trade accounts using our proven stockist strategy. This will be based on our well established terms and
conditions, selling independent accounts our best selling products and, where appropriate, the extended range. Our global trade
manager has some ambitious plans to grow the net number of trade outlets we have, with a particular focus on North America.
3. Explore new core trade opportunities in toy, craft, book and comic stores. This has always been a great opportunity to extend our
reach and help us find new customers. I am working closely with my advisers exploring these types of locations.
So sales are down about 4%, and operating profits (not counting exceptional costs nor royalties) around 3%. They upped overall profits from last year thanks to not having exceptional costs (i.e. dumping 4 million pounds in the WC to revamp their website).
Sales are down and profits from a sales/costs ratio are down. The numbers may be slightly better than expected but I don't see how this can be called good news for GW by anyone. They're still shrinking in the midst of an expanding market.
Oh and we also have Kirby's usual madman ramblings in the form of his chairman's preamble. The usual
Not for any of the figures, strip it all away and GW barely trod water, which is better than going backwards but in the context of the year's releases etc still suggests that the same problems persist, even if a finger has been shoved into the dyke.
However, nearly all of the problems are, either tacitly or overtly, acknowledged in the Chairman's report, often with suggestions or hints about what they propose to do about it.
I think this is quite reassuring that the message many of us have been shouting has finally reached the ears of people who matter, my only reservation is if they approach solving the problems in what, for many of us, is the 'right' way.
Oddly, none of those steps involve "improving customer relations and providing products they want and/or improve rules". It's all about opening more stores which don't help people actually play the game.
Not for any of the figures, strip it all away and GW barely trod water, which is better than going backwards but in the context of the year's releases etc still suggests that the same problems persist, even if a finger has been shoved into the dyke.
However, nearly all of the problems are, either tacitly or overtly, acknowledged in the Chairman's report, often with suggestions or hints about what they propose to do about it.
I think this is quite reassuring that the message many of us have been shouting has finally reached the ears of people who matter, my only reservation is if they approach solving the problems in what, for many of us, is the 'right' way.
Indeed. It reads as a much more balanced PoV from the man (Roundtree) who is day to day running the organisation. Less Kirby hubris more common sense it would seem.
Allot of the releases over the last 6 months seemed like GW were moving however slowly toward the more sensible desires of the player base this report seems to back that up.
The figures seem strong enough especially given what must be anticipated improvements in the next period.
Kirasu wrote: Oddly, none of those steps involve "improving customer relations and providing products they want and/or improve rules". It's all about opening more stores which don't help people actually play the game.
Or advertising.
The only approaches mentioned seem to just double down on the current approach (more 1 man stores, more sales targets), rather than either assessing the situation or improving things.
Kirasu wrote: Oddly, none of those steps involve "improving customer relations and providing products they want and/or improve rules". It's all about opening more stores which don't help people actually play the game.
He does, however, acknowledge gaming as part of the hobby, alongside acknowledging that adults buy their products.
So, for the first time in a long time we know that GW knows that grown ups buy their stuff and play games with it, we can only hope they do something decent with that information, customer relations get taken care of if they do.
You want get an admission along the lines of "we've been donkey-caves to a solid percentage of our customers" in a financial report, but one very much gets the impression that GW has sat up and paid attention since the hurt of the last few reports.
How the hell the entire GW didn't sink when Kirby was the chairman is a miracle itself. The guy seems to have ... issues, let's call it that.
Well, since the report there was the release of the Skitarii, the Adeptus Mechanicus, the new Knight and now Age of Sigmar. I'm REALLY curious if the trend was changed thanks to this year's releases.
I attend the same place as Grimtuff, so he's welcome to try
So , if we're all done with the waving of our gigantic manly bits about, how about we revisit the topic and leave the posturing for somewhere more appropriate, hmm?
To me it sounded like they were opening more, and they called it "proven" on top of that. They're tinkering with the idea of opening a few big stores in big cities with lots of traffic or tourism, but I wouldn't call that reversing the format, though.
I have set a goal of getting the business into sales growth in 2015/16 and have asked staff to accept a salary freeze until December
2015 to allow us to maintain our cost to sales ratio. If we deliver sales growth in the first half of 2015/16 I have agreed to back date any
salary reviews to 1 June 2015. We are all working hard to deliver this goal.
They are on a salary freeze in the same year they payed out a dividend?!? And they literally just put a gilded statue out in front of the building. They need to start worrying about the squirly guy burning the building down. And getting their raises is contingent on turning around a multi-year sales decline trend. Good luck with that.
Seriously though, this is death spiral stuff. Put salary freezes into a company with failing sales and anyone talented enough to get a job elsewhere, will. You end up left with the people too thick to see the writing on the wall, or people who aren't qualified enough to do good work, but just good enough not to get fired.
I have set a goal of getting the business into sales growth in 2015/16 and have asked staff to accept a salary freeze until December
2015 to allow us to maintain our cost to sales ratio. If we deliver sales growth in the first half of 2015/16 I have agreed to back date any
salary reviews to 1 June 2015. We are all working hard to deliver this goal.
They are on a salary freeze in the same year they payed out a dividend?!? And they literally just put a gilded statue out in front of the building. They need to start worrying about the squirly guy burning the building down. And getting their raises is contingent on turning around a multi-year sales decline trend. Good luck with that.
Seriously though, this is death spiral stuff. Put salary freezes into a company with failing sales and anyone talented enough to get a job elsewhere, will. You end up left with the people too thick to see the writing on the wall, or people who aren't qualified enough to do good work, but just good enough not to get fired.
I do wonder if these freezes include the chairman's golden parachute
I have set a goal of getting the business into sales growth in 2015/16 and have asked staff to accept a salary freeze until December
2015 to allow us to maintain our cost to sales ratio. If we deliver sales growth in the first half of 2015/16 I have agreed to back date any
salary reviews to 1 June 2015. We are all working hard to deliver this goal.
They are on a salary freeze in the same year they payed out a dividend?!? And they literally just put a gilded statue out in front of the building. They need to start worrying about the squirly guy burning the building down. And getting their raises is contingent on turning around a multi-year sales decline trend. Good luck with that.
Seriously though, this is death spiral stuff. Put salary freezes into a company with failing sales and anyone talented enough to get a job elsewhere, will. You end up left with the people too thick to see the writing on the wall, or people who aren't qualified enough to do good work, but just good enough not to get fired.
I do wonder if these freezes include the chairman's golden parachute
This is speculation. But if they do salary review annually for the whole company to coincide with the annual financials, then that June 1 announcement could have been right as employees where expecting to get their raises. Maybe a past employee of GW can shed light on when they typically handle salary reviews. I'd like to know just how bad GW kicked its employees in the
I have set a goal of getting the business into sales growth in 2015/16 and have asked staff to accept a salary freeze until December
2015 to allow us to maintain our cost to sales ratio. If we deliver sales growth in the first half of 2015/16 I have agreed to back date any
salary reviews to 1 June 2015.
AduroT wrote: Preamble wasn't nearly as good this time as some of the previous. A couple nice gems, but nothing as good as Who even hears about Pokemon nowadays?
Perhaps someone showed Kirby the profits of Pokemon during one of his Jane Austen reading sessions and he nearly choked to death on his tea?
He does, however, acknowledge gaming as part of the hobby, alongside acknowledging that adults buy their products.
So, for the first time in a long time we know that GW knows that grown ups buy their stuff and play games with it, we can only hope they do something decent with that information, customer relations get taken care of if they do.
That certainly sounds encouraging, but if they're acknowledging that grown ups play their games, where does AoS fit in? Or is that likely to be a remnant of the old direction?
Uuuh... did I miss something? Somehow, I can not agree that GW makesd premium quality.
You don't? I think you'd pretty much be on your own there. Most people seem to agree that their models are some of the best on the business.
The plastic as such is good, but even the new models are a mixed bag, some good, some less so, and some of their models models don't assemble too smoothly. Their infantry lines certaily are prone to gaps and the tanks also require a lot of care to not leave gaps. Nothing a dedicated hobbyist can't fix, sure, but I wouldn't call models where you have to spend so much time on mould lines and seamless fits "premium". Decent quality, yes, but not premium.
I'm excited for this. I'd like to see what their half-year report in January 2016 says.
I'm feeling the exact opposite emotion, myself. Maybe I'm just paranoid, but it makes me think they'll be reducing the range and Squatting some armies that aren't selling so well (even if that reason is only because of terrible rules or because they've never been updated since they were released), which puts me in a mood to stop buying anything for fear of throwing my money away investing in an army that won't be around anymore. Same thing if they "AoS-ify" 40k as everyone's been saying, it'll kill pretty much whatever little interest I had left in the game. It really doesn't sound "safe" to give GW my money...we'll see about the time that Tau release is supposed to come out, though.
And if Tau end up getting cut from the game, for whatever reason, then all of my 40k crap goes on eBay and I never touch another GW product ever again. I don't think they'd actually be stupid enough to do that, but then after Age of Sigmar there's really no telling anymore.
To me it sounded like they were opening more, and they called it "proven" on top of that. They're tinkering with the idea of opening a few big stores in big cities with lots of traffic or tourism, but I wouldn't call that reversing the format, though.
There's a bit about continuing to trial multi man stores in high traffic areas such as their Tottenham Court Road store.
I read that as corporate speak for "one man stores are a nightmare, so we're going back to proper shops, but I can't say that otherwise I make the Chairman out to be the idiot we all know he is."
I have set a goal of getting the business into sales growth in 2015/16 and have asked staff to accept a salary freeze until December
2015 to allow us to maintain our cost to sales ratio. If we deliver sales growth in the first half of 2015/16 I have agreed to back date any
salary reviews to 1 June 2015. We are all working hard to deliver this goal.
They are on a salary freeze in the same year they payed out a dividend?!? And they literally just put a gilded statue out in front of the building. They need to start worrying about the squirly guy burning the building down. And getting their raises is contingent on turning around a multi-year sales decline trend. Good luck with that.
Seriously though, this is death spiral stuff. Put salary freezes into a company with failing sales and anyone talented enough to get a job elsewhere, will. You end up left with the people too thick to see the writing on the wall, or people who aren't qualified enough to do good work, but just good enough not to get fired.
A fatal flaw in this plan is that the UK government is increasing the minimum wage heavy over the next year, so some GW staff will be getting pay rises no matter what management want!
The report is better than many expected, the barrage of releases in the last six months seems to have stemmed the tide for now, but the bottom line is that sales continue to decrease. At least Roundtree has acknowledge this problem and is making it a priority to fix it.
I just hope AoS bombs hard enough in the next six months to make them realise that doing the same to 40K will kill them as a company.
Also I'm hopeful the Forgeworld changes will get ride of the high postage costs, if I can get them delivered to a local store for free they will see more of my money.
I have set a goal of getting the business into sales growth in 2015/16 and have asked staff to accept a salary freeze until December
2015 to allow us to maintain our cost to sales ratio. If we deliver sales growth in the first half of 2015/16 I have agreed to back date any
salary reviews to 1 June 2015. We are all working hard to deliver this goal.
They are on a salary freeze in the same year they payed out a dividend?!? And they literally just put a gilded statue out in front of the building. They need to start worrying about the squirly guy burning the building down. And getting their raises is contingent on turning around a multi-year sales decline trend. Good luck with that.
Seriously though, this is death spiral stuff. Put salary freezes into a company with failing sales and anyone talented enough to get a job elsewhere, will. You end up left with the people too thick to see the writing on the wall, or people who aren't qualified enough to do good work, but just good enough not to get fired.
I do wonder if these freezes include the chairman's golden parachute
Kirby owns, what, about 7% of the stock? Why would he care if he gets a freeze? He's getting a sweet dividend check.
Anyway, I feel it is very telling that, even after all of the releases this year, they still couldn't do better. What are they going to do when they've "finished" updating 40K in the next year or so?
As far as "premium" models go, they do a good job on their infantry (as long as you like the over-the-top aesthetics), but their vehicle designs ssuucckk. They can't properly design a vehicle for actual gameplay use to save their lives. Weapons that barely move, or mounted in ways that they can't even shoot anything near the vehicle, "spheres" that aren't spheres, flyers that technically can't shoot anything within 24", and on and on.
and he's expressed a desire to get back in to toy shops, comic stores etc where GW has not been since the glory days of heroquest,, space crusade etc
if they manage that it will actually count as advertising as well as more opportunities to sell stock (how many of the older UK members here first encountered table top gaming via one of those boxsets from a toy focused store? a fairly high percentage I would suspect)
OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote: and he's expressed a desire to get back in to toy shops, comic stores etc where GW has not been since the glory days of heroquest,, space crusade etc
if they manage that it will actually count as advertising as well as more opportunities to sell stock (how many of the older UK members here first encountered table top gaming via one of those boxsets from a toy focused store? a fairly high percentage I would suspect)
I took that to mean they'll send a sales rep to the specialist places to see if they'll take a rack of stuff. I'm not sure there's many up here that would agree (though I heard something about Forbidden Planet stocking some).
What they need to do (but don't seem to be doing) is trying to get their goods into big box retailers - Walmart, Tesco, Argos* etc.
*Back when I got into gaming about '96, Argos was the only place I could get GW stuff, and they've currently got pages and pages of games and lego, though I don't think they have any model kits. Anyway, they sell similar stuff, used to sell it, and there is a store in pretty much every large town across the UK. There's at least 8 within a 30 minute drive of me, whilst there's 1 game store and 1 comic shop.
The big question is: is Kirby a genuine lunatic or is he trolling everyone?
I do not often talk about our products
Translation: I wouldnt know where to start. Is it something to do with the Star Treks?
To be here next year we have to do what all our customers want, not just a noisy few
Stop liking what I dont like.jpg
Only £7.50 and a day you will remember all your life.
Sell, sell, sell!
The new Warhammer is new.
Long cat is long
As I write the world is tumbling in chaos around us. Pundits discover they cannot predict elections, the Americans ride to the rescue of world football (thank you, Uncle Sam), Sunderland escape relegation, again, the UK will split up into its consistent parts, it will leave Europe; and yet we struggle on.
Ok, so hes a lunatic. Is he actually predicting these things or is he just being unnecessarily overly-dramatic. Also Kirby, I think you mean "constituent ".
They still fail to acknowledge the obvious elephant in the room:
Barrier to entry is far to high, and constantly increasing the prices to ludicrous levels (seriously, look at the cost of those Sigmarines!) is not going to rescue them.
Tannhauser42 wrote: Kirby owns, what, about 7% of the stock? Why would he care if he gets a freeze? He's getting a sweet dividend check.
Anyway, I feel it is very telling that, even after all of the releases this year, they still couldn't do better. What are they going to do when they've "finished" updating 40K in the next year or so?
Smacks of more short term cost cutting that GW have been doing, which seems aimed at making the company a more attractive purchase and thus enabling Kirby to trouser a nice big payout from the buy out.
RE: min wage, not sure many are on min wage at GW now that they have one man stores? I guess maybe some of the bar staff at Bugmans?
Time is a flat circle, we'll simply go back round to the begining and start all over again when it comes to releases for 40k. GW simply can't afford a break in the release cycle now based on these numbers otherwise they risk tanking their already slowing down sales.
H.B.M.C. wrote: They still fail to acknowledge the obvious elephant in the room:
Barrier to entry is far to high, and constantly increasing the prices to ludicrous levels (seriously, look at the cost of those Sigmarines!) is not going to rescue them.
Not true, there's a whole bit about the top down reorganisation of the range, and while they won't be cutting prices, they'll be expanding the range of price points.
Of course, I have made an assumption that expansion will be down but I foresee a range of 5 man Tactical Squads, Assault Marines without jump packs, smaller fantasy regiments etc.
Basically the same old gak with sprues taken out, but with AoS working the way it does, then that barrier could conceivable be much lower.
Please not I'm making no assertions about the quality of AoS or anyone's desire to play it, just about the accessibility.
Harriticus wrote: Jeez GW is taking a long time to just collapse already
I have it on good word that they've been in a death spiral ever since they moved to white metal in the early '90s.
Smug much?
Look at all they've done in the last year just to tread water, and while the intro makes a lot of the right noises, it's still just words and modern GW is almost defined by the right idea being executed poorly, so I wouldn't crow too much just yet.
I have set a goal of getting the business into sales growth in 2015/16 and have asked staff to accept a salary freeze until December
2015 to allow us to maintain our cost to sales ratio. If we deliver sales growth in the first half of 2015/16 I have agreed to back date any
salary reviews to 1 June 2015. We are all working hard to deliver this goal.
They are on a salary freeze in the same year they payed out a dividend?!? And they literally just put a gilded statue out in front of the building. They need to start worrying about the squirly guy burning the building down. And getting their raises is contingent on turning around a multi-year sales decline trend. Good luck with that.
Seriously though, this is death spiral stuff. Put salary freezes into a company with failing sales and anyone talented enough to get a job elsewhere, will. You end up left with the people too thick to see the writing on the wall, or people who aren't qualified enough to do good work, but just good enough not to get fired.
I do wonder if these freezes include the chairman's golden parachute
Kirby owns, what, about 7% of the stock?
You guys mean Kevin Rountree the new CEO?
I'm not sure what a price freeze has to with prior agreements to the "chairman's" severance package?
GW's strategy of increasing customer uptake is highly dependent on goodwill from both existing customers and stockists due to their strategy of reliance on physical storefronts (both theirs and independents) and positive word of mouth. Considering the scorched earth tactics that were used against the fandom and stockists (Independent sites shut down, non-communication (FAQs, rumors), shutting of fan events, Chapterhouse, regional embargoes, no photo webstores, direct only etc), they have to realize that part of their barrier to growth is the disgruntled masses they have left in their wake. These are a direct obstruction either by not carrying their product or circulating negativity by word of mouth. I think GW's strategy of ignoring those it left behind in favor of new blood is not working out the best as the critical mass that once fueled its growth is now the critical mass that is holding it back.
They'll have to cross back over the scorched earth they created themselves sooner or later, and the sooner they do so, cap in hand, the better off they will be.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
H.B.M.C. wrote: Barrier to entry is far to high, and constantly increasing the prices to ludicrous levels (seriously, look at the cost of those Sigmarines!) is not going to rescue them.
C'mon HBMC: You've been on this board long enough to know that GW costs are a drop in the bucket compared to luxury yachting, space tourism or super car collecting.
1) FW moving to the main website publically confirmed, this becomes interesting if it allows ordering to store and removes that ridiculous postage barrier (price is a little steep in my experience considering I've been part of doing more for less in London with companies with proven track records but whatever).
This is such a wonderful thing. If it can be ordered via FLGS (through web orders) they will get, like tens of thousands out of some peeps.
The people spending thousands get free shipping anyway, so there's no barrier there. It will mean a pretty significant boost in smaller purchases though .
Where does this leave the whole "I don't support GW, I give my money to FW" "you know its the same company?" stuff that was going on elsewhere?
Eh. I've got people near me who'll still claim that FW stuff is not allowed, even if it's both on the GW store, and in a main codex...
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also:
1) Kirby: wtf?
2) FW and GW store merge: Yay
3) Range revision: Could be good. Probably will result in the old metal Steel Legion and Vostroyan models getting either retconned, or made plastic.
4) AoS "Broad Acclaim". They've stuck their head in the sand, and called the planet wrong. Again.
