Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Palindrome wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:

Spoiler:

Fist of Fun....that brings me back to my days as a callow youth.

Was it Fist Of Fun? I remember it being on TMWRNJ?

Both Lee and Herring, so might have been both I suppose.

PhantomViper wrote:

dereksatkinson wrote:
I wonder if GW's stock price decline is somehow related to the implosion of emerging markets which is causing world stock and bond markets to be thrust into turmoil...

Nah.. got to be the one man stores

You're obviously correct, the rising stock price that GW had in the previous years had, after all, been a direct consequence of the increase in demand that China had placed in the worlds reserves of rare earth elements.

No.. It's called leverage. Stock prices are artificially high because interest rates are artificially low. Meaning people can take on debt to buy more securities. As you can see below, stocks have rallied inline with the increase in the Federal reserve's balance sheet. The more securities (bonds) the Fed (and other central banks) buy, the higher stocks move. They are forcing investors away from low risk assets and into the stock market and things like that. It's called chasing yield.



This works up to the point where someone calls bs on it. Emerging market central banks have started to do just that because the bonds they hold in their reserves (US, UK and JPY) are being debased rapidly. So what you are seeing now are places like Turkey, India, Brazil and Russia raising interest rates. This is causing the leveraged players to unwind their positions. The only way stock prices continue to climb is if we get a major ramp up in QE (in the USA, UK and JPY). Even then, it will only blow this bubble bigger and make the coming onslaught that much worse.

btw.. I do find it really amusing reading what you guys are typing. One little suggestion.. Look at the "float" when you are trying to figure out how many shares are able to be actively traded. Everything else isn't able to be traded without there being a regulatory filing. I also recommend reading up on block trades.

Wayshuba wrote:

Backfire wrote:

...snip...

But maybe what was meant that non-GW companies have grown annual 8 to 10%? That seems somewhat more plausible, and it's actually well believable over single year. All it takes is one or two successful titles to gain big sales. However, even then it doesn't seem all that likely that such growth is maintained year after year. Over 4 years it would mean around 50% growth. Honestly: has it really appeared that there has been quite so big growth in non-GW games? Lets not forget that many of those titles were available even back then, and there were some which have since gone under.

Yes, the growth has been that big. In the industry, miniature wargames fall into one of two-classifications - collectible or non-collectible (pre-painted or unpainted doesn't matter). You are looking at GWs game structure and comparing it to similar companies rather than looking at it in terms of consumer dollars spent on collectible miniature games. Collectible miniature games can be those like 40k or those like Deadzone, Dreadball, et al. The collectible miniature board game industry is growing like gangbusters right now and accounts for the majority of that 8% CAGR. But tabletop wargaming is still growing, albeit at a slower pace.

The point is, where are gamers spending their dollars. Whether it is on a traditional tabletop wargame, like Warhammer 40k, or a collectible miniatures game, such as X-Wing or DeadZone, is of no consequence. The dollars are being spent and going somewhere. Unfortunately, GW is not a benefactor in this. While they have made so bad decisions in regards to the internet and channel, the decision to move out of specialist games at a time when this is the fastest growing part of the sector, is probably hurting them more than anything else.

Net effect, is in 2009 x$ were spent on collectible miniature games. In 2013, y$ we spent. 2013 estimates place total expenditures around $400m-$450m. So to your earlier point, GW would be around 45% market share. Which is large. However, their market share is declining in typical fashion as their corporate arrogance and hubris come to rest (Like Kodak did with the advent of the digital camera while they wanted to protect their film margins, or Apple did in the in between Jobs years, or Wang Computer did with the rise of the tiny WordPerfect Corporation - in which a $500m dollar company (WordPerfect) forced a $51 billion dollar company (Wang) out of existence).

And just one small point, PP is probably sitting at the $20m-$40m range based on three observations. The overall sales of WHFB and that PP has surpassed them (you really believe GW would even keep WHFB around if it only did $1m-$5m in sales?), the observed penetration in the market (# of stores stocking, games being played at FLGS and conventions, etc.), and that Rackham was known to be about $10m and Confrontation had no where near the presence that Warmachine does.

That you are lumping collectible and non-collectible miniature games together is creating a false premise. Deadzone and X-Wing are not collectible. Heroclicks are collectible and catering to a completely different market. By your logic the collectible miniature market is doing sluggish growth compared to CCG's and Board Games which are seeing 25% annual growth based on ICV2 numbers.

As for PP surpassing WHFB, the ICV2 number are only for independent retailers, it does not include sales through GW store or their website. Independent retailers account for only ~45% of GW's sales. You're tossing around flawed assumptions and comparing apples to oranges.

dereksatkinson wrote:

Spoiler:

PhantomViper wrote:

dereksatkinson wrote:
I wonder if GW's stock price decline is somehow related to the implosion of emerging markets which is causing world stock and bond markets to be thrust into turmoil...

Nah.. got to be the one man stores

You're obviously correct, the rising stock price that GW had in the previous years had, after all, been a direct consequence of the increase in demand that China had placed in the worlds reserves of rare earth elements.

