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.

Alot of it has to do with the way the game is set up as well. Ill happily pay $50 for a great eagle, who will, 99% of the time, see a lot of combat throughout the game, in any game I play him in. I have a harder time spending $70 on a chaos maulerfiend (love the model) who may get destroyed well before I ever get to use him in any game. That and the fact of rules for rules sake is a pita. Eagle has fly and terror, easy enough to remember. The maulerfiend has all the rules for walkers, which is a chore to remember, plus about 6 rules of his own to remember. Its just a mess in my eyes.

XvReaperXv wrote:
Alot of it has to do with the way the game is set up as well. Ill happily pay $50 for a great eagle, who will, 99% of the time, see a lot of combat throughout the game, in any game I play him in. I have a harder time spending $70 on a chaos maulerfiend (love the model) who may get destroyed well before I ever get to use him in any game. That and the fact of rules for rules sake is a pita. Eagle has fly and terror, easy enough to remember. The maulerfiend has all the rules for walkers, which is a chore to remember, plus about 6 rules of his own to remember. Its just a mess in my eyes.

And why on Earth is a Maulerfiend a walker and not a MC? Seeing as how it's monstrous creature and all.

Maulerfiends, Forge Fiends, Dreadnoughts, Contemptor Dreadnoughts, and Decimators should all be MCs.

XvReaperXv wrote:
Its just a mess in my eyes.

It is a mess. I've been saying the same thing for years. So join me in making a better game. How about it?

 MWHistorian wrote:

XvReaperXv wrote:
Alot of it has to do with the way the game is set up as well. Ill happily pay $50 for a great eagle, who will, 99% of the time, see a lot of combat throughout the game, in any game I play him in. I have a harder time spending $70 on a chaos maulerfiend (love the model) who may get destroyed well before I ever get to use him in any game. That and the fact of rules for rules sake is a pita. Eagle has fly and terror, easy enough to remember. The maulerfiend has all the rules for walkers, which is a chore to remember, plus about 6 rules of his own to remember. Its just a mess in my eyes.

And why on Earth is a Maulerfiend a walker and not a MC? Seeing as how it's monstrous creature and all.

Didn't have the book in front of me, but still applies, gotta remember all his rules AND MC rules on top of it, for one model, out of 50+ in your army. I may have been wrong but rules for rules sake still applies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Thirdeye wrote:

XvReaperXv wrote:
Its just a mess in my eyes.

It is a mess. I've been saying the same thing for years. So join me in making a better game. How about it?

I'd love too, while the warpath game with our minis went well, I would still love to use the weapons and what not like I did when I was 15. I should really just go back to that edition and play the game lol, when the most badass weapon on the field was a lascannon.

@Thirdeye.
Have you got a W.I,P we can look at /help with?

Lanrak wrote:
@Thirdeye.
Have you got a W.I,P we can look at /help with?

Humm, yeah... I had that thread on Warseeker. You contributed to it and I very much appreciate that. I had one going over here for a while too, but too little interest to keep it going. I even got some play testing in with my group but little interest there too I'm afraid. The guys still do 40K but mostly its X-Wing these days. I finally broke-down and recently bought a few ships of my own.

I've made some changes in the rules since the Warseer stuff. I really think its coming together but there's a ton of stuff yet to do. What do you think about how I resolved that scenario? Pretty cool, Humm... quick, clean, simple, intuitive.

I certainly want some other's perspectives. I'm thinking I should set-up a Face-Book page or something. But I don't want to do that unless I can get a few guy to commit to working on it with me. It just so hard to get guys interest in a project like this. Even if they're interested they don't have the time. I really need someone who's like retired and stuff. Hey XvReaperXv, I'm talkin to you!

Plenty of time over here, well, once all my yard work gets done getting the pool ready and all lol. But it sounds like a lot of fun and something ive never done before, so im in!

 MWHistorian wrote:

 malfred wrote:
I've moved on. I buy models from GW with no guilt and play with
none of them.

That's not really teaching GW a lesson.
I wish people would punish me by buying my books. That'll teach me.

I didn't say I was teaching them a lesson.

@Thirdeye&XvReaperXv.
How about starting a new thread in the rules development forum?
I can contribute ideas , and a limited amount of play testing feed back.
If XvReaperXv could type up an up to date PDF document for the latest core rules etc.(And attach it to the thread some where?)