Sales volume appears to be continuing to slide even after the expansive, rapid release of new products. Inventory levels are even lower than last year and the previous year which could mean that the company recognizes volume and demand are lower and don't expect them to increase or that they've hit the wall in their production capabilities. Mr. Rountree's comment about taking a look at the product range could indicate the latter as too many SKUs will weigh heavily on production capabilities unless they plan to expand them, which doesn't appear to be the case.
The company is still profitable and is lean and able to be more responsive to the market. This after Kirby's reorganization efforts; say what you will about the loon...er man but he did cut a lot of fat that needed trimming. I'm not speaking to 1-man stores here as I think that's just silly to begin with and probably a major reason retail is down so much versus mail-order. Why plan your purchasing around when the store is actually open if you can just order online?
Rountree's other comments are just typical corporate speak for different things that companies do anyway which makes me question a bit who they think their target readers are for this because any experienced trader can read between the lines.
"We'll open some stores and close some stores and put them in different places." OK, no company has ever done that before.
"We need more customers so we'll try to open more trade accounts." Odd statement considering the draconian nature of their trade terms and general poor handling of trade accounts.
"We'll try to court comic, toy and other shops as trade partners." Yeah, you're really showing you have no idea who you're selling to or how inaccessible your product is (on several levels) to the broader market.
Financials look good but I have to look at the insane amount of work that it's taken to get them there and that they've really placed all of their eggs in one basket with the focus on 40K and then leaving off of 40K for some time to pursue something completely new in the form of AoS. If AoS doesn't pan out, they've lost out on money they could have been getting from their proven cash-cow, 40K. It's a gamble and I think they know that from they way that they are actually attempting to market the game versus just expecting people to buy it like their other attempts. Time will tell if AoS was a good gamble or not.
Interesting times for GW as a company and they're very much still viable with good cash-flow and a strong, albeit weakening, market position.
Rountree's other comments are just typical corporate speak for different things that companies do anyway which makes me question a bit who they think their target readers are for this because any experienced trader can read between the lines.
Interesting you should say that, because I very much felt it was written with one eye on the likes of us as much as actual shareholders.
I have set a goal of getting the business into sales growth in 2015/16 and have asked staff to accept a salary freeze until December
2015 to allow us to maintain our cost to sales ratio. If we deliver sales growth in the first half of 2015/16 I have agreed to back date any
salary reviews to 1 June 2015. We are all working hard to deliver this goal.
They are on a salary freeze in the same year they payed out a dividend?!? And they literally just put a gilded statue out in front of the building. They need to start worrying about the squirly guy burning the building down. And getting their raises is contingent on turning around a multi-year sales decline trend. Good luck with that.
Seriously though, this is death spiral stuff. Put salary freezes into a company with failing sales and anyone talented enough to get a job elsewhere, will. You end up left with the people too thick to see the writing on the wall, or people who aren't qualified enough to do good work, but just good enough not to get fired.
I do wonder if these freezes include the chairman's golden parachute
Kirby owns, what, about 7% of the stock?
You guys mean Kevin Rountree the new CEO?
I'm not sure what a price freeze has to with prior agreements to the "chairman's" severance package?
Yeeesh, it was just a joke. I was just commenting on how I find it funny that Chairmen/CEOs are always so excited to show off how they're sticking it to their employees via pay freezes, while I'm quite sure their ability to reap in more profit will go unhindered.
Rountree's other comments are just typical corporate speak for different things that companies do anyway which makes me question a bit who they think their target readers are for this because any experienced trader can read between the lines.
Interesting you should say that, because I very much felt it was written with one eye on the likes of us as much as actual shareholders.
My thought as well since they don't have an official communication channel to their customers outside of White Dwarf which doesn't strike me as the place to do anything except sell the new shiny.
I have set a goal of getting the business into sales growth in 2015/16 and have asked staff to accept a salary freeze until December
2015 to allow us to maintain our cost to sales ratio. If we deliver sales growth in the first half of 2015/16 I have agreed to back date any
salary reviews to 1 June 2015. We are all working hard to deliver this goal.
They are on a salary freeze in the same year they payed out a dividend?!? And they literally just put a gilded statue out in front of the building. They need to start worrying about the squirly guy burning the building down. And getting their raises is contingent on turning around a multi-year sales decline trend. Good luck with that.
Seriously though, this is death spiral stuff. Put salary freezes into a company with failing sales and anyone talented enough to get a job elsewhere, will. You end up left with the people too thick to see the writing on the wall, or people who aren't qualified enough to do good work, but just good enough not to get fired.
I do wonder if these freezes include the chairman's golden parachute
Kirby owns, what, about 7% of the stock?
You guys mean Kevin Rountree the new CEO?
I'm not sure what a price freeze has to with prior agreements to the "chairman's" severance package?
Yeeesh, it was just a joke. I was just commenting on how I find it funny that Chairmen/CEOs are always so excited to show off how they're sticking it to their employees via pay freezes, while I'm quite sure their ability to reap in more profit will go unhindered.
Their comments about putting stores in tourist locations/ high foot traffic areas baffles me. Why put a test store in FN Boston when you could do it in Vegas, Orlando, New York, or even LA? All 4 of those cities probably get far more tourism than FN Boston...LOL.
H.B.M.C. wrote: They still fail to acknowledge the obvious elephant in the room:
Barrier to entry is far to high, and constantly increasing the prices to ludicrous levels (seriously, look at the cost of those Sigmarines!) is not going to rescue them.
They do acknowledge that though in the comment about a "broader range of price points". They also follow that up with the stupid comment about no price drops so the only option there is to offer more "board game" style one and done offerings like that assassin game or come out with rules that support much lower model counts (like AOS).
Kevin Rountree wrote:In the period we signed 17 new deals and have 44 contracts currently in place to produce more than 50 interactive products. Reported
income is split: 52% traditional PC games, 27% mobile and 21% card, board and role-playing game licences. 37 new products were
released in the period. We also announced a major tie up with SEGA to develop a real time strategy game ‘Total War: Warhammer’
H.B.M.C. wrote: I don't think 40K is getting Age of Sigmar'd.
Horus Heresy on the other hand...
One of the most trusted rumors guys has said 40k is basically getting sigmar'ed. Now we have a financial report that says they are revaluating their range.
It's over. Done. Pack it in. That's polite corporate bs talk.
They'll gak out as much codices and anything else they possibly can before they go the sigmar route just to milk the old fans one last time. Then kick them out on their way to their new fanbase. That simple really.
^
If it means all armies get 7th edition codices I'm all for that. Then I can play 7th with all armies on the most equal playing field since like ever. And my group can adjust the rules mess and broken units as needed knowing there won't be any new offenders.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also if they clean up 40k but keep it mostly intact, and make horus heresy the new AoS, that's fine with me too.
The forge world books are written as a 40k expansion after all.
H.B.M.C. wrote: They still fail to acknowledge the obvious elephant in the room:
Barrier to entry is far too high, and constantly increasing the prices to ludicrous levels (seriously, look at the cost of those Sigmarines!) is not going to rescue them.
They do acknowledge that though in the comment about a "broader range of price points". They also follow that up with the stupid comment about no price drops so the only option there is to offer more "board game" style one and done offerings like that assassin game or come out with rules that support much lower model counts (like AOS).
None of these would be a long-term winning strategy. If they make board games, people that play board games but aren't already GW customers will not likely give them custom because other companies are more established, do it better and cost less. The assassin game was, what 15 models for over $100? Limited releases are completely useless as a marketing/entry-level gimmick; if no one can buy it a few months after it's released how are you going to attract new business?
I still say that the best way to do things are battle-box type products, pre-packaged with kill-team or similar, low-point rules. An HQ, a troop squad and a vehicle for 40K and something the size of one of the AoS box forces for around $50-$60 would be the perfect entry into the games and good starting points for new players. Even better if these are simpler to build products like the AoS snap-fit models then people don't feel like they need to spend tens of hours building their units before they can even get a game in.
GW is finally making a concentrated effort to move away from the crap TT and push in the direction of the video game master race. My millenial blood races at the thought!
BlaxicanX wrote: GW is finally making a concentrated effort to move away from the crap TT and push in the direction of the video game master race. My millenial blood races at the thought!
Kevin Rountree wrote:In the period we signed 17 new deals and have 44 contracts currently in place to produce more than 50 interactive products. Reported
income is split: 52% traditional PC games, 27% mobile and 21% card, board and role-playing game licences. 37 new products were
released in the period. We also announced a major tie up with SEGA to develop a real time strategy game ‘Total War: Warhammer’
Not sure that this is actually a feather in their cap!!! Browsing their list of licensed video game products - GW doesn't seem very picky about who licenses their IP. Lord Kirby does not care from where the cash flows, as long as the cash flows! Cash for the Cash God. Dividends for the Dividend Throne!
Kevin Rountree wrote:In the period we signed 17 new deals and have 44 contracts currently in place to produce more than 50 interactive products. Reported
income is split: 52% traditional PC games, 27% mobile and 21% card, board and role-playing game licences. 37 new products were
released in the period. We also announced a major tie up with SEGA to develop a real time strategy game ‘Total War: Warhammer’
Not sure that this is actually a feather in their cap!!! Browsing their list of licensed video game products - GW doesn't seem very picky about who licenses their IP. Lord Kirby does not care from where the cash flows, as long as the cash flows! Cash for the Cash God. Dividends for the Dividend Throne!
Truth be told, there's a lot of good stuff in the video games section but stuff like the GOD-EMPEROR AWFUL "Storm of Vengeance" and "Snotling Fling" kinda ruins the whole deal. (There are many I didn't even know existed so no idea about their quality. Hell there's one in the Horus Heresy era!)
@TheDraconicLord: That's part of the problem... we don't know half those products exist! We are steeped in GW's lore... Think about how newcomers are supposed to find out about this crap!
H.B.M.C. wrote: They still fail to acknowledge the obvious elephant in the room:
Barrier to entry is far to high, and constantly increasing the prices to ludicrous levels (seriously, look at the cost of those Sigmarines!) is not going to rescue them.
A store local to my university is selling the 5 man liberator box for $35 dollars. 30% cut right off the bat.
Rapid fire releases for the new year really seemed to have closed the gap on their losses in the first half of the fiscal year. If they can maintain that sort of actual performance you might see them actually grow vs. this year.
I mean, if I remember correctly, weren't they almost double digit down on the previous report or year to date in the half year report? Closing that gap seems like they are going in the right direction. They also seemed to feel they didn't need the new SM codex to boost this year and saved it for the 2015/2016 fiscal year.
It's interesting to see an actual acknowledgement of issues they've been having. I'm cautiously optimistic about next year.
Also lets be realistic. 40k isn't getting AoS'd. You may see a move to "dateslates" so model rules are free online but they aren't going to kill their golden goose. I really wish people would stop assuming it's going to happen. The entire fantasy range was down to single percentage digits of their total sales. Even with the End Times boost they only jump to low teens. It was a dead game. 40k is far from anywhere near that position.
Harriticus wrote: Jeez GW is taking a long time to just collapse already
I have it on good word that they've been in a death spiral ever since they moved to white metal in the early '90s.
Smug much?
Look at all they've done in the last year just to tread water, and while the intro makes a lot of the right noises, it's still just words and modern GW is almost defined by the right idea being executed poorly, so I wouldn't crow too much just yet.
No, it's perspective much. Conversations extremely similar to these were seen on rec.games.miniatures.warhammer 20 years ago.
I realize that reality doesn't fit in with certain agendas and world views. But people have literally been declaring GW's imminent demise for a couple decades now, and yet somehow that turd still floats.
And "crowing"? This may be very, very hard for you to understand, but seeing some of the doomsaying here for what it is doesn't make me a "white knight." And these numbers aren't anything to crow about, even if I was one. Then again, they aren't something to crank up the gloom and doom machine about either. However, I'm sure that seeing the world in black and white creates a lot of nice contrasts and makes life easier for you, so...have fun with that, I guess.
keezus wrote: @TheDraconicLord: That's part of the problem... we don't know half those products exist! We are steeped in GW's lore... Think about how newcomers are supposed to find out about this crap!
You would think that if, as a company, you are licensing your name and "universe" that you might actually advertise the products created in some way since the more money it makes, the more money you make...
So revenue dropped by 4.4 million, which is a decent chunk of the typical profits but since costs were also reduced the profit remained similar.
I don't think GW is going anywhere for a while. They have a long way to fall and lots of costs to cut before they go down the hole. So unfortunately that means if they ever do go down the tube, they'll be dragging their games down with them.
Hulksmash wrote: Rapid fire releases for the new year really seemed to have closed the gap on their losses in the first half of the fiscal year. If they can maintain that sort of actual performance you might see them actually grow vs. this year.
I mean, if I remember correctly, weren't they almost double digit down on the previous report or year to date in the half year report? Closing that gap seems like they are going in the right direction. They also seemed to feel they didn't need the new SM codex to boost this year and saved it for the 2015/2016 fiscal year.
Yes, the second half of YE2015 was very good (much better than the second half of 2014) to make up for a slow first half, for sure. Detractors of GW don't want to acknowledge this, and also don't want to acknowledge that "high prices" haven't hurt GW at all in 1H 2015.
My reading of it is that GW products are not too expensive for GW to be profitable and that GW products released at a rapid cadence is not a bad thing. Sure, the prices might be too expensive for some people, but GW is probably near the sweet spot on the elasticity curve. However, in 2015, GW launched more products that people wanted, hence better revenues: AdMech, Eldar, IK upgrade, Harlequins, etc. Note that SM had no impact as they launched in June.
It's interesting to see an actual acknowledgement of issues they've been having. I'm cautiously optimistic about next year.
Also lets be realistic. 40k isn't getting AoS'd. You may see a move to "dateslates" so model rules are free online but they aren't going to kill their golden goose. I really wish people would stop assuming it's going to happen. The entire fantasy range was down to single percentage digits of their total sales. Even with the End Times boost they only jump to low teens. It was a dead game. 40k is far from anywhere near that position.
It's simply an argument by people who want to see players flee 40k. There are lots of people who would love for GW to get rid of points from 40k, because it would make a big chunk of 40k players leave the game, and this type of anti-GW observer is of the opinion that (a) GW is stupid/incompetent and (b) GW hates its players and (c) GW wants to wreck its games.
Of course, GW making a profit of USD$32M in one year, probably exceeding the REVENUES of almost every other direct competitor doesn't mean anything at all to the business acumen of those running GW. It must all be because of blind luck and the sheep who have GW products on autoship!
I found Snotling Fling was pretty darn fun to play. That was until they released an "optimising" patch, which literally brought all the cash milking "goodies" you'd normally find in all other "free" games.
Too bad, they didn't post that diagram with cash flow every month. This way we could see what brought the most profit
AllSeeingSkink wrote: So revenue dropped by 4.4 million, which is a decent chunk of the typical profits but since costs were also reduced the profit remained similar.
I don't think GW is going anywhere for a while. They have a long way to fall and lots of costs to cut before they go down the hole. So unfortunately that means if they ever do go down the tube, they'll be dragging their games down with them.
It didn't really, though. It only dropped by this as a differential in currency valuation.
Canadian exporters do the same thing all the time (value revenues at constant currency) -- because of Canadian dollar fluctuations relative to USD, what happens is one year, it might look like your sales spiked 25% or dropped 25%, when in fact the number of units sold was exactly the same, and the only difference was the Canadian dollar. Many manufacturers like GW don't sell in their home currency, because that would cause fluctuations in the marketplace. For instance, it's not helpful for the price of a box of liberators to be more cheaper when USD or AUD happens to be stronger relative to GBP.
Keep in mind it works both ways; just as often constant currency revenues reflect a decline in sale.
Harriticus wrote: Jeez GW is taking a long time to just collapse already
I have it on good word that they've been in a death spiral ever since they moved to white metal in the early '90s.
Smug much?
Look at all they've done in the last year just to tread water, and while the intro makes a lot of the right noises, it's still just words and modern GW is almost defined by the right idea being executed poorly, so I wouldn't crow too much just yet.
No, it's perspective much. Conversations extremely similar to these were seen on rec.games.miniatures.warhammer 20 years ago.
I realize that reality doesn't fit in with certain agendas and world views. But people have literally been declaring GW's imminent demise for a couple decades now, and yet somehow that turd still floats.
And "crowing"? This may be very, very hard for you to understand, but seeing some of the doomsaying here for what it is doesn't make me a "white knight." And these numbers aren't anything to crow about, even if I was one. Then again, they aren't something to crank up the gloom and doom machine about either. However, I'm sure that seeing the world in black and white creates a lot of nice contrasts and makes life easier for you, so...have fun with that, I guess.
All of which would be quite reasonable if I hadn't read a bunch of your other posts.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: So revenue dropped by 4.4 million, which is a decent chunk of the typical profits but since costs were also reduced the profit remained similar.
I don't think GW is going anywhere for a while. They have a long way to fall and lots of costs to cut before they go down the hole. So unfortunately that means if they ever do go down the tube, they'll be dragging their games down with them.
It didn't really, though. It only dropped by this as a differential in currency valuation.
Canadian exporters do the same thing all the time (value revenues at constant currency) -- because of Canadian dollar fluctuations relative to USD, what happens is one year, it might look like your sales spiked 25% or dropped 25%, when in fact the number of units sold was exactly the same, and the only difference was the Canadian dollar. Many manufacturers like GW don't sell in their home currency, because that would cause fluctuations in the marketplace. For instance, it's not helpful for the price of a box of liberators to be more cheaper when USD or AUD happens to be stronger relative to GBP.
Keep in mind it works both ways; just as often constant currency revenues reflect a decline in sale.
Yes, but keep in mind that with "constant currency" it still went down a tiny bit DESPITE them practically doubling their new product output. LOTR and WHFB had very few releases during that time compared with previous years and 40k really ramped up the codex and kit releases during the same time... and their "constant currency" sales didn't budge except to drop a tiny bit. They made tons more yet folks didn't actually buy tons more. That is also a key piece of information.
@warboss, yes - through the whole year, revenues went down a little bit under constant currency. Objectively, I think an observer would say that revenues were flat -- if it had gone up by less than 1%, an objective observer would also have to say that revenues were flat.
I think that people need to recognize how good 2015 must have been to make up for the weak 2014 half of the full year.
Frankly, I expected revenues to be lower, as well as profits (most people expected profits to be in the order of magnitude of GBP 10m lower than 2014). I don't think that GBP 16m profit and GBP 25m increase in cash was something that most people on these forums would have guessed (not me). I didn't even expect the sales in 2015 to be as strong as they were.
I suspect, Fantasy/LoTR sales declined a little, and 40k sales increased a little (less, over the whole year). But of course, we don't have any data to substantiate that, except that the first half of 2015 was almost all 40k.
It might have already been brought up, but I only just read this bit...
We have taken the decision in the year to rebrand our stores ‘Warhammer’. It is what our customers call us.
So, is this confirmation that GW's perceived customers are the parents of Little Timmy? Because I've never heard an actual hobbyist call GW themselves "Warhammer" unless referring specifically to the game not the company.
Um, yeah, because they didn't have a 4.5 million exception expense this year (iirc it was their website redesign) and they also paid around a million GBP less in taxes. Sales and actual revenue are down.
Range management – as discussed above we are reviewing our range to ensure that we are exploring all opportunities. The risk is that we don’t fully exploit all the opportunities that are available to us.