No.. It's called leverage. Stock prices are artificially high because interest rates are artificially low. Meaning people can take on debt to buy more securities. As you can see below, stocks have rallied inline with the increase in the Federal reserve's balance sheet. The more securities (bonds) the Fed (and other central banks) buy, the higher stocks move. They are forcing investors away from low risk assets and into the stock market and things like that. It's called chasing yield.



This works up to the point where someone calls bs on it. Emerging market central banks have started to do just that because the bonds they hold in their reserves (US, UK and JPY) are being debased rapidly. So what you are seeing now are places like Turkey, India, Brazil and Russia raising interest rates. This is causing the leveraged players to unwind their positions. The only way stock prices continue to climb is if we get a major ramp up in QE (in the USA, UK and JPY). Even then, it will only blow this bubble bigger and make the coming onslaught that much worse.

btw.. I do find it really amusing reading what you guys are typing. One little suggestion.. Look at the "float" when you are trying to figure out how many shares are able to be actively traded. Everything else isn't able to be traded without there being a regulatory filing. I also recommend reading up on block trades.

That's a macroeconomic problem. So unless a large chunk of the market experienced the same correction at the same time, it has nothing to do with this very specific situation. Otherwise we have to assume that GW's investors have a form a prescience not available to the rest of the investment community.

This is a perfect example of when to apply Occam's Razor. A a single value correction due to company's performance requires fewer moving parts in this case.

silent25 wrote:

That you are lumping collectible and non-collectible miniature games together is creating a false premise. Deadzone and X-Wing are not collectible. Heroclicks are collectible and catering to a completely different market. By your logic the collectible miniature market is doing sluggish growth compared to CCG's and Board Games which are seeing 25% annual growth based on ICV2 numbers.

As for PP surpassing WHFB, the ICV2 number are only for independent retailers, it does not include sales through GW store or their website. Independent retailers account for only ~45% of GW's sales. You're tossing around flawed assumptions and comparing apples to oranges.

It's not fair to pull them apart either. The customer base for CCGs, board games, and miniature games have a healthy amount of overlap. It's rare to find a gamer who hasn't dabbled in at least 2 of the three.

 CaulynDarr wrote:
That's a macroeconomic problem. So unless a large chunk of the market experienced the same correction at the same time, it has nothing to do with this very specific situation. Otherwise we have to assume that GW's investors have a form a prescience not available to the rest of the investment community.

This is a perfect example of when to apply Occam's Razor. A a single value correction due to company's performance requires fewer moving parts in this case.

I don't need anecdotal evidence to prove that the entire rally since 09 was because of central bank intervention. No one should be surprised to see the real fundamentals come to light now that they are being forced to step back.

The truth is, we are starting to see other retailers come clean on how bad their numbers are. Look at BBY and AAPL blowing up. I don't even have to get into the S, JCP or ANFs of the world. The major indexes are starting to show weakness and we are just starting earnings season. Just because these other companies haven't reported yet doesn't mean they aren't doing equally as poorly. Like I said before.. Retail is a festering pile of dog poo right now. Sure, some companies sprang up and went from zero to existing but that doesn't mean they will survive.

You also don't have to assume that management has a form a prescience. Good management teams understand the business cycle and don't constantly try to grow when the environment is not favorable. All you have to do is look at how many vacancies there are in commercial real estate and the vast amount of store closings to see that the environment is bad.

It's not fair to pull them apart either. The customer base for CCGs, board games, and miniature games have a healthy amount of overlap. It's rare to find a gamer who hasn't dabbled in at least 2 of the three.

Fair has nothing to do with it. They are different products. While they may have some overlap in customer bases, so does breakfast cereal, trash bags, and skateboards.

You will get a far better analysis by separating categories of product, than by lumping them together. This is my opinion bases on both a Masters degree in Statistics and owning game stores for 25 years.

A further comment: I see ICV2 mentioned a lot. Their data isn't anything more than anecdotal. Very much like the rumor roundups on Dakka. Much of their numbers are at best ranked data. They call up and ask someone in a game distribution warehouse to list "the top 5 miniature games" or "10 top selling boardgames". No sales data usually accompanies these numbers, and it may not even have been used in the decision making process. Just go ask 20 people in the game industry what they think and lump it together.

Distributors do not give out their numbers to anyone, its proprietary information. ICV2 takes non-numerical data and sort of reads the entrails to make up their charts. It's very fallible with GW, since so little GW product is distributed through the system where ICV2 tries to get it's numbers. They have no data on what GW sells through it's stores or websites, or what they sell to roughly 1200 FLGS just in NA.

So take ICV2 for what it is, and don't try to over analyze what they say too much.

*edit*

Mikhaila did a way better job of explaining it than me.

 mikhaila wrote:
It's not fair to pull them apart either. The customer base for CCGs, board games, and miniature games have a healthy amount of overlap. It's rare to find a gamer who hasn't dabbled in at least 2 of the three.

Fair has nothing to do with it. They are different products. While they may have some overlap in customer bases, so does breakfast cereal, trash bags, and skateboards.

You will get a far better analysis by separating categories of product, than by lumping them together. This is my opinion bases on both a Masters degree in Statistics and owning game stores for 25 years.

A further comment: I see ICV2 mentioned a lot. Their data isn't anything more than anecdotal. Very much like the rumor roundups on Dakka. Much of their numbers are at best ranked data. They call up and ask someone in a game distribution warehouse to list "the top 5 miniature games" or "10 top selling boardgames". No sales data usually accompanies these numbers, and it may not even have been used in the decision making process. Just go ask 20 people in the game industry what they think and lump it together.

