You know what I think GW should try that most businesses do, sales!
People love sales, I may not need a box of tyranid warriors but if the price is right, hey they may come in handy!
Rainbow Dash wrote: You know what I think GW should try that most businesses do, sales!
People love sales, I may not need a box of tyranid warriors but if the price is right, hey they may come in handy!
I am not a business expert but I believe GW is in with companies like Tiffany in that they don't do sales so that they don't devalue their products. They believe they are a high end premium models company that is above that.
Rainbow Dash wrote: You know what I think GW should try that most businesses do, sales!
People love sales, I may not need a box of tyranid warriors but if the price is right, hey they may come in handy!
Downside: people won't buy standard models, as they'll wait for them to be in a sale.
Lots of companies who hold sales tend to do so with seasonal gear.
(OK they could have a sale of Genestealers, who are so last season, dahling but you know what I mean...)
stopcallingmechief wrote: Not trying to crap all over australia but when your minimum wage is $16 and its $10 in canada and what, $7 something in america things will and should cost more.
Minimum wages are irrelevant to whether or not people should be charged a fair price. But we don't need to derail another thread with the same old arguments about equal pricing in a global market.
If you believe that minimum wage doesn't have a large impact on pricing then you don't know much about how things work. Prices are based upon people's ability and willingness to pay. Forget anything you might have been told about production costs or anything like that. Those just represent a starting point to determine if a product is viable. The MSRP for a product is based upon what the target group is able and willing to pay and the profit the seller is willing to accept. That is exactly what defines "fair". If you personally aren't willing to pay the price, then you don't need to buy it.
Every single time minimum wage increases, the cost of basics such as milk, bread, clothing, housing, etc will go up. That's not because it suddenly costs that much more to produce - the human labor component in most of those items is neglible - it's because the people are now able and willing to pay more. It usually takes about 3 months after a mandated min wage increase before things "balance" back to how they were before.
It's really not that complicated and makes complete sense if you think about it.
If you really want price parity (same product, same price regardless of location) - then wages have to be normalized across the globe. There are a LOT of things that would have to change to make this happen. Not the least of which is governments giving up on imposing tariffs and various trade restrictions based on origination of the product. Then, you'd also have to have similar education levels so that the distribution of skilled workers was such that location no longer mattered. Good luck with that as the only real way to make it happen would be to have a single world government.
Germany has twice the value of minimum wage that we have here in Portugal. They pay the exact same for GW products as we do. Your premise is therefore false, but thanks for playing in the 101st edition of the "minimum wage affects prices on a global market" game.
clively wrote: Do I think GW is "going under"? No. At least one poster compared them to Lehman brothers and Enron which is something you simply can't do. Heck, you can't even compare those two companies together as the machinations that brought them down were radically different..
I would tend to agree with this as I don't think GW is big enough to play games with sales to show they have more revenue than they actually do. There are also laws in place to prevent cooking the books the way Enron did to show more revenue than they actually had.
The closest parallel to GW is TSR (DnD). GW is mirroring the TSR path of ignoring the player base, thinking they have more influence than they actually do and flooding the market with product to boost sales. GW does however appear to be taking the correct path to prevent over production, which is what caused TSR to fold suddenly, but could lead to a loss of players because product isn't available.
I guess the most likely scenario is that GW's next financial report is rather poor and doesn't meet expectations and/or shows a downward trend. This causes the stock to tank, which may lead to one of three outcomes:
1) Current shareholders hold on to stock and force the board to vote in a new chairman
2) Kirby picks up more stock or current stock holders decided to keep him as chairman
3) Stock dips low enough that someone outside buys a controlling share and the company is sold or puts in their chairman
I think the chances of GW IP changing hands in the next year is fairly low. However, I do think the chances of the stock price tanking is fairly high, which means a new chairman and CEO should be in order. The primary issue with that is that I don't know how much GWs board, other than Kirby, actually care about the company's long term future. This means they may just slowly divest from the company and try to get out before it shrivels and dies.
The wildcard is what do other companies think GW's IP is worth?
Rainbow Dash wrote: You know what I think GW should try that most businesses do, sales! People love sales, I may not need a box of tyranid warriors but if the price is right, hey they may come in handy!
I am not a business expert but I believe GW is in with companies like Tiffany in that they don't do sales so that they don't devalue their products. They believe they are a high end premium models company that is above that.
Can't remember the quote but I read that this is what they actually think. That's why the "1-Click Collections" don't offer any discount whatsoever. They really think that their products are luxury level and that people will happily pay full price for the "privilege" of luxury figures (kind of funny as IIRC their plastic is the really cheap variety; it's like McDonalds having a $15 hamburger that's Big Mac with a fancy bun and saying it's a gourmet meal). Which is a bit funny because they technically DO offer sales, albeit in the form of boxed sets (e.g. Dark Vengeance, Stormclaw, Space Marine Strikeforce).
I also read somewhere (might have been here, don't 100% remember) that they recalled and destroyed unsold copies of Dreadfleet rather than put them on sale, to avoid giving the impression that one just has to wait a few months and the price will drop. Now from everything I've read Dreadfleet was abysmal, but still only a complete madman would eat the cost rather than sell for less and recoup SOME of that investment. It's like having a shop and selling things for double everyone else, and when nobody buys it turning around and burning the place down rather than having a sale!
Well obviously they'd have to be very calculated about it and only certain things would be on sale-but I think even if people wait for a sale, I'm sure they'll probably spend more then they would have in the beginning!
People are funny like that. GW could make a lot more money then they do by...you know understanding how people shop.
Back in the day stores had auctions of all its damaged and random junk.
But they can't have all that money for things they'd just have thrown out so they had to get rid of that.
(Seriously people were paying for their garbage!! You stopped selling your garbage!)
That's the biggest wtf to me, I want them to thrive and be a great business, but they just seem to make one terrible decision after another. If the models were affordable, I'd be much more kind to the rules, on that coin, if the rules were better I'd be much kinder about the prices (because my dolls are on average more expensive, it's more the rules issue then the money, the money don't help, I don't need two really expensive, niche hobbies taking my money-only got room for one these days!)
I think the chances of GW IP changing hands in the next year is fairly low. However, I do think the chances of the stock price tanking is fairly high, which means a new chairman and CEO should be in order. The primary issue with that is that I don't know how much GWs board, other than Kirby, actually care about the company's long term future. This means they may just slowly divest from the company and try to get out before it shrivels and dies.
The wildcard is what do other companies think GW's IP is worth?
This is the most interesting prospect. I've been there with a not dissimilar mass-market Plc, where the CEO got booted out by big investors... but you usually have to commit one really public error to get the boot like that. In my case it was the CEO losing around 30% of the company's market value with a disastrous deal.
Kirby's conservatism (save money, increase prices) would tend to mitigate against that, so while we can hope, I'm sceptical.
TheCustomLime wrote: [I am not a business expert but I believe GW is in with companies like Tiffany in that they don't do sales so that they don't devalue their products. They believe they are a high end premium models company that is above that.
Shame GW's gak doesn't hold it's value like Tiffany. I have a $1000 worth of WHFB I'll be lucky to get $200 out of.
TheCustomLime wrote: [I am not a business expert but I believe GW is in with companies like Tiffany in that they don't do sales so that they don't devalue their products. They believe they are a high end premium models company that is above that.
Shame GW's gak doesn't hold it's value like Tiffany. I have a $1000 worth of WHFB I'll be lucky to get $200 out of.
Games Workshop thinks too highly of itself in general. They believe that their products are the best, that all their customers want to do is buy their stuff and that they are above the rest of the TTG market. Their arrogance will be their downfall.
Hivefleet Oblivion wrote: This is the most interesting prospect. I've been there with a not dissimilar mass-market Plc, where the CEO got booted out by big investors... but you usually have to commit one really public error to get the boot like that. In my case it was the CEO losing around 30% of the company's market value with a disastrous deal.
Kirby's conservatism (save money, increase prices) would tend to mitigate against that, so while we can hope, I'm sceptical.
I think it depends on how much time the other board members spend or get presented with GW's market share information. Market share is a big deal as GW probably had 60%+ of the miniature gaming market share at one point and is probably down to sub 40% now, with a downward trend. Loosing 20%+ market share is a big deal.
I suspect that the board is presented with top line, bottom line and margin numbers and nothing else. The board is probably willfully ignorant of how the product is perceived and used in the market.
WayneTheGame wrote: Isn't Kirby also the majority shareholder though? So could the other investors just kick him out like that?
It would be the Board who sacks him; it can vary depending on, I think, the Memorandum of Association, which varies from company to company.
If big investors are unhappy, they\d usually speak to a particular member of the board, and try and get the ball rolling. The fact he has a substantial shareholding doesn't protect him against a majority of the board. But getting a majority could be tough... I think there's only five or them, and he's the chair, presumably with a casting vote, so you'd need four out of five board members to take up pitchforks against him.
Several members of the board have a long working relationship with Kirby, and in many cases probably (purely speculative on my part) are accustomed to him being in charge.
Coupled with the fact that Kirby is indeed the largest non-institutional investor, and something like third largest overall, it would take a massive ground shift to dislodge him if he doesn't want to go.
azreal13 wrote: Several members of the board have a long working relationship with Kirby, and in many cases probably (purely speculative on my part) are accustomed to him being in charge.
Coupled with the fact that Kirby is indeed the largest non-institutional investor, and something like third largest overall, it would take a massive ground shift to dislodge him if he doesn't want to go.
Indeed. But there are issues of corporate governance; it's their responsibility to ensure the company is well-run, so the finance experts on the board they have, who've worked for banks etc, would have a duty to do something if they think he's running the company into the ground. That's why I don't think simply losing market share, hiking prices, and having no social media policy, is likely to get him the boot.
It would have to be a high-profile mistake that's directly attributable to him.
He's been quite good at drawing the sting of criticisms, though, if memory serves he acknowledged the one-man stores were a mess.
When dealing with those accustomed to power, they sometimes find it amusing when others think they have a say in what they do.
Kirby will leave when it suits him, no other time.
When it is not possible for him to receive dividends anymore he may move on, it is his primary reason to be where he is: to ensure he can pay himself, others luckily benefit as well.
Rainbow Dash wrote: You know what I think GW should try that most businesses do, sales!
People love sales, I may not need a box of tyranid warriors but if the price is right, hey they may come in handy!
I am not a business expert but I believe GW is in with companies like Tiffany in that they don't do sales so that they don't devalue their products. They believe they are a high end premium models company that is above that.
The difference between farmers with a colossal heap of gak and GW is that farmers with a colossal heap of gak do not try to pretend it is not a colossal heap of gak.
Kilkrazy wrote: The difference between farmers with a colossal heap of gak and GW is that farmers with a colossal heap of gak do not try to pretend it is not a colossal heap of gak.
YMMV.
Huh. And here I thought the difference was that the farmer's colossal heap of gak is actually useful for something.
The excuse I got was "well apple doesn't do sales" to which I responded with "well GW is no apple"
that and, aren't you able to buy a significant number of their older products, where as with GW, you can't buy anything old?
They really do dilute themselves into thinking they are the best, even when the companies that they compare themselves to, generally have better track records, imo.
azreal13 wrote: Several members of the board have a long working relationship with Kirby, and in many cases probably (purely speculative on my part) are accustomed to him being in charge.
Coupled with the fact that Kirby is indeed the largest non-institutional investor, and something like third largest overall, it would take a massive ground shift to dislodge him if he doesn't want to go.
Indeed. But there are issues of corporate governance; it's their responsibility to ensure the company is well-run, so the finance experts on the board they have, who've worked for banks etc, would have a duty to do something if they think he's running the company into the ground. That's why I don't think simply losing market share, hiking prices, and having no social media policy, is likely to get him the boot.
It would have to be a high-profile mistake that's directly attributable to him.
He's been quite good at drawing the sting of criticisms, though, if memory serves he acknowledged the one-man stores were a mess.
He blamed the fall of revenue on the changeover to one man stores and the disruption caused in it's entirety, which stretches my credulity somewhat.
As for the directors..
Games Workshop Investor Relations wrote:Executive directors
Tom Kirby (age 63), chairman and acting CEO. Tom Kirby joined Games Workshop in April 1986 as general manager and led the management buy-out in December 1991, becoming chief executive at that time. Between 1998 and 2000 he took on the role of non-executive chairman, returning to the role of chief executive in September 2000. He performed the role of chairman from December 2007 to January 2013 when he became chairman and acting CEO. Prior to joining Games Workshop, Tom worked for six years for a distributor of fantasy games in the UK and was previously an Inspector of Taxes.
Kevin Rountree (age 43), COO. Kevin Rountree joined Games Workshop in March 1998 as assistant group accountant. He then had various management roles within Games Workshop, including head of sales for the Other Activities division (including Black Library, licensing and Sabertooth Games). During the year ended 29 May 2011, he took on the responsibility of managing the Group’s service centres globally. To reflect this, his title was changed to chief operating officer from chief financial officer. He, however, still retains responsibility for all financial matters within Games Workshop. He qualified as a chartered management accountant in August 2001. Prior to joining Games Workshop, Kevin was the management accountant at J Barbour & Sons Limited and trained at Price Waterhouse.
Independent directors
Chris Myatt (age 69). Chris Myatt is the senior independent director, joining the board on 18 April 1996. He is a director of the Douglas Macmillan Hospice and was formerly a divisional managing director within Tarmac PLC.
Nick Donaldson (age 59). Nick Donaldson was appointed to the board on 18April 2002. A barrister by profession, Nick is a partner of London Bridge Capital Limited. Nick was, until 2003, head of corporate finance at Arbuthnot Securities Limited and previously held senior investment banking positions at Robert W Baird Limited and at Credit Lyonnais Securities. He is chairman of DP Poland PLC and a director of The Fulham Shore plc.
Elaine O’Donnell (age 43). Elaine O’Donnell was appointed to the board on 28 November 2013. A chartered accountant by profession, until recently Elaine was a corporate finance partner with EY.
That's a very small number of people with a lot of time served under their collective belts. (O'Donnell aside.) I'd really be surprised if they hadn't lost a proportion of any professional objectivity given their history together, and while there may be something Kirby could conceivably do to get himself drummed out, given his apparent stance of conservatism and risk avoidance, I doubt it'll happen before he grabs his golden parachute and jumps.
Toofast wrote: Why would a company with no debt and £9mil in the bank that still turns a profit month after month and year after year be in any danger of going under?
Because you have to look at trends, not single reports. And what we see now is that GW is losing market share and sales volume with no apparent hope of turning it around. Sure, they've kept the profit numbers acceptable, but only because of aggressive cost cutting and price increases (including day-1 DLC and larger, more expensive kits). And eventually GW are going to reach a point where there's nothing left to cut without making obvious sacrifices in quality, and prices can't go up any higher without sacrificing so many sales that it's a net loss. Meanwhile the rules are an absolute disaster, model releases are inconsistent in quality, and GW doesn't seem to see any problem with that. So that means that GW isn't ever going to increase sales by producing a superior product, they're entirely dependent on trying to milk the cash cow more efficiently and extract the maximum possible profit from their declining customer base.
And no, this doesn't mean that GW will collapse overnight. Most of their shareholders probably have no clue about GW's products and just look at the financial report, so it will probably be a while before they run out of ways to cover up the bad numbers and see a real collapse in stock prices. For example, the next financial report will include a sales spike from 7th edition, so it will probably look a lot better than a "normal" report and that will keep the shareholders happy a bit longer. But I wouldn't bet anything on GW's long-term future.
This. Exactly this. The proof is in the financial reports and observing their changing policies. It's not rocket science.
clively wrote: If you believe that minimum wage doesn't have a large impact on pricing then you don't know much about how things work. Prices are based upon people's ability and willingness to pay.
Exactly. Which is why minimumwage will affect the price of necessities and basic goods, while pricing of luxury goods is down more to disposable income (which people on minimum wage don't have a heck of a lot of) and brand perception.
And that's ignoring the fact that back in 2002 when the Australian dollar crashed to under US50c, GW prices here in OZ were raised to compensate. When the Oz Dollar increased over the ensuing decade to sit just under the US dollar, there was no corresponding price drop... just the usual annual-ish price rises up until the last couple of years when they decided to start bringing the rest of the world up to match our prices.
We're not more expensive because of a higher minimum wage. We're more expensive because our pricing is based on a decade-old exchange rate.
And just a note of stormclaw, its not sold out, the Webstore pre order allotment sold out. GW stores will have 20+ copies each not to mention all the indys.
So its not some staggering GW victory, they low balled the allotment number to artificially generate hype and give you a sense there is a shortage.
TheCustomLime wrote: Games Workshop thinks too highly of itself in general. They believe that their products are the best, that all their customers want to do is buy their stuff and that they are above the rest of the TTG market. Their arrogance will be their downfall.
Mechanical Crow wrote: And just a note of stormclaw, its not sold out, the Webstore pre order allotment sold out. GW stores will have 20+ copies each not to mention all the indys.
So its not some staggering GW victory, they low balled the allotment number to artificially generate hype and give you a sense there is a shortage.
Damn. Wish I knew that. Just spent my money on X-wing and Attack Wing thinking, I will not be able to get it because it's sold out. Oh well, GW wants to be silent, my money goes else where. I don't hinge on what GW might or might not do.
stopcallingmechief wrote: Not trying to crap all over australia but when your minimum wage is $16 and its $10 in canada and what, $7 something in america things will and should cost more.
Minimum wages are irrelevant to whether or not people should be charged a fair price. But we don't need to derail another thread with the same old arguments about equal pricing in a global market.
If you believe that minimum wage doesn't have a large impact on pricing then you don't know much about how things work. Prices are based upon people's ability and willingness to pay. Forget anything you might have been told about production costs or anything like that. Those just represent a starting point to determine if a product is viable. The MSRP for a product is based upon what the target group is able and willing to pay and the profit the seller is willing to accept. That is exactly what defines "fair". If you personally aren't willing to pay the price, then you don't need to buy it.
Every single time minimum wage increases, the cost of basics such as milk, bread, clothing, housing, etc will go up. That's not because it suddenly costs that much more to produce - the human labor component in most of those items is neglible - it's because the people are now able and willing to pay more. It usually takes about 3 months after a mandated min wage increase before things "balance" back to how they were before.
It's really not that complicated and makes complete sense if you think about it.
If you really want price parity (same product, same price regardless of location) - then wages have to be normalized across the globe. There are a LOT of things that would have to change to make this happen. Not the least of which is governments giving up on imposing tariffs and various trade restrictions based on origination of the product. Then, you'd also have to have similar education levels so that the distribution of skilled workers was such that location no longer mattered. Good luck with that as the only real way to make it happen would be to have a single world government.
I find your post interesting but, in this context, incorrect. The price of milk, bread, and other essentials go up due to minimum wage, yes, however the production of those things is more localized than the production of cheap plastic in a global economy.
Grocery stores have those stupid "discount" cards so they can determine what stuff you'll buy regardless of if it's on sale or not and charge you as much as possible. However, that's not the case here. We get iPhones, computers, crappy furniture, TVs, clothing, and whatever else at a ridiculously low price because we're part of a global economy and the fact of the matter is places like China and Malaysia have dirt cheap labor that they can exploit to manufacture those things. That establishes an expectation of price for certain goods, regardless of if it's fair or not. The exchange rate for currencies modifies that to a certain extent, but beyond the influence that a countries' minimum wage has on that exchange rate, their minimum wage is irrelevant to what the price of manufactured plastic toy soldiers are... in theory.
Personally, I think in this case the company is run by Brits who are petty and just wanna stick it to the Aussies, but what do I know?
======
Ironically I didn't quote the rest of your post because I agreed with it and would like to subscribe to your news letter.
Also, to keep this lengthy post somewhat on topic, I'll toss my two cents in, since I've been lurking for the whole thing:
I don't think GW is going to do the insta-tank that TSR did because they have *slightly* better business sense (i.e. Risk Adversity) than to expose themselves to the inventory reverse-buyout that sunk TSR seemingly overnight, however I do think their lack of foresight is going to lead them into an isolated subsection of the market where they are a much small player than they have been for the past 30 years. They will continue to exist, but become more and more irrelevant as other companies that embrace the Internet, social media, and customer relations continue to make headway. Think of any industry where some people come in on a "dumbed down" version of the product and then quickly progress to a more advanced version, and that's what GW will be.
You make some good points and GW don't have the buyback problem that sank TSR but they do have a huge chain of international stores. I think the cost of those stores will drag them under in the next couple of years. It would be easy to get rid of them and focus on direct and FLGS sales but this has been a problem for a while now and GW just keep doubleing down and opening more stores.
You make some good points and GW don't have the buyback problem that sank TSR but they do have a huge chain of international stores. I think the cost of those stores will drag them under in the next couple of years. It would be easy to get rid of them and focus on direct and FLGS sales but this has been a problem for a while now and GW just keep doubleing down and opening more stores.
GW should have gotten rid of their own stores and embraced FLGS long ago. Instead they bully local game shops to push their own shops, but with the switch to one-man stores they can't even support them properly.
WayneTheGame wrote: GW should have gotten rid of their own stores and embraced FLGS long ago. Instead they bully local game shops to push their own shops, but with the switch to one-man stores they can't even support them properly.
In the mid 90s a major toy distributor actually carried GW's stuff. I remember seeing it pop up all over the place in toy stores, billiard/darts/game stores, comic shops and everywhere that used that distributor. Then GW decided they'd deal with trade customers directly and have been jerking them around ever since
I really think GW has drunk their own koolaid and spent the last decade enforcing their yes-men corporate culture of attitude over skills to the point where they actually believe their products and way of doing business is flawless. I really do hope they get a rude awakening sooner rather than later and that their going all-in on their single person retail stores blows up in their faces. My only worry is that I'm beginning to think that the way they hold their customers in contempt as people who will just buy whatever they're told may be more accurate than I'd like.