This is exciting chatter. GorkaMorka, Custodes, Blood Bowl, Necromunda, Squats. Christ, even the potential for someone to maybe consider releasing Squats again makes me smile.
The odds of 40K getting the Sigmar treatment are very slim. They're too greedy for that.
That's a really hard question to answer, because GW's new thing is to not increase the price of (most) old kits, and shoulder price increases entirely on new releases. So for example, Devastators see a big jump in prices, but Command Squad sees none. So to answer the question, you'd need to know what the revenue breakdown in sales between old kits and new kits were...
Um, yeah, because they didn't have a 4.5 million exception expense this year (iirc it was their website redesign) and they also paid around a million GBP less in taxes. Sales and actual revenue are down.
We have a winner.
Bottom line, no spin, profits are down again.
Bottom line, no spin, profits are up, actually. As in the operating profit number is higher.
But if you read down the next couple of posts, you'll notice that Warboss ninja'd me before I mentioned exactly what he wrote.
Talys wrote: @AllSeeingSkink - To people who aren't involved in the hobby, Warhammer is a way more recognized brand than Games Workshop.
Perhaps, but it's definitely not what most "customers" call them.
Maybe it's just me, but the commentary in this report actually seems to be written to gamers more than previous years. It could just be me, but some of the comments just seem directed at gamers more than investors this time round.
Harriticus wrote: Jeez GW is taking a long time to just collapse already
I have it on good word that they've been in a death spiral ever since they moved to white metal in the early '90s.
Smug much?
Look at all they've done in the last year just to tread water, and while the intro makes a lot of the right noises, it's still just words and modern GW is almost defined by the right idea being executed poorly, so I wouldn't crow too much just yet.
No, it's perspective much. Conversations extremely similar to these were seen on rec.games.miniatures.warhammer 20 years ago.
I realize that reality doesn't fit in with certain agendas and world views. But people have literally been declaring GW's imminent demise for a couple decades now, and yet somehow that turd still floats.
You do grasp that this is the same spurious nonsense as the "people complained about Thing, now Thing is changing and people are still complaining!" argument, yeah?
Come back when you can prove that the people pointing out the issues with GWtoday based on current information are the exact same people who were on those message boards 20 years ago, and maybe, just maybe you would have the tiniest hint of a point(because even then, an argument can be wrong in one context and be correct at a later time when the context has changed).
Talys wrote: @AllSeeingSkink - To people who aren't involved in the hobby, Warhammer is a way more recognized brand than Games Workshop.
Perhaps, but it's definitely not what most "customers" call them.
Maybe it's just me, but the commentary in this report actually seems to be written to gamers more than previous years. It could just be me, but some of the comments just seem directed at gamers more than investors this time round.
Yeah, I agree. Most customers call them GW. But it's not like they're rebranding the company; just the sign on the store, right? It would be no different than Microsoft calling retail outlets "Windows Stores" instead of "Microsoft Stores" ... I mean... whatever A rose (or a turd) by another name is still... you know, all that
I think it's just to give the more recognizable brand a bit more visibility, since they have physical stores and this means free advertising to people who don't know who GW is.
I do agree with you -- the notes seem more customer-centric than in previous years. That's not a bad thing! Maybe they realize that the investors barely read it because it's a tiny company in the grand scheme of things, while gamers and hobbyists obsess over it
Automatically Appended Next Post: Good news for shareholders, btw. +5.5%, looks like, and pretty stable.
I like how GW acknowledged that adults play instead of force feeding us the "little Timmy" line.
However, 2015 has started to crater to the vets imo. We saw Harlequins and Admech released as mini factions within a month or two of each other.
As a old school player I am so excited to see my clowns get some much needed love. Also the Admech are a huge fighting force in the setting and people have been clamouring for them to be made into a playable force for a long time.
Yeah, I suspect AdMech had to do with a big part of that spike in 2015 sales. Our local independent has done REALLY well on AdMech stuff -- as quick as they come in, they fly off the shelf. Any time there's a sale, the entire AdMech section empties out.
Harlequins, not so much, though personally, I love the models. The original metal harlequin box was one of my favorite kits of all time.
Yeah, I suspect AdMech had to do with a big part of that spike in 2015 sales. Our local independent has done REALLY well on AdMech stuff -- as quick as they come in, they fly off the shelf. Any time there's a sale, the entire AdMech section empties out.
Harlequins, not so much, though personally, I love the models. The original metal harlequin box was one of my favorite kits of all time.
That was pretty much inevitable though, a fair few of us have been after AdMech for years(decades, even), and I have no doubt solid sales of the FW Mechanicum line were a big factor in GW deciding to do the plastic range. Similarly I expect this apparent plastic Heresy release will sell like hotcakes even if GW do push some really inane ruleset with it(providing the FW books keep coming of course). They should get some credit for recognising the obvious opportunities there, and Az does have a point that it's possible to read the new CEO's comments in a fairly positive way for vets, but AoS will be the real test; how they roll it out going forward, the pricing structure, their willingness or otherwise to alter their plans if necessary etc.
Hell, they could even win me over on AoS very, very easily; let FW put out a more vet-/gamer-focused variant of the core rules(ie one with a sane army selection system and some pretense of balanced/structured play) set in the Realhammer world and I'll happily shovel cash at them. EDIT: Or better yet, let Forgeworld release a new version of Mordheim & the other specialist games - this is what gets me about GW, it's not actually that difficult or expensive for them to keep most of the people they've pissed off on-side and happy(and so providing them with positive word of mouth advertising), which is why a lot of people come to the conclusion they're either thick or being deliberately obtuse.
That's a really hard question to answer, because GW's new thing is to not increase the price of (most) old kits, and shoulder price increases entirely on new releases. So for example, Devastators see a big jump in prices, but Command Squad sees none. So to answer the question, you'd need to know what the revenue breakdown in sales between old kits and new kits were...
GW managed to mask their declining sales for years simply by increasing prices year on year at a faster rate than they were losing customers. There is, or at least was, a very interesting graph that Osbad(?) posted in a previous years financial report thread that tracked average price increase across their whole range and GW's fluctuating revenues since (IIRC) the mid 00's, it was instrumental in convincing me that GW was beginning its death spiral. Its possible its still floating around here or on Warseer somewhere. I realise that average price increase is an imprecise method but as GW will never, ever release the real figures they are at least a reasonable approximation.
Given that I no longer buy anything from GW anymore and as such I have no idea how much they have raised their prices in the last 12 months (although I am sure that they have). I wouldn't be surprised if GW's reported revenues are worse, not that they are good, than they appear for the afore mentioned reason.
Freezing salary rates while paying out dividends... not the kind of company I want to support honestly. Everything about their new direction (super rapid product release, abandonment of formation-based fantasy) isn't for me... I'm glad the new CEO can write coherently, and is somewhat open to adjusting for the market (very slightly)... but yeah, they're as merciless as ever.
Yeah, I suspect AdMech had to do with a big part of that spike in 2015 sales. Our local independent has done REALLY well on AdMech stuff -- as quick as they come in, they fly off the shelf. Any time there's a sale, the entire AdMech section empties out.
Harlequins, not so much, though personally, I love the models. The original metal harlequin box was one of my favorite kits of all time.
I saw the same in my area. People went crazy over the Admech stuff (not surprised) and while the talk about Harlequins was positive few people rushed out to buy them.
That's a really hard question to answer, because GW's new thing is to not increase the price of (most) old kits, and shoulder price increases entirely on new releases. So for example, Devastators see a big jump in prices, but Command Squad sees none. So to answer the question, you'd need to know what the revenue breakdown in sales between old kits and new kits were...
GW managed to mask their declining sales for years simply by increasing prices year on year at a faster rate than they were losing customers. There is, or at least was, a very interesting graph that Osbad(?) posted in a previous years financial report thread that tracked average price increase across their whole range and GW's fluctuating revenues since (IIRC) the mid 00's, it was instrumental in convincing me that GW was beginning its death spiral. Its possible its still floating around here or on Warseer somewhere. I realise that average price increase is an imprecise method but as GW will never, ever release the real figures they are at least a reasonable approximation.
Given that I no longer buy anything from GW anymore and as such I have no idea how much they have raised their prices in the last 12 months (although I am sure that they have). I wouldn't be surprised if GW's reported revenues are worse, not that they are good, than they appear for the afore mentioned reason.
We know revenue has remained flat. (Giving them the benefit of the doubt and using the adjusted figure)
We know average transaction value has likely increased due to the number of price increases, even if they weren't unilateral as in previous years.
Therefore it is reasonable to assume that unit sales volume has dropped.
I genuinely think that, properly executed, there's a lot to be optimistic about for the future, but if the best you can say about a report is "it's no worse than last year!" then it hasn't been a great year.
RiTides wrote: Freezing salary rates while paying out dividends... not the kind of company I want to support honestly. Everything about their new direction (super rapid product release, abandonment of formation-based fantasy) isn't for me... I'm glad the new CEO can write coherently, and is somewhat open to adjusting for the market (very slightly)... but yeah, they're as merciless as ever.
In fairness they can't freeze salaries due to the introduction of a 'living wage' next April. I think that the majority of GW's front line staff are on minimum wage at the moment so they will all be getting a pay increase next year.
Silent Puffin? wrote: I think that the majority of GW's front line staff are on minimum wage at the moment
Wat.
-Runs one-man store -Has to deal with lots of smelly whiny sods day in/day out -Forced through loops by GW -In a job that requires regular training -Paid less than needed to live, never mind chip into the hobby they wanted the job for
I got paid more for lifting boxes in a warehouse for the NHS.
We know revenue has remained flat. (Giving them the benefit of the doubt and using the adjusted figure)
We know average transaction value has likely increased due to the number of price increases, even if they weren't unilateral as in previous years.
Therefore it is reasonable to assume that unit sales volume has dropped.
I genuinely think that, properly executed, there's a lot to be optimistic about for the future, but if the best you can say about a report is "it's no worse than last year!" then it hasn't been a great year.
The revenue for the industry (in North America) also remained flat, so GW basically stayed with the pack -- which is good news, considering that there are more manufacturers than ever, and it's the hardest for the company that has the most customers to hang on to them with new, interesting stuff nibbling at the edges.
Remember: last week, the meme was, "the industry is flat, and GW lost 10% of revenues; therefore, the rest of the pack did 10% better". So, in fairness, one must now adjust that statement to, "the industry is flat, and GW is also flat; therefore, the rest of the pack didn't really grow the way we thought it did".
What I'd love to know is how profitable some of the other companies (like Mantic, PP) are. Of course, barring some leak, we never will
Silent Puffin? wrote: I think that the majority of GW's front line staff are on minimum wage at the moment
Wat.
-Runs one-man store
-Has to deal with lots of smelly whiny sods day in/day out
-Forced through loops by GW -In a job that requires regular training
-Paid less than needed to live, never mind chip into the hobby they wanted the job for
I got paid more for lifting boxes in a warehouse for the NHS.
I don't know if that's true. But if so: those people are free to work somewhere else that pays more and requires less of them!
I hope GW pays its staff more than minimum wage. Most people I've come across working GW stores seem to be "worth more" in salary than, say, a cashier in a mall or at a fast food restaurant. I don't know how desirable the job is -- if you're young and a real GW fan, would you want to work there, and how much less would you take by way of salary in order to work where you want?
To give you an example, as a youth, I would have gladly worked for nearly nothing... or nothing at all... for my local NHL hockey team, but I would have wanted to be paid a LOT more to do some menial, boring job
Fair point, but if you chose a job to be closer to your hobby, only to find that you cannot afford the hobby anymore, it'd really get to you that you are *this* close to it, and cannot do anything about it.
RiTides wrote: Freezing salary rates while paying out dividends... not the kind of company I want to support honestly. Everything about their new direction (super rapid product release, abandonment of formation-based fantasy) isn't for me... I'm glad the new CEO can write coherently, and is somewhat open to adjusting for the market (very slightly)... but yeah, they're as merciless as ever.
In fairness they can't freeze salaries due to the introduction of a 'living wage' next April. I think that the majority of GW's front line staff are on minimum wage at the moment so they will all be getting a pay increase next year.
That's great for next year, although I was referring to this which lasts until December:
I have set a goal of getting the business into sales growth in 2015/16 and have asked staff to accept a salary freeze until December
2015 to allow us to maintain our cost to sales ratio. If we deliver sales growth in the first half of 2015/16 I have agreed to back date any
salary reviews to 1 June 2015. We are all working hard to deliver this goal.
They are on a salary freeze in the same year they payed out a dividend?!?
Lack of sales growth isn't the staff's fault - their targets for stores are by all accounts extremely high, it's their overall strategy that is resulting in loss of sales volume each year...
Talys wrote: @AllSeeingSkink - To people who aren't involved in the hobby, Warhammer is a way more recognized brand than Games Workshop.
Perhaps, but it's definitely not what most "customers" call them.
Maybe it's just me, but the commentary in this report actually seems to be written to gamers more than previous years. It could just be me, but some of the comments just seem directed at gamers more than investors this time round.
For those 'who aren't involved in the hobby' name recognition for either is pretty much nil.
D&D is more recognized, I believe, but is financially a much smaller market than 'Warhammer'.
Next half should be decent for GW - AoS will be at least a bump.
The question remains as to whether AoS is sustainable - if it does what I kind of expect it to do... rvenues for the year after will take a hit.
Other thing that helped GW this time around - they finally got rid of the albatross that was the Chapterhouse case, and have been quieter about trying to defend their Moat and Castle.
Kirby seemed a lot more retrained this time around... but paying out a dividend while freezing pay... does not look good.
Selym wrote: Fair point, but if you chose a job to be closer to your hobby, only to find that you cannot afford the hobby anymore, it'd really get to you that you are *this* close to it, and cannot do anything about it.
I have no idea about GW stores, but I know quite a few people who work at the local independents, and it's not easy to enjoy miniature hobbies in general, working at hobby stores, even with staff discounts. Not to say that some don't play 40k and such, of course -- and of course, everyone's situation is different. Some still live at home with mom & dad, making most of what they earn disposable income.
I'm curious. When you see GW minis painted at GW stores, do those minis belong to GW or to the painter (staff)? Or to put it another way, when the person stops working at the store one day, do they take those minis with them? Some of the stores have an awful lot of minis for someone to afford at minimum wage (if that's indeed what they're paid)
The results are actually good for the industry and hobby as a whole. Less product sold to less people through fewer channels means more market share for smaller companies and more companies that can enter the market as prices can be higher while still popping in under the high end of GW.
The product line reset is going to be very interesting. I expect we'll see a sigmarization of 40k. I think AoS represents what GW believes the majority of their customers want rather than just what a noisy few say. People say 40k sells fine so GW won't change it, but I think GW believes the elements in AoS that also happen to be in 40k is why 40k sells well. So when the time comes for a top down product line reset the elements in AoS will be what is preserved.
Salary freezes for employees and then increasing dividends by 25% from 16p to 20p is just hilarious.
Talys wrote: Some of the stores have an awful lot of minis for someone to afford at minimum wage (if that's indeed what they're paid)
I don't know about these days, but they used to get some pretty substantial discounts... and were 'encouraged' to buy as much as possible.
It's one of the common complaints that I've heard from ex-GW staff... The money wasn't great to start with, and they felt a certain amount of pressure to spend too much of it on product.
We know revenue has remained flat. (Giving them the benefit of the doubt and using the adjusted figure)
We know average transaction value has likely increased due to the number of price increases, even if they weren't unilateral as in previous years.
Therefore it is reasonable to assume that unit sales volume has dropped.
I genuinely think that, properly executed, there's a lot to be optimistic about for the future, but if the best you can say about a report is "it's no worse than last year!" then it hasn't been a great year.
The revenue for the industry (in North America) also remained flat, so GW basically stayed with the pack -- which is good news, considering that there are more manufacturers than ever, and it's the hardest for the company that has the most customers to hang on to them with new, interesting stuff nibbling at the edges.
Remember: last week, the meme was, "the industry is flat, and GW lost 10% of revenues; therefore, the rest of the pack did 10% better". So, in fairness, one must now adjust that statement to, "the industry is flat, and GW is also flat; therefore, the rest of the pack didn't really grow the way we thought it did".
What I'd love to know is how profitable some of the other companies (like Mantic, PP) are. Of course, barring some leak, we never will
The industry didn't stay flat, it grew. You're trying to argue that GW managed to tread water in what isn't even their biggest territory historically by making a comparison to the sector but that's just fluffing. The reality is GW is competing against the whole of the tabletop gaming market, just like every other wargaming manufacturer. GW's competition isn't solely other wargames companies, it's everything else in the market which will typically attract the same sort of customer. Granted, some will be closer competition than others but I'm sure there's plenty of people posting here which also spend money on other items you'll typically find in your typical hobby shop that you're trying to exclude, be it CCGs, board games or even comics.
That wargaming stayed flat in a growing tabletop gaming market is a failure of the wargaming companies, including GW, to capitalise on the increased interest and spending on related products. Don't try and paint it as some sort of success on their part because they haven't failed worse than their counterparts.
Although personally I think that a lot of money has gone into wargaming through KS which won't have shown up on the ICV report and definitely won't have made it into GW's pockets.
Someone mentioned that the report said an average of 3% increase across the range. But I suspect that's brought down by things like the old metal range which is still pretty large but hasn't had a price increase in years (despite the fact finecast was brought in because the cost of metal was going up).
Of course, GW making a profit of USD$32M in one year, probably exceeding the REVENUES of almost every other direct competitor doesn't mean anything at all to the business acumen of those running GW. It must all be because of blind luck and the sheep who have GW products on autoship!
knickers twisted...
Go away. We are all plotting the downfall of GW in here.
Um, yeah, because they didn't have a 4.5 million exception expense this year (iirc it was their website redesign) and they also paid around a million GBP less in taxes. Sales and actual revenue are down.
We have a winner.
Bottom line, no spin, profits are down again.
The $4.5MM extraordinary expense was due to the website and restructuring costs. I believe the website was about $1.0MM. The other $3.5MM was due to the lease buy outs (not sure how many locations but I thought at one point people were saying close to 100 locations closed throughout the world due to their restructure - I didn't see a specific number though), closing several of the country's sales HQ offices, and severance to employees.
RiTides wrote: Freezing salary rates while paying out dividends... not the kind of company I want to support honestly. Everything about their new direction (super rapid product release, abandonment of formation-based fantasy) isn't for me... I'm glad the new CEO can write coherently, and is somewhat open to adjusting for the market (very slightly)... but yeah, they're as merciless as ever.
In fairness they can't freeze salaries due to the introduction of a 'living wage' next April. I think that the majority of GW's front line staff are on minimum wage at the moment so they will all be getting a pay increase next year.
Minimum Wage going up? Expect price raises sometime between next March and June.
I still think the whole "secrecy" thing is really hurting them. In today's world, a lot of people are impulse buyers. "Oh look a new video game. I wonder if GW will release something I want in the coming weeks/months, Do I save my money and hope? Or do I just buy said video game?" I think a good portion of people go for the impulse purchase. I get that people copy their designs, but I have very rarely seen anyone even bother with the knock offs. Let's face it, GW makes some of the best minis out there and the "competition" isn't up to snuff. Oh well. Maybe someday they'll go back to giving us some notice. Would certainly make budgeting for the hobby easier...
boyd wrote: The $4.5MM extraordinary expense was due to the website and restructuring costs. I believe the website was about $1.0MM. The other $3.5MM was due to the lease buy outs (not sure how many locations but I thought at one point people were saying close to 100 locations closed throughout the world due to their restructure - I didn't see a specific number though), closing several of the country's sales HQ offices, and severance to employees.