Distributors do not give out their numbers to anyone, its proprietary information. ICV2 takes non-numerical data and sort of reads the entrails to make up their charts. It's very fallible with GW, since so little GW product is distributed through the system where ICV2 tries to get it's numbers. They have no data on what GW sells through it's stores or websites, or what they sell to roughly 1200 FLGS just in NA.

So take ICV2 for what it is, and don't try to over analyze what they say too much.

I have to respectfully disagree (and to clarify, I have been a market research analyst for over 28 years). Trash bags and skateboards are two different segments. Tabletop games, whether board, miniature, or similar, are the same when competing for consumer dollars. A consumer is going to spend $x amount on leisure tabletop games. That may go to tabletop wargames, board games, whatever, but it is still being spent on games and the financials show GW is NOT capturing a good portion of it.

Let me give an example: When Magic: The Gathering came onto the scene there was no market, at the time, for CCGs since it was the true pioneer. But a major market for CCGs grew from that, and where from? Mostly from what consumers were already spending on other products (remember that tabletop RPGs took a huge hit at the same time that MTG took off). There is a classic example of why you can also segment into too narrow a niche as well. We are seeing this same effect with tablets versus tabletop PCs today. Technically different segments, but they serve a similar purpose to the consumer and thus represent a shift in consumer dollars. Same can be said for tabletop mini games, versus board games, versus pre-painted collectable games. They are all competing for the same consumer dollars and thus should be inclusive in the same customer segment.

We can talk about semantics all day long. What truly matters is consumers are spending more money today in tabletop leisure products than they did in 2009 and GW is not capitalizing on that trend and is instead moving in the opposite direction. At one time, GW used to focus on games and thus, in addition to large scale miniature war games, also produced skirmish games (Necromunda and Mordheim), adventure games (Space Hulk and Warhammer Quest) and board games (Talisman and Fury of Dracula). Somewhere in the last few years they decided they were no longer a game company and instead were a miniature company and everything has gone wrong with just that change in attitude. My personal belief is the next half will be even worse than this half, since the half GW reported on is typically the good half for manufacturers and retailers (with Christmas and all).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 silent25 wrote:

Wayshuba wrote:

Backfire wrote:

...snip...

But maybe what was meant that non-GW companies have grown annual 8 to 10%? That seems somewhat more plausible, and it's actually well believable over single year. All it takes is one or two successful titles to gain big sales. However, even then it doesn't seem all that likely that such growth is maintained year after year. Over 4 years it would mean around 50% growth. Honestly: has it really appeared that there has been quite so big growth in non-GW games? Lets not forget that many of those titles were available even back then, and there were some which have since gone under.

Yes, the growth has been that big. In the industry, miniature wargames fall into one of two-classifications - collectible or non-collectible (pre-painted or unpainted doesn't matter). You are looking at GWs game structure and comparing it to similar companies rather than looking at it in terms of consumer dollars spent on collectible miniature games. Collectible miniature games can be those like 40k or those like Deadzone, Dreadball, et al. The collectible miniature board game industry is growing like gangbusters right now and accounts for the majority of that 8% CAGR. But tabletop wargaming is still growing, albeit at a slower pace.

The point is, where are gamers spending their dollars. Whether it is on a traditional tabletop wargame, like Warhammer 40k, or a collectible miniatures game, such as X-Wing or DeadZone, is of no consequence. The dollars are being spent and going somewhere. Unfortunately, GW is not a benefactor in this. While they have made so bad decisions in regards to the internet and channel, the decision to move out of specialist games at a time when this is the fastest growing part of the sector, is probably hurting them more than anything else.

Net effect, is in 2009 x$ were spent on collectible miniature games. In 2013, y$ we spent. 2013 estimates place total expenditures around $400m-$450m. So to your earlier point, GW would be around 45% market share. Which is large. However, their market share is declining in typical fashion as their corporate arrogance and hubris come to rest (Like Kodak did with the advent of the digital camera while they wanted to protect their film margins, or Apple did in the in between Jobs years, or Wang Computer did with the rise of the tiny WordPerfect Corporation - in which a $500m dollar company (WordPerfect) forced a $51 billion dollar company (Wang) out of existence).

And just one small point, PP is probably sitting at the $20m-$40m range based on three observations. The overall sales of WHFB and that PP has surpassed them (you really believe GW would even keep WHFB around if it only did $1m-$5m in sales?), the observed penetration in the market (# of stores stocking, games being played at FLGS and conventions, etc.), and that Rackham was known to be about $10m and Confrontation had no where near the presence that Warmachine does.

That you are lumping collectible and non-collectible miniature games together is creating a false premise. Deadzone and X-Wing are not collectible. Heroclicks are collectible and catering to a completely different market. By your logic the collectible miniature market is doing sluggish growth compared to CCG's and Board Games which are seeing 25% annual growth based on ICV2 numbers.

As for PP surpassing WHFB, the ICV2 number are only for independent retailers, it does not include sales through GW store or their website. Independent retailers account for only ~45% of GW's sales. You're tossing around flawed assumptions and comparing apples to oranges.