Nothing lasts forever, the other games will continue to grow and GW will shrink. One man stores are terrible because there's no community there, how am I supposed to meet anyone to play games with if there's nowhere to hang out?!
I could go to a FLGS sure but then there's a problem, all the other, cheaper games there alluring me!
They have big fanbases too so...what makes GW so special then?
If they are all on the same level at a FLGS, what's GW's edge? Used to be their stores but they are pretty much scrapping those, so what are you left with?
You could buy GW kits in Hobby Craft a year or two ago. I haven't been in lately. They don't sell in Toys R Us.
Automatically Appended Next Post: There are problems with putting GW into mainstream toy shops.
The GW offering combines rules, modelling and fluff. This makes it difficult to understand without explanation and demonstration.
The rules now are very long and complicated. The models and background do not relate to any clear real world frame of reference. For example, D Day and Great War stuff is booming at the moment, because the news is full of the 70th and 100th anniversaries. 40K has the undead God Emperor on his Golden Throne WTF?!?!?
Fantasy ought to be more recognisable because people can relate to LotR and Game of Thrones, yet The Hobbit has been a flop.
A simple introductory starter set would help. The starter set for 40K includes the entire 200+ page rulebook printed in specially small and hard to read type.
In the mid 90s a major toy distributor actually carried GW's stuff. I remember seeing it pop up all over the place in toy stores, billiard/darts/game stores, comic shops and everywhere that used that distributor. Then GW decided they'd deal with trade customers directly and have been jerking them around ever since
In the late 90's you could actually buy GW stuff in HMV, which at the time were a huge high street entertainment company. I also bought my very first GW game (Space Crusade) from an Argos catalogue. Basically at one time GW's products were available from mainstream retail outlets.
A properly done, self contained starter set designed specifically to be sold in toy stores then direct people to GW stores would get around all of those problems and be a massive boost for GWs recruitment numbers.
Or hell, just license out a magazine again, that worked wonders for them.
Yeah but GW has this idea they're like the greatest thing ever and if you just build a store, people will go to it and buy a lot, regardless of things like community, player base, or anything.
This internet thing is a fad and will soon go away (in their mind I can only imagine)...
A note on sales - they were enjoined from holding ANY sales at all in the UK back in the late 90s, as they (by that point) were essentially the monopoly producer and supplier of tabletop games in the UK. They could, through sales, essentially undercut everyone, putting them out of business.
They can only "discount" if it is a new SKU, hence why box sets, battleforces are around. Except these cost money to produce and more importantly space within stores
Hence why the 1 click bundles are there - convenience only.
Rainbow Dash wrote: You know what I think GW should try that most businesses do, sales! People love sales, I may not need a box of tyranid warriors but if the price is right, hey they may come in handy!
Back when I started in the mid 90's, GW DID have sales (at least local ones if not global ones). The first army I bought, Lizardmen, was mostly bought off the back of sales. The 3rd army I bought was Tyranids, again bought mostly off the back of sales.
I think GW are silly for not exploiting sales. I'm pretty sure a large part of the reason Stormclaw is so popular is because the huge savings. Hell, part of the reason I bought Space Hulk back in the day was because I realised how much cheaper it was than buying the Terminators and Stealers separately.
Filch wrote: Gw is doomed! 3 stores closed out from 30 miles from me. No more gamng for me!
Can't you play at home or at a club?
I must admit that I've never really understood why stores are considered so important. And, by extension, why Games Workshop tries to claim that their premium prices are important to support stores and that their stores are important for the hobby. I mean: I've never had a Games Workshop store anywhere near me and all my gaming have been at home or at a club. No store needed for that.
Palindrome wrote: In the late 90's you could actually buy GW stuff in HMV, which at the time were a huge high street entertainment company. I also bought my very first GW game (Space Crusade) from an Argos catalogue. Basically at one time GW's products were available from mainstream retail outlets.
It's really strange when a business is so hungry for margin that they'll pull out of all sales channels but the ones they directly control rather than figure out how to best use all the channels available to them.
If anyone should be able to make tons of money even with distributors and retailers taking a cut, it's GW. They are geared for mass production in a way that few of their competitors could even hope to be. And yet they can't seem to get margins they are happy with and would rather abandon markets entirely rather than let someone else retail the product how they want.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: Back when I started in the mid 90's, GW DID have sales (at least local ones if not global ones). The first army I bought, Lizardmen, was mostly bought off the back of sales. The 3rd army I bought was Tyranids, again bought mostly off the back of sales.
I think GW are silly for not exploiting sales. I'm pretty sure a large part of the reason Stormclaw is so popular is because the huge savings. Hell, part of the reason I bought Space Hulk back in the day was because I realised how much cheaper it was than buying the Terminators and Stealers separately.
Same where I played in the late 90s. The GW store would have a sale every year on the same weekend. No gaming for the weekend and days leading up to it because the store would be full of product. A line would start forming a hour a head of time and the store would be packed all day with people buying stuff. I see no reason why this amount of volume and sales at the store wouldn't make up for the discount.
I can buy at 20% off retail via online discounter which means GW gets maybe 60% of MSRP with say 10% margin
OR for the same price
I can buy at 20% off retail at the GW store because they are having a sale which means GW gets 80% of MSRP with say 30% margin
AllSeeingSkink wrote: Back when I started in the mid 90's, GW DID have sales (at least local ones if not global ones). The first army I bought, Lizardmen, was mostly bought off the back of sales. The 3rd army I bought was Tyranids, again bought mostly off the back of sales.
I think GW are silly for not exploiting sales. I'm pretty sure a large part of the reason Stormclaw is so popular is because the huge savings. Hell, part of the reason I bought Space Hulk back in the day was because I realised how much cheaper it was than buying the Terminators and Stealers separately.
Same where I played in the late 90s. The GW store would have a sale every year on the same weekend. No gaming for the weekend and days leading up to it because the store would be full of product. A line would start forming a hour a head of time and the store would be packed all day with people buying stuff. I see no reason why this amount of volume and sales at the store wouldn't make up for the discount.
I can buy at 20% off retail via online discounter which means GW gets maybe 60% of MSRP with say 10% margin
OR for the same price
I can buy at 20% off retail at the GW store because they are having a sale which means GW gets 80% of MSRP with say 30% margin
Which gets the company more money?
What about the rest of the year when that sales weekend isn't on? If I was in the market for a GW army, I'd just wait for the next sale to appear.
Bartholomew - again, theyre not allowed to do sales. AS in, the UK gov't specifically stopped them from having them. They then have that approach be consistent worldwide, presumably to avoid either similar action, or being to seen to not hold the UK in sufficient regard (appearance can count for a lot)
nosferatu1001 wrote: Bartholomew - again, theyre not allowed to do sales. AS in, the UK gov't specifically stopped them from having them. They then have that approach be consistent worldwide, presumably to avoid either similar action, or being to seen to not hold the UK in sufficient regard (appearance can count for a lot)
Can you explain this? Not being from the UK I don't quite understand how the government can tell you that you aren't allowed to have sales on your own product. Something related to competition?
I'd be surprised if UK law forbids it; plenty of companies, like Mulberry, have sales in their own stores of items that also sell thru other retailers.
WayneTheGame wrote: Isn't Kirby also the majority shareholder though? So could the other investors just kick him out like that?
To answer your question, no he is not. Kirby is a large shareholder, yes, but not majority.
Just to clarify, owning a majority of a company is having 50.1% of more of controlling interest (not necessarily in shares but in decision making). Kirby does not have that power.
Kirby currently holds about 7% of the shares in GW. Which means if another 50.1% of shareholders got fed up with him and voted him to be booted, he would be gone no matter what he did.
Kilkrazy wrote: The thing is that for all our discontent at Kirby he has made millions of ££ for the shareholders.
I don't see any apparent reason why half the shareholders would suddenly decide to can him.
(Unless the end of year report is a disaster. Even then, GW have bad reports before and survived.)
No one is going to can him. The company is too small and under the radar of a lot of other companies. Rarely are niche company CEOs ousted, no matter how bad things get.
If GW starts to tank, and tank bad, all shareholders will do is sell their shares and buy shares in another company that isn't having so many problems. Why go through the hassle of forcing a company to be fixed when you can just sell and buy into a company that isn't all fethed up? So much easier on the shareholders.
Filch wrote: Gw is doomed! 3 stores closed out from 30 miles from me. No more gamng for me!
Can't you play at home or at a club?
I must admit that I've never really understood why stores are considered so important. And, by extension, why Games Workshop tries to claim that their premium prices are important to support stores and that their stores are important for the hobby. I mean: I've never had a Games Workshop store anywhere near me and all my gaming have been at home or at a club. No store needed for that.
Friends i had quit. They sold their army and moved on with their lives. I now must make the life transition, but i dont want to.
Filch wrote: Gw is doomed! 3 stores closed out from 30 miles from me. No more gamng for me!
Can't you play at home or at a club?
I must admit that I've never really understood why stores are considered so important. And, by extension, why Games Workshop tries to claim that their premium prices are important to support stores and that their stores are important for the hobby. I mean: I've never had a Games Workshop store anywhere near me and all my gaming have been at home or at a club. No store needed for that.
Friends i had quit. They sold their army and moved on with their lives. I now must make the life transition, but i dont want to.
Yeah...
See, that's the issue that Games Workshop has right now.
They've had dips before, but back then they still had a viable customer base to back them up. Now however, many local communities seem to have collapsed, leaving just one or two players. And not being able to get a game, they'll dump their stuff on Ebay and that's the end of Games Workshop in that area.
It's sad really. Once upon a time, all stores and all clubs were filled with Games Workshop fanboyz. Fantasy or 40K. Necromunda or Blood Bowl. It didn't matter - you could always get a game. But now...
Best you can hope for, I'm afraid, is that you can talk you friends into trying another game like Infinity or Malifaux, or any of the other games that's sprung up over the last few years.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: What about the rest of the year when that sales weekend isn't on? If I was in the market for a GW army, I'd just wait for the next sale to appear.
Couple of points
1) You are making the false assumption that the only place that the army can be purchased is via GW. This is means that GW has no incentive to run a sale because they have a captive audience who can only acquire product via GW at full price.
2) You are under estimating the power of "I want it now". I know many, many players who impulse buy items at full price because they have to have it.
3) GW is not the only place to purchase the army. You can buy the vast majority of it from any number of online retailers at a steady 20% discount, year round.
As it is now, GW direct (internet or shop) is the LAST place I would buy an army from. Why would I pay 20% more for the same product? Now if GW did have a sale of 20%+, bundle or not, I may consider purchasing direct from them. GW can the little money from me they get for going through a distributor all the time or they can have a bit more of my money by having sales.
Edit:
The reason the Sanctus Reach: Stormclaw set is selling at any appreciable volume is because it contains $225 worth of product and costs $125, not including the rulebook. That is a 45% discount. If I played Orks or Space Wolves and new someone playing the other, I would consider splitting it with them because it has value.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Bartholomew - again, theyre not allowed to do sales. AS in, the UK gov't specifically stopped them from having them.
I'm afraid that I'm going to have to need a citation for this affirmation...
I'm going to have to echo this, firstly because I can't find any evidence for myself, and secondly because it sounds hugely implausible. The only Governmental organisation I can envisage having the power, remit and interest to do this would be the MMC, and I really don't think GW are a big enough part of the toy market (which is what they'd look at, not 'wargaming' which isn't really a defined sector so much as a self generated label) to warrant that action.
Sounds and smells like Redshirt bs spun to some poor unsuspecting kid that has inexplicably become part of Internet lore to me, but I'd be very interested to be proven wrong.
Especially in light of the fact that I bought stuff from GW shops in the 90s at a discount from RRP.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Bartholomew - again, theyre not allowed to do sales. AS in, the UK gov't specifically stopped them from having them.
I'm afraid that I'm going to have to need a citation for this affirmation...
I'm going to have to echo this, firstly because I can't find any evidence for myself, and secondly because it sounds hugely implausible. The only Governmental organisation I can envisage having the power, remit and interest to do this would be the MMC, and I really don't think GW are a big enough part of the toy market (which is what they'd look at, not 'wargaming' which isn't really a defined sector so much as a self generated label) to warrant that action.
Sounds and smells like Redshirt bs spun to some poor unsuspecting kid that has inexplicably become part of Internet lore to me, but I'd be very interested to be proven wrong.
Especially in light of the fact that I bought stuff from GW shops in the 90s at a discount from RRP.
This.
I seem to remember being told some similar yarn by a redshirt when I was younger.
We have about 25-30 40k players at my local GW store. It's in a very high traffic area across from a huge shopping mall on route 31 just off I-65 and 459. Finding a game isn't the issue, waiting for a table is because even on weekdays right when the store opens, there will always be 6-8 people in there either painting, trying to get a game in or both. I'm sure this isn't the norm but I'm just saying that moving stores to low rent/low traffic areas and dying player bases is not the case in every GW store. They need to figure out what stores like mine are doing and replicate that in other stores. I moved down here from Columbus a few months ago and the 40k scene at the local GW there was very similar. The store was also in a similar location, across from a huge mall and just off I-71.
Toofast wrote: We have about 25-30 40k players at my local GW store. It's in a very high traffic area across from a huge shopping mall on route 31 just off I-65 and 459. Finding a game isn't the issue, waiting for a table is because even on weekdays right when the store opens, there will always be 6-8 people in there either painting, trying to get a game in or both. I'm sure this isn't the norm but I'm just saying that moving stores to low rent/low traffic areas and dying player bases is not the case in every GW store. They need to figure out what stores like mine are doing and replicate that in other stores. I moved down here from Columbus a few months ago and the 40k scene at the local GW there was very similar. The store was also in a similar location, across from a huge mall and just off I-71.
My closest GW actually banned pickup games, for the purposes of having 3 "new player" tables. One for LOTR, one for 40k and one for Fantasy. Only the 40k table ever sees any action, and that's because everyone is crowded around the edge trying to paint/build.
They try to do game nights for things like an Apoc battle, but the playerbase has heavily lost interest, considering that even the most basic store game takes an hour or two to set up, another 30 mins+ to put models on the table, and then can take 1-3 hours to do turn one.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Come to Reading, thriving games night on a friday (also sadly same night my club is on, due to a change in our venue) - very broad player base.
How does it take 2 hours to set up a game? wtf are people DOING in that time??
I believe it was in relation to the Apoc game. Which, given that many gamers, is understandable. It's like herding cats.
Toofast wrote: We have about 25-30 40k players at my local GW store. It's in a very high traffic area across from a huge shopping mall on route 31 just off I-65 and 459. Finding a game isn't the issue, waiting for a table is because even on weekdays right when the store opens, there will always be 6-8 people in there either painting, trying to get a game in or both. I'm sure this isn't the norm but I'm just saying that moving stores to low rent/low traffic areas and dying player bases is not the case in every GW store. They need to figure out what stores like mine are doing and replicate that in other stores. I moved down here from Columbus a few months ago and the 40k scene at the local GW there was very similar. The store was also in a similar location, across from a huge mall and just off I-71.
My closest GW actually banned pickup games, for the purposes of having 3 "new player" tables. One for LOTR, one for 40k and one for Fantasy. Only the 40k table ever sees any action, and that's because everyone is crowded around the edge trying to paint/build.
They try to do game nights for things like an Apoc battle, but the playerbase has heavily lost interest, considering that even the most basic store game takes an hour or two to set up, another 30 mins+ to put models on the table, and then can take 1-3 hours to do turn one.
I don't think the GW here is dumb enough to try that, it certainly is nowhere near as popular as it once was, there's other FLGS (many of them) with more tables, and of course all the other games.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Come to Reading, thriving games night on a friday (also sadly same night my club is on, due to a change in our venue) - very broad player base.
How does it take 2 hours to set up a game? wtf are people DOING in that time??
I believe it was in relation to the Apoc game. Which, given that many gamers, is understandable. It's like herding cats.
Nah, gamers herd quite well, you just need someone to direct. Which, if the store is organising should be the black or blue shirt....we managed a large number of apoc games in store without this issue.
Dont get having a table for the hobbit though, that isnt exactly needed in the current CI....
We were talking about player numbers today. We have 5 hobbit/LOTR "players". I say that because 5 people buy but we haven't really seen them come into the store to play. I am in there 2-3 times a week to get games and I have yet to see a hobbit/LOTR game being played. We have 3 tables, one for displaying models and starter sets and 2 that are either fantasy or 40k depending on who wants to play what. We do clear off the third table once a month and play large games with 2-3 tables pushed together. I'm not sure why the store would ban pickup games. I lost count of how many times someone has come in just to play a pickup game and ended up making an impulse purchase. The only rule here is league games take priority over pickup games. If you are waiting for a table for a fantasy pickup game and 2 guys come in ready to play a 40k league game, they jump you on the waiting list for a table. This makes perfect sense as we need to get so many league games in to qualify for the tournament whereas pickup games can be played any time.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: What about the rest of the year when that sales weekend isn't on? If I was in the market for a GW army, I'd just wait for the next sale to appear.
Couple of points
1) You are making the false assumption that the only place that the army can be purchased is via GW. This is means that GW has no incentive to run a sale because they have a captive audience who can only acquire product via GW at full price.
2) You are under estimating the power of "I want it now". I know many, many players who impulse buy items at full price because they have to have it.
3) GW is not the only place to purchase the army. You can buy the vast majority of it from any number of online retailers at a steady 20% discount, year round.
As it is now, GW direct (internet or shop) is the LAST place I would buy an army from. Why would I pay 20% more for the same product? Now if GW did have a sale of 20%+, bundle or not, I may consider purchasing direct from them. GW can the little money from me they get for going through a distributor all the time or they can have a bit more of my money by having sales.
Edit:
The reason the Sanctus Reach: Stormclaw set is selling at any appreciable volume is because it contains $225 worth of product and costs $125, not including the rulebook. That is a 45% discount. If I played Orks or Space Wolves and new someone playing the other, I would consider splitting it with them because it has value.
I'm neither assuming nor underestimating anything. You do appear to be reading a lot into a single line.
I sold my entire collection about 6 months ago. Over $30,000 worth. Mutliple pro-painted armies, forge world, titans, you name it.
And I am so glad I did. This was around the time the new Tyranid codex came out in 6th, with stronghold assault and the LOW supplement.
The game was unplayable then without house rules.
And I see the state it is in now. Unbound LMFAO, oh I can see how it got worse. And it is not going to turn around guys. The game sucks for any
kind of reasonable, balanced play. Even friendly games where both people okay each others armies, are very questionably balanced.
It feels so good to be free of this crap. I don't miss it one bit, and it feels like a weight lifted off my shoulders.
Having fun on the PS4, and hanging out with friends. Life is good.
My advice: Dump this garbage. It is not worth your time or money.
GW isn't the only company producing stuff for the hobby. You can get all sorts of miniatures without being on GW's cash sucking treadmill. I just finished painting up some colonial British infantry for a Victorian Sci-fi dinosaur hunt on Venus.
Get your rules from one place, your miniatures from another, and you'll pretty much guarantee you won't get dragged into a GW style churn and burn situation as the rules and miniatures will each have to stand on their own merits independently rather than the rules being a marketing idea to suck as much money out of you as possible.
You can do this and still play in the 40k or WFB universes. They are basically just mishmashes of other people's ideas. If people stop thinking of direct army list conversions into other rules and think more in story terms and just use the rules to represent things, it's really easy. For example, in Bolt Action tank weapons and tanks themselves are separated into categories based on size. So instead of trying to convert an entire army list you just decide that a lascannon is a heavy anti tank weapon and get playing.
Aftermath. wrote: I sold my entire collection about 6 months ago. Over $30,000 worth. Mutliple pro-painted armies, forge world, titans, you name it.
And I am so glad I did. This was around the time the new Tyranid codex came out in 6th, with stronghold assault and the LOW supplement.
The game was unplayable then without house rules.
And I see the state it is in now. Unbound LMFAO, oh I can see how it got worse. And it is not going to turn around guys. The game sucks for any
kind of reasonable, balanced play. Even friendly games where both people okay each others armies, are very questionably balanced.
It feels so good to be free of this crap. I don't miss it one bit, and it feels like a weight lifted off my shoulders.
Having fun on the PS4, and hanging out with friends. Life is good.
My advice: Dump this garbage. It is not worth your time or money.
........End of line
But you really haven't left have you? And you do miss it or you wouldn't be here.
If you don't miss it, you wouldn't be on a forum to discuss something you like or liked, even if you got rid of everything.
Crimson Devil wrote: Or he could've have been bored at work and decided to enjoy some schadenfreude.
Dakka is more than just a 40k forum.
Or he wants more people to leave, so he can find more opponents for other systems. If someones leaves table top gaming it is bad, but if he leaves to take up warmahordes or infinity, it is good for me, because I get more opponents and more people to split boxs with.
Crimson Devil wrote: Or he could've have been bored at work and decided to enjoy some schadenfreude.
Dakka is more than just a 40k forum.
Or he wants more people to leave, so he can find more opponents for other systems. If someones leaves table top gaming it is bad, but if he leaves to take up warmahordes or infinity, it is good for me, because I get more opponents and more people to split boxs with.
I consider it a campaign of information; too many people it seems play 40k because they're just ignorant of other options, or because the FLGS only has 40k players come in, so nobody bothers to start other games out of fear if not having anyone to play against.
Filch wrote: Gw is doomed! 3 stores closed out from 30 miles from me. No more gamng for me!
Can't you play at home or at a club?
I must admit that I've never really understood why stores are considered so important. And, by extension, why Games Workshop tries to claim that their premium prices are important to support stores and that their stores are important for the hobby. I mean: I've never had a Games Workshop store anywhere near me and all my gaming have been at home or at a club. No store needed for that.
Friends i had quit. They sold their army and moved on with their lives. I now must make the life transition, but i dont want to.
I'm doing the same right now. If you want some advice, take some of the money and set it aside to buy something nice for yourself; maybe for another game. It will make it sting a lot less.