They said in the last financial report that the website cost 4 million pounds. Can't remember for sure, but that cost may have been split over two reporting periods.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nocturnus wrote: I think a good portion of people go for the impulse purchase.
That's exactly what GW are counting on by not giving advance warning.
The problem is just that most of what GW are offering is priced outside 'impulse' range for a lot of people. And it doesn't help those people who want to know when their army is going to get something new.
Azreal13 wrote: The industry didn't stay flat, it grew. You're trying to argue that GW managed to tread water in what isn't even their biggest territory historically by making a comparison to the sector but that's just fluffing. The reality is GW is competing against the whole of the tabletop gaming market, just like every other wargaming manufacturer. GW's competition isn't solely other wargames companies, it's everything else in the market which will typically attract the same sort of customer. Granted, some will be closer competition than others but I'm sure there's plenty of people posting here which also spend money on other items you'll typically find in your typical hobby shop that you're trying to exclude, be it CCGs, board games or even comics.
That wargaming stayed flat in a growing tabletop gaming market is a failure of the wargaming companies, including GW, to capitalise on the increased interest and spending on related products. Don't try and paint it as some sort of success on their part because they haven't failed worse than their counterparts.
Although personally I think that a lot of money has gone into wargaming through KS which won't have shown up on the ICV report and definitely won't have made it into GW's pockets.
I'm comparing GW with its direct competitors, which doesn't include Magic cards, scale models, roleplaying games, or board games. I'm not comparing GW to "everything sold in a hobby or gaming store".
Privateer Press, Mantic, Games Workshop, Infinty -- none of these companies have "failed". GW (and presumably others) have made money doing something that they are good at, keep people employed, and sell products that people want. That's a success.
Also, by any measure, GW's Dec 2014 - June 2015 is a success:
- GW performed very well in order to offset the first half of lower performance. - They made more money than they did in the last half-year of the same period. - Their stock price got a bump. - They paid out nice dividends to shareholders. - They ended the year with a nice pile of cash. - They did a bunch of work on Warhammer World and made it what they want to make it - They released a brand new faction (Adeptus Mechanicus) that people have been asking for, for decades
You might not like them as a company; you may not like their prices and release schedules, or products. But they can be proud that they did pretty good in the last 6 months, and obviously, enough people like their products that they stay both profitable and relevant. So the real question is -- can they keep it up?
In 6 months, 12 months, 24 months from now, either this will be a momentary reprieve in a downtrend, this will mark some stabilization in their revenue as they find a new equilibrium, or a bunch of people will be wrong, and Age of Sigmar will mark the beginning of a Fantasy resurgence for GW.
Neither we, nor Games Workshop know the answer to that (and if we did, we'd be buying or selling GW stock!) -- but it's pretty clear they aren't going anywhere any time soon, and they'll do the same thing and annoy the same people each week.
Tip: This week, the shooty guys will be expensive. Next week, the paladins and terrain pieces will be expensive. The week after that, the chaos stuff will be expensive. Then some limited edition book. And on and on. And some people will save up and buy stuff, even so, while others will buy stuff, and think, "This is cheap!" Same deal when FW hits the shelves.
A hike in minimum wage wouldn't get past a salary freeze. Salary workers by definition do not make an hourly wage.
In the US at least even the one man store guys wouldn't be affected. I'm pretty sure their job title is manager; that makes them except employees. All they can hope for is the Department of Labor is supposed to be reclassifying what count's as the minimum salary for exemption. Then GW would have to raise their salary to match the new exempt minimum, or they would be entitled to overtime and minimum wage.
Nocturnus wrote: I think a good portion of people go for the impulse purchase.
That's exactly what GW are counting on by not giving advance warning.
The problem is just that most of what GW are offering is priced outside 'impulse' range for a lot of people. And it doesn't help those people who want to know when their army is going to get something new.
Not quite. Not publishing complete rules "forces" some fans to buy stuff "just in case" it's good. For instance, a lot of people bought all the AdMech releases in my area (insane amounts!) without knowing how good it would be in the context of the codex, "in case" that would be a great unit, and it'd be sold out after. Likewise with Assault Marines and Devastators. Nobody knew if ASM would be even usable in the new codex, "but what the heck, it might be good, so I better buy 2 in case" is an attitude you see frequently.
I'm not saying it's rational or anything, but I've done it myself on occasion.
Plus, there is a certain mystique to the "distant rumor - near rumor - news - release - gloating" cycle that's kinda fun. There is literally nothing else I'm interested in that captures me with the rumor cycle like GW/40k.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CaulynDarr wrote: A hike in minimum wage wouldn't get past a salary freeze. Salary workers by definition do not make an hourly wage.
In the US at least even the one man store guys wouldn't be affected. I'm pretty sure their job title is manager; that makes them except employees. All they can hope for is the Department of Labor is supposed to be reclassifying what count's as the minimum salary for exemption. Then GW would have to raise their salary to match the new exempt minimum, or they would be entitled to overtime and minimum wage.
Salaried workers are still limited by the maximum number of employable non-overtime hours. You can't make someone work for $5 an hour by making them work 10 hours a day and 7 days a week, paying them a salary of $1500 a month. I don't believe that's legal in any state (it certainly isn't in Canada, nor Washington State or California). The only case in which this is permissible is where a person has a reasonable expectation of earning commissions or tips that would allow the total earnings to exceed minimum wage for the hours worked.
Azreal13 wrote: The industry didn't stay flat, it grew. You're trying to argue that GW managed to tread water in what isn't even their biggest territory historically by making a comparison to the sector but that's just fluffing. The reality is GW is competing against the whole of the tabletop gaming market, just like every other wargaming manufacturer. GW's competition isn't solely other wargames companies, it's everything else in the market which will typically attract the same sort of customer. Granted, some will be closer competition than others but I'm sure there's plenty of people posting here which also spend money on other items you'll typically find in your typical hobby shop that you're trying to exclude, be it CCGs, board games or even comics.
That wargaming stayed flat in a growing tabletop gaming market is a failure of the wargaming companies, including GW, to capitalise on the increased interest and spending on related products. Don't try and paint it as some sort of success on their part because they haven't failed worse than their counterparts.
Although personally I think that a lot of money has gone into wargaming through KS which won't have shown up on the ICV report and definitely won't have made it into GW's pockets.
I'm comparing GW with its direct competitors, which doesn't include Magic cards, scale models, roleplaying games, or board games. I'm not comparing GW to "everything sold in a hobby or gaming store".
Ok, so it's a thought exercise rather than anything with any meaningful commercial validity. Gotcha.
Spoiler:
Privateer Press, Mantic, Games Workshop, Infinty -- none of these companies have "failed". GW (and presumably others) have made money doing something that they are good at, keep people employed, and sell products that people want. That's a success.
Also, by any measure, GW's Dec 2014 - June 2015 is a success:
- GW performed very well in order to offset the first half of lower performance.
- They made more money than they did in the last half-year of the same period.
- Their stock price got a bump.
- They paid out nice dividends to shareholders.
- They ended the year with a nice pile of cash.
- They did a bunch of work on Warhammer World and made it what they want to make it
- They released a brand new faction (Adeptus Mechanicus) that people have been asking for, for decades
You might not like them as a company; you may not like their prices and release schedules, or products. But they can be proud that they did pretty good in the last 6 months, and obviously, enough people like their products that they stay both profitable and relevant. So the real question is -- can they keep it up?
In 6 months, 12 months, 24 months from now, either this will be a momentary reprieve in a downtrend, this will mark some stabilization in their revenue as they find a new equilibrium, or a bunch of people will be wrong, and Age of Sigmar will mark the beginning of a Fantasy resurgence for GW.
Neither we, nor Games Workshop know the answer to that (and if we did, we'd be buying or selling GW stock!) -- but it's pretty clear they aren't going anywhere any time soon, and they'll do the same thing and annoy the same people each week.
Tip: This week, the shooty guys will be expensive. Next week, the paladins and terrain pieces will be expensive. The week after that, the chaos stuff will be expensive. Then some limited edition book. And on and on. And some people will save up and buy stuff, even so, while others will buy stuff, and think, "This is cheap!" Same deal when FW hits the shelves
.
All those pretty bullet points to argue a point I didn't make.
If the tabletop game market grew, and the wargaming market remained constant (all of which is based on one, slightly dubious, source, a source which, were it not to support the point you're trying to make, I'm sure you'd be amongst the first to point out) then the companies in the wargaming sector failed to capitalise on that growth.
This is not saying they are failures, this is saying that they failed to do something. This includes GW, who also didn't grow, while those around them did. Which logically suggests that the money GW aren't getting is going to other wargame companies, but nobody is drawing in new blood.
So unless you're going to try and seriously argue that CCGs and boardgames aren't competing for the same cash from a notable percentage of the wargame buying public, this means they did not capitalise on this growth. Not just GW but all wargaming companies.
This could, of course, be down to the fact that the new GW store format seems counterproductive in terms of recruitment, so it could be that what was the historically most significant driver of new blood into the hobby isn't doing its job.
You can set your own criteria to try and make your point if you like, but you're arguing based on a very narrow view of the market which isn't accounting for various other possibilities in terms of income that simply doesn't show up on a traditional distributors accounts.
CaulynDarr wrote: A hike in minimum wage wouldn't get past a salary freeze. Salary workers by definition do not make an hourly wage.
In the US at least even the one man store guys wouldn't be affected. I'm pretty sure their job title is manager; that makes them except employees. All they can hope for is the Department of Labor is supposed to be reclassifying what count's as the minimum salary for exemption. Then GW would have to raise their salary to match the new exempt minimum, or they would be entitled to overtime and minimum wage.
Salaried workers are still limited by the maximum number of employable non-overtime hours. You can't make someone work for $5 an hour by making them work 10 hours a day and 7 days a week, paying them a salary of $1500 a month. I don't believe that's legal in any state (it certainly isn't in Canada, nor Washington State or California). The only case in which this is permissible is where a person has a reasonable expectation of earning commissions or tips that would allow the total earnings to exceed minimum wage for the hours worked.
You know that the UK isn't a "state" right?
Our employment laws are different over here, some of which certainly need tightening up, but it is possible for a doctor to barely earn over minimum wage and to employ someone without guaranteeing to pay them anything on a week to week basis.
I'm not totally sure what the implications of the living wage directives will be (I suspect not many do at this precise point in time) but don't make assumptions based on your local laws in regard to the UK
CaulynDarr wrote: A hike in minimum wage wouldn't get past a salary freeze. Salary workers by definition do not make an hourly wage.
In the US at least even the one man store guys wouldn't be affected. I'm pretty sure their job title is manager; that makes them except employees. All they can hope for is the Department of Labor is supposed to be reclassifying what count's as the minimum salary for exemption. Then GW would have to raise their salary to match the new exempt minimum, or they would be entitled to overtime and minimum wage.
Salaried workers are still limited by the maximum number of employable non-overtime hours. You can't make someone work for $5 an hour by making them work 10 hours a day and 7 days a week, paying them a salary of $1500 a month. I don't believe that's legal in any state (it certainly isn't in Canada, nor Washington State or California). The only case in which this is permissible is where a person has a reasonable expectation of earning commissions or tips that would allow the total earnings to exceed minimum wage for the hours worked.
In the US, actually you can. If you call them a manager and pay them at least 24K a year. It's the white collar exemption. It was originally meant to cover guys who wear ties, so they didn't fall into the same overtime requirements of hourly wage earners. It's assumed that their compensation is more tied to the performance of the company and it's to be expected that they work whatever hours make sense for the job.
The problem is they haven't adjusted the exception cutoff for inflation in like 60 years. Companies have caught on to this in the last few years and have been giving manager titles to people who aren't really the types of managers intended by the laws. For instance shift managers at a fast food restaurant. They are often expected to work such hours that their effective rate puts them under that of the minimum wage workers they "manage".
The department of labor in the US is currently considering updating the exemption level to match the last few decades of inflation because of this. Something closer to 50K annually.
The way I see it comes down to the numbers and that despite everything GW still has a sales decline of 4.369 million pounds, this on top of the 11.096 million plus pounds the previous year.
Overall this is a sales decline over the last two years of over still equates to 15.465 million pounds.
GW is still shrinking, and the management is doing it on purpose. If you offer a 52 pence per share dividend on a 38.3 pence per share earning, you are making a crystal clear statement that you do not think your company is worth investing in, and that the money that people have already invested in your company is better used elsewhere.
I found the numbers of independent stockists and the amount of revenue they generate for GW to be really shocking. Even if you double the number so you can talk about things at full MSRP, it takes many trade acounts to bring in the same money as the average GW store.
Cash and cash equivalents 2015: 12,561 2014: 17,550
When your pile of cash shrinks by 5 million pounds, it's probably not the type of thing you point to as "nice."
Why did it shrink? Dividend payments outstripping earnings. Again.
"Dividends of 52 pence per share were paid during the year"
Earnings per share during that same period? 38.3p.
They're paying out 135% of what they are earning. GW says they are only returning truly surplus cash. Hah! More like looting the company's future to pay to keep the share price afloat.
Just imagine if GW had kept to a sane dividend policy of paying out 30-40% of earnings an invested the remainder in product development, marketing, or anything that might help them actually return to growth. They have a wage freeze for their employees just so they can scrape a bit more to pay out as dividends. Year over year they continue to stagnate.
I suppose when you aren't spending millions in court trying to convince people you invented the Roman numerals, arrows, skulls and the grenade launchers it has a positive effect on your balance sheet! HA!
Talys wrote: Neither we, nor Games Workshop know the answer to that (and if we did, we'd be buying or selling GW stock!) -- but it's pretty clear they aren't going anywhere any time soon, and they'll do the same thing and annoy the same people each week.
Tip: This week, the shooty guys will be expensive. Next week, the paladins and terrain pieces will be expensive. The week after that, the chaos stuff will be expensive. Then some limited edition book. And on and on.
This is one of the most depressingly true (depending on your perspective) posts I've read in a while. I think I have PTSD now. Is there like a mini buyer's support group yet?
The fact that the game costs ~$300 minimum to get into is a definite barrier to entry, and until they address that, Games Workshop will always be a premium product that has no place in toy stores. They say they want to address the fandom at large, but then only make the game affordable to the few. Meanwhile, other games have a cost of entry at a fraction of what Warhammer costs to get into. The old Battleforces used to be a good start, but they should take it a step further and include all of the rules required to run said units.
On the "redesigning lines", I think we may be seeing some of that already. I've noticed that in the Adeptus Mechanicus books (and the Sigmarite army list) there are no named characters for the armies. I suspect in future books we will be seeing less and less "named" characters and existing named characters to be dropped as selectable models; they'll remain in the fluff, but since someone is likely to only buy *1* copy, they'll slowly be dropped out as playable options.
My take away... GWs profits are up because they've shifted a large number of products to being only available from their webstore where they get a larger margin. Those sales effectively rob the sales from retail outlets... They don't seem to understand that as their strategy for growth is to sell more through retailers.
Stormonu wrote: On the "redesigning lines", I think we may be seeing some of that already. I've noticed that in the Adeptus Mechanicus books (and the Sigmarite army list) there are no named characters for the armies. I suspect in future books we will be seeing less and less "named" characters and existing named characters to be dropped as selectable models; they'll remain in the fluff, but since someone is likely to only buy *1* copy, they'll slowly be dropped out as playable options.
I think that's more to do with dropping 'Fine'cast than a part of the design philosophy.
I suspect that from here on out, named characters will only be included in a codex where there is an existing model that they still have remaining stock of, or where they can produce a plastic replacement. AM didn't get a named character because they're a brand new army (so no existing character models) and their budget went on producing as many plastic unit kits as possible. We'll likely see a special character or two sooner or later... either when the codex gets re-done, or when they release new models under whatever system eventually replaces the codexes.
Considering the sheer amount of models and books released so far this year (with no sign of slowing down if AoS is any indication) these numbers are embarrassing.
Stormonu wrote: On the "redesigning lines", I think we may be seeing some of that already. I've noticed that in the Adeptus Mechanicus books (and the Sigmarite army list) there are no named characters for the armies. I suspect in future books we will be seeing less and less "named" characters and existing named characters to be dropped as selectable models; they'll remain in the fluff, but since someone is likely to only buy *1* copy, they'll slowly be dropped out as playable options.
I think that's more to do with dropping 'Fine'cast than a part of the design philosophy.
I suspect that from here on out, named characters will only be included in a codex where there is an existing model that they still have remaining stock of, or where they can produce a plastic replacement. AM didn't get a named character because they're a brand new army (so no existing character models) and their budget went on producing as many plastic unit kits as possible. We'll likely see a special character or two sooner or later... either when the codex gets re-done, or when they release new models under whatever system eventually replaces the codexes.
I think the last infantry-sized named character that popped in plastic was Karlaen. There was Grimnar last year, but he had the sleigh and reindeers. Nork was last year, too (but slightly bigger); and Sanguinary Priest is as close to Corbulo as it's ever going to get. Oh yeah, and the chaos guy out of the DV box.
To the point of design philosophy: I really like the idea of upgrade kits that essentially give you the extra parts to model whomever you want, in combination with standard kits. I wish this would become the norm. I would gladly pay between $15 - $50 for a sprue that gave me various bits to model all the special characters in a single package. The variation depends on how many of the special characters I can squeeze out of the upgrade box -- basically $15 for a small sprue, $30 for a single standard frame, $50 for 2 standard frames would be what I'd have in mind.
Them everyone could just buy that, add it to whatever standard pieces, and be done with all their characters!
Stormonu wrote: On the "redesigning lines", I think we may be seeing some of that already. I've noticed that in the Adeptus Mechanicus books (and the Sigmarite army list) there are no named characters for the armies. I suspect in future books we will be seeing less and less "named" characters and existing named characters to be dropped as selectable models; they'll remain in the fluff, but since someone is likely to only buy *1* copy, they'll slowly be dropped out as playable options.
I think that's more to do with dropping 'Fine'cast than a part of the design philosophy.
I suspect that from here on out, named characters will only be included in a codex where there is an existing model that they still have remaining stock of, or where they can produce a plastic replacement. AM didn't get a named character because they're a brand new army (so no existing character models) and their budget went on producing as many plastic unit kits as possible. We'll likely see a special character or two sooner or later... either when the codex gets re-done, or when they release new models under whatever system eventually replaces the codexes.
I think the last infantry-sized named character that popped in plastic was Karlaen. There was Grimnar last year, but he had the sleigh and reindeers. Nork was last year, too (but slightly bigger); and Sanguinary Priest is as close to Corbulo as it's ever going to get.
To the point of design philosophy: I really like the idea of upgrade kits that essentially give you the extra parts to model whomever you want, in combination with standard kits. I wish this would become the norm. I would gladly pay between $15 - $50 for a sprue that gave me various bits to model all the special characters in a single package. The variation depends on how many of the special characters I can squeeze out of the upgrade box -- basically $15 for a small sprue, $30 for a single standard frame, $50 for 2 standard frames would be what I'd have in mind.
Them everyone could just buy that, add it to whatever standard pieces, and be done with all their characters!
When we talk about characters, we're talking dudes you can't make from regular kits, Astorath, Dante, Mephiston, stuff like that which is *definitely* more stand out than the regular rank and file type kits.