See my post above for further information. And you may also want to have a look at the FFG website where X-Wing is listed on their own site under Catalog-Miniatures (a collection style game). Also, they are not completely different markets, they are all the same market competing for what consumers spend on tabletop leisure products. You are mistakenly considering the product type, rather than the market type when stating your reply. See my example above regarding MTG and tabletop RPGs. Different product types but came from the same consumer dollars and thus the same market segment.

Let me state this another way to better clarify. A customer walks into his or her local FLGS with $100 to spend. In the store is GW products, board games, role playing games, collectible miniature games and CCGs. The consumer decides to spend that $100 on a board game and therefore not on GW. (I've lost count of the number of comments on the internet I have seen that state then went in to get a new GW model to flesh out their army but when they saw an $80 price tag and could get a board game with 20 miniatures and a bunch of other components for the same $80 they went in that direction - lost sale to GW even though it isn't a tabletop wargame). That is $100 GW may have captured that they did not. This is why you have to bring these together as you have to look at how customers spend their dollars and the distribution of product (i.e., the variety of products where they reach the customer) are. This is how Privateer Press first penetrated the GW base, at the existing channels of contact for GW customers. Same can be said for MTG versus stores carrying tabletop roleplaying games.

Just for the record: One buyer bought 522,000 GW shares (worth 2.741m £) at 4.08 pm. That alone is more than a quarter of what Kirby accumulated over a decade. Can't see in the public record who did this and who bought the rest of the 1,201,468 shares today. There is definitely something going on there, maybe the decisive steps for a take-over.

Last big transactions were Schroders plc buying shares on 10th Jannuary (now 5.268%, not listed a year ago, so less than 2.5%), Quantum Partners LP from Cayman Islands selling stock on 10th January (now 3.69%, earlier more than 4%), and Nomad Investment Partnership L.P. , the biggest shareholder, selling almost half its shares on 3rd December (now 9.8% down from 18.7% a year ago).

Wayshuba wrote:
/snip

So by your expertise, a Hello Kitty doll and a GI Joe figure are exactly the same for terms of market analysis just because both are sold in the same toy store? Thus if Hello Kitty doll sales are booming, it is clear GI Joe is doing something wrong because it is not capitalizing on that growth?

 silent25 wrote:

Wayshuba wrote:
/snip

So by your expertise, a Hello Kitty doll and a GI Joe figure are exactly the same for terms of market analysis just because both are sold in the same toy store? Thus if Hello Kitty doll sales are booming, it is clear GI Joe is doing something wrong because it is not capitalizing on that growth?

Potentially competing for the same dollar/euro/yen/etc... There could be underlying factors; for example, research show that Hello Kitty is particularly popular with adolescent females, a sharp growth in the population of adolescent females would have an impact on the sale of Hello Kitty dolls. A new Hello Kitty cartoon could account for rapid demand...etc.

In the case of GW you have growth in licensing which would normally generate interest and increased sales, but it didn't. Other tabletop gaming companies are reporting growth (they could be lying!), GW did not. etc.

Wayshuba wrote:

And just one small point, PP is probably sitting at the $20m-$40m range based on three observations. The overall sales of WHFB and that PP has surpassed them (you really believe GW would even keep WHFB around if it only did $1m-$5m in sales?), the observed penetration in the market (# of stores stocking, games being played at FLGS and conventions, etc.), and that Rackham was known to be about $10m and Confrontation had no where near the presence that Warmachine does.

Warmachine surpassing WHFB in sales was reported by icv2 first time in 2010. You think PP was in $20 to 40 million revenue range in 2010? No, it was not. And I very much doubt it is there today, or even anywhere close, since the company even today barely registers on outside observers. I remind you that FFG is in 20 to 30 million USD revenue range, and it appears to be clearly larger company than PP. Confrontation was pretty big at one time at least in Europe, though I've read that it was mostly people buying their great looking minis, rather than actually playing the game.

Now, as for collectors market, Specialist games and whatnot - I believe that whilst discontinuing SG was a mistake (part of the revenue drop might be because of SG buying surge in spring 2013), the models were largely obsolete and in need of redoing, which they for one reason or another aren't willing to do. Companies who "cut superfluous branches from their business" are usually those on decline . Discontinuing metal was also probably a mistake: whilst Finecast is in fact more popular amongst the player crowds than one would believe reading the forums, those who collect miniatures aren't big on Finecast or plastic. They want metal or well cast resin. Current GW range does not hold much interest for these folks. However, I doubt that movement of collectors away from GW and to other companies is really observable as huge annual growth %.

Backfire wrote:

Wayshuba wrote:

And just one small point, PP is probably sitting at the $20m-$40m range based on three observations. The overall sales of WHFB and that PP has surpassed them (you really believe GW would even keep WHFB around if it only did $1m-$5m in sales?), the observed penetration in the market (# of stores stocking, games being played at FLGS and conventions, etc.), and that Rackham was known to be about $10m and Confrontation had no where near the presence that Warmachine does.