I'm doing the same right now. If you want some advice, take some of the money and set it aside to buy something nice for yourself; maybe for another game. It will make it sting a lot less.
I concur. I'm using my 40k funds to buy some durable goods for the kitchen to get back into cooking along with models for other games and for painting purposes. Then the rest into some savings for a rainy day.
I still play because
- I still have tons of fun, win or lose
- I've spent far too much time and money on my army to ebay it for 1/3 of what it's worth
- I can drive 1/4 mile down the street to my local GW and get a game from 500 points to 3000 points any time it's open
- I enjoy the fluff
- I still have tons of fun, win or lose
- I've spent far too much time and money on my army to ebay it for 1/3 of what it's worth - I can drive 1/4 mile down the street to my local GW and get a game from 500 points to 3000 points any time it's open
- I enjoy the fluff
These two [bolded] aren't solid ground. I agree with the other two, however enjoyment of the fluff can be had without the tabletop game. The video games, like Dawn of War, got me into 40k and I still read a black library offering from time to time. I've really spend a ton of time on the wikis absorbing the mythos. I look forward to making a diorama, or two, but some of my work makes light (or absurdity) of the 40k GrimDark™ nature.
The former is what we call "sunk cost". It's something that makes for bad business; reinvesting or staying invested in something "bad" just because you already have a sunk cost. I am not saying it invalidates your reason to play, but it's not a good reason to keep playing if it was your only one.
My example, if you care:
Spoiler:
I have sold all my 40k stuff except for probably 1000~pts of SpaceMarine/Blood Angels in boxes if you don't count all the HQs I have and my Grey Knights army and netted me $1,600 in cash and $800+ in store credit. I have a complete Merovingian Sectorial for Infinity (read about 6000 pts equivalent in 40k in terms of competitiveness), 5 Crew boxes + 5 Add-on boxes for Malifaux (which is a lot for that game), and about 75 points of Cryx and the complete p/eBaldur tier lists (save the Gargantuan) for Circle. Minus the Cryx, which was from selling my wolves last year for Cryx + $600 cash, I got all that and still have a ton of cash left for home and personal improvements. So I'm in deep for three games at the cost of dropping one.
If it was bad in my eyes, I wouldn't keep investing in it. Yes, GW makes horrible business decisions and doesn't care about their customers nearly enough, if at all. However, the price is still bearable to me (FAR cheaper than my other hobbies), and despite what a lot of people have said about 7th, I'm really enjoying it. Also I should've clarified on the fluff, I like it as it relates to the game compared to the fluff of other games. You will never catch me reading a black library novel or spending hours pouring through the fluff section of my codex. I just couldn't see myself getting into the setting of the other tabletop games.
2 Things
Firstly, to the thread in general, lets try and keep our interactions positive. That means not consigning one view point to, as one user put it, 'the dakka discussions chamber of hate', as if it isn't worthy of discussion unless it's in a special pit somewhere.
Secondly, lets keep it on topic. Going back and forth about how a thread may not be in the appropriate place is something that is better done by hitting the yellow triangle. We look at all yellow triangle hits, and discuss things like if threads are in the right spot, if that is what is brought up.
Apparently GW's beliefs are that they are perfect in every way, their miniatures are SO good that people will pay any price for them, they have no competition and anyone who cares about price isn't their target demographic. A poster on Warseer posted some bits they recalled from a conversation with GW management at an unmentioned time:
Wolf Lord Balrog @ Warseer wrote: I recently had an opportunity to have a lengthy discussion with a member of GW's lower management about the company's strategy and its vision of itself. There are two key assumptions that GW operates under that I don't think most people understand. First, they believe that their product is so good, that people will pay whatever price tag they put on it. Second, they see themselves as totally without serious competition in wargames, that their only competition is from other hobby activities.
They totally and completely believe these things, they are articles of faith for every member of management (or if they feel differently they don't dare say so where another employee might hear). You think about it, and this alone explains much.
---
Some more bits I remembered from that conversation: If you have any qualms about prices, you are not GW's target market. They believe that there are sufficient 'collectors', for whom GW's 'super-ultimate-quality' will always trump price, that they don't need anybody for whom money is an issue. Similarly, if you aren't starting a new army, they don't care about you. New armies mean sales of their 'core' products, which is what they care most about. It is also true that GW doesn't care about the rules' 'balance' or tournament playability, not even a little bit. The rules are there to add value to the models, and so they can sell rulebooks as well as models, no other reason.
Take note, this isn't your standard internet 'whinging', or loose inferences from quotes in White Dwarf or a blog interview from somebody who used to work there years ago. These are the apparently deeply-held, current views of the company management, as described to me by a current member of management.
If they really believe that nonsense, then that's the reason they are going under. The point about not having any competition from other wargames is especially telling though, because I've seen that line of gak trotted out on forums a lot from posters as well, by comparing 40k to non-gaming hobbies and them claiming that 40k is cheaper than that (I recall someone once comparing 40k as a hobby to restoring muscle cars and used that as an argument that 40k's prices weren't that bad, as though the two had anything in common!)
What I've seen most of all though is people who stick with 40k because they like the models and fluff, and continually try to compare everything on that alone, so they dismiss Warmachine (too steampunk), Kings of War (too basic/not WHFB), FoW (historicals), etc. because it's not 40k, so they put up with the rules and price hikes for the "privilege" of playing in the setting as everything else isn't identical to it. So, intentionally or not they are playing right into what GW wants and thinks - that 40k is *so* good there is no alternatives.
Anybody else enjoying finding cut-price GW models on ebay?
I am. SO far I and my friends have pretty much sworn to not give GW any money, but still allow ourselves to enjoy the modelling and gaming aspects of 40k.
As much as we like GW stuff (aside from rulesets, none of us have gone to 7th ed), we see no reason to give them money for acting callously towards their customers and those that sell their minis.
In an anecdotal vein, I played my first real game of 7th edition, 4000 points and did not enjoy it. There is literally too much bookkeeping now to really enjoy the game at this level. Part of the blame is on me for taking Grey Knights but having to deal with the sheer number of psychic phase shenanigans became very taxing and killed the enjoyment that I initially felt at having that many points on the board at one time. We didn't even bother with mission cards and all the other added nonsense but that would have just had me stopping after turn 1 and going to play xwing or join the werewolf game going on across the room.
My opponent played CSM and Daemons and I can't imagine how I could have won with my Tau or Dark Eldar because I would have had no way to stop him from summoning several hundred points in Daemons each turn.
The one thing I did like was the new D weapon rules. I played a couple of Knights and felt that they're much better balanced than when they first came out. They were tough but he was able to take them both down before the game ended. All in all I say that I probably would have enjoyed the game where it not for the psychic phase.
Toofast wrote: This is the age of unemployment, recession and new video game systems. What gaming company hasn't lost some profit since the 2008 recession?
The boardgame/wargame market is actually growing. GW is almost the only company to shrink.
From a gamer perspective, almost all other systems seem to work well. Some more than others, but it's still pretty easy to find players for Dystopian Wars, Firestorm Armada, Bolt Action, Infinity... Warmahordes is played almost everywhere.
What about GW? Well... Their most popular games in my aera are Bloodbowl and Mordheim.
It's pretty difficult to find WHFB/40k games. Too cumbersome. WHFB/40k mechanics haven't really evolved since the 90s. 8th edidion WHFB just feels like another 4th edition with some extra house rules, without magic cards and larger units. Allowing two ranks to fight, premesuring everything and putting sixes instead of dashes in a Strenght/Toughness chart are "updates" that could have been done by my 6 years old nephew.
There's also this cost issue. Being up to date is costly, and it's nothing compared to the starting cost. It's incredibly difficult to recruit new players, especially if you're trying to be honest about the value of all the games you play.
My club sometimes do events, people can come, discover wargaming... You've got this dad and his two children who really like the games, but you know how things works... hard times... dad asks you about the cost of the game.
I suppose I could compare apple to oranges, and push GW systems. You know, restrict your choices to 2 factions, take the most elite one, sell half your stuff, min-max you way to 800 pts, but I don't really see why I'd do that. I don't have anything to sell, I really don't care if they play X-Wing or WHFB, I just want these people to have fun, and enjoy this hobby.
Costs of some systems, for 2 players (no hobby supplies) :
HOTT/DBA: 40-50€. Rules + 3 armies cost me 55€ and I have enough spare units for a 4th player...
X-Wing: 100-120€. 2 core boxes + 2 or 3 extra ships. No "hobby supplies" cost.
Bolt Action: 100€. Rulebook, 2 infantry boxes and 1 tank box on each side. (in my aera, people usually play with 1/72 minis)
Bloodbowl: 100-120€. LRB + 2 teams.
FSA/DW: 150€. One rulebook + starters of the 2 factions + a couple blisters to add some squadrons.
WHFB: 1000-1200€. IoB/rulebook + two armybooks + 3 to 4 batallions per kid.
I've seen people who genuinely thought they could spend half a thousand euros (rules, 2 batallions, paints and modelling stuff) and make their kids happy, only for the kids to discover later that one does not play WHFB with one batallion, but at least 3 of them. Believe me, it's not pretty.
Litcheur wrote: I've seen people who genuinely thought they could spend half a thousand euros (rules, 2 batallions, paints and modelling stuff) and make their kids happy, only for the kids to discover later that one does not play WHFB with one batallion, but at least 3 of them. Believe me, it's not pretty.
So true. My parents were outrageous when they found out exactly how expansive my hobby was. They have come to terms with it now a bit more, but they still complain whenever I buy something new. It is one of the main reasons I started Dystopian Wars, which is delightfully cheap compared to 40k. I am lucky enough to earn some good money for miniatures with delivering newspapers, but GW has really priced most younger players out of the hobby.
Litcheur wrote: I've seen people who genuinely thought they could spend half a thousand euros (rules, 2 batallions, paints and modelling stuff) and make their kids happy, only for the kids to discover later that one does not play WHFB with one batallion, but at least 3 of them. Believe me, it's not pretty.
So true. My parents were outrageous when they found out exactly how expansive my hobby was. They have come to terms with it now a bit more, but they still complain whenever I buy something new. It is one of the main reasons I started Dystopian Wars, which is delightfully cheap compared to 40k.
I am lucky enough to earn some good money for miniatures with delivering newspapers, but GW has really priced most younger players out of the hobby.
I can only assume that their target demographic is, almost literally, spoiled rich kids. No other young player could afford it.
I haven't paid directly for GW product since the Tau Riptide. Everything since then has been second hand.
With the edition changes and inconsistency of codex balance, 40k has died down quite a bit in my area. Infinity, Warma-Hordes, and Mordhiem have increased significantly. Warhammer Fantasy has had a consistent small following. X-wing is growing and pulling in new gamers. Malifaux had a following, but died down with local college semester changes.
From seeing whats going on in my local area, GW is loosing ground. The community is steadily growing, but GW isn't part of that growth.
I was speaking with one of the folks that's "in the know" at my local game store, and year over year of GW sales is way down and board games are up. Folks would rather pay $40~$80 for a complete game, play it 20~30 times and get another one versus keeping with a wargame with the costs of 40k.
There is being a slow shift to other skirmish games, too. It seems like mainly the super competitive 40k guys are still around and the younger dudes who cannot afford a shift.
Wolf Lord Balrog @ Warseer wrote:
I recently had an opportunity to have a lengthy discussion with a member of GW's lower management about the company's strategy and its vision of itself. There are two key assumptions that GW operates under that I don't think most people understand. First, they believe that their product is so good, that people will pay whatever price tag they put on it. Second, they see themselves as totally without serious competition in wargames, that their only competition is from other hobby activities.
They totally and completely believe these things, they are articles of faith for every member of management (or if they feel differently they don't dare say so where another employee might hear). You think about it, and this alone explains much.
---
Some more bits I remembered from that conversation: If you have any qualms about prices, you are not GW's target market. They believe that there are sufficient 'collectors', for whom GW's 'super-ultimate-quality' will always trump price, that they don't need anybody for whom money is an issue. Similarly, if you aren't starting a new army, they don't care about you. New armies mean sales of their 'core' products, which is what they care most about. It is also true that GW doesn't care about the rules' 'balance' or tournament playability, not even a little bit. The rules are there to add value to the models, and so they can sell rulebooks as well as models, no other reason.
Take note, this isn't your standard internet 'whinging', or loose inferences from quotes in White Dwarf or a blog interview from somebody who used to work there years ago. These are the apparently deeply-held, current views of the company management, as described to me by a current member of management.
If they believe people will pay any price, why did another management representative recently acknowledge there was consumer resistance to pricing? (And why have they introduced bargain "campaign boxes").
If they believe other wargames manufacturers aren't competition, why did they spend $1m suing Chapterhouse?
If they don't care about the rules at all, why do they employ people to design them, and spend 8 or 12 pages talking about them in White Dwarf every week?
If we're going to slate GW, let's do it for real failings, not imaginary , nonsensical "secrets" someone got off someone's else's auntie or pet dog.
Wolf Lord Balrog @ Warseer wrote:
I recently had an opportunity to have a lengthy discussion with a member of GW's lower management about the company's strategy and its vision of itself. There are two key assumptions that GW operates under that I don't think most people understand. First, they believe that their product is so good, that people will pay whatever price tag they put on it. Second, they see themselves as totally without serious competition in wargames, that their only competition is from other hobby activities.
They totally and completely believe these things, they are articles of faith for every member of management (or if they feel differently they don't dare say so where another employee might hear). You think about it, and this alone explains much.
---
Some more bits I remembered from that conversation: If you have any qualms about prices, you are not GW's target market. They believe that there are sufficient 'collectors', for whom GW's 'super-ultimate-quality' will always trump price, that they don't need anybody for whom money is an issue. Similarly, if you aren't starting a new army, they don't care about you. New armies mean sales of their 'core' products, which is what they care most about. It is also true that GW doesn't care about the rules' 'balance' or tournament playability, not even a little bit. The rules are there to add value to the models, and so they can sell rulebooks as well as models, no other reason.
Take note, this isn't your standard internet 'whinging', or loose inferences from quotes in White Dwarf or a blog interview from somebody who used to work there years ago. These are the apparently deeply-held, current views of the company management, as described to me by a current member of management.
If they believe people will pay any price, why did another management representative recently acknowledge there was consumer resistance to pricing? (And why have they introduced bargain "campaign boxes").
Because falling sales have proven this attitude to be, ahem, incorrect?
If they believe other wargames manufacturers aren't competition, why did they spend $1m suing Chapterhouse?
Because those filthy gypsies were taking a free ride on GW's imperious coat tails, that's why! *deadpan*
If they don't care about the rules at all, why do they employ people to design them, and spend 8 or 12 pages talking about them in White Dwarf every week?
Because, evidently contrary to your belief, even poor quality rules don't spontaneously spring into existence, even if Tom Kirby wishes ever so hard.
If we're going to slate GW, let's do it for real failings, not imaginary , nonsensical "secrets" someone got off someone's else's auntie or pet dog.
If you're going to leap to GW's defence, I'd pick easier fights to win. Regardless of whether this is actually the case, the fact that something like this can actually be entertained as plausible in the context of how GW appears to go about there business is symptomatic of a problem, whether it's real or not.
1) If they believe other wargames manufacturers aren't competition, why did they spend $1m suing Chapterhouse?
2) If they don't care about the rules at all, why do they employ people to design them, and spend 8 or 12 pages talking about them in White Dwarf every week?
If we're going to slate GW, let's do it for real failings, not imaginary , nonsensical "secrets" someone got off someone's else's auntie or pet dog.
1) Becouse they do not understand what competition is or they wouldn't of gone after a aftermarket company. One people still need your product, the other your product isn't need at all. Guess witch one Chapterhouse falls under.
2) Rewriting rules and changing point vaules to move product, with out play testing doesn't mean they care about the rules. Just, that they care about selling more models.
2) Rewriting rules and changing point vaules to move product, with out play testing doesn't mean they care about the rules. Just, that they care about selling more models.
The word-of-mouth rumor mill states that internal management teams feels like play-testing isn't necessary. That the writers should do it correctly the first time. Playing games is something you do off the clock, not on it. Given the break-neck speed of the current releases, one could imagine they wouldn't have adequate time to play test at all. The recent FAQ release and how slipshod it still continues to be would lean towards this concept.
We can only connect the dots from reasoning based on what we see on the outside. I'd love for the book to be written in 20 years on "what happened behind the scenes at Nottingham".
2) Rewriting rules and changing point vaules to move product, with out play testing doesn't mean they care about the rules. Just, that they care about selling more models.
The word-of-mouth rumor mill states that internal management teams feels like play-testing isn't necessary. That the writers should do it correctly the first time. Playing games is something you do off the clock, not on it. Given the break-neck speed of the current releases, one could imagine they wouldn't have adequate time to play test at all. The recent FAQ release and how slipshod it still continues to be would lean towards this concept.
We can only connect the dots from reasoning based on what we see on the outside. I'd love for the book to be written in 20 years on "what happened behind the scenes at Nottingham".
"Confessions of a Warhammer Games Designer: The Dark Years, Or How I Sold My Soul To Plastic Toy Soldiers - Volume 1"
2) Rewriting rules and changing point vaules to move product, with out play testing doesn't mean they care about the rules. Just, that they care about selling more models.
The word-of-mouth rumor mill states that internal management teams feels like play-testing isn't necessary. That the writers should do it correctly the first time. Playing games is something you do off the clock, not on it. Given the break-neck speed of the current releases, one could imagine they wouldn't have adequate time to play test at all. The recent FAQ release and how slipshod it still continues to be would lean towards this concept.
We can only connect the dots from reasoning based on what we see on the outside. I'd love for the book to be written in 20 years on "what happened behind the scenes at Nottingham".
Which just goes to show that they don't understand their own company at all. Or how to do business in general...
Testing and verifying the quality of your product is an integral part of being an manufacture.
But then again, they probably couldn't care less. Given their rather low opinion of their own customers, it's not really surprising that they thought they could get away with doing no testing.
2) Rewriting rules and changing point vaules to move product, with out play testing doesn't mean they care about the rules. Just, that they care about selling more models.
The word-of-mouth rumor mill states that internal management teams feels like play-testing isn't necessary. That the writers should do it correctly the first time. Playing games is something you do off the clock, not on it. Given the break-neck speed of the current releases, one could imagine they wouldn't have adequate time to play test at all. The recent FAQ release and how slipshod it still continues to be would lean towards this concept.
We can only connect the dots from reasoning based on what we see on the outside. I'd love for the book to be written in 20 years on "what happened behind the scenes at Nottingham".
Which just goes to show that they don't understand their own company at all. Or how to do business in general...
Testing and verifying the quality of your product is an integral part of being an manufacture.
But then again, they probably couldn't care less. Given their rather low opinion of their own customers, it's not really surprising that they thought they could get away with doing no testing.
The word of mouth is also complete bollocks, as usual.
Game Friday. From two close friends in the studio, the rules team writes rules, then plays them in a Friday. So, nope. Try again, maybe not listening to every rumour that confirms your viewpoint next time. Really question these things...
What an insightful post. Pray tell what led you to this profound conclusion?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
nosferatu1001 wrote: Game Friday. From two close friends in the studio, the rules team writes rules, then plays them in a Friday. So, nope. Try again, maybe not listening to every rumour that confirms your viewpoint next time. Really question these things...
Question it more than some random guy who claims to know people in the studio? If they play with their rules at all, then clearly they do playtesting wrong. Hint: Playtesting isn't just playing a game and seeing what happens, playtesting is setting up specific conditions to see what happens under those circumstances. If you just play a normal game and walk away saying "Wellp, those rules work great, we had no issues" you're doing it wrong.
Hint: note the utter lack of qualification I made on how they test? Nope, just more supposition on your part, assuming a position that is easy to attack and then attacking it. Now THAT is a strawman...
And by question it I do not mean "trust me", as I try to avoid fallacies such as argument from authority. I just get amused by those repeating only the rumours that confirm their opinion, without questioning source, veracity, or really applying much cogent thought at all. No, what I mean is: talk to the actual people who make the game. They make themselves fairly well available, and really are interesting people to talk to. Then, if you're still not convinced, you've done something a damn sight more worthwhile than just only hearing what fits your preconceived notions. Or talk to people you trust who have talked to the designers, to at least get so etching second hand but more reliable.
Or instead, repeat yet another rumour. Maybe "they not only don't play test, they also have"mock customers day", where they read feedback in a patronising tone and work it how best to screw them over next release" - at least that's interesting.
nosferatu1001 wrote: : talk to the actual people who make the game. They make themselves fairly well available, and really are interesting people to talk to.
Best sarcasm award goes to....wait....you were being serious?
nosferatu1001 wrote: : talk to the actual people who make the game. They make themselves fairly well available, and really are interesting people to talk to.
Best sarcasm award goes to....wait....you were being serious?
To be fair - I've met jervis and thought he was a very pleasant guy to chat to. Even did a q&a for us a few years ago.
I have friends whose names appear in the special thanks section of the codices. There are 'feelers' put out - gw don't always listen, but they do look for 'some' external input. Maybe it's not enough, or maybe there is too much 'push' from elsewhere in the company, or the design team is often stuck with a deadline and a design brief that they just adhere to, rather than creative freedom.
nosferatu1001 wrote: : talk to the actual people who make the game. They make themselves fairly well available, and really are interesting people to talk to.
Best sarcasm award goes to....wait....you were being serious?
To be fair - I've met jervis and thought he was a very pleasant guy to chat to. Even did a q&a for us a few years ago.
I have friends whose names appear in the special thanks section of the codices. There are 'feelers' put out - gw don't always listen, but they do look for 'some' external input. Maybe it's not enough, or maybe there is too much 'push' from elsewhere in the company, or the design team is often stuck with a deadline and a design brief that they just adhere to, rather than creative freedom.
nosferatu1001 wrote: : talk to the actual people who make the game. They make themselves fairly well available, and really are interesting people to talk to.