One might even argue that the SM Captain kit (the multi part one) is more rank and file than any SC.
PlaguelordHobbyServices wrote: When we talk about characters, we're talking dudes you can't make from regular kits, Astorath, Dante, Mephiston, stuff like that which is *definitely* more stand out than the regular rank and file type kits.
One might even argue that the SM Captain kit (the multi part one) is more rank and file than any SC.
Yeah, for sure.
But a lot of these are buildable (like Dante, Sanguinius, Corbulo); a few aren't, really -- like Astorath, Mephiston. But I mean, Mephiston is so ugly. It's like conquering the Blood Rage hit him with the fugly stick (I'm talking about the gorgeous Calistarius model out of Space Hulk, which is a young Mephiston before he became Chief Librarian).
But what I was asking for is a kit -- up to $50 -- that has all the special parts that you need to build ALL the special named characters, in combination with parts from standard kits. So two of the scroll float thingies, for instance, for Blood angels (for Astorath and Sanguinius), any special weapons, any unique heads, torso fronts, et cetera.
People would *easily* pony up the $50 (look how people went nuts on the $15 upgrade sprues).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
H.B.M.C. wrote: If you don't think GW is in competition with Magic then you don't really understand the hobby we're in.
I disagree. There are plenty of wargamers with no interest in CCGs and vice versa.
CCG and miniature wargames are hobbies, they're often sold in the same stores, and in some cases they compete for dollars -- but they not the same hobby, and they aren't *direct* competition. If someone isn't happy with AoS, their first thought probably isn't going to be, "gee, maybe I should play Magic instead".
Of course there's crossover. But there are with video games too -- I bet most 40k players have bought a video game in the last year. Someone might think, "Do I buy an Xbox or do I buy AdMech?" But that doesn't put them in competition with each other.
H.B.M.C. wrote:If you don't think GW is in competition with Magic then you don't really understand the hobby we're in.
Exactly, I see people all the time in my LGS admiring the GW kits, then they look at the price, and I kid you not hear them say along the lines of "That's *way* too much to be asking for that, think i'll just spend this $50 on the new Magic set."
Talys wrote:
PlaguelordHobbyServices wrote: When we talk about characters, we're talking dudes you can't make from regular kits, Astorath, Dante, Mephiston, stuff like that which is *definitely* more stand out than the regular rank and file type kits.
One might even argue that the SM Captain kit (the multi part one) is more rank and file than any SC.
Yeah, for sure.
But a lot of these are buildable (like Dante, Sanguinius, Corbulo); a few aren't, really -- like Astorath, Mephiston. But I mean, Mephiston is so ugly. It's like conquering the Blood Rage hit him with the fugly stick (I'm talking about the gorgeous Calistarius model out of Space Hulk, which is a young Mephiston before he became Chief Librarian).
But what I was asking for is a kit -- up to $50 -- that has all the special parts that you need to build ALL the special named characters, in combination with parts from standard kits. So two of the scroll float thingies, for instance, for Blood angels (for Astorath and Sanguinius), any special weapons, any unique heads, torso fronts, et cetera.
People would *easily* pony up the $50 (look how people went nuts on the $15 upgrade sprues).
Ehh, in what universe does the SG kit make a half-decent Dante? No hand-mounted Infernus Pistol, no one-handed axe (the two handed one is too big, the blade just looks ridiculous in one hand) And no Jump pack with the three jets mounted in each booster. Plus, the armor isn't as finely sculpted as Dante's. (The plastic kit is only 5 years old, and the reprints are showing the signs of degredation)
Astorath's Armor is entirely made of that sinew-like armor. (I'm guessing a special Artificer suit)
The Sanguinor... He's unique, his armor is as finely detailed as Dante's, but you can't get that pose from the SG kit.
And the reason that $15 upgrade sprue sold like hotcakes is because people finally didn't have to shell out $30 for a crappy monopose Sanguinary Priest.
Also, more BA bits for the new SM kits are nice to have, so of course people bought a crap ton of them.
H.B.M.C. wrote: If you don't think GW is in competition with Magic then you don't really understand the hobby we're in.
In competition for our money, yes.
But if we use that metric then GW is in competition with Super Markets and Petrol Stations as well then.
If you want hobby/luxury funds only, then GW and Magic are still two very different beasts.
I have dabbled in Magic in my experimental college days (sad but true that I wasted some of my youthful experimentation on that) but the collectible and cyclical nature, as well as the incredible turnover of boosters, soured me in short order.
A few years after that GW and other tabletop games let me build, paint and play (3 things I enjoy in different measures) miniatures that I will be able to use, at least in the majority, for years.
I built my marines as Deathwatch coz I think they are cool (and I can use them as proxies for any imperial marine army, yeah i'm a tight ass) and while I haven't played more than 2 games of 6th and absolutely no games of 7th I still build build up my force because eventually I will get back to playing them and even if they rejig the rules I am confident I will find uses for the models, even if some are less/more awesome than they were before.
...where was I going with this? Oh yeah, they are both hobbies but their formats attract people for different reasons.
I would put Magic in the middle of a sliding scale where PP/Mantic/Infinity are at 10 and Food is at 1 for relative competitively.
H.B.M.C. wrote: If you don't think GW is in competition with Magic then you don't really understand the hobby we're in.
In competition for our money, yes.
But if we use that metric then GW is in competition with Super Markets and Petrol Stations as well then.
If you want hobby/luxury funds only, then GW and Magic are still two very different beasts.
I have dabbled in Magic in my experimental college days (sad but true that I wasted some of my youthful experimentation on that) but the collectible and cyclical nature, as well as the incredible turnover of boosters, soured me in short order.
A few years after that GW and other tabletop games let me build, paint and play (3 things I enjoy in different measures) miniatures that I will be able to use, at least in the majority, for years.
I built my marines as Deathwatch coz I think they are cool (and I can use them as proxies for any imperial marine army, yeah i'm a tight ass) and while I haven't played more than 2 games of 6th and absolutely no games of 7th I still build build up my force because eventually I will get back to playing them and even if they rejig the rules I am confident I will find uses for the models, even if some are less/more awesome than they were before.
...where was I going with this? Oh yeah, they are both hobbies but their formats attract people for different reasons.
I would put Magic in the middle of a sliding scale where PP/Mantic/Infinity are at 10 and Food is at 1 for relative competitively.
Cyclical nature, yeah, for Standard format. You do realize there are Eternal formats, like Legacy and Vintage where cards never rotate, right? So cards from alpha (if they're not banned) can be used alongside new cards, in fact, many new deck architypes are responsible for old cards rising in price. There's also the relatively new Modern format, which is all boosters 8th edition and forward. To, saying the rotation cycle keeps you out of MTG is a cop out because there are multiple formats to choose from, sure, you can play standard, or take some older cards, add them to your old standard deck at rotation, and play modern, go back even further and play Legacy. Etc. There's also Draft, sealed, pauper (commons only) Elder Dragon highlander.
MTG is vast and diverse in the ways you can play the game. Saying standard is the reason you don't play is a non-answer, like I said, a cop out.
MTG directly competes with other games in the LGS. People often ask what more people turn up to play more often, the answer is Magic. Magic beats Wargaming in terms of hobby funds almost all the time. Like I said above, I hear different people come in *all the time* and say they like the 40K models, etc, but it's too much money to get into. $300 might get you a small, 1000 point force, but that same $300 could also buy you a competitive entry deck in Legacy or Modern. Nothing too off the wall, something like a burn deck, it'll get you your fetches, and the pricey bits you need to play competitively. I built a Legacy Burn deck for $200 and Burn is still a top tier competitive deck. If 40K had lower entry points, then it'd sell better (or maybe just a few price drops altogether)
The industry didn't stay flat, it grew. You're trying to argue that GW managed to tread water in what isn't even their biggest territory historically by making a comparison to the sector but that's just fluffing. The reality is GW is competing against the whole of the tabletop gaming market, just like every other wargaming manufacturer. GW's competition isn't solely other wargames companies, it's everything else in the market which will typically attract the same sort of customer. Granted, some will be closer competition than others but I'm sure there's plenty of people posting here which also spend money on other items you'll typically find in your typical hobby shop that you're trying to exclude, be it CCGs, board games or even comics.
That wargaming stayed flat in a growing tabletop gaming market is a failure of the wargaming companies, including GW, to capitalise on the increased interest and spending on related products. Don't try and paint it as some sort of success on their part because they haven't failed worse than their counterparts.
Although personally I think that a lot of money has gone into wargaming through KS which won't have shown up on the ICV report and definitely won't have made it into GW's pockets.
If you are going off the ICV2 statement that the North American retail miniature market was flat then GW didn't tread water in North America, it grew.
North American Trade:
2014: 16,498K GBP
2015: 17,740K GBP
North American independent trade grew 7.5% in a supposedly flat market. Given SW: Armada and D&D Attack Wing also showed up this year, for the losses to even out some companies are definitely hurting. 40k dominates North American sales, so the AdMech and Harelquins armies probably helped with that boost.
Ehh, in what universe does the SG kit make a half-decent Dante? No hand-mounted Infernus Pistol, no one-handed axe (the two handed one is too big, the blade just looks ridiculous in one hand) And no Jump pack with the three jets mounted in each booster. Plus, the armor isn't as finely sculpted as Dante's. (The plastic kit is only 5 years old, and the reprints are showing the signs of degredation)
Sorry, but I beg to differ -- hand mounted infernus is no problem, nor is 1h axe. Jump pack isn't the same as Dante's (it's from DC), but it's a reasonable proxy.
This is not even really a great kitbash; I did this a very long time ago and just rebased it to 32mm.
There is very little crossover between the Wargamers and the CCGers here. A few, but they're more outliers. Board games and video games are much more in competition for dollars with wargaming here than MtG or YuGi.
H.B.M.C. wrote: If you don't think GW is in competition with Magic then you don't really understand the hobby we're in.
I disagree. There are plenty of wargamers with no interest in CCGs and vice versa.
CCG and miniature wargames are hobbies, they're often sold in the same stores, and in some cases they compete for dollars -- but they not the same hobby, and they aren't *direct* competition. If someone isn't happy with AoS, their first thought probably isn't going to be, "gee, maybe I should play Magic instead".
Of course there's crossover. But there are with video games too -- I bet most 40k players have bought a video game in the last year. Someone might think, "Do I buy an Xbox or do I buy AdMech?" But that doesn't put them in competition with each other.
Obviously there is a lot of crossover, or you wouldn't have the vast majority of gaming stores selling the things in the same stores, on the shelves next to each other..
Jesus wept, I sometimes think you are being deliberately facetious Talys
Video games have long since entered entertainment mainstream, in much the same way as music or movies, saying that a young to middle-aged person might buy those as well as Warhammer really isn't saying a whole lot.
@Pacific - There are stores that sell CCGs and sports jerseys too (because they're both collectibles). There's two right in my town, and they sell 40k as well. And comic books are in a lot of the hobby shops, several locally -- does that make Iron Man comics a competitor of 40k and Magic the Gathering?
To take that a step further, a lot of AV stores sell televisions, xboxes, microwaves, and cameras. So does that make them all competitors in the same market too? And if you go into an Apple store, there are iPhones and Macbooks, so surely those are direct compete with each other as well.
Oh, speaking of music and movies. Most stores that sell music also sell movies, and a large number sell video games too. Surely, you don't think Elton Jon, Fast & the Furious, and Fallout are competitors in the same market
Stores are allowed to sell things that aren't in direct competition with each other, you know.
For two things to be direct competitors, they need to essentially be involved in then same sort of thing. You could argue that miniature wargames are pretty close to miniature boardgames; but it would be hard to convince me that miniature wargames compete with traditional Milton-Bradley type boardgames like Trivial Pursuit and Monopoly. Likewise, Vallejo and Games Workshop compete on paint supplies. But in no way does Vallejo compete with Magic the Gathering, even though they're sold at the same store. Neither with Coke or Frito Lay, who have products in the same store too. And guess what, food accounts for more profit than Privateer Press in some stores!
The sales revenue for Magic is apparently in the ballpark of $250 million. If I'm reading the numbers right, that's more than all of GW combined. 40k isn't a Magic competitor, that would imply that they weren't being crushed by Magic's sales.
Tells me GW still doesn't know what they are doing. With a competent job of managing the company and their fanbase they would be expanding. Lost sales are nothing in my eyes compared to lost potential, at any rate.
Ehh, in what universe does the SG kit make a half-decent Dante? No hand-mounted Infernus Pistol, no one-handed axe (the two handed one is too big, the blade just looks ridiculous in one hand) And no Jump pack with the three jets mounted in each booster. Plus, the armor isn't as finely sculpted as Dante's. (The plastic kit is only 5 years old, and the reprints are showing the signs of degredation)
Sorry, but I beg to differ -- hand mounted infernus is no problem, nor is 1h axe. Jump pack isn't the same as Dante's (it's from DC), but it's a reasonable proxy.
This is not even really a great kitbash; I did this a very long time ago and just rebased it to 32mm.
Dante doesn't actually use a mounted Inferno Pistol, his is handheld. He also has a Death Mask. BUT, between the Death Company kit (for a BA Jump Pack and Inferno Pistol arm) and the Sanguinary Guard kit (main body, Death Mask, axe), Dante is quite easy to proxy. Now imagine what it would be like if they actually built a kit with Dante in mind the way they did with the Space Wolves Upgrade kit and Ragnar Blackmane. Honestly, they could cover Mephiston and Asorath in the same kit, since their armors(flayed skin Artificer Armor) are basically the exact same, Mephiston just wears a robe. They should just phase out Captain Tycho, dude has been dead in the fluff for years. I could see a kit for making Dante and the Sanguinor and another kit for making Mephiston and Asorath, and lastly a kit for Corbulo and a Sanguinary Priest. They wouldn't need to phase out many of the characters.
They really should do what they did with the Space Wolves Upgrade kit for more chapters and more armies in general. It pains me to say this, but there isn't much reason for a model for Pedro Kantor to exist, he could easily be made using an Imperial/Crimson Fists upgrade kit. Here's a thought, make a Terminator kit and a Power Armor kit with multi-pose legs. Release all sorts of upgrades like the Chaplain(has a Skull Helmet and a Crozius Arcanum), Captain (Iron Halo and some more weapon choices), Librarian (Psychic Hood, Power Staff), and the special characters (Khan would come with a Bike since NO ONE puts Khan on foot!, Pedro would come with the right arm Power Fist and Dorn's Arrow, Shrike would come with a jump pack and his Lightning Claws, etc.).
Disclaimer, this applies to the UK only, we have different employment laws to the US that actually protect the worker, e.g., no fire at will.
The living wage is being implemented in the UK over a four year period, the full amount will not be payable until 2020 and then only to those over 25. Currently min. wage is £6.50 for over 21s, living wage will be £7.20 for over 24s, it has zero impact on under 25s.
RiTides wrote: Freezing salary rates while paying out dividends... not the kind of company I want to support honestly. Everything about their new direction (super rapid product release, abandonment of formation-based fantasy) isn't for me... I'm glad the new CEO can write coherently, and is somewhat open to adjusting for the market (very slightly)... but yeah, they're as merciless as ever.
In fairness they can't freeze salaries due to the introduction of a 'living wage' next April. I think that the majority of GW's front line staff are on minimum wage at the moment so they will all be getting a pay increase next year.
No most of the UK staff are not on min wage, min wage at present is £13,520 assuming over 21 and working 40 hours a week, GW pays between £16,000 and £18,000 without bonuses for a typical store manager. Living wage will be £7.20 for over 24 and then £9 for over 24 by 2010, that's £14,976 and £18,720 for a 40 hour week respectivley. So GW won't need to give a pay rise because of min wage to the vast majority of its UK staff until 2020. GW simply doesn't employ anybody other that possibly bar staff at bugmans, cleaners and catering at HQ that is on min wage, and its likely that the cleaners and catering staff that are employed via an outsourcing deal.
CaulynDarr wrote: A hike in minimum wage wouldn't get past a salary freeze. Salary workers by definition do not make an hourly wage.
In the US at least even the one man store guys wouldn't be affected. I'm pretty sure their job title is manager; that makes them except employees. All they can hope for is the Department of Labor is supposed to be reclassifying what count's as the minimum salary for exemption. Then GW would have to raise their salary to match the new exempt minimum, or they would be entitled to overtime and minimum wage.
In the UK this is NOT true at all, if you can prove that your salary divided by hours worked is less than min wage then the company is going to get fined. See here:
Zero hour contracts are very different beasts, you can quite legally earn nothing for a week if you have worked no hours, the key point here is that you have not actually worked and you never had the promise of any guarantee of any hours, thats the whole point of a zero hour contract. Even if you work only one hour that week they have to still pay you the min. wage for that hour, thats the whole reason we have a min wage set as an hourly wage. Personally I think zero hour contracts are one step up from indentured serfs as you still have to be available to work that day for ever how many hours the company wants for whatever shift pattern they want even if the company does not want you. If you refuse to work that day (say you had work elsewhere), you stand a high risk of having your contract terminated, this makes it an uneven agreement with all the power in the companies hand.
TheWaspinator wrote: The sales revenue for Magic is apparently in the ballpark of $250 million. If I'm reading the numbers right, that's more than all of GW combined. 40k isn't a Magic competitor, that would imply that they weren't being crushed by Magic's sales.
If that's your metric than GW has no competition in the miniature wargaming space.
Vain wrote: In competition for our money, yes. But if we use that metric then GW is in competition with Super Markets and Petrol Stations as well then.
Then I stand by my original statement: You don't understand the hobby we're in.
If you don't see the comparisons between GW and Magic, and think that super markets and buying petrol is somehow an equivalent, and should be considered equal competitors with GW as Magic, then you don't understand the hobby we're in.
Anything that competes for the same time and money is a competitor to GW. Magic is a competitor to GW. Video games as well. Anything that competes for free time.
Talys wrote: @Pacific - There are stores that sell CCGs and sports jerseys too (because they're both collectibles). There's two right in my town, and they sell 40k as well. And comic books are in a lot of the hobby shops, several locally -- does that make Iron Man comics a competitor of 40k and Magic the Gathering?
To take that a step further, a lot of AV stores sell televisions, xboxes, microwaves, and cameras. So does that make them all competitors in the same market too? And if you go into an Apple store, there are iPhones and Macbooks, so surely those are direct compete with each other as well.
Stores are allowed to sell things that aren't in direct competition with each other, you know.
Yes, on a macro-economic level, every commodity is in competition with every other for the limited ressource "money" of the consumers.
But more concrete, some commodities are more likely to be in direct competition -"direct" meaning a) on a regular basis, for example, at least every month, and b) in the same sector of interest and allocated budget, in this case: hobby time & pocket money.
The question of direct impact / competition boils down to target group and mode of demand/supply. I.e. are these things a) collectibles/comsumables for b) the hobby time of c) teenage boys and college students, d) both with limited cash and relatively diverse (unfocussed) interests in the fantastical/geeky.
Generally, the statement "If little Johnny has 60 bucks a month to spend on hobby stuff, he will make a choice between the new Magic starter and 3 boosters or 1 WH40K tank" or even taking your example "If little Johnny has only 20 bucks a month to spend on hobby, and he likes comics jjust as much as tabletop, he will chose Iron Man comics over WH40K" is truer (i.e. much more often true) than "If little Johnny is not happy with AoS he will buy a microwave oven instead"
Alright, also not what you said, but you hopefully get the jist: direct competition in the field of fantasy/sci-fi hobby is much more likely than not.