Warmachine surpassing WHFB in sales was reported by icv2 first time in 2010. You think PP was in $20 to 40 million revenue range in 2010? No, it was not. And I very much doubt it is there today, or even anywhere close, since the company even today barely registers on outside observers. I remind you that FFG is in 20 to 30 million USD revenue range, and it appears to be clearly larger company than PP. Confrontation was pretty big at one time at least in Europe, though I've read that it was mostly people buying their great looking minis, rather than actually playing the game.

Now, as for collectors market, Specialist games and whatnot - I believe that whilst discontinuing SG was a mistake (part of the revenue drop might be because of SG buying surge in spring 2013), the models were largely obsolete and in need of redoing, which they for one reason or another aren't willing to do. Companies who "cut superfluous branches from their business" are usually those on decline . Discontinuing metal was also probably a mistake: whilst Finecast is in fact more popular amongst the player crowds than one would believe reading the forums, those who collect miniatures aren't big on Finecast or plastic. They want metal or well cast resin. Current GW range does not hold much interest for these folks. However, I doubt that movement of collectors away from GW and to other companies is really observable as huge annual growth %.

Do you believe that WHFB does less than $20 million? If so, I highly doubt GW would continue to try and revive something for less than 10% of their business. So, if PP did surpass WHFB in sales as reported than, yes, they would be in that range. Not unheard of for a game that is close to 10 years old now.

As for the company registering on outside observers I will say this, the information on their annual revenue is available (as it is on all private companies who file tax returns) one just has to know where to look.

As for the move away from GW, this has nothing to do with annual growth overall in the market. There are many sources that have quoted double-digit growth, including in this very thread. The fact that there is systemic growth being reported while GW is reporting a heavy decline is further evidence that there is observable market growth overall. This is not growth being achieved because of GWs decline as that double-digit growth is being achieved DESPITE GWs sales decline.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 silent25 wrote:

Wayshuba wrote:
/snip

So by your expertise, a Hello Kitty doll and a GI Joe figure are exactly the same for terms of market analysis just because both are sold in the same toy store? Thus if Hello Kitty doll sales are booming, it is clear GI Joe is doing something wrong because it is not capitalizing on that growth?

No, you missed my point entirely. Hello Kitty and GI Joe are separate demographic audiences. You have to segment by demographic and where that demographic spends particular dollars. Thus, gamers who are into tabletop wargames also frequently buy boardgames or other such games (And, by the way, hobby gaming, much like technology products, are generally gender agnostic. Whereas the example you gave is gender driven, which is a completely different comparison). For example, many X-Wing players have also probably bought Games Workshop, or Mantic, or Corvus Belli, or whatever. In other words, GW is competing for more than just the tabletop wargames market when it comes to revenue. They most likely miss this point because the only products they carry in their stores are GW products and they are overly hostile to internet and independent retailers who they only do business with reluctantly. This is why they are struggling because they have forgotten these basic facts. Market research is always, always based on buyer demographics for similar or related products, not on individual product lines themselves.

Look, the point is that GW sales are down when there are multiple observable sources showing overall market growth. We can argue semantics all day long on demographics and segmentation. It does not change the fact that GW is declining rapidly in sales when many other companies are growing. They have a slew of competition now like they have never had before. But because they only look at their stores, which carry only GW products, they only see the world with blinders on - and it is obviously having a major impact on them. GW is pricing themselves as the Ferrari of the tabletop gaming market. But you know what, far more gamers by Chevys or Fords compared to Ferraris, so they will get what they are targeting - a much smaller audience at a higher price point. Unfortunately, their business is not built for this and the current numbers (and I bet future ones as well), will show that there are not enough Ferrari buying gamers to support a large business like GW is today.

At this point, I would be willing to bet that the sales decline over the next six months will be even bigger than the current six month period just based on the statements made by management in the current financials. They really do not understand what is going wrong and their current stance is to just do more of the same, keep their fingers crossed, and hope gamers will continue with their hobby of "buying" GW models.

 silent25 wrote:

Wayshuba wrote:
/snip

So by your expertise, a Hello Kitty doll and a GI Joe figure are exactly the same for terms of market analysis just because both are sold in the same toy store? Thus if Hello Kitty doll sales are booming, it is clear GI Joe is doing something wrong because it is not capitalizing on that growth?

Your missing the point entirely.

GI Joes and Hello Kitty dolls are not actually targeting the same 'consumer dollars' - forgive the sexsism here lol, but GI Joes are aimed at males and Hello Kitty at females. Distinct difference in target audience.

Wheras with the games; table top, collectible cards, miniatures, roleplay, wargames etc etc... are all competing for the money of out the same pockets.

UInless ofcourse we're talking about mummy and daddies pockets then the GI joe's, hello kittys and also games workshop (and the rest) are infact all targeting the same people - parents with children to buy for.

So either include all toys and games together, Or be realistic about which products are sharing a market - and thus compete for the same share of your money.

This may or may not be relevant to the "GW losing ground in the market discussion" but there is a plastic warlord games burned farmhouse model in the background of a tyranid picture on the daily WD. Granted this was fan submitted, but nevertheless...Bolt action models on the GW website!

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m3740178a_1xl.jpg

 Strombones wrote:
This may or may not be relevant to the "GW losing ground in the market discussion" but there is a plastic warlord games burned farmhouse model in the background of a tyranid picture on the daily WD. Granted this was fan submitted, but evertheless...Bolt action models on the GW website!