Then the rules can be seen to be progressing and moving forward.

(If you folks could PM me to sort out the details, so we dont de rail this thread any further. )

XvReaperXv wrote:
Ill admit, as a retired gamer with a retired gamer wife, we spend alot on GW products. In the past month we have spent over 2k for Lotr, and have spent close to 4k altogether. But every cent was worth it to us, the game is amazing, and we play 3+ games a week of it. Plus we enjoy the hobby side of it immensely. After playing lotr for quite a while, I had the itch to play 40k again, as I had not played since I was about 15 or so.

Got the wife on board, and we bought the 6th edition starter with dark angels and choas. We enjoyed it, and wanted to build small armies to play. Well, I bought the dv expansion for chaos, while she bought an eldar battleforce and wraithknight. But by the time we got most of it assembled, 7th had come out, so there was 85 bucks for a new rulebook. I bought the rulebook, and finally our codexes, and continued painting when we could. We played about 2 games, and then the new eldar codex came out, and we didn't feel like spending another 50 bucks for another book so soon. The reason we spend so much on lotr I think is because we have all the rules, which wont get updated ever, and our money can go towards models, paints, terrain, etc.

I want to get back into 40k, but I dont see the value there. Buying rules it seems every few months is too much wasted money. So atm we still play with our current codexes, but are going to play a warpath game with our models later this week. I love the models, but if I can play with free rules im going that route. Im sure GW would get much more money out of me if the rules were streamlined quite a bit, and they held there value for longer. Its weird because lotr is such a solid ruleset, but every time we play 40k there are just rules for rules sake for no reason and it really bogs the game down to the point where its just not enjoyable to us.

Want more 40K fun? Do what me and my son did when we got bored of 40K. Play 40K with Lord of the Ring/The Hobbit rules. Lots of fun.

Davor wrote:


Want more 40K fun? Do what me and my son did when we got bored of 40K. Play 40K with Lord of the Ring/The Hobbit rules. Lots of fun.

You're not playing 40k with LotR rules, though, you're playing LotR with 40k miniatures ;D

 Sigvatr wrote:

Davor wrote:


Want more 40K fun? Do what me and my son did when we got bored of 40K. Play 40K with Lord of the Ring/The Hobbit rules. Lots of fun.

You're not playing 40k with LotR rules, though, you're playing LotR with 40k miniatures ;D

Hmmm...

I think with the abstractions used by both games that the distinction is non-existent.

Both are "games" in the proper sense of the word, rather than simulations of their respective "period" or "genre."

But the point is a good one, though... Philosophically, though, the ontology of what is happening is hard to decipher.

MB

BeAfraid wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

Davor wrote:


Want more 40K fun? Do what me and my son did when we got bored of 40K. Play 40K with Lord of the Ring/The Hobbit rules. Lots of fun.

You're not playing 40k with LotR rules, though, you're playing LotR with 40k miniatures ;D

Hmmm...

I think with the abstractions used by both games that the distinction is non-existent.

Both are "games" in the proper sense of the word, rather than simulations of their respective "period" or "genre."

But the point is a good one, though... Philosophically, though, the ontology of what is happening is hard to decipher.

MB

:]



So i'm just waiting for a bad financial report to drop the share price a bit (but the new overpowered releases might stave that off for a while) the existing shareholders seemed happy to buy more at 500p, with enthusiasm capped at 530p so i recon <500p is my signal to buy-in.
I've been looking into share purchasing as a group or as an individual and the group based stuff looks complicated! it's a lot of effort to do and probably something i would undertake if i started to get a reasonable amount invested as an individual.

There are a number of shares investment companies out there and i worry that some of them will say they have invested in the shares you wanted, then not bother and invest your money in something else and give you whatever you might get from your requested shares allowing them to keep the difference from better performing shares elsewhere.
Those companies i suspect of doing this are the types which make it very easy to get into shares.
Though there was one in particular i noticed based in london which i am relativley sure do NOT do the practice i have just mentioned because thier prices are much higher (per trade per month) and they make a big point of shareholder benefits (vouchers from M&S was the example)
I wasn't aware of a fee for holding the shares but im sure they must have a fee for keeping and processing the returns from your portfolio.
Still, i'm basicly going with them when my expectations realize - to hell with the fees!