Now, I actually think that there is at least a second target group (grown-up teenage boys and former college students) which has enough money to spend on several interests parallely, as well as sub-groups in both target groups where there is no competition between hobby expressions, for lack of (conflict of) interest.
I would still assume that in the group of non-full-time working young people, most make regular choices and hence create a competition between products in the same niche (and more important: for the same budget!) on a regular basis.
If that is not the case with you, you are (too) rich. Or you have no other obligations. Which probably means you are (too) rich.
Happens, but is not the average position.
Indeed, seeing that the distribution of wealth in most industrialized countries is getting more and more top-sided, it becomes an ever more marginalized position!
The numbers are pretty uninteresting. Almost exact same as last year sans the website costs so profits went up. This may be seen as positive and company is making a good profit, however given that last year was fairly universally considered as "not very good", I am not sure that "same as not very good" is THAT encouraging. Though obviously, there is still no sign of the "death spiral" much predicted by certain folks.
They acknowledge lack of revenue growth. However they mostly seem to assign it to restructuring of their sales channels, and not price or quality of their product.
Rountree gives an impression that he's having lots of new ideas and who knows, maybe this is both real and a good thing. He talks about "resetting the ranges" which might seem slightly ominous. Remember Kirby's last year comments about "sweeping changes...in our product" and then AoS.
Stormonu wrote: On the "redesigning lines", I think we may be seeing some of that already. I've noticed that in the Adeptus Mechanicus books (and the Sigmarite army list) there are no named characters for the armies. I suspect in future books we will be seeing less and less "named" characters and existing named characters to be dropped as selectable models; they'll remain in the fluff, but since someone is likely to only buy *1* copy, they'll slowly be dropped out as playable options.
I think that's more to do with dropping 'Fine'cast than a part of the design philosophy.
I suspect that from here on out, named characters will only be included in a codex where there is an existing model that they still have remaining stock of, or where they can produce a plastic replacement. AM didn't get a named character because they're a brand new army (so no existing character models) and their budget went on producing as many plastic unit kits as possible. We'll likely see a special character or two sooner or later... either when the codex gets re-done, or when they release new models under whatever system eventually replaces the codexes.
I think the last infantry-sized named character that popped in plastic was Karlaen. There was Grimnar last year, but he had the sleigh and reindeers. Nork was last year, too (but slightly bigger); and Sanguinary Priest is as close to Corbulo as it's ever going to get. Oh yeah, and the chaos guy out of the DV box.
To the point of design philosophy: I really like the idea of upgrade kits that essentially give you the extra parts to model whomever you want, in combination with standard kits. I wish this would become the norm. I would gladly pay between $15 - $50 for a sprue that gave me various bits to model all the special characters in a single package. The variation depends on how many of the special characters I can squeeze out of the upgrade box -- basically $15 for a small sprue, $30 for a single standard frame, $50 for 2 standard frames would be what I'd have in mind.
Them everyone could just buy that, add it to whatever standard pieces, and be done with all their characters!
If they're serious about managing their bloated range, that "upgrades" path is the one they should take with Space Marines. Ideally in combination with truescaling the models, you could reduce the core SM range to four infantry boxes, two bike boxes, and four vehicle boxes(Tactical Squad, Assault Squad, Scout Squad, Terminator Squad, Bikes, Attack Bike, Dreadnought with all options, Rhino/Razor/AA combo, Pred/Vindi combo, Land Raider combo), then offer additional options in 2/3 sprue plastic clampacks; heavy weapons for Dev squads, Veteran options, Honour Guard bitz, chapter upgrade sprues etc.
notprop wrote: The fairly static position is interesting in itself.
I'm looking at this a ls a pause for a deep breath. You know the kind to take either before taking a step up or a a big plunge on the roller coaster.
I'm not sure it actually is static. They are selling less stuff. Now, for many businesses, mine included, selling less stuff for the same profit is actually desirable, less work for the same money in terms of input v output.
However, there are reasons why I think this outlook would not apply to GW.
Firstly, my business does not rely on a social component, which GW does. Less product sold inherently means less people consuming. This is not a good idea when you sell a product that, by design, requires more consumers to be useful.
Secondly, and this for me is the really important point, they have sold less stuff for the same profit, but this is during an accounting period where they have actually produced more product (in terms of SKU if not volume) than ever before.
There is an inherent instability in all product that relies on social interaction, and that is the ability to easily find those social interactions, and my concern, if I were running GW, was hitting the cliff of losing too many players to keep it viable for the rest of the consumers way before the financials themselves have an effect. Because at that point, sales will go into freefall, and with little warning. Are they there yet? Nowhere near, but they really need to address the loss of consumers, it should have been their number one priority for the last 5 years or more in reality.
I, like many others have played Magic at one point in my life -- for about 2.5 years. I've played 40k for about 10x that.
There are many people in my circle of friends who play magic, but would never consider playing a wargame or paint a mini. Of the people that I play 40k with, none would consider Magic an 'alternative' or 'competitor'. I would also say that Magic and RPGs are not direct competitors.
On the other hand, Magic and YuGiOh are direct competitors.
They may all compete for dollars from some gamer/youth/senior's wallet, but comparing them as in 'this game does this better' is as useful as saying a TV is better than a PC or vice versa. And besides, it's an important distinction, or the industry would not distinguish between them.
I would also add one other huge difference between Magic and 40k: it's possible to spend countless hours enjoying 40k by oneself painting and modeling, which is a very distinct hobby from gaming. I spend about 3-5 hours a day in this solo aspect of the hobby, but frankly, would be happy if it could be 10 hours a day. That's not something you can do in Magic; MtG really is, mostly, a hobby that requires an opponent for everything other than unwrapping boosters and making decks, neither of which is going to turn into a thousands-of-hours hobby.
notprop wrote: The fairly static position is interesting in itself.
I'm looking at this a ls a pause for a deep breath. You know the kind to take either before taking a step up or a a big plunge on the roller coaster.
I'm not sure it actually is static. They are selling less stuff. Now, for many businesses, mine included, selling less stuff for the same profit is actually desirable, less work for the same money in terms of input v output.
However, there are reasons why I think this outlook would not apply to GW.
Firstly, my business does not rely on a social component, which GW does. Less product sold inherently means less people consuming. This is not a good idea when you sell a product that, by design, requires more consumers to be useful.
Secondly, and this for me is the really important point, they have sold less stuff for the same profit, but this is during an accounting period where they have actually produced more product (in terms of SKU if not volume) than ever before.
There is an inherent instability in all product that relies on social interaction, and that is the ability to easily find those social interactions, and my concern, if I were running GW, was hitting the cliff of losing too many players to keep it viable for the rest of the consumers way before the financials themselves have an effect. Because at that point, sales will go into freefall, and with little warning. Are they there yet? Nowhere near, but they really need to address the loss of consumers, it should have been their number one priority for the last 5 years or more in reality.
To me, it seems that GW is choosing to please its best customers at the expense of it's least spenders, and charging the best customers for it.
For example: 'superfans' are very happy with rapid book releases, and updated kits make them all excited. But more casual customers want their product to last, and would rather pay less than get a kit refresh.
So GW makes the superfan happy by pumping out the new books and the refreshed kits, but they know there will be some people who won't bite. So what to do? Make those that Really wanted the new stuff pay more - in fact, get them to make up the difference in lost sales, because after all, they are the ones that want it.
Will this implode at some point?
If there aren't enough superfans, or if it gets too expensive for them, sure it can.
There is not a great deal of royalties considering what they are sitting on.
It seems to me that the 44 license agreements has the potential to increase a lot, thats where I would be looking to improve, although quite a few of these 44 licensing contracts will come to fruition this year or at a later date.
Three of those titles Vermintide , Eternal Crusade and Warhammer total war have the potential to be big money spinners, previous titles on a similar scale (space Marine and Dawn of war) also bought many people into the hobby.
In addition to the horus heresy plastics range or game that is on the horizon, things are looking very good for the rest of this year, long term depends on the success of the polarizing AOS and whats yet to come I guess, still no reason to panic.
Rayvon wrote: There is not a great deal of royalties considering what they are sitting on.
It seems to me that the 44 license agreements has the potential to increase a lot, thats where I would be looking to improve, although quite a few of these 44 licensing contracts will come to fruition this year or at a later date.
Three of those titles Vermintide , Eternal Crusade and Warhammer total war have the potential to be big money spinners, previous titles on a similar scale (space Marine and Dawn of war) also bought many people into the hobby.
In addition to the horus heresy plastics range or game that is on the horizon, things are looking very good for the rest of this year, long term depends on the success of the polarizing AOS and whats yet to come I guess, still no reason to panic.
I know I am waiting impatiently for Eternal Crusade. I am really looking forward to playing a Space Marine (probably either a BA Assault Marine or Tactical Marine). I really wish they would release a stand alone console game that is a sequel to Space Marine. And then take that formula and apply it to the other races too. I don't always want to play an MMO.
notprop wrote: The fairly static position is interesting in itself.
I'm looking at this a ls a pause for a deep breath. You know the kind to take either before taking a step up or a a big plunge on the roller coaster.
I'm not sure it actually is static. They are selling less stuff. Now, for many businesses, mine included, selling less stuff for the same profit is actually desirable, less work for the same money in terms of input v output.
However, there are reasons why I think this outlook would not apply to GW.
Firstly, my business does not rely on a social component, which GW does. Less product sold inherently means less people consuming. This is not a good idea when you sell a product that, by design, requires more consumers to be useful.
Secondly, and this for me is the really important point, they have sold less stuff for the same profit, but this is during an accounting period where they have actually produced more product (in terms of SKU if not volume) than ever before.
There is an inherent instability in all product that relies on social interaction, and that is the ability to easily find those social interactions, and my concern, if I were running GW, was hitting the cliff of losing too many players to keep it viable for the rest of the consumers way before the financials themselves have an effect. Because at that point, sales will go into freefall, and with little warning. Are they there yet? Nowhere near, but they really need to address the loss of consumers, it should have been their number one priority for the last 5 years or more in reality.
Yes, I agree. Sales volume down with a small uptick in profits is desirable in several metrics; however, it takes a very astute company with a market advantage to prevent that slide from going too far. There is a quantifiable point beyond which sales volume drops to the point where the product is no longer relevant and it no longer matters how high the company ratchets prices to compensate, so few people are interested in the product that the customer pool has dropped below sustainable levels. I'll just say that I don't believe this is intentional; no sane company commits a lingering suicidal death by a thousand cuts, not when there's hungry, younger sharks circling.
Let's play devils' advocate and assume that GW is somehow engineering this "orderly retreat" from the market; they've damaged their sales relationship with stockists to the point where they are losing market presence to new custom. To counter this, I think they may have realized that moving to one-man operations and placing stores in out-of-the-way places has been detrimental to their retail arm being self-sufficient; Rountree's statements seem to indicate this with the "new concept" of what they used to do. So, what do they do? Try to repair their relationship with independents or double down on the same losing strategy? CEO and Chairman statements expressed a pride in their strongly controlled sales terms. It doesn't bode well; you can't say that you're going to expand while bragging about the damaging sales terms that resulted in people dropping your product line. Do they actually think that they'll convince toy stores and comic shops to carry their product, places that don't necessarily need their product to survive or have traditionally carried them, while being so restrictive? Laughable.
Time will tell but with my prognostication hat on, I see this trend continuing; slow slide downwards in sales volume and profitability. The problem here is that they need new blood. The create AoS to draw in the new blood but then create a pricing structure that has prevented people from interfacing with their brand in the past, barrier for entry is too high. The thing with mini-wargaming is that a starter box is just that, it's to start with; you're either adding to it to keep the game interesting and refresh replayability or you lose interest. If the price for new product is too high, you inhibit growth in sales.
Rountree seems to have an inkling of what needs to be done, let's see if the Board of Directors lets him do it because at the end of the day, words are just words without appropriate action. If we see the same thing next year as we've seen this year, that tells me that they are going to continue their slide into mediocrity.
Wait, did somebody really say that food and fuel are as much a competitor to Warhammer as Magic is?
Dude, quit smoking the pot. It's turned your brain to mush. If you can't figure out the difference between entertainment costs and cost of living, then you should probably move back into your parents' basement. Otherwise you'll likely be dead within a month from not knowing which "entertainment" costs will be the most important for you. Good grief.
Comparing Warhammer and Magic is like comparing apples and oranges. They taste different. They have different costs (usually depending on season). Different colors. But they're also both fruit and land in the same spot on the food pyramid (this used to be a thing, for you kids who are too young to know anything other than "carbs are the devil"). They have their differences, but they're still in the same bloody category. So quit being obtuse.
To me, it seems that GW is choosing to please its best customers at the expense of it's least spenders, and charging the best customers for it.
For example: 'superfans' are very happy with rapid book releases, and updated kits make them all excited. But more casual customers want their product to last, and would rather pay less than get a kit refresh.
So GW makes the superfan happy by pumping out the new books and the refreshed kits, but they know there will be some people who won't bite. So what to do? Make those that Really wanted the new stuff pay more - in fact, get them to make up the difference in lost sales, because after all, they are the ones that want it.
Will this implode at some point?
If there aren't enough superfans, or if it gets too expensive for them, sure it can.
Actually, my main point there, which is why I said it was the most important, was that they decreased volume whilst increasing, quite significantly, the amount of product they produce (again, in terms of SKU, I do not think overall volume is up). For any production management this should be a huge red flag, because in terms of sales funnel, they are as a business becoming more inefficient. I assume this is why they are talking about rebalancing the product line, which is a sensible suggestion. However, it would have been more sensible had they not just embarked on a drastic increase in the product line, and the associated costs involved, in the very accounting period they are just commenting on.
Mymearan wrote: Anything that competes for the same time and money is a competitor to GW. Magic is a competitor to GW. Video games as well. Anything that competes for free time.
Gaming money comes from discretionary income - that money that you can afford to spend on things that you enjoy, but do not need.
Food, housing, petrol... these are the things that get paid for before any discretionary income.
Eating at a restaurant could be argued to compete with GW - but that box of macaroni and cheese that you ate last night would not.
Video games, certainly, and it competes for time as well - I know that I intend to spend a lot less time playing Kings of War when Fallout 4 comes out.
But moving the competition to just what you see in a game store is a more precise gauge - these are things competing for your money on the spot.
Magic is weird - the individual parts can be bought in addition to anything else - folks buy a $50 Pathfinder book and a couple of booster packs for Magic.
Magic fits very nicely in the impulse buy category.
Miniatures used to be the same way - I could buy a Ral Partha mini for a dollar when I first started fantasy gaming.
GW used to pack their minis two to a blister, to attract the impulse buy crowd.
So, money gets split all kinds of ways, even inside of the discretionary amount.
Competitive magic with any sort of constructed deck cannot be done on a budget unless you have very understanding friends who will loan you their best cards when you need them. Even playing draft on a regular basis can get expensive. Those people who buy one or two booster packs and play with a mixed deck are equiv. to those who play 40k with 'nids, SM, Necrons all in the same army because thats all they have and they need 1250 points to play.
For most adults in full time emploment time is the bigger limiting factor rather than money, after that its what your local group is into.
Looky Likey wrote: Competitive magic with any sort of constructed deck cannot be done on a budget unless you have very understanding friends who will loan you their best cards when you need them. Even playing draft on a regular basis can get expensive. Those people who buy one or two booster packs and play with a mixed deck are equiv. to those who play 40k with 'nids, SM, Necrons all in the same army because thats all they have and they need 1250 points to play.
For most adults in full time emploment time is the bigger limiting factor rather than money, after that its what your local group is into.
You're assuming that everyone, or even a majority, of people who play Magic do so at a competitive level on the same token, we can assume that all people who play 40K are competitive players. Since we patently know this to be untrue, the same will hold true for Magic and every other game in the industry.
Draft tournaments run about $25 and even weekly this is still within an impulse buy range for most people (assuming that they want to do this every week). Now go out and find a complete GW game for the same price; something that someone can plunk down $25 and have an evening's entertainment with a group of people. Sure, I can buy a box of miniatures for around $25 but that, in and of itself, isn't going to allow me to play a game for several hours with friends.
PLEASE restrict commentary to the discussion at hand, and not the particular users in this thread and/or their ability or qualifications to discuss things on...a discussion forum.
Looky Likey wrote: Competitive magic with any sort of constructed deck cannot be done on a budget unless you have very understanding friends who will loan you their best cards when you need them. Even playing draft on a regular basis can get expensive. Those people who buy one or two booster packs and play with a mixed deck are equiv. to those who play 40k with 'nids, SM, Necrons all in the same army because thats all they have and they need 1250 points to play.
For most adults in full time emploment time is the bigger limiting factor rather than money, after that its what your local group is into.
The non-competitive Magic players are also the overwhelming majority.
So, not a good argument - Magic sells more to those non-competitive players than GW does to all of their players put together.
And, gee, when did they start selling GW miniatures randomly? I kind of missed that.... Because I do not see a whole lot of nid-necron-marine armies....
The Auld Grump
*EDIT* On topic....
Reading the report, it seems that GW is still treading water, but is moving faster to do so.
Growth seems to be limited, with the webstore becoming a moneymaker instead of a money sink. (Still not worth 4 Million.)
Starting off the fiscal year with dividends that exceed earnings... what? Why?
You're assuming that everyone, or even a majority, of people who play Magic do so at a competitive level on the same token, we can assume that all people who play 40K are competitive players. Since we patently know this to be untrue, the same will hold true for Magic and every other game in the industry.
Draft tournaments run about $25 and even weekly this is still within an impulse buy range for most people (assuming that they want to do this every week). Now go out and find a complete GW game for the same price; something that someone can plunk down $25 and have an evening's entertainment with a group of people. Sure, I can buy a box of miniatures for around $25 but that, in and of itself, isn't going to allow me to play a game for several hours with friends.
Magic is very much pay to win up to a certain level, the same wasn't true of 40k until the more exclusive formations started turning up. You can house rule Magic however you want, but any sort of pick up game using a constructed deck against anybody that takes Magic even remotely seriously you are going to need a decent deck to have anything remotely resembling fun. Excluding formations a normal 1750 or 2000k 40k list are broadly similar in competativeness, I can get by with a cheaper army against your all FW elysian army even though you paid much more per model without a major penality. The same is nowhere near as true for constructed magic as you need the best cards and this is a particular problem for pick up games, competition would be another level on top.
Draft is ~$25 per go, a full day would be at least two drafts, and thats a week on week cost assuming you only want to play once a week, or $300 a year. Granted you'll have some cards that you can sell (if you are quick enough) for a good return. 40k is more upfront for a single 2k army but I shouldn't have to spend more money on it till the next book hits unless I want to.
You're assuming that everyone, or even a majority, of people who play Magic do so at a competitive level on the same token, we can assume that all people who play 40K are competitive players. Since we patently know this to be untrue, the same will hold true for Magic and every other game in the industry.
Draft tournaments run about $25 and even weekly this is still within an impulse buy range for most people (assuming that they want to do this every week). Now go out and find a complete GW game for the same price; something that someone can plunk down $25 and have an evening's entertainment with a group of people. Sure, I can buy a box of miniatures for around $25 but that, in and of itself, isn't going to allow me to play a game for several hours with friends.