That's happened a few times, it's always accidental and the image is removed the instant someone points it out to them.

 Ouze wrote:

 Strombones wrote:
This may or may not be relevant to the "GW losing ground in the market discussion" but there is a plastic warlord games burned farmhouse model in the background of a tyranid picture on the daily WD. Granted this was fan submitted, but evertheless...Bolt action models on the GW website!

That's happened a few times, it's always accidental and the image is removed the instant someone points it out to them.

Yeah I figured it couldn't have been the first time something like that happened. But it certainly seems to legitimize the rise of bolt action popularity and hamper any argument that 40k players are unlikely to migrate to historical games. I'll be interested to see if they take it down.

 Strombones wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 Strombones wrote:
This may or may not be relevant to the "GW losing ground in the market discussion" but there is a plastic warlord games burned farmhouse model in the background of a tyranid picture on the daily WD. Granted this was fan submitted, but evertheless...Bolt action models on the GW website!

That's happened a few times, it's always accidental and the image is removed the instant someone points it out to them.

Yeah I figured it couldn't have been the first time something like that happened. But it certainly seems to legitimize the rise of bolt action popularity and hamper any argument that 40k players are unlikely to migrate to historical games. I'll be interested to see if they take it down.

Were things reversed and Bolt Action had posted an image containing a GW building in the background..... Well.. I'm not even gonna say it lol...

GW will likely take it down sharpish to avoid the c&d and any legal hassle that they would probably be doing if it were the other way.

 Kroothawk wrote:
Just for the record: One buyer bought 522,000 GW shares (worth 2.741m £) at 4.08 pm. That alone is more than a quarter of what Kirby accumulated over a decade. Can't see in the public record who did this and who bought the rest of the 1,201,468 shares today. There is definitely something going on there, maybe the decisive steps for a take-over.

Last big transactions were Schroders plc buying shares on 10th Jannuary (now 5.268%, not listed a year ago, so less than 2.5%), Quantum Partners LP from Cayman Islands selling stock on 10th January (now 3.69%, earlier more than 4%), and Nomad Investment Partnership L.P. , the biggest shareholder, selling almost half its shares on 3rd December (now 9.8% down from 18.7% a year ago).

Quoting for interest---that seems like a lot of shares!

Wayshuba wrote:

Backfire wrote:

Wayshuba wrote:

And just one small point, PP is probably sitting at the $20m-$40m range based on three observations. The overall sales of WHFB and that PP has surpassed them (you really believe GW would even keep WHFB around if it only did $1m-$5m in sales?), the observed penetration in the market (# of stores stocking, games being played at FLGS and conventions, etc.), and that Rackham was known to be about $10m and Confrontation had no where near the presence that Warmachine does.

Warmachine surpassing WHFB in sales was reported by icv2 first time in 2010. You think PP was in $20 to 40 million revenue range in 2010? No, it was not. And I very much doubt it is there today, or even anywhere close, since the company even today barely registers on outside observers. I remind you that FFG is in 20 to 30 million USD revenue range, and it appears to be clearly larger company than PP. Confrontation was pretty big at one time at least in Europe, though I've read that it was mostly people buying their great looking minis, rather than actually playing the game.

Now, as for collectors market, Specialist games and whatnot - I believe that whilst discontinuing SG was a mistake (part of the revenue drop might be because of SG buying surge in spring 2013), the models were largely obsolete and in need of redoing, which they for one reason or another aren't willing to do. Companies who "cut superfluous branches from their business" are usually those on decline . Discontinuing metal was also probably a mistake: whilst Finecast is in fact more popular amongst the player crowds than one would believe reading the forums, those who collect miniatures aren't big on Finecast or plastic. They want metal or well cast resin. Current GW range does not hold much interest for these folks. However, I doubt that movement of collectors away from GW and to other companies is really observable as huge annual growth %.

Do you believe that WHFB does less than $20 million? If so, I highly doubt GW would continue to try and revive something for less than 10% of their business. So, if PP did surpass WHFB in sales as reported than, yes, they would be in that range. Not unheard of for a game that is close to 10 years old now.

Do realise that GW most likely sells only small part of their models through ICV2 (I don't even pretend to know what is the case with PP). Thus you cannot directly assume that sales in ICV2 are good way to measure the which of the two games sell more overall. Never mind making quesses about the size of PP based on that.

The thing about ICV2 reporting that Warmachine outsold WFB......

ICV2 isn't taking into account sales of GW products from the GW website, stores, or NA trade sales. My stores did over 50,000 in sales of WFB in the year 2010. ICV2 doesn't count it.In fact, ICV2 doesn't 'Count' anything. They don't adjust their data by sales volume, they usually just have distributors rate games "Give us the top 5 selling tabletop games." So while ICV2 can let you make statements like "Based on the opinions of the 5 US distributors we talked to, Warmachine sold better than WFB, from the 5 distributors the talked to.

It is equally valid to ask GW to rate the sales of the top 5 games based on their data.

1. 40k
2. WFB
3. LOTR
4. Dreadfleet
5. Mighty empires

See? warmachine didn't even make the top 5!