I think this will be a golden opportunity for a couple of reasons:
I could go to the shareholder meetings.
Shareholders are getting edgy about the player's support for the company.

On the latter subject; I noticed someone post a shareholders report on his worries about GW compared to tesco - it looks like shareholders are starting to notice to consternation from long-term players and recognise the threat to returns that poses.

I also noticed on a share-dealing forum that any profits made by GWPLC over operating costs and R&D/promotion are split between the shareholders according to percentage controlled! (no sources cited so pinch of salt etc...) To me that says that whenever sales take a nose-dive the shares take a dive because typically shareholders want a consistent or increasing return on having thier shares and will sell them to ensure their overall portfolio remains 'healthy' (yeah, wierd term for saying 'increasing in value without losses')

I am really excited about the shareholder meetings - i think i might be able to make a genuine positive impact; essentially we'd all spend more money with them if there was some sort of plan to give money off when you spend a certain ammount - i'm a fan of that because it can keep under-performing lines moving rather than stagnating and spoiling on the shelf. and lets face it - how pleased have you all been with the little pin-badges? i love mine!!
In my experience a little 'give' can facillitate a much greater 'take' from trading overall.



Another real positive of this is that because i'm not intrested in making money off the shares the performance of the company makes no difference to me other than facilitating purchasing more of the shares at a cheaper price! Huzzah!

We'll see how it goes, i suppose....

One chance to make GW change was when they released chaos knights £12 for 5.

Not enough units sold to justify the price, hence the different pricing for future cav kits.

nareik wrote:
One chance to make GW change was when they released chaos knights £12 for 5.

Not enough units sold to justify the price, hence the different pricing for future cav kits.

The above example always shows to me how GW clearly has no clue and just highlights their "short term profits" mentality.

Has anyone stopped to think that GW MIGHT JUST be trapped by the LAW regarding Corporate Profits?

Corporations are required by Law to maximize shareholder value.

MOST shareholders interpret this to mean immediate value as opposed to Long Term Value.

Apple and Google are examples of companies that have EXCELLENT Balance between long-term, and short-term shareholder value (i.e. "Profits").

GW is an example of a Company whose shareholders seem to force ONLY Short-Term value (profits) from the company. Or, if not "forcing," certainly the shareholders have not complained.

It took me a while to think about this. . . . .

But maybe the OP is correct.

Maybe gamers need to form a Shareholder Collective, whereby we form our own Fund for buying stock, and then at the Shareholders meetings, we get time to speak to the Shareholders to present a case for more longer term profits based upon what gamers WANT.

It would take a while, but you could lobby larger shareholders (which are probably mostly hedge-funds) to support a bid to force a change in management.

If you begin to see large single-digit numbers of support, or small two-digits numbers (percentages) of support for such a thing, then the current management will probably take notice and act, since things like that tend to cause momentum to build on a trend.

It is something to think about.

MB

I believe GWs first obligation, above that of paying their investors, is to the survival of the company.

If you're striking rapidly in a market experiencing unprecidented growth and you can't find a single thing to invest your profits in rather than pay them out you should not be allowed anywhere near a managment position.

tgjensen wrote:
The only way to make them change is to STOP GIVING THEM MONEY.

I did four years ago.

What is taking you guys so long to do the same?

Technically... I have.

I stopped in 2009, when I acquired all of the LotR stuff I wanted.

I already had all the Tau for 40K I would ever use, or want. There is no way I could afford an Orca, or that humongous drop-ship (whose name escapes me... A Manta?) that holds four Devilfish (I think they only make that for Epic, in which case I MIGHT want one.

And, at this point, I am working on creating my own miniatures to use for any games I like, and trying to promote those (Hoplon, getting a re-write done of Striker for Traveller 5, and doing some Starships and game that uses a 1:1 ship:game scale), rather than feeding GW.

I do not dislike their models. They have VERY capable and talented artists.

It is the associations of those models with which I have a problem.

MB

@SirDonald.
Just a word of warning, Tom Kirby has been paying out share dividends GW can not afford to pay just to keep shareholders on side.(And to swell his own wealth).
GW plc is loosing sales volumes at ever increasing rates, and the next bad report , will probably be one of a series of bad reports.