Best sarcasm award goes to....wait....you were being serious?
Yes, because I find basing my opinions on multiple real life experiences, such as the ones I had today, much much better than taking one idiots responses and extrapolating out from a single data point. But hey, don't let "facts" or "logic" or even a passing nod to "balance" get in the way of another good anti-GW rant!
nosferatu1001 wrote: Game Friday. From two close friends in the studio, the rules team writes rules, then plays them in a Friday. So, nope. Try again, maybe not listening to every rumour that confirms your viewpoint next time. Really question these things...
Uhh... this verifies the rumour. That if there's testing, it's not on the clock as part of a larger development plan, but on their own time with a small circle of volunteer yes-men friends.
To answer the question to the Original Poster, I would have to say yes, but with a few caveats (which I will get to in a minute):
The first being that while the Miniature Wargaming market has been growing as whole slowly but steadily, Games Workshop has not been experience this growth very much (if not at all). One can look at the different amount of new games that have came out in a two year period and how much others have grown (which has coincided with the release of 6th edition almost). This suggest a shift in the overall community to some degree where alternatives are becoming more preferable than Games Workshop.
As well, there is Wayshuba's insight into this, which seems to suggest that GW financially is just managing to make a little profit due to cutting most things as they view as 'unnessacy cost'. Let alone how most of their actions seem to mirror a company that is in decline (Wayshuba, I do not mean to twist your words at all if I did, I was referring to your post since you do make some very good points).
EDIT: While GW still has a large majority of the market share, this has managed to slip away in more recent years as well but still has a monopoly presence in the hobby to some degree.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Game Friday. From two close friends in the studio, the rules team writes rules, then plays them in a Friday. So, nope. Try again, maybe not listening to every rumour that confirms your viewpoint next time. Really question these things...
Uhh... this verifies the rumour. That if there's testing, it's not on the clock, but on their own time with a small circle of volunteers.
We have taken away the shovel yet he continues to dig...
TheKbob wrote: The word-of-mouth rumor mill states that internal management teams feels like play-testing isn't necessary. That the writers should do it correctly the first time.
Problem is, they're not totally wrong.
Today's "broken armies" are not made of über-complex multiple interactions between buffs/debuffs à la Warmachine. It's not even close to the good old hilariously powerful Herohammer combos. Because most often than not, there's no combo at all. It's just about spamming six flyers, twelve Serpents...
We're not talking about complex combos or slight over/undercosts here and there, but about major balance issues.
Just ask any SoB player about Celestians from the infamous WDex. Or even more hilarious: preachers.
Spoiler:
You though Ripper Swarms were useless? Come on.
A Preacher is a regular IG grunt, with the regular carboard jacket and a (undervolted) laser pointer. Allow him to give a modest CC boost to his unit *if* you're stupid enough willing to waste one of your precious Faith Points on him instead of other units and *if* you're lucky enough to pass the Faith Test. Remember, you're denying useful buffs to other units to give a modest melee boost to one unit in an army that's only marginally better than IG in close combat (basic human in power armour vs basic human in flak vest...)
Give your preacher a Rosarius. That's right, regular human statline, T3/W1 + Rosarius. Oh, I'm slightly unfair here, he's got +1A / +1I (still has S3/WS3...)
1 preacher costs 45 pts. Yes, that's a one, and a forty five. Do you really need hours of playtesting to see something's wrong?
TheKbob wrote: The word-of-mouth rumor mill states that internal management teams feels like play-testing isn't necessary. That the writers should do it correctly the first time.
Problem is, they're not totally wrong.
Today's "broken armies" are not made of über-complex multiple interactions between buffs/debuffs à la Warmachine. It's not even close to the good old hilariously powerful Herohammer combos. Because most often than not, there's no combo at all. It's just about spamming six flyers, twelve Serpents...
We're not talking about complex combos or slight over/undercosts here and there, but about major balance issues.
Just ask any SoB player about Celestians from the infamous WDex. Or even more hilarious: preachers.
Spoiler:
You though Ripper Swarms were useless? Come on.
A Preacher is a regular IG grunt, with the regular carboard jacket and a (undervolted) laser pointer. Allow him to give a modest CC boost to his unit *if* you're stupid enough willing to waste one of your precious Faith Points on him instead of other units and *if* you're lucky enough to pass the Faith Test. Remember, you're denying useful buffs to other units to give a modest melee boost to one unit in an army that's only marginally better than IG in close combat (basic human in power armour vs basic human in flak vest...)
Give your preacher a Rosarius. That's right, regular human statline, T3/W1 + Rosarius. Oh, I'm slightly unfair here, he's got +1A / +1I (still has S3/WS3...)
1 preacher costs 45 pts. Yes, that's a one, and a forty five. Do you really need hours of playtesting to see something's wrong?
Or that a Penitent Engine costs 85 points or that a Forgefiend and Riptide are just five points off or so.
Ok, so Mark Bolger was only one example, but has GW given us any reason to think they don't feel this way? Answer: no. They have not given us any reason to think otherwise.
nosferatu1001 wrote: : talk to the actual people who make the game. They make themselves fairly well available, and really are interesting people to talk to.
Best sarcasm award goes to....wait....you were being serious?
To be fair - I've met jervis and thought he was a very pleasant guy to chat to. Even did a q&a for us a few years ago.
I have friends whose names appear in the special thanks section of the codices. There are 'feelers' put out - gw don't always listen, but they do look for 'some' external input. Maybe it's not enough, or maybe there is too much 'push' from elsewhere in the company, or the design team is often stuck with a deadline and a design brief that they just adhere to, rather than creative freedom.
Very interesting to talk to.
I would to know exactly *how* 1-man stores are a great concept. Perhaps I'm missing something with all that fat in my head?
nosferatu1001 wrote: : talk to the actual people who make the game. They make themselves fairly well available, and really are interesting people to talk to.
Best sarcasm award goes to....wait....you were being serious?
Yes, because I find basing my opinions on multiple real life experiences, such as the ones I had today, much much better than taking one idiots responses and extrapolating out from a single data point. But hey, don't let "facts" or "logic" or even a passing nod to "balance" get in the way of another good anti-GW rant!
Next up: GW eat babies! A rumour said so!
So you provide a rumor that lacks the details to contradict my own and then further go on to post a statement that we cannot believe any rumor. It's funny that I've heard what I've heard in two different stores now that have zero overlap from what I've seen. It could be false and simply stemmed from the current condition of the game and business practices of the company. As Azrael put it, which is better, that they aren't testing or that this is the quality of product we get after play-testing? Ask yourself which truly is worse.
And while you're doing that, please ask your in-house friends what the points cost is for my Grey Knight Vindicators and Whirlwinds. I'm still waiting for that after they put them in the FAQs. Because test or not, we have definitive evidence that they aren't proof reading. Oh, and if you don't like the facts of the situation and rational discussion of them, I suggest you remove yourself from these discussions. These anti-Games Workshop topics arrive solely because of their own actions, remember this. You're defending the company that said, in a court of law, that the hobby is buying their product.
TheKbob wrote: The word-of-mouth rumor mill states that internal management teams feels like play-testing isn't necessary. That the writers should do it correctly the first time. Playing games is something you do off the clock, not on it. Given the break-neck speed of the current releases, one could imagine they wouldn't have adequate time to play test at all. The recent FAQ release and how slipshod it still continues to be would lean towards this concept.
That's really quite sad. I mean, pick up any FFG40KRPG book (we need a shorter acronym for that...). Every single one has a legion of play-testers. As for "off the clock", well they need to outsource their play testing. You want mistakes found? You send it to a bunch of people who've never read it before. Fresh eyes, woods for the trees and all that - they get results. I mean I consider myself pretty diligent in this arena, and have (professionally) proof-read other books, but even I miss stuff so the more eyes the better.
Of course GW won't do that, because they're so determined to keep their iron curtain of secrecy up that it's to the detriment of everything else. This means that any "testing" they do is done in an echo-camber between the people who wrote the rules. x Infinity.
azreal13 wrote: A worse thought than "GW don't play test" is "GW actually try to play test quite hard"
That's really quite sad. I mean, pick up any FFG40KRPG book (we need a shorter acronym for that...). Every single one has a legion of play-testers. As for "off the clock", well they need to outsource their play testing. You want mistakes found? You send it to a bunch of people who've never read it before. Fresh eyes, woods for the trees and all that - they get results. I mean I consider myself pretty diligent in this arena, and have (professionally) proof-read other books, but even I miss stuff so the more eyes the better.
Of course GW won't do that, because they're so determined to keep their iron curtain of secrecy up that it's to the detriment of everything else. x Infinity.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
azreal13 wrote: A worse thought than "GW don't play test" is "GW actually try to play test quite hard"
That's... actually worse, yes. Frightening.
As I said, it's a rumor, but your addition is the summary of the matter. They are either not play-testing and we're getting a terrible product or play-testing and we're getting a terrible product.
Yonan wrote: You pay less for exactly the same sales, duh! If the neckbeards are inconvenienced they'll just wait at the door until the staff member comes back.
Yes. 'Cause this "internet" thing is just a fad, and no one will go home and order stuff "online". That's a myth. No one does that.
I hope you're aware that "reductio ad absurdum" generally means you make the other person's argument look absurd and not that you make yourself look absurd.
2) Rewriting rules and changing point vaules to move product, with out play testing doesn't mean they care about the rules. Just, that they care about selling more models.
The word-of-mouth rumor mill states that internal management teams feels like play-testing isn't necessary. That the writers should do it correctly the first time. Playing games is something you do off the clock, not on it. Given the break-neck speed of the current releases, one could imagine they wouldn't have adequate time to play test at all. The recent FAQ release and how slipshod it still continues to be would lean towards this concept.
We can only connect the dots from reasoning based on what we see on the outside. I'd love for the book to be written in 20 years on "what happened behind the scenes at Nottingham".
Which just goes to show that they don't understand their own company at all. Or how to do business in general...
Testing and verifying the quality of your product is an integral part of being an manufacture.
But then again, they probably couldn't care less. Given their rather low opinion of their own customers, it's not really surprising that they thought they could get away with doing no testing.
The word of mouth is also complete bollocks, as usual.
Game Friday. From two close friends in the studio, the rules team writes rules, then plays them in a Friday. So, nope. Try again, maybe not listening to every rumour that confirms your viewpoint next time. Really question these things...
So word of mouth is bollocks and yet I'm supposed to trust what you're saying? As in, word of mouth...
I hope you can see the irony yourself.
In any case, I'm quite happy to believe the original rumour. The sorry state of the current rules would certainly suggest that they've been pushed out the door way earlier than planed and with very little play testing or forethought.
As for "Game Friday", please don't make me laugh.
Firstly, that actually seems to confirm the rumour that testing is done off the clock.
Secondly, for a game this complex, that's absolutely laughable. To really get to grips with this game you'd need a large public beta-test phase. A few thousand games a week for, say, six months or so might allow you to get to grips with the core issues. It would be utterly stupid to think that you could play test a game like this in the course of a few Fridays.
Bottom line is that Games Workshop has a horrible history with quality control lately. FineCast was so bad that they've now tried to bury that word again. And the rules are so shoddy as to make me wonder if they play test them at all.
Accolade wrote: I would to know exactly *how* 1-man stores are a great concept. Perhaps I'm missing something with all that fat in my head?
You pay less for exactly the same sales, duh! If the neckbeards are inconvenienced they'll just wait at the door until the staff member comes back.
That fits GW's short term view on life. I was buying stuff from my local GW (mostly paints and stuff that I don't like ordering online), right up until a few months back I had to wait 20 minutes to buy a couple of pots of paint because the 1 store manager had a couple of people who got there before me and needed more attention than me. I haven't bought anything from them since, if I have to wait 20 minutes to buy something I might as well drive the 5 minutes further to the FLGS down the road.
Don't get me wrong azrael - I've heard first hand some of the insider playtesting stories, and gw doesn't seem to rate it highly at all. Some of the stories just had me shaking my head with their lack of professionalism.
Similarly, I don't disbelieve the corporate attitude that holds garners in contempt. I think its likely. But jervis was a nice guy when I met him. this was at the start of fifth though. So the company has changed since then, and not for the better.
Here are Games Workshop's most basic financial results of annual turnover and profit, converted to constant currency 2013 (meaning I have made adjustments for UK average price inflation.) The original figures came from GW's annual reports.
Column 1 is the year. Col. 2 is the turnover in millions of GBP. Col. 3 is the profit in millions of GBP. Remember that GW's financial year runs from the start of June to the end of May the next year, so the 2003 report reflects sales from mid 2002 to mid 2003.
We see the LoTR Boom in 2003, peaking in 2004 (the last film was released in Dec 2003).
In 2005 to 2008 they suffer the burst of the LoTR bubble and turnover declines rapidly. In two years they make an actual loss.
In 2009 the 5th edition of 40K feeds into increased sales (my interpretation -- price increases must have helped too) and the cost cutting efficiency drive starts to take effect, increasing profits.
From 2009 to 2013 turnover is fairly flat, but profits are very good.
Remember there is lots that is not shown in these figures. For instance the effect of foreign exchange fluctuations. The GBP declined considerably in 2008 to 2009, and remained weak until mid-2013. This helped GW by making their overseas sales more valuable. I have not tried at all to work out the effect of this, and it is concealed in the figures.
Column 1 is the year. Col. 2 is the turnover in millions of GBP. Col. 3 is the profit in millions of GBP. Remember that GW's financial year runs from the start of June to the end of May the next year, so the 2003 report reflects sales from mid 2002 to mid 2003.
Kilkrazy wrote: From 2009 to 2013 turnover is fairly flat, but profits are very good.
I'd disagree with this. Profits are flat despite price increases and aggressive cost cutting (which GW brags about in their own reports) during that time, which means that GW is working really hard just to break even compared to the previous year. This pretty strongly implies that GW's sales aren't in very good shape, and there are going to be some serious problems once they run out of ways to make the business run more efficiently.
Column 1 is the year. Col. 2 is the turnover in millions of GBP. Col. 3 is the profit in millions of GBP. Remember that GW's financial year runs from the start of June to the end of May the next year, so the 2003 report reflects sales from mid 2002 to mid 2003.
Annoyingly, these figures are telling GW they're doing good. :C
Those figures are.... very much not the whole picture.
While yes, that probably is telling GW they are doing it right, there is mounting evidence that they have lost a massive amount of sales in the last 12 months or so. Their mid year report clearly ruffled their feathers. The guys over at Painting Buddha (the guy responsible for the Future of Games Workshop articles, if you haven 't read them go google that before discussing anything here) where saying that they where hearing that GW stores across Europe where struggling to make 50% of the sales they where this time last year. Someone (I forget who) was saying in Dakka Discussions a month or so back that their FLGS (and presumably others) was being offered discounts on next years stock if they bought it in this financial year. Then there was the release of 7th ed the week before the end of financial year.
Whatever those numbers say GW know they have a problem. Whether or not they know how to fix it is a whole different issue though.
Kilkrazy wrote: Well their profits in the past few years have been as good or better than during the LoTR boom years.
They haven't. £14.3m in 2003 is the equivalent of £19.7m today. Their profits are dopping in actual terms and this is despite prices rising several times inflation and with an extremely heavy cost cutting scheme.
And this is all in the context of their market increasing by double digits each year.
Column 1 is the year. Col. 2 is the turnover in millions of GBP. Col. 3 is the profit in millions of GBP. Remember that GW's financial year runs from the start of June to the end of May the next year, so the 2003 report reflects sales from mid 2002 to mid 2003.
Annoyingly, these figures are telling GW they're doing good. :C
Those figures are.... very much not the whole picture.
While yes, that probably is telling GW they are doing it right, there is mounting evidence that they have lost a massive amount of sales in the last 12 months or so. Their mid year report clearly ruffled their feathers. The guys over at Painting Buddha (the guy responsible for the Future of Games Workshop articles, if you haven 't read them go google that before discussing anything here) where saying that they where hearing that GW stores across Europe where struggling to make 50% of the sales they where this time last year. Someone (I forget who) was saying in Dakka Discussions a month or so back that their FLGS (and presumably others) was being offered discounts on next years stock if they bought it in this financial year. Then there was the release of 7th ed the week before the end of financial year.
Whatever those numbers say GW know they have a problem. Whether or not they know how to fix it is a whole different issue though.
Not the whole picture indeed...
Considering the number of price-hikes we've seen, it's worrying that their turnover is largely static. And considering the aggressive campaign to cut costs, it's worrying that their profit is still largely static.
What this indicates to me is a steadily declining unit-sales. In short, Games Workshop is loosing customers and have only been kept in the black through price-hikes, cost-cuts, and royalties.
I suspect that what we saw in the mid year report was the indication that they're still losing customers (and at a frightening rate, these days) but is now unable to cut much further as they've already gutted their own retail chain. The premature launch of 7. edition 40K and the rapid pace of releases (with attendant fall in quality) further proves the point. And now, it seems, they've finally woken up and smelled the ashes of all the bridges they've burned behind them.
Considering the number of price-hikes we've seen, it's worrying that their turnover is largely static. And considering the aggressive campaign to cut costs, it's worrying that their profit is still largely static.
What this indicates to me is a steadily declining unit-sales. In short, Games Workshop is loosing customers and have only been kept in the black through price-hikes, cost-cuts, and royalties.
I suspect that what we saw in the mid year report was the indication that they're still losing customers (and at a frightening rate, these days) but is now unable to cut much further as they've already gutted their own retail chain. The premature launch of 7. edition 40K and the rapid pace of releases (with attendant fall in quality) further proves the point. And now, it seems, they've finally woken up and smelled the ashes of all the bridges they've burned behind them.
The full report will certainly be interesting.
Remember that it's possible that they may have remained steady for H2 due to major sellers like Knights and possibly 7th. I think the report will be flat (apart from H1) at best, but even that is a really bad sign for them with such a huge release.
The Shadow wrote: GW will start going under when another wargaming company opens high street stores across the UK and US. Not before.
How would this have any impact on whether GW is profitable or not? Competition would drive them down faster, sure, but a company doesn't magically stay profitable because it has no retail competition.
The Shadow wrote: GW will start going under when another wargaming company opens high street stores across the UK and US. Not before.
They have absolutely no need to. Other companies understand the important role that the FLGS plays in bringing in new players and moving product. And there ARE FLGSs opening across the road from GW stores (well, it's usually the other way around) and the GW stores are the ones struggling to get people through the doors while FLGs thrive.
*Edit, I see from your flag your from the UK. You see this kind of argument a lot from people there who have GW stores on every corner and no FLGSs left. The rest of the world is VERY different. GW stores play no role here anymore other than interesting a few new players, not nearly enough to keep them profitable.
Daedleh wrote: Remember that it's possible that they may have remained steady for H2 due to major sellers like Knights and possibly 7th. I think the report will be flat (apart from H1) at best, but even that is a really bad sign for them with such a huge release.
True.
However, going by the anecdotal evidence I've heard, 7. edition isn't selling very well. So I'm expecting the second half to be below expectations as well.
But since we can't really know how many books have been sold (especially directly from Games Workshop) I guess we'll have to wait another week before seeing just how bad it is.
Remember that it's possible that they may have remained steady for H2 due to major sellers like Knights and possibly 7th. I think the report will be flat (apart from H1) at best, but even that is a really bad sign for them with such a huge release.
But also remember that the first half report included the period where they re-launched the Space Marines codex, their biggest selling line bar none.
If they launched a new SM codex and got such an abysmal half year report, I can't see how a single large kit and 1 week of new edition sales will make that much of a difference.
Musashi363 wrote: Ok, so Mark Bolger was only one example, but has GW given us any reason to think they don't feel this way? Answer: no. They have not given us any reason to think otherwise.
Was Mark Bolger really an example? He didn't actually work for GW at the time he posted that comment; word is that he was "let go." The fact that his one post has been copied dozens if not hundreds of times demonstrates, if anything, that there isn't any substantial contempt for GW customers - if there were, we'd have verified example from people actually employed by the company.
In fact, there are several people here at dakkadakka who've spoken to designers, and got their input and rationales for working the way they do. Those quotes don't seem to echo around dakkadakka forever, because the notion that most of the people at GW love the game, and their job, isn't as news-worthy.
The truth is mundane: GW is a pretty successful company with some talented people, which is unfortunately a Plc, and therefore beset by terrible short-termism. Seriously, I've been there, at a Plc, where when you hit December, you have to square April's budget and hit target.GW sounds even worse because it's helmed by an ex-taxman, hardly the visionary needed to push a creative company forward. It's a horrible, stupid, capitalist system - but it's not unique to GW.
Musashi363 wrote: Ok, so Mark Bolger was only one example, but has GW given us any reason to think they don't feel this way? Answer: no. They have not given us any reason to think otherwise.
Was Mark Bolger really an example? He didn't actually work for GW at the time he posted that comment; word is that he was "let go." The fact that his one post has been copied dozens if not hundreds of times demonstrates, if anything, that there isn't any substantial contempt for GW customers - if there were, we'd have verified example from people actually employed by the company.
So he just magically formed this opinion after leaving GW? Erm, no.
There's being an apologist and there's being an apologist. But, damn...
Musashi363 wrote: Ok, so Mark Bolger was only one example, but has GW given us any reason to think they don't feel this way? Answer: no. They have not given us any reason to think otherwise.
Was Mark Bolger really an example? He didn't actually work for GW at the time he posted that comment; word is that he was "let go." The fact that his one post has been copied dozens if not hundreds of times demonstrates, if anything, that there isn't any substantial contempt for GW customers - if there were, we'd have verified example from people actually employed by the company.
So he just magically formed this opinion after leaving GW? Erm, no.
There's being an apologist and there's being an apologist. But, damn...
Was that even confirmed that he left?