ICV2 will be highly weighted by the sales numbers of Diamond Comics and Alliance Games Distributors. Very few retailers that carry a lot of GW order any GW product from them. It carries a 35% discount, not 45%. And from Diamond will incur shipping charges at well. Stock on hand is limited. You won't get product as fast. you will not recieve the free racking and product support that GW offers retailers. It's just a far worse deal to go through them for GW vs going direct.

Compare that to Privateer, that goes 100% through distribution, does not sell off their own website, or sell direct to stores. ICV2 will count ALL of my Privateer sales, and none of my GW sales.

It's just not good data for trying to analyze GW sales in comparison to other companies.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
As a point of information:

ICV2 = Internal Correspondance Volume 2. This was a newletter put out by Capital City Comics, a comic book distributor that was #2 behind diamond comics in the days before Marvel Comics caused such chaos in the industry that all but Diamond Comics Distributing were driven out of business. Diamond assumed some of the properties of Cap City and of course got all their accounts when they went under. (One distributor left, got to use them.)

ICV2 came along with that, and they kept it going. It's just an old newletter. They gather some data, ask opinions, write articles. I laugh at many of their "Top 5 XXXXX" each month. They do not have access to any hard numbers other than possibly Diamond Comics, and maybe Alliance Games Distributors. (Who bought Alliance.)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

HairySticks wrote:

 Strombones wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 Strombones wrote:
This may or may not be relevant to the "GW losing ground in the market discussion" but there is a plastic warlord games burned farmhouse model in the background of a tyranid picture on the daily WD. Granted this was fan submitted, but evertheless...Bolt action models on the GW website!

That's happened a few times, it's always accidental and the image is removed the instant someone points it out to them.

Yeah I figured it couldn't have been the first time something like that happened. But it certainly seems to legitimize the rise of bolt action popularity and hamper any argument that 40k players are unlikely to migrate to historical games. I'll be interested to see if they take it down.

Were things reversed and Bolt Action had posted an image containing a GW building in the background..... Well.. I'm not even gonna say it lol...

GW will likely take it down sharpish to avoid the c&d and any legal hassle that they would probably be doing if it were the other way.

Warlord Games is run by John Stollard, who was at GW almost at the beginning, and for the next 20 or so years. Held a very high position in the company at one time. There wouldn't be a cease and desist, more likely John calling up to laugh at them and making someone buy him a beer. GW will take it down just because it doesn't have enough skulls on it!!!

Wayshuba wrote:

Do you believe that WHFB does less than $20 million? If so, I highly doubt GW would continue to try and revive something for less than 10% of their business. So, if PP did surpass WHFB in sales as reported than, yes, they would be in that range. Not unheard of for a game that is close to 10 years old now.

As for the company registering on outside observers I will say this, the information on their annual revenue is available (as it is on all private companies who file tax returns) one just has to know where to look.

And where would this wonderful information be available? Especially given private company revenue is not meant to be available to the public. Financial analyst sites list PP as only having 1 - 10 employees and $1.25M in revenue, which we know is incorrect.

Well, in the UK at least, a limited liability company above a certain size (I forget the threshold, but it is relatively low, I'd expect all the bigger names to exceed it) is obliged to submit its accounts to a third party (Companies House.)

While these records aren't freely available, as with a PLC such as GW, they can be purchased by anyone with the desire to do so.

I can only assume something similar exists in the US.

Wayshuba wrote:

Backfire wrote:

Warmachine surpassing WHFB in sales was reported by icv2 first time in 2010. You think PP was in $20 to 40 million revenue range in 2010? No, it was not. And I very much doubt it is there today, or even anywhere close, since the company even today barely registers on outside observers. I remind you that FFG is in 20 to 30 million USD revenue range, and it appears to be clearly larger company than PP. Confrontation was pretty big at one time at least in Europe, though I've read that it was mostly people buying their great looking minis, rather than actually playing the game.
.

Do you believe that WHFB does less than $20 million? If so, I highly doubt GW would continue to try and revive something for less than 10% of their business. So, if PP did surpass WHFB in sales as reported than, yes, they would be in that range. Not unheard of for a game that is close to 10 years old now.

As for the company registering on outside observers I will say this, the information on their annual revenue is available (as it is on all private companies who file tax returns) one just has to know where to look.

No I don't believe WHFB sales are less than 20 million USD. I believe it's much more likely icv2's numbers are in error, or apply only to some regions. I can well believe PP is bigger than WHFB locally in some places (especially in USA), but globally? Unlikely.
As of PP's size, I don't know where to look. Outside estimates I've seen place annual revenue between $100k and $5 million. Now, that is possibly too low (lower range numbers certainly are), but what it does tell us is that the company is too small to get attention from business people.

Other wargaming companies reporting growth - I'm sure many are. But remember the scale: when you run a wargaming company of say $1 million annual revenue (not too shabby), and your sales have increased by 100k /year, of course you're happy to report 10% growth, it's pretty damn good! But it would take over 1000 years to catch GW at that rate.

