Blacksails wrote:

bitethythumb wrote:
DakkaDakka has more economists than the LSE this is great, GW is staying number 1 and the ragers keep on raging... So when are people predicting the fall of GW now because I remember same theories of their downfall 5-7 years ago.

So you still have nothing intelligent to add to this conversations?

*Edit * Honestly Az, I don't know how you do it.

I'm not even mad anymore, its just amazing.

12 whole secs. Math is hard.

Use less, smaller words, and have studied typing and word processing at school!

 Azreal13 wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
I just did the math, and, at 20 pence a share, Kirby will be getting roughly $6600 in his dividend check.

Must be nice to be one of the people who decides what the dividend will be, when everybody else will be on a salary freeze...

I've done different math.

2.1m shares x 0.20p per share = £420 000

Oops, I see the mistake I made. I did that same multiple, then move the decimal point over to convert to pounds, not realizing it was already in pound when multiplying by .2, oops. Of course, that makes it even more ridiculously sickening, since that could be enough to cover any raises for all the non-executive people in GW.

 Azreal13 wrote:

Yet again you get caught up trying to debate the minutiae of the example rather than grasping the overall intent.

I bet nothing goes over your head. I bet you would catch it.

Gotta do something productive with my smartphone! If it weren't for you Az, I'd spend all my lineup and heavy traffic time bored stiff.

 Azreal13 wrote:


Use less, smaller words, and have studied typing and word processing at school!

One of these days, before your morning coffee (or tea...or guiness...whatever you Brits drink in the morning), I'll post before you.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
I just did the math, and, at 20 pence a share, Kirby will be getting roughly $6600 in his dividend check.

Must be nice to be one of the people who decides what the dividend will be, when everybody else will be on a salary freeze...

I've done different math.

2.1m shares x 0.20p per share = £420 000

Oops, I see the mistake I made. I did that same multiple, then move the decimal point over to convert to pounds, not realizing it was already in pound when multiplying by .2, oops. Of course, that makes it even more ridiculously sickening, since that could be enough to cover any raises for all the non-executive people in GW.

Doesn't take a genius to see why they consistently pay a dividend above what they should when you see this chart..

Shareholder Number of shares Percentage
Ruffer LLP 3,225,596 10.1
Investec Asset Management Limited 3,087,765 9.6
Tom Kirby 2,134,094 6.7
Massachusetts Financial Services Company 2,044,385 6.4
Phoenix Asset Management Partners Limited 1,865,218 5.8
Legal and General Group plc 1,683,901 5.3
Schroders plc 1,677,861 5.2
Aberforth Partners LLP 1,636,300 5.1
Artemis Investment Management LLP 1,620,001 5.1
FIL 1,516,682 4.7

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blacksails wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:


Use less, smaller words, and have studied typing and word processing at school!

One of these days, before your morning coffee (or tea...or guiness...whatever you Brits drink in the morning), I'll post before you.

Given the time difference, good luck!

 Blacksails wrote:

bitethythumb wrote:
DakkaDakka has more economists than the LSE this is great, GW is staying number 1 and the ragers keep on raging... So when are people predicting the fall of GW now because I remember same theories of their downfall 5-7 years ago.

So you still have nothing intelligent to add to this conversations?

*Edit * Honestly Az, I don't know how you do it.

I'm not even mad anymore, its just amazing.

12 whole secs. Math is hard.

Since when was this an intelligent discussion? More like loud arguing but carry on arguing about none topic related things, hey I heard Kirby drives a Ferrari, I will just wait here for GW to die, again.

Paying out dividends is the responsible action for a company that doesn't have anything better to do with its cash, though. Hoarding cash is not good for share prices, and doesn't benefit shareholders (nor does paying your employees better, or lowering your prices, unless that ultimately leads to more profits that could generate even more dividends). Keep in mind too that GAW is not a growth stock, so the best way to provide shareholder revenue is in the form of dividends.

Of course, having something useful to do with that money would be good, but GW doesn't want to acquire anything, and I don't think it's actually possible for them to release more stuff than they have in 2015.

bitethythumb wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

bitethythumb wrote:
DakkaDakka has more economists than the LSE this is great, GW is staying number 1 and the ragers keep on raging... So when are people predicting the fall of GW now because I remember same theories of their downfall 5-7 years ago.

So you still have nothing intelligent to add to this conversations?

*Edit * Honestly Az, I don't know how you do it.

I'm not even mad anymore, its just amazing.

12 whole secs. Math is hard.