I remember that thread in N&R when this happened, one account with about 8 posts behind it was swearing up and down that their local GW redshirt told them he left a while back but at the time his Linkedin profile still listed him as working for GW.
Remember that it's possible that they may have remained steady for H2 due to major sellers like Knights and possibly 7th. I think the report will be flat (apart from H1) at best, but even that is a really bad sign for them with such a huge release.
But also remember that the first half report included the period where they re-launched the Space Marines codex, their biggest selling line bar none.
If they launched a new SM codex and got such an abysmal half year report, I can't see how a single large kit and 1 week of new edition sales will make that much of a difference.
Absolutely true. It could be as bad as people are predicting, on the other hand it might not be *that* bad and be merely flat. I really don't see them making up for H1.
Either way, if they have managed to prop up H2 then it was only by the short term gains of 7th ed and the Knights. They don't have another large release which could bring in that sort of profit for H1 in the next report, even a new edition of WHF would do nothing at this point. If, and IF they have managed to remain level then the report after will be the interesting one.
Kilkrazy wrote: Well their profits in the past few years have been as good or better than during the LoTR boom years.
They haven't. £14.3m in 2003 is the equivalent of £19.7m today. Their profits are dopping in actual terms and this is despite prices rising several times inflation and with an extremely heavy cost cutting scheme.
And this is all in the context of their market increasing by double digits each year.
The figures I gave are already corrected to 2013 constant value. They did not make 14.3 million in 2003.
Kilkrazy wrote: Well their profits in the past few years have been as good or better than during the LoTR boom years.
They haven't. £14.3m in 2003 is the equivalent of £19.7m today. Their profits are dopping in actual terms and this is despite prices rising several times inflation and with an extremely heavy cost cutting scheme.
And this is all in the context of their market increasing by double digits each year.
The figures I gave are already corrected to 2013 constant value. They did not make 14.3 million in 2003.
Gotcha, I stand corrected
However, the point of price rises being much, much higher than inflation meaning that there has been a significant drop in sales in that time still stands
The Shadow wrote: GW will start going under when another wargaming company opens high street stores across the UK and US. Not before.
They have absolutely no need to. Other companies understand the important role that the FLGS plays in bringing in new players and moving product. And there ARE FLGSs opening across the road from GW stores (well, it's usually the other way around) and the GW stores are the ones struggling to get people through the doors while FLGs thrive.
*Edit, I see from your flag your from the UK. You see this kind of argument a lot from people there who have GW stores on every corner and no FLGSs left. The rest of the world is VERY different. GW stores play no role here anymore other than interesting a few new players, not nearly enough to keep them profitable.
Just because here in the UK things are "different" to the rest of the world does not make the influx of new games any different. Sure the FLGS might be the gaming engine in the US, in the UK its quite odd, we have many clubs dotted around and a few FLGS. However, the few FLGS i've been to i have not been overly impressed with them, at least with GW you can guarantee you will get swooped on and asked how you are doing etc. Even if you've had pot luck and the shop is actually open and not "on lunch" .
Its the UK club network that changes attitudes and perceptions, GW is hanging in there still, but many dropped GW as their main game and have branched out. Mostly to warmahordes but the other games do have a following not to mention the historicals are being given an airing. But that is my experience, so take it at that.
Personal preferences have a lot to do with it. However make no mistake the UK isn't the GW bastion it once was, it only seems that way from the high street chain.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Game Friday. From two close friends in the studio, the rules team writes rules, then plays them in a Friday. So, nope. Try again, maybe not listening to every rumour that confirms your viewpoint next time. Really question these things...
Uhh... this verifies the rumour. That if there's testing, it's not on the clock, but on their own time with a small circle of volunteers.
We have taken away the shovel yet he continues to dig...
Sigh. Yay for reading comprehension failure! Where did I say it was after work? Anywhere? No, that was just an assumption made....and a bad one.
It is on the clock. As in, that IS Friday. All of it.
You have taken nothing away, as you have absolutely no clue.
To those saying I was saying you should trust me. In that very sentence I was saying to question it, from places you trust. Not trusting me - I trust myself, Im not saying you should. And yes, you DO have a chance to talk to the designers - games days, open days, etc. Its just not as easy as a forum, or facebook etc. Could they do better? Of course. I have not stated the opposite, I am not making that claim. However those of you on the anti-GW at all costs side tend to not be able to see anything but black and white on this topic, when as ever it is somewhere in the middle. Gain clarity on where they are - not the singlesided view, but a balanced one - and then you can have meaningful debate, as you have a known starting point.
What I AM saying is that constantly repeating the headline grabbing rumours is a fairly terrible way to argue a point - again, question sources. If you want to know about the design process, actually make an effort to find out for yourself. Constant reliance on, and repetition of, only the most headline grabbing rumours that coincide with your impression of the company, is a poor way to convince anyone. It just becomes an exercise, like this thread, in back slapping, in calling others stupid, and other inanities that bring little value to a discussion.
To repeat - I am not, in anyway, saying GW is perfect at anything they do. In fact, they are bad at a fair few things - coherent communication being one, and their approach to rules development being in-house only. However its not ALL bad either - speak to the designers. HEAR their enthusiasm for the setting, the concept, and try to understand how they want the game to operate.
It doesnt have to fit your requirements, it just has to fit enough peoples requirements.
Okay so they take all of a Friday to "playtest". Assuming they work 8 hours (do you work 8 hours a day in the UK?) that's what, two games of 40k? I don't believe for a minute that they actually playtest by setting up specific conditions to test e.g. what if X unit with ability A is within 12" of Y unit with ability B. If anything they playtest by actually having a game and probably using whatever new unit is coming out, which doesn't show you a lot.
Not really - as I said, its the issue with marking your own work. You know it too well, and so while its ok for an initial cut of a rule (i.e. does it make any kind of sense) , but is bad for objective clarity.
Wayne - "usual" is 7.5, 7 if in london, but thats widely ignored, especially with creatives, management etc. My friends often work crazy hours at GW, which is partly that they love their job.
I dont converse too much on that - I dont really want to potentially put them in an awkward situation with work, given GW being quite so secrecy-sensitive these last few years.
One is, anyway, on the fluff / backrgound side, and while he has contact with rules, isnt so involved in the development - he knows what they do, and some, but isnt involved day to day.
The other is in rules writing, but also has an external comms role which, I understand, is quite new - so fingers crossed that WILL mean some form of improvement. They are, however, cursed with a long memory; they have been burnt by people breaking agreements before, leading to leaked information whcih CAN be damaging, given their release cycle (all at once vs drip feed updates inflicts very different buying habits) , and so they are reluctant to engage.
WayneTheGame wrote: I don't believe for a minute that they actually playtest by setting up specific conditions to test e.g. what if X unit with ability A is within 12" of Y unit with ability B.
I would be very happy if 40k suffered from that kind of balance issue...
Most of the time, we're not even talking about combos, but things like "unit A is hilariously overpowered, unit B is grossly overcosted, let's take plenty of A, and leave B on the shelf". It almost always worked that way, from the leafblower to the Scythe/Drake/Stormraven spams to the serpent lists and the daemon bucket-o'-dice.
The only recent exception that actually involved some kind of complex interactions was the TauDar alliance.
Kilkrazy wrote: Well their profits in the past few years have been as good or better than during the LoTR boom years.
They haven't. £14.3m in 2003 is the equivalent of £19.7m today. ... ...
And this is all in the context of their market increasing by double digits each year.
The figures I gave are already corrected to 2013 constant value. They did not make 14.3 million in 2003.
Gotcha, I stand corrected
However, the point of price rises being much, much higher than inflation meaning that there has been a significant drop in sales in that time still stands
I agree with you.
GW have aggressively increased prices over the past five years or so. For example, codexes cost double now what they did in 2012. This has caused vocal discontent among the user base, and revenue has remained fairly steady.
The implication is that if prices went up 50% and revenues stayed level, the company actually sold 66% as many kits as before, or lost 1/3rd of its users (or a mixture of both). These figures are made up for the sake of illustration. I have no idea what the overall price increase has been, though in some areas it obviously has been considerable.
On constant revenue, profits have increased due to efficiency savings, such the one man shop policy, and dropping metal and the bitz service.
The danger for GW is if they have underestimated the importance of veterans in recruitment of new players and/or in long tail sales. They can survive buy selling expensive armies to new players only as long as new players are attracted to the game.
I dont keep up with miniature gaming outside of GW, which I consider myself a part-timer at just that, but it seems to me, that the quality of GW's art and products, and the ability to produce so much in plastic, tells me they have to be the envy of most gaming companies. The only two companies I think that are even close in scraping up any market share that GW doesnt have would be the makers of Warmachine/Hordes, and Flames of War. I know there are many many other gaming companies out there, but I am just considering the part of the market that produces miniatures that you build and paint.
GW might have financial issues from time to time, as everyone else, but geez they have been around for decades now. Some of their products, like the Eldar Falcon and Space Marine Land Raider, are unchanged yet cost quite a lot of money. Those molds have been around forever. I know GW has to refresh its products here and there, but they seem to get a lot out of most of the designs, with resources to put towards some pretty ambitious designs, like the Wraithknights and Riptides. I dont know of any gaming company that can put out gaming models of that size. And I am sure those molds will eventually pay themselves off, if they havent already, and remain around as is for years for come.
While I disagree with GWs practices sometimes, they seem to have a business model that seems to work. They have managed to keep people interested in their games for quite some time now. Thats impressive.
I expect them to remain around for a long time until someone else can put out something that knocks 40k off its perch, which I dont see happening. A lot of games have come and gone, yet GW is still putting out great products, not just getting by.
Due to the high retail costs, the ROI on the older kits, where the sprues were damned expensive, was suprisingly long - the old plastic rhino was essentially only in profit the year before it was replaced.
Not everyone likes GW stores, however they do act, in the UK at least, as a very good introduction to the world of wargaming, and in the UK at least companies would struggle to "recruit" sufficiently well otherwise. That may only be temporary, but companies can struggle very quickly if they lose momentum.
I expect them to remain around for a long time until someone else can put out something that knocks 40k off its perch, which I dont see happening. A lot of games have come and gone, yet GW is still putting out great products, not just getting by.
So you don't have any experience with miniature games outside GW, yet still make the claim that GW products are "great"?
Because they really, really aren't. Apart from the technical quality of their plastic kits, everything else that they produce is pretty much below par for the rest of the industry.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
nosferatu1001 wrote: I dont converse too much on that - I dont really want to potentially put them in an awkward situation with work, given GW being quite so secrecy-sensitive these last few years.
One is, anyway, on the fluff / backrgound side, and while he has contact with rules, isnt so involved in the development - he knows what they do, and some, but isnt involved day to day.
The other is in rules writing, but also has an external comms role which, I understand, is quite new - so fingers crossed that WILL mean some form of improvement. They are, however, cursed with a long memory; they have been burnt by people breaking agreements before, leading to leaked information whcih CAN be damaging, given their release cycle (all at once vs drip feed updates inflicts very different buying habits) , and so they are reluctant to engage.
So you have a friend in GW's rules writing but the issue of the perception of GW rules outside the development studio never came up in conversation? Right...
The other is in rules writing, but also has an external comms role which, I understand, is quite new - so fingers crossed that WILL mean some form of improvement. They are, however, cursed with a long memory; they have been burnt by people breaking agreements before, leading to leaked information whcih CAN be damaging, given their release cycle (all at once vs drip feed updates inflicts very different buying habits) , and so they are reluctant to engage.
So you have a friend in GW's rules writing but the issue of the perception of GW rules outside the development studio never came up in conversation? Right...
Or it did come up, but he's choosing not to share with random spods on the internet. Where things are never blown out of proportion or distorted.
I expect them to remain around for a long time until someone else can put out something that knocks 40k off its perch, which I dont see happening. A lot of games have come and gone, yet GW is still putting out great products, not just getting by.
So you don't have any experience with miniature games outside GW, yet still make the claim that GW products are "great"?
Because they really, really aren't. Apart from the technical quality of their plastic kits, everything else that they produce is pretty much below par for the rest of the industry.
Compared to who? Like what? Maybe the rules people have an issue with, but I have never seen anyone pick up a rulebook or codex and say, "wow this artwork sucks". All their large books are hardcover, while everyone else is softcover. Looks to me like better quality. Even though it comes with a higher price.
The other is in rules writing, but also has an external comms role which, I understand, is quite new - so fingers crossed that WILL mean some form of improvement. They are, however, cursed with a long memory; they have been burnt by people breaking agreements before, leading to leaked information whcih CAN be damaging, given their release cycle (all at once vs drip feed updates inflicts very different buying habits) , and so they are reluctant to engage.
So you have a friend in GW's rules writing but the issue of the perception of GW rules outside the development studio never came up in conversation? Right...
Or it did come up, but he's choosing not to share with random spods on the internet. Where things are never blown out of proportion or distorted.
And it's not like his friend is going to just come out and say that monkey randomly banging on a keyboard could write better rules than he's paid a salary to...
agnosto wrote: And it's not like his friend is going to just come out and say that monkey randomly banging on a keyboard could write better rules than he's paid a salary to...
KTG17 wrote:Compared to who? Like what? Maybe the rules people have an issue with, but I have never seen anyone pick up a rulebook or codex and say, "wow this artwork sucks". All their large books are hardcover, while everyone else is softcover. Looks to me like better quality. Even though it comes with a higher price.
You obviously haven't been paying much attention then...
Battlefront does most of their books in hardcover. Privateer Press does all their books in hardcover (though they tend to switch to softcover for reprints) Spartan Games do many of their books in hardcover.
Need I go on?
And the real kicker is that these books are typically of vastly better value - both in raw page-count and in the actual content - than what Games Workshop does. Better priced too...
As for artwork... What artwork? The Ork Codex pretty much did away with that. Because just taking a picture is much cheaper than hiring an actual artist. It looks absolutely terrible! And as for the rest of the codex (and Heaven will know there isn't much left once you've stripped out all the pictures), it's badly laid out and entirely uninspired.
Quite besides, equating hardcover with quality is highly debatable. I'd certainly rather carry a slim softcover around when gaming than a monstrous hardcover. But each to his own...
PP gives you the choice of hard and soft covers. You can order either on their site though my local store usually just carries the soft cover.
The RPG books come in hardcover though and have higher page count, stuffed with information and fluff (which is fantastic btw) and has great artwork. And I'm not even getting into the quality of the rules.
Ork dex had photos of the units, not artwork. That's a step backwards and the cover of 7th looks hideous.
Those figures are.... very much not the whole picture.
While yes, that probably is telling GW they are doing it right, there is mounting evidence that they have lost a massive amount of sales in the last 12 months or so. Their mid year report clearly ruffled their feathers. The guys over at Painting Buddha (the guy responsible for the Future of Games Workshop articles, if you haven 't read them go google that before discussing anything here) where saying that they where hearing that GW stores across Europe where struggling to make 50% of the sales they where this time last year..
Ah, the internet.
Where something some fella on a website heard is better evidence than company results (adjusted for inflation).
Where if someone doesn'twork for a company, that's exactly the same as if they do work for a company, and if you say being employed and not being employed are different states, you're an 'apologist.'
No confirmation bias here. No sirree.
A shame, 'cos the issue of whether GW will survive is actually an intriguing one.
Those figures are.... very much not the whole picture.
While yes, that probably is telling GW they are doing it right, there is mounting evidence that they have lost a massive amount of sales in the last 12 months or so. Their mid year report clearly ruffled their feathers. The guys over at Painting Buddha (the guy responsible for the Future of Games Workshop articles, if you haven 't read them go google that before discussing anything here) where saying that they where hearing that GW stores across Europe where struggling to make 50% of the sales they where this time last year..
Ah, the internet.
Where something some fella on a website heard is better evidence than company results (adjusted for inflation).
Where if someone doesn'twork for a company, that's exactly the same as if they do work for a company, and if you say being employed and not being employed are different states, you're an 'apologist.'
No confirmation bias here. No sirree.
A shame, 'cos the issue of whether GW will survive is actually an intriguing one.
Whereas a current GW employee DID state in a court of law that GW customers hobby is buying GW product and several other less flattering characterizations of their customer base.
Phantomviper- I don't know you from Adam, and have nothing to prove to you, or anyone else on this site. What I discuss with my friends is unlikely to be any of your business. Hence why I have told you how you can actually do something constructive, and more verifiable, instead.
But then, casting aspersions on other peoples characters while behind a keyboard is SO much more useful instead. Good going!
The other is in rules writing, but also has an external comms role which, I understand, is quite new - so fingers crossed that WILL mean some form of improvement. They are, however, cursed with a long memory; they have been burnt by people breaking agreements before, leading to leaked information whcih CAN be damaging, given their release cycle (all at once vs drip feed updates inflicts very different buying habits) , and so they are reluctant to engage.
So you have a friend in GW's rules writing but the issue of the perception of GW rules outside the development studio never came up in conversation? Right...
Or it did come up, but he's choosing not to share with random spods on the internet. Where things are never blown out of proportion or distorted.
Then nosferatu1001 shouldn't try to make an appeal to authority argument by using that "I have friends in GW" line.
Also, you misquoted, I was quoting nosferatu1001 in that post, not KTG17.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Phantomviper- I don't know you from Adam, and have nothing to prove to you, or anyone else on this site. What I discuss with my friends is unlikely to be any of your business. Hence why I have told you how you can actually do something constructive, and more verifiable, instead.
But then, casting aspersions on other peoples characters while behind a keyboard is SO much more useful instead. Good going!
You brought it up in this conversation relating to GW's inner workings. Now you're saying that it's none of our business?
nosferatu1001 wrote: Phantomviper- I don't know you from Adam, and have nothing to prove to you, or anyone else on this site. What I discuss with my friends is unlikely to be any of your business. Hence why I have told you how you can actually do something constructive, and more verifiable, instead.
But then, casting aspersions on other peoples characters while behind a keyboard is SO much more useful instead. Good going!
No, you don't have anything to prove. But all the posts that I've read from you so far only consist of your personal attacks on other posters without any shred of evidence to back up your claims, including this latest strings of appeal to authority, so don't try and act all upset when people call you on it.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Phantomviper- I don't know you from Adam, and have nothing to prove to you, or anyone else on this site. What I discuss with my friends is unlikely to be any of your business. Hence why I have told you how you can actually do something constructive, and more verifiable, instead.
But then, casting aspersions on other peoples characters while behind a keyboard is SO much more useful instead. Good going!
You brought it up in this conversation relating to GW's inner workings. Now you're saying that it's none of our business?
Which is why I suspect its pure unadulterated male bovine excrement.
So he just magically formed this opinion after leaving GW? Erm, no.
There's being an apologist and there's being an apologist. But, damn...
To play devils advocate though, an individual's views do not necessarily reflect those of their company. Standard corporate spiel. One guy going off on a rant is not necessarily an accurate indicator for what way the wind is blowing.
Now, I don't doubt there is a tsr-esque contempt for gamers going on amongst some sections of the company, nor do I dismiss the possibility it is the majority view. But We simply do not know.
But what i do know is that I have met jervis. And he was a very pleseant guy. I got no sense of this utter hatred of gamers wafting from him. He's just a guy, at the end of the day, who enjoys rolling dice and not taking his wargames too seriously. I'm sympathetic to this 'vision' that they want their game to be, despite my personal disagreement with its merits. It's old school. It's dated. It's probably obselete. But it's nice to believe in it, nonetheless.
My mates have also met allessio (he came to our con a few years ago with his game shurro) and Andy chambers. Again, no sense of utter hatred from them either.
I am friends with some of the (admittedly, former) playtesters. And they were a very professional crew. (But for what it's worth, gw didn't always care to listen to them!)Even though a lot of this external playtesting was canned at the start of fifth due to leaks etc., they still found time to call some of these playtesters and 'feel out' some ideas with them as to what direction they should take with subsequent codices. No, they didn't get any say in the actual 'crunch' of the rules design, but did have a say in overall direction, themes and ideas. Whether gw implemented them well or not - well, that's another story!
Now, to take this in another direction - and again, playing devils advocate - this idea of holding gamers in some form of contempt. Let's look in the mirror for a second. It's not always a nice reflection. Let's face it -whilst a lot of us are just ordinary folks, there are plenty gamers that are simply obnoxious self entitled brats with terrible hygiene and even worse social manners. We've all seen the 'tfg' threads and 'worst opponent ever' threads. They exist. Imagine dealing with them every day? Imagine constantly seeing your name put through the mud on the internet by them every day. Every decision scrutinised, and every action analysed and deemed irrevocably wrong at best, and terrible at worst, often by people who have never met you, or worked in the industry, but are still armchair experts. Any second, third or fourth hand rumour, whether right or wrong, embellished and repeated. People who are great at tearing things down, but never offer anything constructive, that whine and moan at every action instead of just getting on with it, people who hurl the vilest disgusting insults at you (google Matt ward hate...) from the anonymous safety if the internet. think about it. Think about being on the other end. Just for a second. Now bear in mind, I'm not saying this is the attitude presented by 'the community' either. Maybe not even by anyone here. But I can imagine this 'fanmail' exists. I can imagine facing it, that it's extremely disheartening. Especially when a lot it it isn't necessarily you're doing (you're given a design brief, and a deadline, not creative freedom. You are a cog in a machine, nothing more). Like I said - disheartening. Is it any wonder that you would go into siege mode, and have issues with the community? Bear in mind, this is just a thought exercise, nothing more.
So he just magically formed this opinion after leaving GW? Erm, no.
There's being an apologist and there's being an apologist. But, damn...
To play devils advocate though, an individual's views do not necessarily reflect those of their company. Standard corporate spiel. One guy going off on a rant is not necessarily an accurate indicator for what way the wind is blowing.
Now, I don't doubt there is a tsr-esque contempt for gamers going on amongst some sections of the company, nor do I dismiss the possibility it is the majority view. But We simply do not know.