Tom Kirby will be retiring soon,(dementia seems to have set in based on the last share holders ramble. )
At which point any proper effort to turn thing around for long term survival will cut share dividends and drop the share value.
Or the company will continue to be run into the ground to pay dividends until it can not afford to pay dividends, and drop share value.

Lanrak wrote:
@SirDonald.
Just a word of warning, Tom Kirby has been paying out share dividends GW can not afford to pay just to keep shareholders on side.(And to swell his own wealth).
GW plc is loosing sales volumes at ever increasing rates, and the next bad report , will probably be one of a series of bad reports.

Tom Kirby will be retiring soon,(dementia seems to have set in based on the last share holders ramble. )
At which point any proper effort to turn thing around for long term survival will cut share dividends and drop the share value.
Or the company will continue to be run into the ground to pay dividends until it can not afford to pay dividends, and drop share value.

This is actually pretty interesting, can you link me up to this overpayment of dividends please?

One does not change GW by any action of his own. One sits out an edition or two and considers other gaming systems.

GW is like an iceberg, where the pretty minis can be seen above the surface, and the demands of being a public company lie below. You never get a sense of the company as a whole, you are either a gamer or an investor, and you see what matters to you.

Interesting; quite a variety of sentiments/actions stated here (all valid) and i feel it reinforces my confidence in what i'm planning - I think i prefer the group of individual gamer/shareholder thing (we play 40k, conflict resolution won't be a problem) but i think it should be a very 'quiet' arrangement - i like the idea of just being there at the side, waiting for when other shareholders are abandoning ship..

the lack of purchasing will definetly send a message, but what message i wonder?
It might make new SoB come out quicker?

Something tells me i'm not going to like seeing some of the decisions that get made, but i feel that a push for higher volume production methods should be first priority and a modular multi-level building system for 40k should be second.

i thought kirby was already gone? someone on a shares-forum said that (so a pinch of salt, etc, etc...) and stated that the new releases were a result of the new guy- again; validity remains to be confirmed...

I like the idea that kirby will be setting the share price up for a fall as the shareholders realize how things are really going; although that gives me a certain amount of pessimism about how open the company actually is with the shareholders and gives me doubts that they would even let me into the factory!

Kirby stepped down as CEO in January of this year but remains the Chairman of the Board; he previously held both positions which is generally frowned upon in the business community.

He was able to secure a nice, short-term but high-paying job for his wife when GW paid 4million pounds to update their website. She headed the operation from the GW side because they contracted a company to do all of the work; a sort of over-paid business analyst type gig. Her previous experience? Secretary for a shell company held by Kirby and before that a recreation coordinator for a YMCA-type organization. Highly qualified to head a 4million investment, obviously.

I think Kirby will die at his desk and only retire if he manages to run GW PLC into the ground and then only exit via golden parachute.

Kirby will work as hard as possible to keep share value high, if you see a statement that he is dropping shares, that's your sign to bail on the company because he's the largest individual, non-institutional, share holder I believe. That's another reason dividends will always be paid, so that he can line his nest further.

 agnosto wrote:
Kirby stepped down as CEO in January of this year but remains the Chairman of the Board; he previously held both positions which is generally frowned upon in the business community.

He was able to secure a nice, short-term but high-paying job for his wife when GW paid 4million pounds to update their website. She headed the operation from the GW side because they contracted a company to do all of the work; a sort of over-paid business analyst type gig. Her previous experience? Secretary for a shell company held by Kirby and before that a recreation coordinator for a YMCA-type organization. Highly qualified to head a 4million investment, obviously.

I think Kirby will die at his desk and only retire if he manages to run GW PLC into the ground and then only exit via golden parachute.

Kirby will work as hard as possible to keep share value high, if you see a statement that he is dropping shares, that's your sign to bail on the company because he's the largest individual, non-institutional, share holder I believe. That's another reason dividends will always be paid, so that he can line his nest further.

All good info there agnosto (Champion of the religiously ambivolent!) particularly the tip on when kirby sells his shares - that will be my cue to get ready for devaluation and post devalue buy-in.

On top of that, while the models are individually expensive, you need a lot less of them. The LVO winner list (IIRC) was around $800-$900 U.S. at MSRP, while the last major DZC tournament had the winner clocking in at around $300. I haven't priced PP armies recently, but last time I did a 3 list format army was around $700.