Since when was this an intelligent discussion? More like loud arguing but carry on... I will just wait for GW to die, again.

Find one person who seriously said this financial report would be the death of GW. Go on, I'll wait.

 Talys wrote:
Paying out dividends is the responsible action for a company that doesn't have anything better to do with its cash, though. Hoarding cash is not good for share prices, and doesn't benefit shareholders (nor does paying your employees better, or lowering your prices, unless that ultimately leads to more profits that could generate even more dividends). Keep in mind too that GAW is not a growth stock, so the best way to provide shareholder revenue is in the form of dividends.

Of course, having something useful to do with that money would be good, but GW doesn't want to acquire anything, and I don't think it's actually possible for them to release more stuff than they have in 2015.

typical company behavior :\ they all do it, capitalism eh..

bitethythumb wrote:


Since when was this an intelligent discussion? More like loud arguing but carry on... I will just wait for GW to die, again.

Maybe if you read the fething thread and weren't such a condescending donkey-cave, you'd have come to a much more mature conclusion.

Besides, if you have nothing of value to add, don't bother posting.

 Talys wrote:
Paying out dividends is the responsible action for a company that doesn't have anything better to do with its cash, though. Hoarding cash is not good for share prices, and doesn't benefit shareholders (nor does paying your employees better, or lowering your prices, unless that ultimately leads to more profits that could generate even more dividends). Keep in mind too that GAW is not a growth stock, so the best way to provide shareholder revenue is in the form of dividends.

Of course, having something useful to do with that money would be good, but GW doesn't want to acquire anything, and I don't think it's actually possible for them to release more stuff than they have in 2015.

Historically, GW have paid out dividends when they shouldn't, and I'd argue there's plenty of things they could find to spend the money on, but they'd be investments in the future of the company and not something Kirby particularly worries about just now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blacksails wrote:

bitethythumb wrote:


Since when was this an intelligent discussion? More like loud arguing but carry on... I will just wait for GW to die, again.

Maybe if you read the fething thread and weren't such a condescending donkey-cave, you'd have come to a much more mature conclusion.

Besides, if you have nothing of value to add, don't bother posting.

I expect that he thinks all the big words and complicated phrases he doesn't understand are swears he hasn't heard before.

 ImAGeek wrote:

bitethythumb wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

bitethythumb wrote:
DakkaDakka has more economists than the LSE this is great, GW is staying number 1 and the ragers keep on raging... So when are people predicting the fall of GW now because I remember same theories of their downfall 5-7 years ago.

So you still have nothing intelligent to add to this conversations?

*Edit * Honestly Az, I don't know how you do it.

I'm not even mad anymore, its just amazing.

12 whole secs. Math is hard.

Since when was this an intelligent discussion? More like loud arguing but carry on... I will just wait for GW to die, again.

Find one person who seriously said this financial report would be the death of GW. Go on, I'll wait.

the financial report? Why would anyone say that, I am just pointing out that the report clearly show GW is alive and kicking and there is little to no sign of any death as several users have pointed out in other post about the inevitable death of GW... No need to be so defensive buddy...

 Azreal13 wrote:


Historically, GW have paid out dividends when they shouldn't, and I'd argue there's plenty of things they could find to spend the money on, but they'd be investments in the future of the company and not something Kirby particularly worries about just now.

I expect that he thinks all the big words and complicated phrases he doesn't understand are swears he hasn't heard before.

I'll be the first person to admit I have zero experience in the business sector, but surely GW could find something more useful to spend a bunch of money than dumping it back on their investors, and apparently at a disproportionate rate from my understanding in this thread.

Was it posted how much money total the dividend will cost them?

Anyways, I've adjusted my forum settings. The thread will be more productive now from my end.

bitethythumb wrote:
The financial report? Why would anyone say that, I am just pointing out that the report clearly show GW is alive and kicking and there is little to no sign of any death as several users have pointed out in other post about the inevitable death of GW... No need to be so defensive buddy...

No one has said, ever that I've seen, that GW will be done for this financial report, or the next one, etc. people have said that if GW follow the pattern of their last few reports, eventually they will die a death. But no you just carry on being snarky because they're still treading water.

 ImAGeek wrote:
No one has said, ever that I've seen, that GW will be done for this financial report, or the next one, etc. people have said that if GW follow the pattern of their last few reports, eventually they will die a death. But no you just carry on being snarky because they're still treading water.

you realise the contradiction of what you just said? No one has said the financial report will be their death apart from the previous financial patterns reports that predict their eventual death? And I did say more or less that, so far 5 years at least I have been hearing same thing... Still gw is alive and kicking.