But what i do know is that I have met jervis. And he was a very pleseant guy. I got no sense of this utter hatred of gamers wafting from him. He's just a guy, at the end of the day, who enjoys rolling dice and not taking his wargames too seriously. I'm sympathetic to this 'vision' that they want their game to be, despite my personal disagreement with its merits. It's old school. It's dated. It's probably obselete. But it's nice to believe in it, nonetheless.
My mates have also met allessio (he came to our con a few years ago with his game shurro) and Andy chambers. Again, no sense of utter hatred from them either.
I am friends with some of the (admittedly, former) playtesters. And they were a very professional crew. (But for what it's worth, gw didn't always care to listen to them!)Even though a lot of this external playtesting was canned at the start of fifth due to leaks etc., they still found time to call some of these playtesters and 'feel out' some ideas with them as to what direction they should take with subsequent codices. No, they didn't get any say in the actual 'crunch' of the rules design, but did have a say in overall direction, themes and ideas. Whether gw implemented them well or not - well, that's another story!
Now, to take this in another direction - and again, playing devils advocate - this idea of holding gamers in some form of contempt. Let's look in the mirror for a second. It's not always a nice reflection. Let's face it -whilst a lot of us are just ordinary folks, there are plenty gamers that are simply obnoxious self entitled brats with terrible hygiene and even worse social manners. We've all seen the 'tfg' threads and 'worst opponent ever' threads. They exist. Imagine dealing with them every day? Imagine constantly seeing your name put through the mud on the internet by them every day. Every decision scrutinised, and every action analysed and deemed irrevocably wrong at best, and terrible at worst, often by people who have never met you, or worked in the industry, but are still armchair experts. Any second, third or fourth hand rumour, whether right or wrong, embellished and repeated. People who are great at tearing things down, but never offer anything constructive, that whine and moan at every action instead of just getting on with it, people who hurl the vilest disgusting insults at you (google Matt ward hate...) from the anonymous safety if the internet. think about it. Think about being on the other end. Just for a second. Now bear in mind, I'm not saying this is the attitude presented by 'the community' either. Maybe not even by anyone here. But I can imagine this 'fanmail' exists. I can imagine facing it, that it's extremely disheartening. Especially when a lot it it isn't necessarily you're doing (you're given a design brief, and a deadline, not creative freedom. You are a cog in a machine, nothing more). Like I said - disheartening. Is it any wonder that you would go into siege mode, and have issues with the community? Bear in mind, this is just a thought exercise, nothing more.
You make several great points and you're probably right.
However, I can't say whether the contempt for their players is widespread, but I will say that they do nothing to counter that opinion. They don't communicate with their customers and that let's frustration and negative rumors spread without hindrance. It's like ignoring a fire without trying to put it out. Yeah, it's unpleasant, but you have to do it. Every other company does.
I'm a sci-fantasy author/illustrator that goes to conventions all the time. There's always TFG that wants to make a panel all about them instead of the authors speaking. You learn to deal with it. You have to because its part of the business.
You make several great points and you're probably right.
However, I can't say whether the contempt for their players is widespread, but I will say that they do nothing to counter that opinion...
I think you've captured this in a nutshell.
really, there is no evidence that GW hates us. However, they don't talk to us. That in itself is A Bad Thing.
Anyone whose phone calls or emails aren't returned, will often assume the other party must hate them - it's basic psychology. And it is indeed Games Workshop's duty to make its users like them, not vice versa. In that respect they've undoubtedly failed, and this is bad for their business. I was always impressed by how both Warhammer Wolrd and GW digital interacted with their customers on facebook; only an idiot would think that getting rid of their interaction would be a Good Thing.
But remember, never ascribe to malice, that which is more easily explained by laziness or incompetence.
To be fair though the internet contempt is brought about by themselves; now I'm sure most of the designers (maybe not Mat Ward ) are nice people, and most of the discontent is aimed at Kirby at all in senior management. After all, the designers aren't absolute - if their boss or boss's boss says they have to rush things out, then they have to rush things out. Nobody hates the designers (except maybe Mat Ward for his fluff-wrecking nonsense ).
However, the designers are the face of the company, so to speak. Their names are attached to the product, they are the ones who write the articles in White Dwarf extolling the virtues of the game and defending their design. Let's take for example the oft-maligned "forge the narrative" excuse. I've seen this spouted out by Jervis in White Dwarf, so even if he doesn't really believe it (which Jervis probably does, being old school) he's giving the impression that he does, and that carries the stigma of it.
Most of the hatred are things out of the design studio's control. Things like constant price hikes while reducing value, pushing out untested and poorly worded rules, pulling all social media, hostility against independent retailers and bitz-sellers, all of these things are a management problem, not the studio. I highly doubt that Jervis or anyone (including Mat Ward ) is saying that GW should stop people selling GW products online, or that Chapterhouse are thieves who should be put out of business. They might even think those decisions are silly, but they are doing what they are told and paid to do.
I would, in actuality, take the current design team and replace senior management. I don't think any of them are truly bad (maybe Mat Ward ), but again they are the ones who bear the brunt of everything. If they can't playtest a codex because management wants it released in 2 weeks, there's nothing they can do about it but they're going to get all the "GW can't balance X" hate because they have to push it out.
I swear, I see nosferatu1001 arguing with people more than anyone else.
I got to know Jervis via email back in the Epic A Playtesting days, and I always thought he was a good guy, with the exception that at the end of the day, he was going to develop Epic A in his own vision and that was that. Some will say Epic A is the greatest game ever, others will disagree. To me though, he was convinced on creating a system based on a new idea rather than looking into the past and seeing what made the most popular version of the game so great and go from there (Epic Space Marine/Titan Legions). The result? Well where is Epic A now? Or any of the Specialist Games? GW shut them down since they werent profitable enough.
I think in the case of game designers, they care more about what other designers think than the gamers. In other words, they would be more happier or disappointed with games being reviewed by guys in the biz, versus the fans. Its a creative process, and they want to show their creativeness. Sometimes you can be overly creative and just make a mess.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Phantomviper- I don't know you from Adam, and have nothing to prove to you, or anyone else on this site. What I discuss with my friends is unlikely to be any of your business. Hence why I have told you how you can actually do something constructive, and more verifiable, instead.
But then, casting aspersions on other peoples characters while behind a keyboard is SO much more useful instead. Good going!
No, you don't have anything to prove. But all the posts that I've read from you so far only consist of your personal attacks on other posters without any shred of evidence to back up your claims, including this latest strings of appeal to authority, so don't try and act all upset when people call you on it.
1) see the triangle of friendship? Use it if you feel the need.
2) I never claimed to have evidence , just my personal experiences which I proffered to counter the gak headed rumours that were being spouted unopposed. Please, cite evidence for the rumours you posted, or maybe, just maybe,..
3) learn what an appeal to authority fallacy actually is, before claiming it incorrectly as you did here.
I never stated "I know x person in authority therefore I am right", just pointed out that from what I know, the rumour isn't true (and not even close to true) but that people should actually question these things themselves, instead of simply repeating them. I said that more than once, just to make sure.even gave you tips as to how you could do so!
nosferatu1001 wrote: Phantomviper- I don't know you from Adam, and have nothing to prove to you, or anyone else on this site. What I discuss with my friends is unlikely to be any of your business. Hence why I have told you how you can actually do something constructive, and more verifiable, instead.
But then, casting aspersions on other peoples characters while behind a keyboard is SO much more useful instead. Good going!
You brought it up in this conversation relating to GW's inner workings. Now you're saying that it's none of our business?
Which is why I suspect its pure unadulterated male bovine excrement.
...and reported. Again, suspect what you like, but your opinion is valueless to me. I am secure enough in who, and what I know, and who IS actually important to me and that I care a great deal for.
If people want to talk evidence then we have a screencap of GW upper managment abusing customers and clearly having no respect for them. We also have a court transcript saying our favorite part of the hobby is buying things.
That is all we can be sure about.
Anything else is circumstantial or anecdotal. The only REAL evidence we have points to GW having no respect tor their customers.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Phantomviper- I don't know you from Adam, and have nothing to prove to you, or anyone else on this site. What I discuss with my friends is unlikely to be any of your business. Hence why I have told you how you can actually do something constructive, and more verifiable, instead.
But then, casting aspersions on other peoples characters while behind a keyboard is SO much more useful instead. Good going!
You brought it up in this conversation relating to GW's inner workings. Now you're saying that it's none of our business?
Which is why I suspect its pure unadulterated male bovine excrement.
...and reported. Again, suspect what you like, but your opinion is valueless to me. I am secure enough in who, and what I know, and who IS actually important to me and that I care a great deal for.
Will you ever add content?
Yup can't have someone call your posts BS, while you call BS on other people posts, wouldn't be fair right.
The only so called proof in the thread, the court case and from the rules they put out, point to not caring about the rules and have no respect for their player base. Everything else, your post included are rumor and hearsay, only backed up by "I know it to be". Say what every you want, your just a guy on the internet and... well are not you the one who pointed out what people say online with out some thing to back it up are.
I think the underlying issue is that GW don't respect us in any way, which leads to them assuming we will buy whatever they make rather than trying to make things we want to buy.
jonolikespie wrote: I think the underlying issue is that GW don't respect us in any way, which leads to them assuming we will buy whatever they make rather than trying to make things we want to buy.
But how serious is that lack of respect? I mean, complaining about how much customers suck is an ancient and sacred tradition among everyone who has to deal with customers, so a "gamers suck" rant is exactly what I'd expect to see occasionally. Yeah, letting it out in public is something you never do (and the idiot should be punished for it), but the rant itself is nothing unusual. Similarly, the "they love buying stuff" thing wasn't an honest opinion, it was a calculated strategy for winning a trial. GW wanted to establish how much their customers love Genuine™ Games™ Workshop™ Products™ to convince the court that they were suffering real financial damage from the third-party sales, so of course they're going to emphasize the buying/collecting aspect instead of the rest of the hobby.
The real concern here would be if GW actually bases their decisions on these opinions instead of understanding that they're just talk. For example, was the death of Games Day because GW genuinely thought that their customers love buying stuff above all else and would keep coming to an event even after all that was left was the GW store, or was it a case of budget problems forcing them to cut and cut until nothing was left? Does GW really dismiss the value of older customers playing a game "for kids" and ignore that market, or do some people just get frustrated occasionally when they have to deal with the worst TFGs? And we can't really answer those questions with any real confidence.
So, You're allowed to call out BS when you think it is so, yet we're not allowed to? Okay... What we have here is a classic case of hypocrite.
Wrong.
I stated that I know the rumour to be false. I also said how you can confirm the rumour, or not, yourself, as opposed to blindly following it like some do here.
Hypocritical is not demanding the same of the initial rumour.
nosferatu1001 wrote: I stated that I know the rumour to be false. I also said how you can confirm the rumour, or not, yourself, as opposed to blindly following it like some do here.
Except your "proof" that the rumor is false is just as unsupported as the claim that GW don't playtest at all. If you're going to complain about "blindly following" unconfirmed rumors then you need to post some evidence for your own rumors.
Hypocritical is not demanding the same of the initial rumour.
It's not hypocritical at all because the initial rumor is supported very well by the rules that GW publishes. They're full of ambiguous rules and major balance problems that even basic playtesting should have caught, so the most obvious conclusion is that if GW does playtest at all it is laughably inadequate. They might play some games every friday, but screwing around and giving yourself a three-day weekend every week is not the same thing as serious playtesting.
Kilkrazy wrote: BTW I understand that GW have stopped putting the name of the designer as the author of codexes. It is credited to The Studio or something like that.
Yet another example of GW burying their head in the sand. They saw the outcry against Ward for the fluff train wreck we got in the Grey Knight Codex, and the further outcry against Newcrons. Yet, like with social media, their forum and every other criticism they receive, rather than dealing with it they just ran away from it. Now it's "the studio design team". As someone who's had rules I've written published in multiple books, having your name in the credits is pretty damned awesome. Being reduced down to "a team of people who wrote some stuff" isn't cool.
jonolikespie wrote: I think the underlying issue is that GW don't respect us in any way, which leads to them assuming we will buy whatever they make rather than trying to make things we want to buy.
No need to assume that. Kirby said exactly that - They'll buy what we make.
Kilkrazy wrote: BTW I understand that GW have stopped putting the name of the designer as the author of codexes. It is credited to The Studio or something like that.
Yet another example of GW burying their head in the sand. They saw the outcry against Ward for the fluff train wreck we got in the Grey Knight Codex, and the further outcry against Newcrons. Yet, like with social media, their forum and every other criticism they receive, rather than dealing with it they just ran away from it. Now it's "the studio design team". As someone who's had rules I've written published in multiple books, having your name in the credits is pretty damned awesome. Being reduced down to "a team of people who wrote some stuff" isn't cool.
...
It also forms part of your portfolio. That is why everyone on films and TV crews is so keen to be credited.
Mmmm... I usually like to talk about how GW is going to go under, but have been staying out of this thread. There's a lot of opinion here, very little substance.
It's always interesting to see what they are doing with their IP and who they are licensing it to. I am starting to see what they are up to with their digital strategy now, where they are licensing IP to smaller developers. Look at the numbers around some of the recent releases:
I know there are other titles on the horizon, which are not as limited as these, but I have to ask: why bother? DOW2 sold more than 6.5 million units. Space Marine sold over 2 million. GW makes more off bigger games even if they flop. I can't see the upside in retreads of Plants versus Zombies / Starcraft.
I guess this is to say, it's clear they are going somewhere, but I don't see any driver at the wheel. If they were counting on brand loyalty to drive sales, this isn't it. Looking down the road a bit: how are they going to get people to sign up for an MMO when they can't get people to download a $7 app? It doesn't bode well...
Games Workshop have licensed the Warhammer/40K backgrounds for a number of games over the years, but the income from licensing and novels has always been a small proportion of their total revenue -- the icing on the cake, not the cake itself, so to speak.
This would seem to indicate that the games (rules and models) are the key driver of sales. In other words, it seems doubtful if licensing would succeed without the core game sales.
techsoldaten wrote: I know there are other titles on the horizon, which are not as limited as these, but I have to ask: why bother? DOW2 sold more than 6.5 million units. Space Marine sold over 2 million. GW makes more off bigger games even if they flop. I can't see the upside in retreads of Plants versus Zombies / Starcraft.
It entirely depends on how much they cost to develop and how much of the licensing money GW actually get off the game. It's entirely possible for a game to sell millions of units and still not recoup the development and advertising costs. It's entirely possible for a game to only sell in the thousands but make a profit if it was only made by a couple of dudes in their basement.
Depending how the contract is written, GW would be paid a base fee for licensing the b/g and artwork, then a royalty per copy sold. These fees would normally be scheduled throughout the life of the project
Of course if the game is a huge expensive to make flop, or the publisher has other financial difficulties, he may be unable to meet his obligations.
The small games are lower risk for everyone, but looking at the Storm of Vengeance it may not be worth it. Selling 20K copies at $2.99 is worth only about £18,000 base revenue, let alone profit. You would need to launch thousands of games each year like that to start making any visible difference to the bottom line.
Kilkrazy wrote: BTW I understand that GW have stopped putting the name of the designer as the author of codexes. It is credited to The Studio or something like that.
I am surprised they did this for so long to be honest. I know typically books includes the author(s), and in some cases, the authors themselves where kind of their own characters, but truthfully it seems like such a 90s thing, and given GWs approach to putting the company before the individual, it makes sense for them to do.
But I see the pros and cons of it. The writer loses credit for what he developed, yet is spared the criticism. But at the end of the day, GW owns it, so why not put its own name down.
I dont know anything about the newer writers either... all the guys I knew from the earlier days are no longer with the company.
techsoldaten wrote: I know there are other titles on the horizon, which are not as limited as these, but I have to ask: why bother?
Three simple words:
Short.
Term.
Profits.
Everything is geared towards the next report, and everything is geared towards maximum short-term income with minimum effort. That's why they're throwing the license at whoever will take it. They collect the fee, and the company makes whatever crappy shovelware mobile title they want to. The number next to licensing fees goes up, and they get to - if you'll excuse the expression - hide the decline.
Kilkrazy wrote: Depending how the contract is written, GW would be paid a base fee for licensing the b/g and artwork, then a royalty per copy sold. These fees would normally be scheduled throughout the life of the project
Of course if the game is a huge expensive to make flop, or the publisher has other financial difficulties, he may be unable to meet his obligations.
The small games are lower risk for everyone, but looking at the Storm of Vengeance it may not be worth it. Selling 20K copies at $2.99 is worth only about £18,000 base revenue, let alone profit. You would need to launch thousands of games each year like that to start making any visible difference to the bottom line.
It is, to me at least, plausible that GW view this sort of thing as advertising rather than a money maker (which still actually makes them money, because we know GW don't like spending.)
Judging by the frequency people of a certain age cite DOW as their introduction to wargaming, I'd suggest that videogamers are a relatively fertile hunting ground for new player recruitment, and this sort of thing puts the IP in front of them with little to no risk.
Then if, by sheer luck, the next 40K IOS title is the next Angry Birds or Candy Crush Saga, then I'm sure the management will all pat themselves on the back and declare themselves visionary geniuses.
techsoldaten wrote: I know there are other titles on the horizon, which are not as limited as these, but I have to ask: why bother?
Three simple words:
Short. Term. Profits.
Everything is geared towards the next report, and everything is geared towards maximum short-term income with minimum effort. That's why they're throwing the license at whoever will take it. They collect the fee, and the company makes whatever crappy shovelware mobile title they want to. The number next to licensing fees goes up, and they get to - if you'll excuse the expression - hide the decline.
Except they are not making any money. This isn't worth the time it took a Lawyer to draft an agreement. At these levels of sales, they have likely lost money just in man-hours. And it diminishes the brand to be engaging in minor commercialization efforts such as these. They look cheap.
Kilkrazy wrote: Depending how the contract is written, GW would be paid a base fee for licensing the b/g and artwork, then a royalty per copy sold. These fees would normally be scheduled throughout the life of the project
Of course if the game is a huge expensive to make flop, or the publisher has other financial difficulties, he may be unable to meet his obligations.
The small games are lower risk for everyone, but looking at the Storm of Vengeance it may not be worth it. Selling 20K copies at $2.99 is worth only about £18,000 base revenue, let alone profit. You would need to launch thousands of games each year like that to start making any visible difference to the bottom line.
It is, to me at least, plausible that GW view this sort of thing as advertising rather than a money maker (which still actually makes them money, because we know GW don't like spending.)
Judging by the frequency people of a certain age cite DOW as their introduction to wargaming, I'd suggest that videogamers are a relatively fertile hunting ground for new player recruitment, and this sort of thing puts the IP in front of them with little to no risk.
Then if, by sheer luck, the next 40K IOS title is the next Angry Birds or Candy Crush Saga, then I'm sure the management will all pat themselves on the back and declare themselves visionary geniuses.
That would be true if these games reflected on Games Workshop in a positive light. These games do not, they make ownership look like gibbering idiots on a drool binge in a crowded train. They are driving their brand into the ground over trivial digital releases and do not seem to understand how bad this is for their business.
GW is a company that makes games. The reason people choose to play GW games, instead of, say, Plants versus Zombies, is that they are expecting something that's clever and operates above a first grade comprehension level. It's not very hard to understand that point - we all made the switch from Candyland to the Grimdark somewhere along the way. They are supposed to be this form of entertainment you graduate to, and it's the company's purpose for existing.
Creating games at operate at the level of Plants versus Zombies, or Candyland, or Monopoly, or whatever, is something that takes away from this purpose for existing. This is what we call diminishing the brand, it is something that shows the brand is less important than we thought in the first place.
The message people are getting right now is that GAMES Workshop doesn't really know how to make games. The company isn't really equipped to do anything new or novel, they are in the business of making clones of other people's games. It doesn't matter if these games are being released by a third party or not, these are the things people see when they search for 40k.
I think this is bad news for GW, and it's the sort of thing that is going to come back and hurt them in the next few years. Crow on as much as they want about it, but eBook sales are not a digital strategy that will scale with the future. They need to have people working out their online gaming strategy and clearly do not.
The real issue in my mind is that GW has lost its focus. They want to sell models. Not games and rules. As such they don't give the rules the attention it deserves. But it still takes man hours to put together what they do have and as such they jack the price of the mini to compensate. But now your pricing the mini out of reach as well.
I have yet to buy a hardback codex because the content of the book is not worth what they are charging. If the book was 30$ I'd probably have bought three of them by now.
And its not like I don't spend money. I spend probably 2000 a year on hobby/gaming stuff. GW hasn't seen a penny of that in three years because the value of the GW hobby has greatly deminished. And it was the hobby that got me into it in the first place.
Minor correction.... GW views itself as a company that makes models. The rules are incidental.
Your second sentence is an unsupported assertion. GW clearly regard themselves as a maker of models first and foremost, but the pricetag they put on their rules suggest that they are far from "incidental".
It's a revenue stream. GW doesn't care if you ever play a single game of 40K with their models, so long as you keep buying models and sticking them on a shelf.
Kilkrazy wrote: I don't care what GW's opinion of me may or may not be. I care that the products they put out should be ones I want to buy and play with.
BTW I understand that GW have stopped putting the name of the designer as the author of codexes. It is credited to The Studio or something like that.
Personally I think if GW lowered prices it would lower complaining across the board. Most people agree the models are awesome but overpriced. If the cost were lower I think people would also stop complaining about game balance.
Kilkrazy wrote: I don't care what GW's opinion of me may or may not be. I care that the products they put out should be ones I want to buy and play with.
BTW I understand that GW have stopped putting the name of the designer as the author of codexes. It is credited to The Studio or something like that.
Personally I think if GW lowered prices it would lower complaining across the board. Most people agree the models are awesome but overpriced. If the cost were lower I think people would also stop complaining about game balance.
I certainly wouldn't feel like my wallet was lifted by a petty thug if the rulebooks are around the $20-$30 mark...