Magic is very much pay to win up to a certain level, the same wasn't true of 40k until the more exclusive formations started turning up. You can house rule Magic however you want, but any sort of pick up game using a constructed deck against anybody that takes Magic even remotely seriously you are going to need a decent deck to have anything remotely resembling fun. Excluding formations a normal 1750 or 2000k 40k list are broadly similar in competativeness, I can get by with a cheaper army against your all FW elysian army even though you paid much more per model without a major penality. The same is nowhere near as true for constructed magic as you need the best cards and this is a particular problem for pick up games, competition would be another level on top.
Draft is ~$25 per go, a full day would be at least two drafts, and thats a week on week cost assuming you only want to play once a week, or $300 a year. Granted you'll have some cards that you can sell (if you are quick enough) for a good return. 40k is more upfront for a single 2k army but I shouldn't have to spend more money on it till the next book hits unless I want to.
I won't argue here but anecdotally I don't see that in my area just like I usually don't see the uber competitive 40K players. I've had just as much fun with a deck of randomness or a pre-built as anything "competitive". People seem to have fun with 40K and AoS and there's no semblance of balance in either of those games, just do the GW thing and talk to your opponent first.
You're assuming that everyone, or even a majority, of people who play Magic do so at a competitive level on the same token, we can assume that all people who play 40K are competitive players. Since we patently know this to be untrue, the same will hold true for Magic and every other game in the industry.
Draft tournaments run about $25 and even weekly this is still within an impulse buy range for most people (assuming that they want to do this every week). Now go out and find a complete GW game for the same price; something that someone can plunk down $25 and have an evening's entertainment with a group of people. Sure, I can buy a box of miniatures for around $25 but that, in and of itself, isn't going to allow me to play a game for several hours with friends.
Magic is very much pay to win up to a certain level, the same wasn't true of 40k until the more exclusive formations started turning up. You can house rule Magic however you want, but any sort of pick up game using a constructed deck against anybody that takes Magic even remotely seriously you are going to need a decent deck to have anything remotely resembling fun. Excluding formations a normal 1750 or 2000k 40k list are broadly similar in competativeness, I can get by with a cheaper army against your all FW elysian army even though you paid much more per model without a major penality. The same is nowhere near as true for constructed magic as you need the best cards and this is a particular problem for pick up games, competition would be another level on top.
Draft is ~$25 per go, a full day would be at least two drafts, and thats a week on week cost assuming you only want to play once a week, or $300 a year. Granted you'll have some cards that you can sell (if you are quick enough) for a good return. 40k is more upfront for a single 2k army but I shouldn't have to spend more money on it till the next book hits unless I want to.
I don't think anyone is saying Magic can't be just as expensive as 40K, just that it's more of a flexible purchase for your hobby dollars. I knew a bunch of guys that picked up a case of boosters from some close-out sale and spent a few months having fun drafting off it. There's ways for people to mitigate the $$-to-win aspect and have fun with magic.
See, you can play Magic competitively for $500, or play it casually for $50. For 40K, you can play it competitively for $500, or you can play it casually for $500. If I want to go from casual to competitive magic, I add in my $450 to the $50 I already spent. If I want to go from casual to competitive 40K, I could have to add in $500 to the $500 I already spent(admittedly worse case). Let's not even talk about the additional hobby time.
You're assuming that everyone, or even a majority, of people who play Magic do so at a competitive level on the same token, we can assume that all people who play 40K are competitive players. Since we patently know this to be untrue, the same will hold true for Magic and every other game in the industry.
Draft tournaments run about $25 and even weekly this is still within an impulse buy range for most people (assuming that they want to do this every week). Now go out and find a complete GW game for the same price; something that someone can plunk down $25 and have an evening's entertainment with a group of people. Sure, I can buy a box of miniatures for around $25 but that, in and of itself, isn't going to allow me to play a game for several hours with friends.
Magic is very much pay to win up to a certain level, the same wasn't true of 40k until the more exclusive formations started turning up. You can house rule Magic however you want, but any sort of pick up game using a constructed deck against anybody that takes Magic even remotely seriously you are going to need a decent deck to have anything remotely resembling fun. Excluding formations a normal 1750 or 2000k 40k list are broadly similar in competativeness, I can get by with a cheaper army against your all FW elysian army even though you paid much more per model without a major penality. The same is nowhere near as true for constructed magic as you need the best cards and this is a particular problem for pick up games, competition would be another level on top.
Draft is ~$25 per go, a full day would be at least two drafts, and thats a week on week cost assuming you only want to play once a week, or $300 a year. Granted you'll have some cards that you can sell (if you are quick enough) for a good return. 40k is more upfront for a single 2k army but I shouldn't have to spend more money on it till the next book hits unless I want to.
I won't argue here but anecdotally I don't see that in my area just like I usually don't see the uber competitive 40K players. I've had just as much fun with a deck of randomness or a pre-built as anything "competitive". People seem to have fun with 40K and AoS and there's no semblance of balance in either of those games, just do the GW thing and talk to your opponent first.
Talking? Oh not that excuse again. I have to talk to my opponent for me to have fun? Why should I do that? It makes no sense, I mean, its not like we play is in any sort of social situation.
Except that isn't the complaint people have about pre game communication and you know it. It's about how much you have to go through before playing to get to a point where you will both enjoy the game compared to other games where you just agree on a points cost and start playing.
I did, sold, but the last dip brought me back in. It's currently at about $8/share (559 pence) so not an expensive stock in the grand scheme of things.
Draft is ~$25 per go, a full day would be at least two drafts, and thats a week on week cost assuming you only want to play once a week, or $300 a year. Granted you'll have some cards that you can sell (if you are quick enough) for a good return. 40k is more upfront for a single 2k army but I shouldn't have to spend more money on it till the next book hits unless I want to.
Y'all need to check where you're drafting. Around here, it's $10-$15 per draft, unless it's something special like Modern Masters or a Sealed done for a pre-release.
As for owning stock, I might. I don't own any individual stocks, but am part of several mutual funds associated with our 403b retirement investing plan. A couple of those mutual funds are related to international business entities, so there's a chance some GW stock might be in there somewhere.
I did, sold, but the last dip brought me back in. It's currently at about $8/share (559 pence) so not an expensive stock in the grand scheme of things.
Damn your eyes, man! You've supposed to be talking the company up, not shredding it with clear, concise analysis.
I did, sold, but the last dip brought me back in. It's currently at about $8/share (559 pence) so not an expensive stock in the grand scheme of things.
Damn your eyes, man! You've supposed to be talking the company up, not shredding it with clear, concise analysis.
Well, a dividend is a dividend and they stupidly pay above their EPS, I'd be a fool not to take the free money. Citibank gives me like .01 cents a share and OG&E only gives me .05 cents a share, GW rolls out the big dividends.
casvalremdeikun wrote: The fact that the game costs ~$300 minimum to get into is a definite barrier to entry, and until they address that, Games Workshop will always be a premium product that has no place in toy stores. They say they want to address the fandom at large, but then only make the game affordable to the few. Meanwhile, other games have a cost of entry at a fraction of what Warhammer costs to get into. The old Battleforces used to be a good start, but they should take it a step further and include all of the rules required to run said units.
I have to question where you get that figure.
I can't speak to anything related to WHF (now Sigmar) since that particular fiction simply doesn't appeal to me, but I've played 40k for over a decade. I've never once had price be a 'barrier to entry' for anyone I've introduced the game to.
Now, I'm a business professional and the only monetary obstacle for me is my own reason - I have to justify the cost, not in terms of 'can I afford this' but in terms of 'is this worth the cost'. I make that call every time I do (or more frequently do not) buy something. Many of my peers are also gainfully employed adults and are thus able to reason what is and is not worth their time. I simply can't speak to the market regarding children or persons with no income so if that the demographic you are referring to as suffering from barriers... not sure what to tell you.
I know that last little bit probably just sounded like me patting my own back and perhaps being callous, but I hope to prove a point... Spending $100 (I think it may even be $115 now) to pick up a starter box set is a bargain. Period. I know dozens of folks who picked up the Black Reach box set a few years back for $99... and they got a fully playable SM force, and some Orks. I know some of those people split the cost, playing $50 to get just the SM or the Orks and some people bought one box each and traded - effectively netting DOUBLE number models for $100. Dark Vengeance was just as good - The new BA & Nid box set is better still. And all of them are worth every penny.
It does exactly what it sets out to do - it gets people started. Is it the ultimate fighting force you dreamed up after years of experienced gaming and exposure to all the codices? Of course not, but then - it's not meant for you if that's the case.
And here's where I get to sound REALLY callous:
If you can't afford the $100 to $130 (taxes?) requires to pick up a new hobby, than 40k certainly isn't for you. It's not a 'rich man's game' - I've spend a few thousand dollars on the hobby over the course of a decade... and while that may sound like a lot, it's less than I spend on many other things. All things considered, it's pretty cheap for a hobby.
You into gaming? Go drop $350 on a new Xbox One or $399 on a PS4. Then spend $59 per game and see how quickly that adds up?
Don't fancy consoles? More of a PC type? Try building a solid gaming rig - MINIMUM $500 if you can suffer low end parts. again, not including the games
But maybe you're into something else entirely? Maybe you like sports or working out... ever bought a treadmill? decent ones START at $700 and get into the thousands QUICK.
Still not there? How about music? Maybe you're an artist? lol.... my daughter's violin lessons cost more every year than I've spent on 40k in over a decade.
Sorry for the tirade - it just irks me that people see money as an obstacle. I wasn't born with a silver spoon in my mouth and I don't commute to work in McLaren - I'm not what you'd call 'rich. But I understand the concept of money....
this whole thread is about GW and their yearly financials... which are poor, there's no doubt. Any other take on the numbers is a spin job. plain and simple. But they're not poor because the price of the models is too high - they're poor because the demographic is drying up. GW failed to market their stuff to the right audience, and they were less than genuine to the loyal folks who stuck with them until now.
If you want the game to be more accessible, stop griping about the price being too high - start griping about the models not being worth the price. GW wants $50 a box now... cool. I expect $50 worth of content from it. I want variety - I want plastic SoB (like almost everyone else) and quality rules that will be around longer than 2 months without being rewritten into a new book. I want that $50 to be something that matters. I'm happy to pay it - like I think most folks are - I just want to know that I'm getting something of value.
casvalremdeikun wrote: The fact that the game costs ~$300 minimum to get into is a definite barrier to entry, and until they address that, Games Workshop will always be a premium product that has no place in toy stores. They say they want to address the fandom at large, but then only make the game affordable to the few. Meanwhile, other games have a cost of entry at a fraction of what Warhammer costs to get into. The old Battleforces used to be a good start, but they should take it a step further and include all of the rules required to run said units.
Tbf to GW (not that I usually do this), the entry barrier is much lower than that.
-Buy 1x Box of infantry (£25 at most)
-Buy Codex (£35)
-Borrow friend's rulebook (£0)
-Play very small game // Kill Team
First game clocks in at £60 GBP.
-Think about 40k for a while.
-Pick up a battleforce (£100)
-Ebay the A5 rulebook (£30)
Second game clocks in with a running total of £190 GBP.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And you can buy these things cheaper w/o GW.
Sorry, no. You can't just pick and choose things like that.
It's like saying GW isn't really that expensive to start up if you buy off eBay second hand. We're talking RRP and assuming everything is bought.
£50. It's not what actually happens around here, but that brings you to £110 for a Kill Team game.
Still high, but not as high as previously estimated.
I keep seeing Kill Team bandied around and please forgive me as I am not particularly au fait with the latest edition of 40K but does such a thing exist any more? I thought Kill Team was a 'thing', officially anyway back in 4th/5th edition era, when it had official rules and such in the main rulebook but are there official rules for it still?
Since 3rd edition, 40K has just not been that great a game when played at less than 1500 points, and it took at least 1000 to get close to the authentic feel of the game. I mean, you could play magic with 10 cards or Warmachine with a single warcaster, but no one does that. Just like no one plays 40K games that small except for maybe their very first demo game.
Sorry, no. You can't just pick and choose things like that.
It's like saying GW isn't really that expensive to start up if you buy off eBay second hand. We're talking RRP and assuming everything is bought.
£50. It's not what actually happens around here, but that brings you to £110 for a Kill Team game.
Still high, but not as high as previously estimated.
Technically you need to buy the kill team rules too. So that's extra on top (can't recall how much, ~£10?) plus if you're playing a variant of the game that requires a supplement, can you really say you're "playing 40K?"
Codex (softback or small format) - $50
Rules - $100
Cadian or Catachan Defense Force - $200
So $350 CAD to start reasonably.
American will be cheaper. So saying ~$300 to start 40k is very reasonable.
This is not a reasonable example. This is not 'entry' into the game.
Step ONE is getting a STARTER box. There is no official rule for this, and obviously a person with the means can take whatever route they wish - you're first purchase could be to buy the $10,000 Ultramarines Chapter set... could...
That's the introduction. Step TWO is later branching off and constructing your own army, from the ground up - codex and individual boxes.
No one is saying that you can't take step two first if you're so inclined, but if you do so, know that you are moving out of the intended order and thus circumventing the provided, lower cost entry options.
There is no entry barrier - unless you opt to start with something other than what is intended.
And I could go out and find on in my garbage bin FOR FREE!!!!
Is that really the argument?
New players WILL not go for ebay but the most standard approach is to buy the big rulebook.
Azreal13 wrote: Oh, I see, so the intention is I buy a bunch of stuff I'm ultimately not going to use?
Because that's cheaper?
It's especially funny because two years ago he asked:
En Excelsis wrote: Another of my work mates has recently shown interest in playing WH40k. He just picked up the Imperial Guard Cadian Battleforce and is wondering how to best configure his units, what load-outs work best, etc.
So why didn't he tell his friend that he was starting 40k wrong?
Talys wrote: By the way, rules aren't really $100. You can easily get the mini softcover for a lot less (free to $30), and it is exactly identical.
You missed the point. Ebay is not the expected way to get started in the game, at least not to GW. They want you to buy a $85 rulebook, a $50 codex, a $30 HQ, and two $40 troops. And that is just to get in on the ground floor. If the paperback rulebook was what they wanted you to buy, it would be on their website separately. The Starter Set is a good value, but only if you want to start Dark Angels(using out of date rules, no less) or Chaos(because nothing gets someone to stay in the hobby more than playing the worst army and losing all of the time).
This is why I think each army needs a starter set of its own that comes with the mini rulebook, an HQ, and two Troops plus all the rules you need to run those basic things (a mini codex with limited options), and sell it for $100. This would have the actual kits you buy off the shelf, just in an easy starter package.
RoninXiC wrote: And I could go out and find on in my garbage bin FOR FREE!!!!
Is that really the argument?
New players WILL not go for ebay but the most standard approach is to buy the big rulebook.
Dude... They are on the shelves of many independents. Stores will give people $10-$15 for them, and sell it for twice that, and many players just give them away.
I've given away (free) 7 copies of mini softcover rules, all to random people who wanted to start 40k.
Azreal13 wrote: Oh, I see, so the intention is I buy a bunch of stuff I'm ultimately not going to use?
Because that's cheaper?
It's especially funny because two years ago he asked:
En Excelsis wrote: Another of my work mates has recently shown interest in playing WH40k. He just picked up the Imperial Guard Cadian Battleforce and is wondering how to best configure his units, what load-outs work best, etc.
So why didn't he tell his friend that he was starting 40k wrong?
In his defence, you can always sell all the models in a starter set. As for the second tho he posted a couple years ago, opinions do change. People find more efficient ways of starting and stuff I suppose
Price barriers actually exist. AoS, whether you like the game or not, represents a corporate admittance that there exists a barrier to entry in the game. In AoS, they've completely removed the $80-$100 price tag from entry allowing potential newcomers the ability to focus on what GW has always said they want to be the best at, the models. So in essence, there's a reduced barrier for entry into the fantasy version of their game. If successful with AoS, I fully expect this to happen to 40K; and if we're all honest, they've already tested the waters with formations and data-slates.
Back to the main topic.
I think where GW fails, and was admitted to in the CEO's statement, is in drawing in new blood. What they are hard-headed about is realizing why that is. Everyone knows the old adage, you have to spend money to make money and GW would rather pay dividends (thank you) than invest in growth opportunities. Scaling back stores, draconian trade practices, expensive rebrandings, lawsuits, etc. None of these will lead to long-term stability and growth. Cost cutting is great and they've really done a good job of cutting some things that were weighing them down BUT there's always the danger of cutting too much, too close to the bone and hitting an artery; the result is hemorrhaging market share and sales. They've applied a tourniquet but it took them pulling out every tool that they have in their bag to do; now it's just a matter of time to see if they've able to stave off infection or they'll wind up having to amputate (close the retail arm).
Well, maybe GW is right, that they put out good looking models and we will buy them.
I just hope they eventually figure out that to get more money out of us is put out better game rules so I will buy more than one pack of them.
It does look like from reading the report they have avoided a fair number of expenses other than the usual costs of production dies for new plastic.
The review of product will be interesting as "threatened", with what in mind will the review be other than possibly stock turns?
I keep thinking of the store changes / structuring as just a distraction: they have committed strongly to the path at hand.
It will be interesting to see how they plan to get into more mainstream market placement: I will believe it when I see it, they do not like to share with anyone.
Funny, this is more personal anecdotal evidence but the GW models are getting bought much less by me, just got a "Bolt Action" army starter.
I think I will always see what GW is up to but there is less I want from them and it is not because I have "enough" models: for any system you never can have enough.
Pick-up games are becoming more important to me and I am playing the games that are more successful in that.
RoninXiC wrote: And I could go out and find on in my garbage bin FOR FREE!!!!
Is that really the argument?
New players WILL not go for ebay but the most standard approach is to buy the big rulebook.
Dude... They are on the shelves of many independents. Stores will give people $10-$15 for them, and sell it for twice that, and many players just give them away.
I've given away (free) 7 copies of mini softcover rules, all to random people who wanted to start 40k.
Hell, I have one for the previous edition that I was given... after I said I wasn't interested! (I swear... some gamers are like Chick tracts in reverse....)
Funny, this is more personal anecdotal evidence but the GW models are getting bought much less by me, just got a "Bolt Action" army starter.
I think I will always see what GW is up to but there is less I want from them and it is not because I have "enough" models: for any system you never can have enough.
Pick-up games are becoming more important to me and I am playing the games that are more successful in that.
Talk about a marketing ploy. I just bought the rulebook for the free box of infantry that Warlord's offering right now; guess who just started a Russian force in Bolt Action?
agnosto wrote: Price barriers actually exist. AoS, whether you like the game or not, represents a corporate admittance that there exists a barrier to entry in the game. In AoS, they've completely removed the $80-$100 price tag from entry allowing potential newcomers the ability to focus on what GW has always said they want to be the best at, the models. So in essence, there's a reduced barrier for entry into the fantasy version of their game. If successful with AoS, I fully expect this to happen to 40K; and if we're all honest, they've already tested the waters with formations and data-slates.
Back to the main topic.
I think where GW fails, and was admitted to in the CEO's statement, is in drawing in new blood. What they are hard-headed about is realizing why that is. Everyone knows the old adage, you have to spend money to make money and GW would rather pay dividends (thank you) than invest in growth opportunities. Scaling back stores, draconian trade practices, expensive rebrandings, lawsuits, etc. None of these will lead to long-term stability and growth. Cost cutting is great and they've really done a good job of cutting some things that were weighing them down BUT there's always the danger of cutting too much, too close to the bone and hitting an artery; the result is hemorrhaging market share and sales. They've applied a tourniquet but it took them pulling out every tool that they have in their bag to do; now it's just a matter of time to see if they've able to stave off infection or they'll wind up having to amputate (close the retail arm).