How's that hard to grasp?

"The car is going to crash, unless it steers around the wall"

It is a fairly elementary concept, how long the car takes to crash depends on the speed it is travelling and how far away the wall is, but if the car doesnt change direction it will hit the wall.

bitethythumb wrote:
you realise the contradiction of what you just said? No one has said the financial report will be their death apart from the previous financial patterns reports that predict their eventual death? And I did say more or less that, so far 5 years at least I have been hearing same thing... Still gw is alive and kicking.

That's not a contradiction.

There is a difference between 'GW are in danger of immediate collapse' and 'If GW follow their current trend, they're going to collapse'...


The trend over the last few financial reports has been that they're still making money, but sales numbers are going backwards and their sales have been largely propped up by cost-cutting. That's not a situation that is sustainable in the long term.

 Talys wrote:
Paying out dividends is the responsible action for a company that doesn't have anything better to do with its cash, though. Hoarding cash is not good for share prices, and doesn't benefit shareholders (nor does paying your employees better, or lowering your prices, unless that ultimately leads to more profits that could generate even more dividends). Keep in mind too that GAW is not a growth stock, so the best way to provide shareholder revenue is in the form of dividends.

Of course, having something useful to do with that money would be good, but GW doesn't want to acquire anything, and I don't think it's actually possible for them to release more stuff than they have in 2015.

The thing is, though, pay freezes are what companies do when they have, or expect to have, money problems. So, then, why is GW freezing salaries? A pay freeze for all employees should be setting off an alarm bell...assuming any of the big investors have someone more important than the office's student intern reading GW's annual reports, anyway.

 Azreal13 wrote:
How's that hard to grasp?

"The car is going to crash, unless it steers around the wall"

It is a fairly elementary concept, how long the car takes to crash depends on the speed it is travelling and how far away the wall is, but if the car doesnt change direction it will hit the wall.

Yes, but the wall could be 30,000 light years away, and all the fuel on the planet could be consumed and everyone relevant could be dead before the car got there.

The prognostications are only helpful with a time frame attached: "Within 5 years on the current track, company X will be bankrupt." or "In 3 years, if no adjustments are made, this company will become largely irrelevant."

To say, "This company will eventually die if changes aren't made" is a such a vague prediction that can't be wrong, because eventually, GW, like every other company on Earth, WILL die, and then the prediction would be right It's like saying an earthquake is going to wipe out Los Angeles. Nobody really doubts that statement, just most people aren't going to pick up and move unless more specificity with reasoning is available.

 Azreal13 wrote:

Yet again you get caught up trying to debate the minutiae of the example rather than grasping the overall intent.

I bet nothing goes over your head. I bet you would catch it.

God I love this thread.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
The thing is, though, pay freezes are what companies do when they have, or expect to have, money problems. So, then, why is GW freezing salaries? A pay freeze for all employees should be setting off an alarm bell...assuming any of the big investors have someone more important than the office's student intern reading GW's annual reports, anyway.

That's not true. During the Great Recession, highly profitable businesses went through a culling to get rid of all the unnecessary employees, and many froze the salaries of people who are left, particularly the replaceable ones. Why? It's an employer's market, and it's more profitable to have fewer employees and pay them less (or at least not more) -- cold, but true. They aren't worried about losing the employees if they treat them a little worse, because nobody's hiring anyways, so why not squeeze them a little.

For example: Microsoft, one of the wealthiest and most profitable companies in the world laid off thousands of employees and restructured divisions with a big, fat knife. They relocated a lot of services and development to India where labour (including skilled labour) is cheaper, not because they had to, but because they'd make more money if they did. TONS of companies the size of GW and larger have done the same thing.

When do employers pay employees more money? When they're worried about losing them, and when employees leave for greener pastures because there are lots of jobs. Most commonly, for minimally skilled workers, this occurs when construction is booming, because "anyone can be a carpenter" (this is just an expression; it just means, there are a lot of good-paying construction jobs).

At the moment, employment is still very weak; in this respect, the UK is not doing well at all, so GW isn't afraid that their workers will flee. And if they do, there will be lots of other eager folks to fill those shoes, at wage-frozen rates.

Not kind, but pretty common.

 Talys wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
How's that hard to grasp?