Kilkrazy wrote: I don't care what GW's opinion of me may or may not be. I care that the products they put out should be ones I want to buy and play with.
BTW I understand that GW have stopped putting the name of the designer as the author of codexes. It is credited to The Studio or something like that.
Personally I think if GW lowered prices it would lower complaining across the board. Most people agree the models are awesome but overpriced. If the cost were lower I think people would also stop complaining about game balance.
I certainly wouldn't feel like my wallet was lifted by a petty thug if the rulebooks are around the $20-$30 mark...
It's easier to expect more from a company when they're asking for so much money. If they didn't charge so much we wouldn't expect so much, and as a result there would be less complaining.
Peregrine wrote: But how serious is that lack of respect? I mean, complaining about how much customers suck is an ancient and sacred tradition among everyone who has to deal with customers, so a "gamers suck" rant is exactly what I'd expect to see occasionally. Yeah, letting it out in public is something you never do (and the idiot should be punished for it), but the rant itself is nothing unusual.
That's the thing, though. Making that rant public is incredibly unprofessional, and in many companies would have scored him a serious paddlin'.
Letting your customers think that they're anything other than a treasured asset is bad for business.
Similarly, the "they love buying stuff" thing wasn't an honest opinion, it was a calculated strategy for winning a trial. GW wanted to establish how much their customers love Genuine™ Games™ Workshop™ Products™ to convince the court that they were suffering real financial damage from the third-party sales, so of course they're going to emphasize the buying/collecting aspect instead of the rest of the hobby.
Which, again, shows a lack of professionalism. The impact of making such a statement should have been considered before they made it.
Then again, a more professional company wouldn't have been involved in that court case in the first place.
The real concern here would be if GW actually bases their decisions on these opinions instead of understanding that they're just talk. For example, was the death of Games Day because GW genuinely thought that their customers love buying stuff above all else and would keep coming to an event even after all that was left was the GW store, or was it a case of budget problems forcing them to cut and cut until nothing was left?
Or somebody realising that when you have just established in court that your primary focus is on selling 'collectible art' to gullible idiots rather than on the making and playing of games, calling your premier event 'Games Day' might be an issue...?
It's easier to expect more from a company when they're asking for so much money. If they didn't charge so much we wouldn't expect so much, and as a result there would be less complaining.
Ehhh, that's a stretch. Quite a big one, when you consider the cost of rules from other companies and their level of quality.
GW's rules would have to be free for me not to take issue with balance problems and poor wording (and even then, I'd expect more than their current offering).
If a company is going to charge anything for a product, I expect quality, and frankly, the company producing should expect quality of themselves.
If 7th was $30 for the rules (in a smaller rulebook), I'd still have the same issues, complaints, and gripes. The only difference would be that I wouldn't be taking issue with the price in addition to the other stuff.
It's easier to expect more from a company when they're asking for so much money. If they didn't charge so much we wouldn't expect so much, and as a result there would be less complaining.
Ehhh, that's a stretch. Quite a big one, when you consider the cost of rules from other companies and their level of quality.
GW's rules would have to be free for me not to take issue with balance problems and poor wording (and even then, I'd expect more than their current offering).
If a company is going to charge anything for a product, I expect quality, and frankly, the company producing should expect quality of themselves.
If 7th was $30 for the rules (in a smaller rulebook), I'd still have the same issues, complaints, and gripes. The only difference would be that I wouldn't be taking issue with the price in addition to the other stuff.
You might still not like it, but would you complain less?
To my enjoyment of a wargame in my off time, very little. When I'm rolling dice, I don't reflect on how much I spent on the rules, I get frustrated by having to flip through five sections to find out there's no rule covering a situation that arose mid-game.
Price is important for many things; how the game plays is not one of them. I'd be more concerned with how it affects the barrier to entry to get new friends into the game. Or how many armies I plan on owning. Or once again, how my wife reacts when I tell her I bought a bunch of games on Steam and a Leman Russ tank.
About GW making a 40K game like Plant vs Zombies and it is devaluing the product.
I thought GW for this very reason doesn't have sales so it doesn't devalue it's product. So why would they make these games that make 40K look childish and foolish? If this doesn't devalue a product, I can't see how sales would then.
Davor wrote: About GW making a 40K game like Plant vs Zombies and it is devaluing the product.
I thought GW for this very reason doesn't have sales so it doesn't devalue it's product. So why would they make these games that make 40K look childish and foolish? If this doesn't devalue a product, I can't see how sales would then.
I think desire for short-term profit is superseding concerns over product devaluation.
That, and crappy mobile games don't impact the slogan "We sell the best miniatures in the world!"
insaniak wrote: That's the thing, though. Making that rant public is incredibly unprofessional, and in many companies would have scored him a serious paddlin'.
Letting your customers think that they're anything other than a treasured asset is bad for business.
But we don't know that he didn't get a serous paddlin'. In fact people can't even agree on whether or not he was still employed by GW when he made that post. IIRC in the original discussion he appeared to be looking for a job, so it's entirely possible that his attitude got him fired.
Which, again, shows a lack of professionalism. The impact of making such a statement should have been considered before they made it.
What impact? That a few random people on a forum might laugh at how stupid it is? Most of GW's customers have probably never even heard of the case, and certainly aren't studying all of the details of what GW said. So that leaves the impact on the court case, where GW is trying to convince a bunch of non-gamers that their sales have suffered as a result of third-party manufacturers using their IP.
Then again, a more professional company wouldn't have been involved in that court case in the first place.
I agree, getting involved at all was a questionable decision and GW's handling of the case was hilariously incompetent, but that's an entirely different subject. Having a zealous and incompetent legal department doesn't have anything to do with how the rest of the company sees their customers, how game design decisions are made, etc.
Or somebody realising that when you have just established in court that your primary focus is on selling 'collectible art' to gullible idiots rather than on the making and playing of games, calling your premier event 'Games Day' might be an issue...?
I seriously doubt that had anything to do with it. GD was declining since before GW made that statement in court, the official end this year was just GW putting a dying event out of its misery. It's like the White Dwarf re-branding, the current brand name is associated with a terrible product, so re-launch it under a new name and hope you get some customers back.
Now, it's entirely possible that the reason for the decline was GW's belief that the game aspect doesn't matter as long as there's a store to buy GW products, and that would certainly be a bad sign for the long-term future of the company. But we don't know that this was the explanation, rather than simply having to cut the budget every year or other reasons that don't involve GW believing their own propaganda.
techsoldaten wrote: Except they are not making any money. This isn't worth the time it took a Lawyer to draft an agreement. At these levels of sales, they have likely lost money just in man-hours. And it diminishes the brand to be engaging in minor commercialization efforts such as these. They look cheap.
Irrelevant. If the game doesn't sell it's not the end of the world for them. They already have their money.
GW is not going under. Quite the opposite I think. I don't know whether their change in business strategy is down to their 'relatively' new ownership or not (I suspect it is), but what I do know is that they are using the same strategies that movies, and to a greater extent video games are using whereby they are maximising profits by following the advice of a bunch of guys that make mathematical calculations on how to best increase profits with no regard whatsoever for the games/IP/fans/customers.
Movies have devolved over the past few decades whereby the age rating of movies in cinemas has notably dropped now unless they are the occasional gratuitous piece of bs to sate the psychotics in our society. Why? Because someone calculated they can make more money and affect more minds if movies have a lower rating cos they will attract a bigger audience.
Much more closely tied to what GW is doing however is the behaviour of the video game market. Just watch this link which I think is hitting the nail on the fething head and every time he says 'extra characters' or 'patch' replace that with the words 'codex supplement' and 'downloadable bullgak' with 'digital editions'.
Last time I came on this forum I didn't like how people where acting so I stopped coming here for a while. But since I see GW releaseing the ugliset peice of gak flyer cash-in for my Wolves I felt the need to come back. Yeah they dont teleport so a flyer makes sense, but.............. There are loads of flyers they could give us access to and me personally I would prefer a universal outflank. This is a trick to make money. Anyway, even if you dont agree with that, watch the link and replace words as instructed. I have my models, GW isnt getting anything more from me. Please do not try to circumvent the swear filter and please note rule 1 - MDS
Psy-Titan wrote: GW is not going under. Quite the opposite I think.
Contrary to all evidence?
GW isn't going under, but they're certainly not going up either. They're plateauing. They are raising prices and cutting costs... and going no where but sideways.
Random Dude wrote: You might still not like it, but would you complain less?
I think the reverse would be a lot more true - higher quality rules would reduce complaints about prices. If there was a solid game with minimal problems that were fixed quickly when found I would complain less about price as the value of the models and books would have increased substantially.
Decreasing the price would satisfy the modelers and reduce their complaints substantially but the gamers still wouldn't have a fun game to play so those complaints would still stand.
Psy-Titan wrote: GW is not going under. Quite the opposite I think.
Contrary to all evidence?
GW isn't going under, but they're certainly not going up either. They're plateauing. They are raising prices and cutting costs... and going no where but sideways.
Yeah, I'm in full agreement with HBMC on this. The prices raises to models (both literal and through lowering model counts in boxes) coupled with a new MO on revenue generation on rules (i.e. books with shorter lifespans, broken up into more books) seems to have staved off any significant decline in revenue. However, I feel these techniques are rather short-sided and are hiding the diminishing population of 40k players/collectors. Many 40k fans may be die-hard fans that never give up the hobby- heck, more power to them! But I think the anecdotes of less 40k players in stores are systemic of a wargaming population that is less interested in playing a tabletop game with such a high cost.
You do realize the word filter is there for a reason right? Mostly because people with titles and certain abilities on the forum take note when people use them or intentionally bypass the filter.
No, but it does stop Dakka auto correcting them smart ass.
You do realize the word filter is there for a reason right? Mostly because people with titles and certain abilities on the forum take note when people use them or intentionally bypass the filter.
If someone is breaking rule 1 blatantly, it would be helpful if folks just click on the olde circle of friendship, and generally avoid quoting the questionable content. No issues with anyone, just passing on that thought. Cheers - MDS
Psy-Titan wrote: GW is not going under. Quite the opposite I think. I don't know whether their change in business strategy is down to their 'relatively' new ownership or not (I suspect it is), but what I do know is that they are using the same strategies that movies, and to a greater extent video games are using whereby they are maximising profits by following the advice of a bunch of guys that make mathematical calculations on how to best increase profits with no regard whatsoever for the games/IP/fans/customers.
Movies have devolved over the past few decades whereby the age rating of movies in cinemas has notably dropped now unless they are the occasional gratuitous piece of bs to sate the psychotics in our society. Why? Because someone calculated they can make more money and affect more minds if movies have a lower rating cos they will attract a bigger audience.
Much more closely tied to what GW is doing however is the behaviour of the video game market. Just watch this link which I think is hitting the nail on the fething head and every time he says 'extra characters' or 'patch' replace that with the words 'codex supplement' and 'downloadable bullgak' with 'digital editions'.
Last time I came on this forum I didn't like how people where acting so I stopped coming here for a while. But since I see GW releaseing the ugliset peice of gak flyer cash-in for my Wolves I felt the need to come back. Yeah they dont teleport so a flyer makes sense, but.............. There are loads of flyers they could give us access to and me personally I would prefer a universal outflank. This is a trick to make money. Anyway, even if you dont agree with that, watch the link and replace words as instructed. I have my models, GW isnt getting anything more from me. Please do not try to circumvent the swear filter and please note rule 1 - MDS
Seriously though everyone is entitled to their opinion, if you want people to listen to it, consider it and take it seriously, you really need to ensure that it is well informed.
Psy-Titan wrote: Movies have devolved over the past few decades whereby the age rating of movies in cinemas has notably dropped now unless they are the occasional gratuitous piece of bs to sate the psychotics in our society. Why? Because someone calculated they can make more money and affect more minds if movies have a lower rating cos they will attract a bigger audience.
Uh, no. There are more movies coming out with a PG rating than there were a decade ago because there's more stuff being allowed into a PG-rated movie that would have pushed it into an M rating a decade ago.
And that really has nothing to do with what GW are doing.
The shift to DLC is something that has been discussed a lot, and it's had a mixed reception from gamers. Whether or not it is working for GW financially is something that remains to be seen. It would need to be working spectacularly well to make up for the number of codex sales I suspect that they have lost from the shift to more expensive hardcovers.
Kilkrazy wrote: I don't care what GW's opinion of me may or may not be. I care that the products they put out should be ones I want to buy and play with.
BTW I understand that GW have stopped putting the name of the designer as the author of codexes. It is credited to The Studio or something like that.
Personally I think if GW lowered prices it would lower complaining across the board. Most people agree the models are awesome but overpriced. If the cost were lower I think people would also stop complaining about game balance.
Yah know, you can try and sell me a genitalia flavored portable confection, but no matter if it's $85 or $30 or $10, I probably still am not going to enjoy myself. While the price is asinine, the quality is by far the biggest offender. The value is right behind it, with codices containing one unit and calling that a $50 game book. Keep your confections.
Kilkrazy wrote: I don't care what GW's opinion of me may or may not be. I care that the products they put out should be ones I want to buy and play with.
BTW I understand that GW have stopped putting the name of the designer as the author of codexes. It is credited to The Studio or something like that.
Apparently the writers are embarrassed to admit that they wrote such terrible books.
techsoldaten wrote: Except they are not making any money. This isn't worth the time it took a Lawyer to draft an agreement. At these levels of sales, they have likely lost money just in man-hours. And it diminishes the brand to be engaging in minor commercialization efforts such as these. They look cheap.
Irrelevant. If the game doesn't sell it's not the end of the world for them. They already have their money.
Relevant. They went from a company that was selling 6.5 million units of a game that (briefly) topped global sales charts, to one that lets it's IP be used in crappy iPad apps that make them ridiculously small amounts of money. In the near future, they are counting on an MMO to restore them to some presence in the digital space, which didn't work out too well the last time they tried it (Warhammer AOR).
The point I was trying to make is that, gee, is GW going under? We live in a world where computer games make more money than movies, and franchises like Star Wars enjoy worldwide recognition. For that matter, lesser brands like Power Rangers, Beyblades, and GoBots enjoy worldwide recognition. It's not exactly hard or expensive to stand up a brand, merchandise it, and create new revenue streams off derivative products.
One would think GW might find something like this desirable, all the pieces are in place and have been since the early 90s. The fact they don't speaks volumes. When they say they are a model company, that's a fancy way of stating leadership doesn't know the first thing about the world outside Nottingham.
It's possible to go under by treading water, eventually you run out of things to do. That's what we are seeing now, in this late-stage corporate concern where prices go up without much actual creative output. Sure, the models look nicer than they did a few years ago, but that's a byproduct of advances in 3d modelling that anyone can take advantage of. It's a matter of time before someone comes along with a better mousetrap, or digital finally overwhelms their market, or their consumers finally get wise and move onto other things. There are so many risks to standing still these days, it's not even funny.
GW execs should be on the phone with MTV about distributing an Aeon Flux style cartoon to create credibility and awareness. They should be printing cheap marines in Vietnam and getting them into Happy Meals to create ubiquity. They should be sponsoring skaters in the X-Games on Inquisition decks to create recognition. They should have creative teams flying to Canada to tell Relic to get DOW III rolling and build the franchise they started. They should be converting buses into Thunderhawks to roll into Comicons with the 40k Experience to increase the weird factor. They should be talking to Warner Brothers about getting a movie in the works, just to get a mention in Variety that producers are talking with Sam Rockwell / Channing Tatum as the Force Commander and Rosie O'Donnell as Ghazghkull. They should be getting Alan Moore to say he doesn't like GW and won't work with them, just to make people think they are nasty, while hiring Simon Bisley as an art director.
Hit 2 of the marks on this list, and people won't be able to get enough. Tabletop models becomes the least profitable business unit in about 6 months and Forgeworld gets spun off into a Norweigan holding company allowing them to keep engaging in their 'core' line of business. Disney is suddenly trying to buy them for $2 billion.
Instead, they talk about moats in their annual reports and stand up poor Jervis in the occasional video to mollify the masses over their latest cash grab. Going under or are under?
techsoldaten wrote: Hit 2 of the marks on this list, and people won't be able to get enough. Tabletop models becomes the least profitable business unit in about 6 months and Forgeworld gets spun off into a Norweigan holding company allowing them to keep engaging in their 'core' line of business. Disney is suddenly trying to buy them for $2 billion.
But, from the point of view of their existing customers, is this really any different from going under? Turning the brand into another pile of mass-produced garbage is effectively killing it anyway. Sure, the results for GW's shareholders might be better, but it's not exactly something we should be hoping for.
Kilkrazy wrote: BTW I understand that GW have stopped putting the name of the designer as the author of codexes. It is credited to The Studio or something like that.
Yet another example of GW burying their head in the sand. They saw the outcry against Ward for the fluff train wreck we got in the Grey Knight Codex, and the further outcry against Newcrons. Yet, like with social media, their forum and every other criticism they receive, rather than dealing with it they just ran away from it. Now it's "the studio design team". As someone who's had rules I've written published in multiple books, having your name in the credits is pretty damned awesome. Being reduced down to "a team of people who wrote some stuff" isn't cool.
I knew the person that wrote Clanbook: Ravnos for White Wolf, back in the day.
The editors changed a whole lot of things - and he was pretty much okay with that, it is what editors do. (Plus, they were trying to tighten down what had been a pretty slapdash approach to canon - it became a running joke that Rasputin claimed by so many vampire clans....)
What made him angry was that they also changed his dedication. And worse, changed that dedication to congratulating the White Wolf editing team.... (The original dedicated the book to the folks running the Haven LARP in Portland, Maine.)
So, agreed - that kind of thing really isn't cool.
Yes, but it's not work. It's not something they put a lot of effort into (outside of approving things), and it's certainly not something they need to invest money into (that was THQ's job). It's a "Have fun while we collect the cheques" kinda deal.
Psy-Titan wrote: GW is not going under. Quite the opposite I think.
Contrary to all evidence?
GW isn't going under, but they're certainly not going up either. They're plateauing. They are raising prices and cutting costs... and going no where but sideways.
Yeah, I'm in full agreement with HBMC on this. The prices raises to models (both literal and through lowering model counts in boxes) coupled with a new MO on revenue generation on rules (i.e. books with shorter lifespans, broken up into more books) seems to have staved off any significant decline in revenue. However, I feel these techniques are rather short-sided and are hiding the diminishing population of 40k players/collectors. Many 40k fans may be die-hard fans that never give up the hobby- heck, more power to them! But I think the anecdotes of less 40k players in stores are systemic of a wargaming population that is less interested in playing a tabletop game with such a high cost.
Another thing to consider here as well. Even if sales are flat this next period with the same period last year, GW shot every bullet in their gun to make this happen. Rushed book/ebook releases, half-baked "armies" (IK and MT), and 7th edition only two years after the 6th. That leaves them with what, exactly, for the next year?
A business going sideways is like treading water in the middle of the ocean. You may survive for a time, but eventually your energy is going to be spent and you are going to sink - and when you sink it is going to be fast because you expended all your energy just to stay a float.
I don't know if GW has been okay the last five years because they have been able to stay ahead of the curve by recruiting new players at a rate that matched their churned players. However, I do believe their pricing to value ratio has finally crossed the threshold where that is no longer possible. $30 for one plastic Space Marine Librarian may be plausible for someone already into the HHHobby for a long time, but for someone new looking at the game, it has them laughing at the absurdity and buying another companies products.
This is an observation to why I say it is probably going to end up in outright collapse. Once you can no longer replace lost customers with new customers, it goes down hill very quick. GW also shows every sign that the only business strategy they know how to deal with is continuing to raise prices for those few that remain to try and make up this loss - instead it will have the opposite effect of what they intended.
This is an observation to why I say it is probably going to end up in outright collapse. Once you can no longer replace lost customers with new customers, it goes down hill very quick. GW also shows every sign that the only business strategy they know how to deal with is continuing to raise prices for those few that remain to try and make up this loss - instead it will have the opposite effect of what they intended.
1: it's always repeated as a given that GW only know how to hike prices. But the reality seems to be they're keeping prices steady on older models (eg Ork Stompa) and only increasing on newer models (eg Ork Morkanaut). So the claim that their only business strategy is raising prices is incorrect.
2: It's more accurate to say that their main business strategy is producing more models. As mentioned previously on dakka, by someone who actually spoke to the staff (I know, not as good as second-hand quotes from blogs, or facebook posts by ex-employees), they've purchased tooling for bigger models and recruited more designers.
1: it's always repeated as a given that GW only know how to hike prices. But the reality seems to be they're keeping prices steady on older models (eg Ork Stompa) and only increasing on newer models (eg Ork Morkanaut). So the claim that their only business strategy is raising prices is incorrect.
That is hiking prices, as you just indicated. Here is the issue with the newer model hike strategy they have now adopted. First, they are using it to pass on 70% price hikes in some cases (old Kaskrin vs. new Scions). Second, it really makes their entire pricing strategy look out of whack. $105 for a model half the size of the $115 one? (seems to be a lot of the comment regarding the new Gork/Morknaut). Third, they seem to be pricing each release cycle higher than the last, to the point that everything they released for Orks has people scratching their heads on how they came up with such pricing.
Hivefleet Oblivion wrote: 2: It's more accurate to say that their main business strategy is producing more models. As mentioned previously on dakka, by someone who actually spoke to the staff (I know, not as good as second-hand quotes from blogs, or facebook posts by ex-employees), they've purchased tooling for bigger models and recruited more designers.
Except this is coupled with the first instance above. If selling "new" was their strategy that is one thing, but each "new" release is climbing in price to similar products with each successive release. They are simply using new now to mean it is a time they can implement massive price hikes.
So, I reinforce my initial point - the only strategy they know, is to continue hiking prices until eventually, no one will see the value in their products for the prices charged.
I still think GW are lining up to get 'sold off'. I know there's the whole public-company thing with shares.