Marketing is a funny creature. On one hand, you want to have a quality product that "sells itself" right? I mean, if everyone has a need for what you're making, than they're going to buy it regardless of how well it end up being received. I don't know many people who would call McDonald's a quality establishment, but close to a billion people eat there everyday.
But tabletop miniatures aren't a necessity like food the appeal has to be much greater... you've got to convince people to buy them. They have to be good in their own right, and justifiable in their price, as well as desirable to the target audience. GW honestly hits the first two points pretty well... they make fine models and sell them at a price that people have historically been willing to pay. What they are losing now is the desirability of the product. People simply don't want buy them. Raise the price, lower it... honestly not going to have an effect. Look at the Amazon Fire Phone... Started out at $699 because it was a 'premium' handset with lots of options... it didn't sell because people had no interest. then they packaged it with other services.... still didn't sell. Right now you can get one NEW for around $100 and they still aren't moving any product. The price - even when lowered DRAMATICALLY, doesn't fix the problem of no one wanting to buy them.
Every marketing pundit who posts about how GW could 'stop the bleeding' if they just changed the pricing scheme is really just off the reservation in terms of what they know about marketing.
The best way to look at it is to take a queue from Evil Inc (aka Apple). This company has basically been selling polished turds for 30 years. They make old technology that is outperformed by everyone else in their industry, and they charge a premium price... but they move product like crazy. And how do they achieve this? Marketing... they have mass appeal. Loyal fans...
GW has no loyal fans because they've burned them all. The game we all loved in the 90s is just gone.. now it's something else. We keep playing because we remember it fondly, but when new blood sees it - they don't have our rosy perspective. They see it for what it is - a gimmick. Nothing at all like what they say it is?
Grimdark? Show me?
Gritty? Show me!
Playable? OMFG Show me already!?
They want their house back in order - they want their sales to pick up - it's time to restore image. The products and the prices have less to do with their success than how likely you or I are to recommend them to our buddies
We design, manufacture, distribute and sell our fantasy miniatures and related products. These are fantasy miniatures from our own Warhammer 40,000 and Warhammer universes. Our factory, main distribution centre and back office support functions are all based in Nottingham
Yet if that were true, why do GW products have "Made in China" on them if they are made in Nottingham?
Manufacture We are proud to manufacture our product in Nottingham. It's where we started and where we intend to stay. During the year we have been planning a project to up grade our core IT systems that interface with our manufacturing equipment and system
Again no mention of the China stamped onto every hard book and plastic kits.
The strategies outlined seem a losing deal to me. the reason they lost so much in America is that 1man stores means less ability to handle multiple customers who come in, Americans hate qeues.
The idea that they merely make great miniatures shows they have no intentions of making well polished rules sets, just some slapped together words to make it look like a game system, but it is just a ploy to try and sell minis, mins which can be quite unaffordable. I am glad I got my Landraiders when they were 50bucks, not the new 80USD price they are now. Sad about the Riptide and it's near 100USD cost.
When you think Resin prices will work for plastics you've lost touch with reality.
Funny, this is more personal anecdotal evidence but the GW models are getting bought much less by me, just got a "Bolt Action" army starter.
I think I will always see what GW is up to but there is less I want from them and it is not because I have "enough" models: for any system you never can have enough.
Pick-up games are becoming more important to me and I am playing the games that are more successful in that.
Talk about a marketing ploy. I just bought the rulebook for the free box of infantry that Warlord's offering right now; guess who just started a Russian force in Bolt Action?
It's a great game. Though I haven't even finished assembling my russians before starting on a German force. The deal was so good I had to get it twice (so now I have 3 books...)
Automatically Appended Next Post: Plastic kits are made in Nottingham, books come from (IIRC) China. I think that rockcore stuff was China too, but pretty much everything is made in Nottingham.
But then, so is everything from Warlord (except books), or the Perry's, and everyone who uses Renedra for plastics.
ImAGeek wrote: Their plastic kits are all made in Nottingham, save some of the scenery I think.
Okay, just saw the new kit of the Skits I made say Made in the UK, but they have stuff made in China, maybe they are shifting back to the UK so folks can have jobs? still, I was voicing my own opinion, and that they have this idea that they make plastics that ought to go for resin costs is delusional.
agnosto wrote: Price barriers actually exist. AoS, whether you like the game or not, represents a corporate admittance that there exists a barrier to entry in the game. In AoS, they've completely removed the $80-$100 price tag from entry allowing potential newcomers the ability to focus on what GW has always said they want to be the best at, the models. So in essence, there's a reduced barrier for entry into the fantasy version of their game. If successful with AoS, I fully expect this to happen to 40K; and if we're all honest, they've already tested the waters with formations and data-slates.
Back to the main topic.
I think where GW fails, and was admitted to in the CEO's statement, is in drawing in new blood. What they are hard-headed about is realizing why that is. Everyone knows the old adage, you have to spend money to make money and GW would rather pay dividends (thank you) than invest in growth opportunities. Scaling back stores, draconian trade practices, expensive rebrandings, lawsuits, etc. None of these will lead to long-term stability and growth. Cost cutting is great and they've really done a good job of cutting some things that were weighing them down BUT there's always the danger of cutting too much, too close to the bone and hitting an artery; the result is hemorrhaging market share and sales. They've applied a tourniquet but it took them pulling out every tool that they have in their bag to do; now it's just a matter of time to see if they've able to stave off infection or they'll wind up having to amputate (close the retail arm).
I'd link the two.
I think GW isn't very good at recruiting new players because new players in 2015 are less inclined to build 100-200 model armies than 1988 players. Back then, I knew an awful lot of people who really wanted to build their giant battle force (fantasy or scifi); now a lot of those potential customers want something with a smaller time investment, if nothing else. 40k becomes a hobby for those who are really dedicated to miniatures, not for those who want to goof around with a $70 game. There are just a lot more things that give instant gratification these days (video games being at the top), that have improved by leaps and bounds. People generally also have less disposable income, work longer hours, and are a little less patient, I find.
Even though I love the game, I would not recommend 40k for a lot of people who are getting into the hobby (of miniature wargaming), because in the particular stage of their life, they just can't spend enough time, money, and energy on it to make it rewarding. It is anything but a casual hobby.
What GW has become expert at in the last decade is figuring out how to extract every possible penny out of the people who are committed 40k players -- to their maximum profit, I believe. Even in this last decade, though, I've seen several new, dedicated 40k collectors and players as well as returning players, locally, that have gone pretty crazy on models, even by my standards (I'm talking ten thousand bucks or more in a half year or less). As long as GW can have these trickling in, they'll be happy on the 40k side.
But to stay relevant, they need volume, and the universe of people who are interested in and able to blow thousands of bucks every month on GW models is small. Age of Sigmar is GW's way at addressing new player recruitment issues. So, the question is, two-fold:
1) Will Age of Sigmar succeed in recruitment?
2) Can GW build a way to recruit new 40k players, without cannibalizing the highly lucrative superfan revenue?
If they can answer those in the affirmative, the future becomes bright for them!
agnosto wrote: Price barriers actually exist. AoS, whether you like the game or not, represents a corporate admittance that there exists a barrier to entry in the game. In AoS, they've completely removed the $80-$100 price tag from entry allowing potential newcomers the ability to focus on what GW has always said they want to be the best at, the models. So in essence, there's a reduced barrier for entry into the fantasy version of their game. If successful with AoS, I fully expect this to happen to 40K; and if we're all honest, they've already tested the waters with formations and data-slates.
Back to the main topic.
I think where GW fails, and was admitted to in the CEO's statement, is in drawing in new blood. What they are hard-headed about is realizing why that is. Everyone knows the old adage, you have to spend money to make money and GW would rather pay dividends (thank you) than invest in growth opportunities. Scaling back stores, draconian trade practices, expensive rebrandings, lawsuits, etc. None of these will lead to long-term stability and growth. Cost cutting is great and they've really done a good job of cutting some things that were weighing them down BUT there's always the danger of cutting too much, too close to the bone and hitting an artery; the result is hemorrhaging market share and sales. They've applied a tourniquet but it took them pulling out every tool that they have in their bag to do; now it's just a matter of time to see if they've able to stave off infection or they'll wind up having to amputate (close the retail arm).
Marketing is a funny creature. On one hand, you want to have a quality product that "sells itself" right? I mean, if everyone has a need for what you're making, than they're going to buy it regardless of how well it end up being received. I don't know many people who would call McDonald's a quality establishment, but close to a billion people eat there everyday.
Spoiler:
But tabletop miniatures aren't a necessity like food the appeal has to be much greater... you've got to convince people to buy them. They have to be good in their own right, and justifiable in their price, as well as desirable to the target audience. GW honestly hits the first two points pretty well... they make fine models and sell them at a price that people have historically been willing to pay. What they are losing now is the desirability of the product. People simply don't want buy them. Raise the price, lower it... honestly not going to have an effect. Look at the Amazon Fire Phone... Started out at $699 because it was a 'premium' handset with lots of options... it didn't sell because people had no interest. then they packaged it with other services.... still didn't sell. Right now you can get one NEW for around $100 and they still aren't moving any product. The price - even when lowered DRAMATICALLY, doesn't fix the problem of no one wanting to buy them.
Every marketing pundit who posts about how GW could 'stop the bleeding' if they just changed the pricing scheme is really just off the reservation in terms of what they know about marketing.
The best way to look at it is to take a queue from Evil Inc (aka Apple). This company has basically been selling polished turds for 30 years. They make old technology that is outperformed by everyone else in their industry, and they charge a premium price... but they move product like crazy. And how do they achieve this? Marketing... they have mass appeal. Loyal fans...
GW has no loyal fans because they've burned them all. The game we all loved in the 90s is just gone.. now it's something else. We keep playing because we remember it fondly, but when new blood sees it - they don't have our rosy perspective. They see it for what it is - a gimmick. Nothing at all like what they say it is?
Grimdark? Show me?
Gritty? Show me!
Playable? OMFG Show me already!?
They want their house back in order - they want their sales to pick up - it's time to restore image. The products and the prices have less to do with their success than how likely you or I are to recommend them to our buddies
A lot of good points here and items that management at GW has just apparently started to get a glimmer of a clue about. The problem is that they've burned so many bridges, they would have to actually put a real effort into reshaping their image to actually get anywhere and they can't talk out of one side of their mouth about reaching out to other, untapped avenues of revenue and then bask in the glory of their draconian stockist policies out of the other. Rebranding their stores "Warhammer" isn't going to do much if there isn't an actual interest in and attempt to reach consumers. You brought-up Apple as an example but look at all of the things that Apple does that GW refuses to; recognize that competition exists, advertise (oh goodness do they advertise), reach out to their customers, etc. When you buy an Apple device, you're not just buying the device, you're buying the whole Apple experience. GW would like to be there but they either don't know how to get there or have no interest in doing the legwork that Apple does to reach that plateau.
I agree, make a product that people perceive as quality and they'll pay a premium for it but GW seems to want to sit on past laurels and expects the customers to come to them while the entire industry is laughing at their games' rules and picking up their customers as they go.
I think GW isn't very good at recruiting new players because new players in 2015 are less inclined to build 100-200 model armies than 1988 players. Back then, I knew an awful lot of people who really wanted to build their giant battle force (fantasy or scifi); now a lot of those potential customers want something with a smaller time investment, if nothing else. 40k becomes a hobby for those who are really dedicated to miniatures, not for those who want to goof around with a $70 game. There are just a lot more things that give instant gratification these days (video games being at the top), that have improved by leaps and bounds. People generally also have less disposable income, work longer hours, and are a little less patient, I find.
Even though I love the game, I would not recommend 40k for a lot of people who are getting into the hobby (of miniature wargaming), because in the particular stage of their life, they just can't spend enough time, money, and energy on it to make it rewarding. It is anything but a casual hobby.
That's pretty much nonsense, there are mini's games out there that utterly dwarf 40K for size. Admittedly, they tend to be played by the older gamers, and are priced appropriately for the scale (under $1/mini).
I think people generally want a pretty quick starting point, and the ability to expand at a rate they are happy with. For instance, in Malifaux you can be taking part in most tournament with maybe 10 mini's, but everyone attending the tournaments up here haven't stopped at that point, and most probably have enough to proxy for 40K. The difference being they could start almost straight away.
I definitely fit in the not-enough-time camp, but that's fine because there are loads of games out there that let me start with a fairly small time investment. But I reckon my Bolt Action Soviet army probably outnumbers my Imperial Guard by now.
Tragically, GW had a whole set of games that catered to that market (it's not a new one, just one GW gave away). Space Hulk, Mordheim, Necromunda, BFG, Epic, Gorkamorka.
ImAGeek wrote: Their plastic kits are all made in Nottingham, save some of the scenery I think.
Okay, just saw the new kit of the Skits I made say Made in the UK, but they have stuff made in China, maybe they are shifting back to the UK so folks can have jobs? still, I was voicing my own opinion, and that they have this idea that they make plastics that ought to go for resin costs is delusional.
It's always been made in Nottingham. And I wasn't commenting on the rest of it, just that part. I think the prices they charge for the clampack characters is insane.
they just can't spend enough time, money, and energy on it to make it rewarding. It is anything but a casual hobby.
What's that thing about any relationship worth anything shouldn't be hard?
There's a big difference between wanting to do something for leisure and having the time or money to go so. For example, there's no alpine skiing on the cheap, and you can't get decent at hockey without spending a lot of weekends playing. You aren't going to hit legendary on Hearthstone playing 30 minutes a night, and you're not going to enjoy 40k if you have only 5 hours a week on the hobby/game.
It doesn't make the hobby 'hard' -- it just makes it a hobby ideal for people who want something that can suck in more time. By the same token, if someone wants a modeling hobby that will keep them busy 40 hours a week building an army, WMH isn't going to be for them.
There were times in my life where I worked 100 hours a week and the only hobby time I had was at the hobby shop buying the occasional product. And then now fortunately, I have much more free time
Well, I'm European, so Alpine skiing is remarkably reasonable. However, I've never been, so are you saying I'd have to go for weeks until I start enjoying it?
Does nobody play hockey on their lawn and have a jolly time?
Does nobody play video games for fun, without completing them, let alone full mastering them?
Sure, one can perhaps find something more rewarding if one commits to it, but for that to be a requirement? That's on some commercially dodgy ground right there.
I don't see how having 5 hours a week would stop you enjoying 40k, it would just take you a while to have an army ready. And I also don't see how WMH necessarily precludes you from enjoying it if you have lots of free time, you can still spend time converting, painting, and basing a WMH army as much as a 40k one.
ImAGeek wrote: I don't see how having 5 hours a week would stop you enjoying 40k, it would just take you a while to have an army ready. And I also don't see how WMH necessarily precludes you from enjoying it if you have lots of free time, you can still spend time converting, painting, and basing a WMH army as much as a 40k one.
Of course, if you want to play your first normal sized game in 1 year, sure. Or if you want to play with grey plastic. I'm not saying it can't be done, just that I wouldn't recommend it for an optimum experience.
Likewise, if you wanted, you could paint a 150 model menoth army. But why? You'd have tons of repeat models, and it would be unplayable in a game.
It's just a question of trying to match someone who is asking for advice, with the game or modeling hobby they'd likely enjoy the most -- if they asks me, I mean.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Azreal13 wrote: Well, I'm European, so Alpine skiing is remarkably reasonable. However, I've never been, so are you saying I'd have to go for weeks until I start enjoying it?
Does nobody play hockey on their lawn and have a jolly time?
Does nobody play video games for fun, without completing them, let alone full mastering them?
Sure, one can perhaps find something more rewarding if one commits to it, but for that to be a requirement? That's on some commercially dodgy ground right there.
Skiing here is pretty expensive and time consuming. You need to dedicate a day to it, and ski passes aren't cheap, nor is equipment, even if you rent most of it. And no matter what, you need relatively useful attire (not jeans...). Most people need to get to the hill too, which can be an hour or more away, requiring suitable transportation. Having done it before, I'm not a fan of bussing it.
I was referring to ice hockey. Yes, kids play hockey on the road. I haven't ever seen a lawn hockey league for adults around these parts, though one probably exists. Adult intramural level hockey is quite popular as a sport, isn't terribly expensive, but requires some dedication and time if you dint want to suck.
I'm saying: 40k is best enjoyed when one commits a decent effort to it, and what to a lot of people is a respectable amount of money (and time) towards a hobby. You can spend $20 on a video game, get bored and walk away after 2 hours. Not so with 40k.
Azreal13 wrote: Well, I'm European, so Alpine skiing is remarkably reasonable. However, I've never been, so are you saying I'd have to go for weeks until I start enjoying it?
Does nobody play hockey on their lawn and have a jolly time?
Does nobody play video games for fun, without completing them, let alone full mastering them?
Sure, one can perhaps find something more rewarding if one commits to it, but for that to be a requirement? That's on some commercially dodgy ground right there.
Skiing here is pretty expensive and time consuming. You need to dedicate a day to it, and ski passes aren't cheap, nor is equipment, even if you rent most of it. And no matter what, you need relatively useful attire (not jeans...). Most people need to get to the hill too, which can be an hour or more away, requiring suitable transportation. Having done it before, I'm not a fan of bussing it.
I was referring to ice hockey. Yes, kids play hockey on the road. I haven't ever seen a lawn hockey league for adults around these parts, though one probably exists. Adult intramural level hockey is quite popular as a sport, isn't terribly expensive, but requires some dedication and time if you dint want to suck.
I'm saying: 40k is best enjoyed when one commits a decent effort to it, and what to a lot of people is a respectable amount of money (and time) towards a hobby. You can spend $20 on a video game, get bored and walk away after 2 hours. Not so with 40k.
Yet again you get caught up trying to debate the minutiae of the example rather than grasping the overall intent.
I bet nothing goes over your head. I bet you would catch it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tannhauser42 wrote: I just did the math, and, at 20 pence a share, Kirby will be getting roughly $6600 in his dividend check.
Must be nice to be one of the people who decides what the dividend will be, when everybody else will be on a salary freeze...
DakkaDakka has more economists than the LSE this is great, GW is staying number 1 and the ragers keep on raging... So when are people predicting the fall of GW now because I remember same theories of their downfall 5-7 years ago.
bitethythumb wrote: DakkaDakka has more economists than the LSE this is great, GW is staying number 1 and the ragers keep on raging... So when are people predicting the fall of GW now because I remember same theories of their downfall 5-7 years ago.
So you still have nothing intelligent to add to this conversations?
And actually, from a professional point of view, I do think that they have range bloat, though I think that is an ill-considered side effect of a poor overall product strategy (that is, basically cutting everything back and relying on 
)
This may be very, very hard for you to understand, but seeing some of the doomsaying here for what it is doesn't make me a "white knight." And these numbers aren't anything to crow about, even if I was one. Then again, they aren't something to crank up the gloom and doom machine about either. However, I'm sure that seeing the world in black and white creates a lot of nice contrasts and makes life easier for you, so...have fun with that, I guess. 
), I thought the webstore was only 1.0 million, and the restructuring was 3.5?