Thrift shopping on Bartertown and Ebay have landed me THREE 2500+ GW armies for less than that.

 Thunderfrog wrote:

On top of that, while the models are individually expensive, you need a lot less of them. The LVO winner list (IIRC) was around $800-$900 U.S. at MSRP, while the last major DZC tournament had the winner clocking in at around $300. I haven't priced PP armies recently, but last time I did a 3 list format army was around $700.

Thrift shopping on Bartertown and Ebay have landed me THREE 2500+ GW armies for less than that.

And I got a $300k house for FREE!

BeAfraid wrote:
Has anyone stopped to think that GW MIGHT JUST be trapped by the LAW regarding Corporate Profits?

Corporations are required by Law to maximize shareholder value.

Sorry chap, but citation needed. It's been a while since I studied this topic and it's never been relevant in my career, but I had no recollection of this, and Google hasn't helped.

It is possible for employees of a Plc to be prosecuted should their actions or negligence damage the company finances, but that's not the same thing.

Equally, as often comes up in any thread about pricing, value is subjective and "shareholder value" is a spurious term at best.

As far as I know, no company type holds any legal obligation to make money, it's simply a good idea and that a company will try and do so is a logical assumption, fraudulent activity aside.

MOST shareholders interpret this to mean immediate value as opposed to Long Term Value.

Apple and Google are examples of companies that have EXCELLENT Balance between long-term, and short-term shareholder value (i.e. "Profits").

GW is an example of a Company whose shareholders seem to force ONLY Short-Term value (profits) from the company. Or, if not "forcing," certainly the shareholders have not complained.

Exactly, the shareholders haven't complained because GW is a tiny fish, but it is a tiny fish that has been paying good dividends. The sort of institution that holds enough shares in GW to affect change (Kirby notwithstanding) isn't interested in fixing GW, if they stop churning out dividends they'll just dump heir stock and invest the cash in something else. In fact, this exact thing has happened recently since the reports have started reporting falling profits and revenue.

It took me a while to think about this. . . . .

But maybe the OP is correct.

Maybe gamers need to form a Shareholder Collective, whereby we form our own Fund for buying stock, and then at the Shareholders meetings, we get time to speak to the Shareholders to present a case for more longer term profits based upon what gamers WANT.

It would take a while, but you could lobby larger shareholders (which are probably mostly hedge-funds) to support a bid to force a change in management.

If you begin to see large single-digit numbers of support, or small two-digits numbers (percentages) of support for such a thing, then the current management will probably take notice and act, since things like that tend to cause momentum to build on a trend.

It is something to think about.

MB

Not really, shareholders do hold power, they can vote to change the make up of the board, they can vote to liquidate the company and all sorts, but on the basis of a single AGM per year, shareholders will struggle to implement any direct change, won't be able to select replacements for board positions etc, etc.

The single greatest thing that is in the hands of every gamer to affect change is the withholding of cash. It might take a while but ultimately it will force a change in behaviour or weaken them to the point that another party takes over. That change may not be for the best, but that's a risk inherent to nearly all change.

 SirDonlad wrote:

All good info there agnosto (Champion of the religiously ambivolent!) particularly the tip on when kirby sells his shares - that will be my cue to get ready for devaluation and post devalue buy-in.

The beautiful thing there is that GW is legally required to report when a member of the Board or upper management buy or sell shares. Timing can be a bit tricky because they have 48 hours. The better bet is to set an alert or auto-sell if shares hit a set amount. I did this with GW shares and sold out the last time the stock took a dive; I can't complain because I made a tidy profit but GW shares have an uncanny ability to rebound, even with negative financials. I attribute this to general knowledge that GW WILL pay a dividend if they are at all able.

Edit:
On an interesting side note. I sometimes wonder if Kirby actually owns much more of the company than is public knowledge through a 10b5-1 plan; this would explain while certain institutional investors seem almost dogged in their support of the stock. I admit that I'm hardly an expert on the matter so I don't know if it's possible but I do know that programs like a 10b5-1 plan are a gray area that can allow for all sorts of behind the scenes stock manipulation due to how executives are not required to report such things. /tinfoil hat