Wayshuba wrote:

Let me state this another way to better clarify. A customer walks into his or her local FLGS with $100 to spend. In the store is GW products, board games, role playing games, collectible miniature games and CCGs. The consumer decides to spend that $100 on a board game and therefore not on GW. (I've lost count of the number of comments on the internet I have seen that state then went in to get a new GW model to flesh out their army but when they saw an $80 price tag and could get a board game with 20 miniatures and a bunch of other components for the same $80 they went in that direction - lost sale to GW even though it isn't a tabletop wargame). That is $100 GW may have captured that they did not. This is why you have to bring these together as you have to look at how customers spend their dollars and the distribution of product (i.e., the variety of products where they reach the customer) are. This is how Privateer Press first penetrated the GW base, at the existing channels of contact for GW customers. Same can be said for MTG versus stores carrying tabletop roleplaying games.

This is the more likely scenario. We bought into X-Wing because the fully playable starter was less than a 40K tank. We then use the justification of new ships in that they cost less than GW characters and they come with all the cards and tokens required. Those sales are money that would have normally gone straight to GW. We've also done the same with board games. So board games, collector mini games and tabletop games are definitely competing for the same hobby money.

Backfire wrote:

Wayshuba wrote:

Backfire wrote:

Warmachine surpassing WHFB in sales was reported by icv2 first time in 2010. You think PP was in $20 to 40 million revenue range in 2010? No, it was not. And I very much doubt it is there today, or even anywhere close, since the company even today barely registers on outside observers. I remind you that FFG is in 20 to 30 million USD revenue range, and it appears to be clearly larger company than PP. Confrontation was pretty big at one time at least in Europe, though I've read that it was mostly people buying their great looking minis, rather than actually playing the game.
.

Do you believe that WHFB does less than $20 million? If so, I highly doubt GW would continue to try and revive something for less than 10% of their business. So, if PP did surpass WHFB in sales as reported than, yes, they would be in that range. Not unheard of for a game that is close to 10 years old now.

As for the company registering on outside observers I will say this, the information on their annual revenue is available (as it is on all private companies who file tax returns) one just has to know where to look.

No I don't believe WHFB sales are less than 20 million USD. I believe it's much more likely icv2's numbers are in error, or apply only to some regions. I can well believe PP is bigger than WHFB locally in some places (especially in USA), but globally? Unlikely.
As of PP's size, I don't know where to look. Outside estimates I've seen place annual revenue between $100k and $5 million. Now, that is possibly too low (lower range numbers certainly are), but what it does tell us is that the company is too small to get attention from business people.

Other wargaming companies reporting growth - I'm sure many are. But remember the scale: when you run a wargaming company of say $1 million annual revenue (not too shabby), and your sales have increased by 100k /year, of course you're happy to report 10% growth, it's pretty damn good! But it would take over 1000 years to catch GW at that rate.

I'm done discussing market semantics here. The simple point was that the market is growing overall as evidenced by many different sources of observations while GW is declining. This growth is coming despite the decline of GW sales. It's pretty simple really, GW is shrinking in a growing market. That is not good - for any company.

The sad part is, GW has no one to blame but themselves and it will continue. As of this month alone, they are STILL continuing to raise prices by double-digits. Just in November of last year, a Tyranid Warrior Brood was $47 US. Now, in January it is $51. Almost a 10% increase. They have not, and will not learn their lesson under the current management, it is that simple. Whether it has permanent effect or temporary depends on how quickly the board wakes up and cleans house on the senior management.

As for outside revenue estimates, like Hoovers, et al., these are never, ever even close to the size of companies for revenues. As a rule of thumb used early in market research projects, whatever Hoover's has, multiple it by 10 and you are probably getting closer. As an example, I just looked up the company I recently worked for. Hoovers has their revenue at $20 million when they did $212 million in revenue last year. You can see how accurate those "outside sources" are. There are far better ways to get revenue performance on private companies. While they do not have to publicly report their revenue, the still have to file tax returns and thus the data becomes available if one knows where to go.

I'm curious about the transfer of stocks that went on yesterday. Any more news on that front? How many shares exactly were bought/sold, and what could it indicate? I don't know much about the stock market, let alone in the UK, so I don't really know what it means or could mean.

 mikhaila wrote:
The thing about ICV2 reporting that Warmachine outsold WFB......

May I ask what the ranking would be in your store concerning tabletops? Did Warmachine outsell Warhammer Fantasy?

On the subject of FLGS, I went into the NY GW early last year. The salesperson I was trying to buy from left me so angry (guy treated me like I was 7) I decided I would never set foot their again. At my FLGS they treat me like a human being and are generally pretty awesome to their regulars, so I feel obliged to buy from them.

 Kroothawk wrote:

 mikhaila wrote:
The thing about ICV2 reporting that Warmachine outsold WFB......

May I ask what the ranking would be in your store concerning tabletops? Did Warmachine outsell Warhammer Fantasy?

1. 40k
2. Warmahordes
3. Flames of War
4. WFB

40k was 3x the sales of Warmahordes/FOW which were pretty much equal. WFB was down at about 1/2 of FOW.

WFB is suffering in this area. GW cut so much out of the line this year and last that it's tough to sell new armies. Brets have one kit. Dwarves up til now had Warriors and a cannon. The new armies get a couple of good kits,a couple unusable ones, and a lack of characters. Dark elves were probably the most complete army. Add that to the general Malaise affecting WFB because of the rules, and we don't have a lot of people looking to start new armies. Sales have been primarily the newer product . There's just far less to sell of WFB than there used to be.

I pray daily that Khorne reaps Kirby's skull for his pile, and sanity returns.