But, if they wanted someone to come in and take over, they've demonstrated that they can sell new books and supplements every month, box sets quite regularly, and even computer games based on the IP.
If the new 'owner' wanted to change things around, the groundwork has been laid. They'll be saddled with 7th-ed 40k for a while, but they could work towards a full overhaul in the meantime.
So, how is the Management's pension coming along? Check back when the next yearly report comes out, as I see it happening soon.
If we look at the data from the CHS trial, the issue with stores, the types of products they're releasing, and comments from ex-staff members about product performance over it's lifetime a reasonable conclusion is that they're actively targeting they're remaining fan base to squeeze more profit out of them.
There would be very little point in raising the price on existing products because the number of units they sell is not significant.
Baragash wrote: If we look at the data from the CHS trial, the issue with stores, the types of products they're releasing, and comments from ex-staff members about product performance over it's lifetime a reasonable conclusion is that they're actively targeting they're remaining fan base to squeeze more profit out of them.
There would be very little point in raising the price on existing products because the number of units they sell is not significant.
So GW are raising prices on things they've not even released yet? Also, what's wrong with charging whatever people will pay for a product? GW would be fools not to.
This is an observation to why I say it is probably going to end up in outright collapse. Once you can no longer replace lost customers with new customers, it goes down hill very quick. GW also shows every sign that the only business strategy they know how to deal with is continuing to raise prices for those few that remain to try and make up this loss - instead it will have the opposite effect of what they intended.
1: it's always repeated as a given that GW only know how to hike prices. But the reality seems to be they're keeping prices steady on older models (eg Ork Stompa) and only increasing on newer models (eg Ork Morkanaut). So the claim that their only business strategy is raising prices is incorrect.
2: It's more accurate to say that their main business strategy is producing more models. As mentioned previously on dakka, by someone who actually spoke to the staff (I know, not as good as second-hand quotes from blogs, or facebook posts by ex-employees), they've purchased tooling for bigger models and recruited more designers.
Most prices have gone up, some merely by natural inflation so to speak; the Tau Hammerhead has gone up from £25 to £35 in 10 years, a 37% increase (ignoring VAT) which is not a massive rate of increase.
Other models have inflated very quickly in bursts. The new model Zoanthrope went from £12 to £15 in one go in 2010 -- 2011 (?), and has stayed there since.
As you say, there seems to be a policy now of keeping older models at the same price for a few years, and launching new models at high starting prices. The Knight Titan at £85, for example.
However it is true overall that GW have put up their prices pretty quickly in recent and that has caused a lot of grumbling by veterans.
Book prices have inflated very quickly in recent years. The cost of army books for Fantasy and codexes for 40K was basically doubled by putting them in hard cover.
There is no doubt in my mind that prices have gone beyond the point where people grumble and have started to push people out of The HHHobby and inhibit the recruitment of new players.
This no doubt is helped by the serious erosion of real incomes since 2008.
Baragash wrote: If we look at the data from the CHS trial, the issue with stores, the types of products they're releasing, and comments from ex-staff members about product performance over it's lifetime a reasonable conclusion is that they're actively targeting they're remaining fan base to squeeze more profit out of them.
There would be very little point in raising the price on existing products because the number of units they sell is not significant.
So GW are raising prices on things they've not even released yet? Also, what's wrong with charging whatever people will pay for a product? GW would be fools not to.
There's no intrinsic problem with the concept, and no ethical issues either.
But. GW have been increasing unit prices very much in the recent years, and simultaneously revenue has been going down (lately very dramatically). This means less people are buying stuff from GW.
Again, from a general business perspective, the idea of selling less for more, with a higher profit margin, is good.
But. GW is not a general business. It's a niche business, and a relatively small company that does not have the resources for marketing to bring in new customers. This makes GW much more reliant on repeat customers than other businesses, and due to the social nature of tabletop wargaming, GW's growth and future revenue streams are very reliant on market share. If everyone at your store plays Warmachine, that new guy who wanders in and wants to start playing with mandollies isn't going to pick up GW products, is he?
And, unlike their competition, GW is a public company, which, in addition to tying their hands with regards to short-term growth, makes them unable to contract and re-consolidate around their core products and markets without having their stocks tank, being taken over, and exposing the management to legal action from shareholders.
Remember not just hardcover, but full colour as well. SO a definite quality increase, especially with the shafting they got from some printers on quality (e.g. WoC 7th ed fell apart seemingly in minutes)
Whether you find it worth the extra money or not is up to you - I tend to, as they last a lot longer when handled reasonably poorly, as the ones slung in my bag tend to be...
Baragash wrote: If we look at the data from the CHS trial, the issue with stores, the types of products they're releasing, and comments from ex-staff members about product performance over it's lifetime a reasonable conclusion is that they're actively targeting they're remaining fan base to squeeze more profit out of them.
There would be very little point in raising the price on existing products because the number of units they sell is not significant.
So GW are raising prices on things they've not even released yet? Also, what's wrong with charging whatever people will pay for a product? GW would be fools not to.
There's nothing wrong with it. At least until you reach a point where many will NOT pay that amount in which case the company is a fool for allowing prices to climb that high.
Also, making the most margin on an individual product is usually not the smartest business. Let's say, for sake of example, a product costs $5 to make. If you sell it at $50, you move 1,000 units of it and make $45,000 in profit. If you sell it at $25, you move 5,000 units and make $100,000 in profit. If you sell it at $10, you move 10,000 units and make $50,000 in profit. Clearly the best price point was $25 as it contributes $100k in total profit to the company, while the $50 price point contributed more margin. At the end of the day, it is not always wise to price at a level that some will pay for it and much better to price at what MOST will pay for it.
Baragash wrote: If we look at the data from the CHS trial, the issue with stores, the types of products they're releasing, and comments from ex-staff members about product performance over it's lifetime a reasonable conclusion is that they're actively targeting they're remaining fan base to squeeze more profit out of them.
There would be very little point in raising the price on existing products because the number of units they sell is not significant.
So GW are raising prices on things they've not even released yet? Also, what's wrong with charging whatever people will pay for a product? GW would be fools not to.
There's no intrinsic problem with the concept, and no ethical issues either.
But. GW have been increasing unit prices very much in the recent years, and simultaneously revenue has been going down (lately very dramatically). This means less people are buying stuff from GW.
Again, from a general business perspective, the idea of selling less for more, with a higher profit margin, is good.
But. GW is not a general business. It's a niche business, and a relatively small company that does not have the resources for marketing to bring in new customers. This makes GW much more reliant on repeat customers than other businesses, and due to the social nature of tabletop wargaming, GW's growth and future revenue streams are very reliant on market share. If everyone at your store plays Warmachine, that new guy who wanders in and wants to start playing with mandollies isn't going to pick up GW products, is he?
And, unlike their competition, GW is a public company, which, in addition to tying their hands with regards to short-term growth, makes them unable to contract and re-consolidate around their core products and markets without having their stocks tank, being taken over, and exposing the management to legal action from shareholders.
Do you have any data on these price rises? Preferably annual increase on year using a "typical" army.
Kilkrazy wrote: As you say, there seems to be a policy now of keeping older models at the same price for a few years, and launching new models at high starting prices. The Knight Titan at £85, for example.
Look at the Stompa, currently at £70, and the so-much-smaller Gork/Morkanaut only £5 cheaper.
Yep, because size alone should dictate the price of a kit. A bit like those complaining that the in game points cost of the new ork guns means the kits should be cheaper...
nosferatu1001 wrote: Yep, because size alone should dictate the price of a kit. A bit like those complaining that the in game points cost of the new ork guns means the kits should be cheaper...
What should dictate the price then if not the amount of materials? A larger kit likely has more plastic so has a bigger cost.
how many units you can sell per player. If let say there is a huge market for bolter marines, because everyone plays them and everyone needs multiple of them. Then you can put their price lower , then sternguard or assault space marines which sell a lot less. That is why HQ options could cost like a box of marines.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Yep, because size alone should dictate the price of a kit. A bit like those complaining that the in game points cost of the new ork guns means the kits should be cheaper...
Number of sprues should dictate price as that is what dictates the cost to make the moulds for the models.
A new thing seems to consist of three of the larger vehicle sized sprues. I don't know how many sprues the stompa is but looking at the size of the box it cant be less than 4, if it is like the other superheavies I have built it'll be 6 or 8 though. At the very least the new thing should only cost 3/4ths as much as the stompa.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Yep, because size alone should dictate the price of a kit. A bit like those complaining that the in game points cost of the new ork guns means the kits should be cheaper...
Number of sprues should dictate price as that is what dictates the cost to make the moulds for the models. A new thing seems to consist of three of the larger vehicle sized sprues. I don't know how many sprues the stompa is but looking at the size of the box it cant be less than 4, if it is like the other superheavies I have built it'll be 6 or 8 though. At the very least the new thing should only cost 3/4ths as much as the stompa.
WayneTheGame wrote:
nosferatu1001 wrote: Yep, because size alone should dictate the price of a kit. A bit like those complaining that the in game points cost of the new ork guns means the kits should be cheaper...
What should dictate the price then if not the amount of materials? A larger kit likely has more plastic so has a bigger cost.
Like everything else, the business case should determine the price, based on likely / desired return on investment period.
So generally, in fantasy special units cost more than core, as people generally have more core than special. Meaning the ROI period is lower for the same given price, meaning you can reduce the price (or increase the other) to mean your ROI is roughly the same. If you get your sums right. Greatswords are a prime example of this for Empire.
The amount of materials is essentially unimportant to the overall price, when talking plastic. WHat does matter is complexity of the sprue (increased tooling cost) and of course number of sprues.
Its why they can now release more character plastics -they can make multi - character sprues now, reducing the cost per model to an acceptable level.
Its why they often get things wrong - the old plastic rhino was arguably priced too low, as it only really paid itself off a year before replacement.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Yep, because size alone should dictate the price of a kit. A bit like those complaining that the in game points cost of the new ork guns means the kits should be cheaper...
What should dictate the price then if not the amount of materials? A larger kit likely has more plastic so has a bigger cost.
There are various ways to assess the "correct" price for a product and firms often use a mixture of them.
Cost of design and production is a factor, of course, and cost of bringing to market. In general you want to sell stuff at a profit. GW's shops eat up a lot of their revenue and force their prices to be much higher than bare cost of production.
Competitor prices are another factor. Possibly GW can ignore these because customers can only buy genuine 40K and Fantasy stuff from them.
The ability or desire of customers to purchase the goods is important. Some goods are priced at premium or luxury levels to enhance their psychological appeal.
Baragash wrote: If we look at the data from the CHS trial, the issue with stores, the types of products they're releasing, and comments from ex-staff members about product performance over it's lifetime a reasonable conclusion is that they're actively targeting they're remaining fan base to squeeze more profit out of them.
There would be very little point in raising the price on existing products because the number of units they sell is not significant.
So GW are raising prices on things they've not even released yet?
Sure, if that's what you want to take from that, more power to you.
KommissarKarl wrote:Also, what's wrong with charging whatever people will pay for a product? GW would be fools not to.
Generally the optimum solution is to sell at a price that maximises the profit you make from the market of potential customers as a whole, so "whatever people will pay for a product" isn't sufficiently specific about anything to have any meaning in a market pricing conversation.
When you're dealing with network effect products where ubiquity is an important factor in demand, pricing for maximum profit may cause damage to future demand.
Cost to design,
Cost to produce, based on size and material,
Cost to ship and store, based on size,
Additional cost to recoup other costs, if limited production run.
When you're dealing with network effect products where ubiquity is an important factor in demand, pricing for maximum profit may cause damage to future demand.
This is where I think GW are vulnerable. Lots of people start to play Warhammer because lots of people play it.
If enough people stop playing it, the network effect would go into reverse.
I think that people should stop trying to look into the future when they have no clue what's going to happen to GW. Companies don't have horizons more than five years and frankly none of us even know what GW has planned in that time. If GW is going under it shows NO real prospects of doing so at the moment, it is just showing a current lack of growth. This could change very easily due to any number of things.
People need to stop trying to predict more than 5 years into the future as you have no idea what will happen beyond then and it doesn't look like GW is going to collapse right now.
Its not unusual for restructuring companies to show little to no growth anyway, and GW has certainly been doing that. Restructuring takes effort away from business development activities, and the shock-effect amongst staff can give issues as well.
If in another year there are still issues thats more concerning.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Remember not just hardcover, but full colour as well. SO a definite quality increase, especially with the shafting they got from some printers on quality (e.g. WoC 7th ed fell apart seemingly in minutes)
Whether you find it worth the extra money or not is up to you - I tend to, as they last a lot longer when handled reasonably poorly, as the ones slung in my bag tend to be...
Both of which seem to be done just to push the notion that it's a luxury product, and to justify a price hike. Bolt Action has a hardcore, full color rulebook for IIRC half the price of the GW rules. Their armies books are about 90ish pages, softcover but full color, for $25, half of what a 40k codex costs for roughly the same amount of pages.
thetallestgiraffe wrote: I think that people should stop trying to look into the future when they have no clue what's going to happen to GW. Companies don't have horizons more than five years and frankly none of us even know what GW has planned in that time. If GW is going under it shows NO real prospects of doing so at the moment, it is just showing a current lack of growth. This could change very easily due to any number of things.
People need to stop trying to predict more than 5 years into the future as you have no idea what will happen beyond then and it doesn't look like GW is going to collapse right now.
Sooooo, how do you explain the rapidly falling market share?
What is that if not a sign of GW going under?
What, by your definition would be anyway? It sounds like you're trying to say that no one can ever know if a company is going under.
There is no denying that GW books are expensive for what they are compared to other wargames. However they are the only GW games rulebooks on the market.
The question is what is the price point at which GW would price their unique product out of reach of enough customers to seriously dent sales.
wufai wrote: Just ask yourself, are you still spending thousands of dollars buying new gw products from gw and flgs?
No, but then again, I haven't even played 40k in like a year-and-a-half (wait, when did 6th edition come out? Then.) because of irritation at how gamey (as in, focusing on gimmicks and rules rather than tactics) 40k is.
And I actively pursued interested friends not to buy into 40k and play x-wing instead.
X-Wing is hella cool, yeah.
Its too bad AT-43 croaked. I think its ruleset was far better than 40k. However, Rackham was even more inept than GW on its worst day, and ended up going out of business because of it.
thetallestgiraffe wrote: I think that people should stop trying to look into the future when they have no clue what's going to happen to GW. Companies don't have horizons more than five years and frankly none of us even know what GW has planned in that time. If GW is going under it shows NO real prospects of doing so at the moment, it is just showing a current lack of growth. This could change very easily due to any number of things. People need to stop trying to predict more than 5 years into the future as you have no idea what will happen beyond then and it doesn't look like GW is going to collapse right now.
Sooooo, how do you explain the rapidly falling market share?
What is that if not a sign of GW going under?
What, by your definition would be anyway? It sounds like you're trying to say that no one can ever know if a company is going under.
A fall in share prices never necessarily means that a company is going under, like the global financial crisis didn't mean that the western economies ceased to exist. They are back and stronger than ever now. I know that analogies are inherently weak in a discussion but I think it's worth pointing out that market price has to go down at some point when people loose faith in the current price, which begins to set trends, where the price bounces up and down.
I'm just saying that GW is a regular company, and like most companies any collapse will most likely only be forseeable when it's about to smack them in the face and as scary as some of the data MAY look there have been no widespread closures and it doesn't look like there will be any time soon. I just think that to make premature judgements now isn't really going to successfully predict anything. Unless there is a sudden decline in sales that can't just be linked to a dip in sales due to Lack of hobbit popularity I think they will be going a bit longer.
Also although this guy has impressive data it's worth remembering that people can come up with statistics to prove anything. 14% of people know that
And? I buy full-colour hardback books from FFG for half the price.
and? your quote snipping again dropped the context, which is that you cannot just compare like for like and say it has doubled in price "because", without including the contributing factors. Or at least those that GW attributed to the price rise.
Try to avoid snipping context out, makes your posts more coherent.
A fall in share prices never necessarily means that a company is going under, like the global financial crisis didn't mean that the western economies ceased to exist. They are back and stronger than ever now. I know that analogies are inherently weak in a discussion but I think it's worth pointing out that market price has to go down at some point when people loose faith in the current price, which begins to set trends, where the price bounces up and down.
I'm just saying that GW is a regular company, and like most companies where any collapse will most likely only be forseeable when it's about to smack them in the face and as scary as some of the data MAY look there have been no widespread closures and it doesn't look like there will be any time soon. I just think that to make premature judgements now isn't really going to successfully predict anything. Unless there is a sudden decline in sales that can't just be linked to a dip in sales due to Lack of hobbit popularity I think they will be going a bit longer.
Also although this guy has impressive data it's worth remembering that people can come up with statistics to prove anything. 14% of people know that
Edit: some of my wording was off
You mean like a 12% drop in revenue accompanying a 30% drop in profits in a period where they did a re-launch of their most popular and profitable product line (Space Marines)?
And? I buy full-colour hardback books from FFG for half the price.
Exactly.
Or you can also say GW's rulebooks are more expensive than most books from La Pléïade, which are fully commented critical editions of major litterary works. We're talking about 1200+ pages of exquisite bible paper, covered in fine leather with gold lettering...
And? I buy full-colour hardback books from FFG for half the price.
and? your quote snipping again dropped the context, which is that you cannot just compare like for like and say it has doubled in price "because", without including the contributing factors. Or at least those that GW attributed to the price rise.
Try to avoid snipping context out, makes your posts more coherent.
Those contributing factors don't excuse the price rise. They especially don't excuse it when other, smaller companies have comparable products for a much lower price.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Its not unusual for restructuring companies to show little to no growth anyway, and GW has certainly been doing that. Restructuring takes effort away from business development activities, and the shock-effect amongst staff can give issues as well.
If in another year there are still issues thats more concerning.
If by restructuring you mean cutting everything they can cut then, yeah, GW has been restructuring.
And? I buy full-colour hardback books from FFG for half the price.
and? your quote snipping again dropped the context, which is that you cannot just compare like for like and say it has doubled in price "because", without including the contributing factors. Or at least those that GW attributed to the price rise.
Try to avoid snipping context out, makes your posts more coherent.
Why exactly can one not compare the same type of product (hardcover, full color book) from two different companies as justification that one (GW in this case) is charging more than they should just because they can get away with it?
The bottom line is that GW charges $50 for hardcover books with color pages, while other companies charge less for hardcover books with color pages.
Well the base fact is that codexes and army books doubled in price over the past three years.
This means bluntly that unless people are prepared to double their spend on the necessary books, they will buy fewer of them, possibly half as many.
GW probably makes as much profit on a single hardback at £30 as on two paperbacks at £30, so that doesn't matter in itself. However there is probably a knock-on effect.
Kilkrazy wrote: Well the base fact is that codexes and army books doubled in price over the past three years.
This means bluntly that unless people are prepared to double their spend on the necessary books, they will buy fewer of them, possibly half as many.
GW probably makes as much profit on a single hardback at £30 as on two paperbacks at £30, so that doesn't matter in itself. However there is probably a knock-on effect.
Guess the knock on effect is that people probably won't buy models for armies they don't have a codex for, so GW will sell less models by charging more for Codices as customers stick to one thing as the cost of investing in a new one is too high.
So does a more expensive codex beat the potential selling of another army (even a small one) to a customer?
I am an example of the knock-on effect. I built up fairly substantial Tau and Tyranid armies in 2004-06 and 2010-2011.
When 6th edition came out I bought the softback rulebook but I didn't buy the new £30 codexes so I haven't bought any of the new models either.
Effectively in their effort to screw an extra £15 out of me for the Tau codex GW threw away the chance to sell me a £50 Riptide and a £40 Sunshark, etc.
Alpharius wrote: I apologize in advance for asking a question which has probably already been asked and answered but...
...when is the next official GW report due?
It is soon, isn't it?
And won't that help 'answer' a lot of these questions?
Next week some time based on previous years.
Whether it answers any questions or not depends what it says
If the Knight + 7th Ed blow the doors off* you'll have the pro-no-problem crowd saying everything was a blip and the anti-no-problem crowd saying launching two flagship products just disguises an underlying decline in the business and by-the-way-didn't-the-market-grow-again.
*This being in the range of H2 revenue flat (so down YoY) to YoY being better in total than H1 all the way through to up YoY total.
Anything less than that and you'll get the pro-no-problem crowd saying one year is not a trend and the anti-no-problem crowd saying it proves their point.
I think the release of 7th edition will save it from looking too bad. Knight Titans must have helped too.
If it did look bad, though, it would look like the doomsayers were right.
Space Marines, Knight Titans, IG codex plus Temp Stormtroopers, Tyranids, Inquisition and 7th edition new rulebook have all been released in the 2013-2014 financial year. All the codexes came with some new models and some DLC.
If GW couldn't get decent good numbers with so many releases, including very popular lines, there really would be a problem.
This might be a non-issue arising due to English not being my first language, but next Thursday is tomorrow, the 24th of July, you still have a whole nother week after that.
This might be a non-issue arising due to English not being my first language, but next Thursday is tomorrow, the 24th of July, you still have a whole nother week after that.
It's ok. In common usage, tomorrow will be "this Thursday" and the Thursday of the following week will be "next Thursday".
This might be a non-issue arising due to English not being my first language, but next Thursday is tomorrow, the 24th of July, you still have a whole nother week after that.
It's ok. In common usage, tomorrow will be "this Thursday" and the Thursday of the following week will be "next Thursday".
Though, like all things in english, that doesn't hold true all the time
This might be a non-issue arising due to English not being my first language, but next Thursday is tomorrow, the 24th of July, you still have a whole nother week after that.
It's ok. In common usage, tomorrow will be "this Thursday" and the Thursday of the following week will be "next Thursday".
this was at the start of fifth though. So the company has changed since then, and not for the better.
.