"The car is going to crash, unless it steers around the wall"

It is a fairly elementary concept, how long the car takes to crash depends on the speed it is travelling and how far away the wall is, but if the car doesnt change direction it will hit the wall.

Yes, but the wall could be 30,000 light years away, and all the fuel on the planet could be consumed and everyone relevant could be dead before the car got there.

The prognostications are only helpful with a time frame attached: "Within 5 years on the current track, company X will be bankrupt." or "In 3 years, if no adjustments are made, this company will become largely irrelevant."

To say, "This company will eventually die if changes aren't made" is a such a vague prediction that can't be wrong, because eventually, GW, like every other company on Earth, WILL die, and then the prediction would be right It's like saying an earthquake is going to wipe out Los Angeles. Nobody really doubts that statement, just most people aren't going to pick up and move unless more specificity with reasoning is available.

Yes, but if one analyzes their annual sales loss, you could easily project how much sales are anticipated to drop under the current dynasty.

 Talys wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
How's that hard to grasp?

"The car is going to crash, unless it steers around the wall"

It is a fairly elementary concept, how long the car takes to crash depends on the speed it is travelling and how far away the wall is, but if the car doesnt change direction it will hit the wall.

Yes, but the wall could be 30,000 light years away, and all the fuel on the planet could be consumed and everyone relevant could be dead before the car got there.

The prognostications are only helpful with a time frame attached: "Within 5 years on the current track, company X will be bankrupt." or "In 3 years, if no adjustments are made, this company will become largely irrelevant."

To say, "This company will eventually die if changes aren't made" is a such a vague prediction that can't be wrong, because eventually, GW, like every other company on Earth, WILL die, and then the prediction would be right It's like saying an earthquake is going to wipe out Los Angeles. Nobody really doubts that statement, just most people aren't going to pick up and move unless more specificity with reasoning is available.

a painter and a thinker, I think I am in love

 PlaguelordHobbyServices wrote:

Yes, but if one analyzes their annual sales loss, you could easily project how much sales are anticipated to drop under the current dynasty.

Very fair -- so following that line of thought, an actual analysis of some sort with a prediction with some specificity would be worthy of debate (even if one disagreed). All I'm saying is that, "GW on its current track is going to die some time in the future" is not really worth debating, as it's obviously true that every company will eventually go out of business.

It's perfectly reasonable to say that if GW shrinks by x percent each year after y years, it will be so small that nobody will care about it. Then you can track it and see if GW actually shrinks by x percent each year, to see if the hypothesis pans out. I mean, people make a good living of that A lot of those pros are wrong a lot of the time, too...

 Talys wrote:
as it's obviously true that every company will eventually go out of business.
.

Nonsense.

Companies are not organic life forms. There is no sell by date or natural lifespan. A company goes out of business when it ceases to make money, but there's no law that says this must happen.

 Talys wrote:
Yes, but the wall could be 30,000 light years away, and all the fuel on the planet could be consumed and everyone relevant could be dead before the car got there.

The prognostications are only helpful with a time frame attached: "Within 5 years on the current track, company X will be bankrupt." or "In 3 years, if no adjustments are made, this company will become largely irrelevant."

To say, "This company will eventually die if changes aren't made" is a such a vague prediction that can't be wrong, because eventually, GW, like every other company on Earth, WILL die, and then the prediction would be right It's like saying an earthquake is going to wipe out Los Angeles. Nobody really doubts that statement, just most people aren't going to pick up and move unless more specificity with reasoning is available.

You seem to be assuming that the point is to predict exactly when GW will die.

It's not.

The point being made is simply that the downward trend in their financial results is a sign that they are doing something wrong. The fact that continuing to follow that trend will eventually lead to their demise is ultimately secondary to that point.

People have been saying for some time now that GW's current direction is not the best way to go. The fact that this direction is seeing their financial results continue to get worse seems to back that up.


Of course, that may not actually be the case. It's entirely possible that GW's current business direction actually is resulting in the best result that would have been possible in the current market, and that doing all of the things that their customers are asking for would have actually made things worse. Obviously, we have no way to know for sure, other than to look at the apparent growth of other companies that are doing those things...

insaniak wrote:You seem to be assuming that the point is to predict exactly when GW will die.

It's not.

The point being made is simply that the downward trend in their financial results is a sign that they are doing something wrong. The fact that continuing to follow that trend will eventually lead to their demise is ultimately secondary to that point.

People have been saying for some time now that GW's current direction is not the best way to go. The fact that this direction is seeing their financial results continue to get worse seems to back that up.

Of course, that may not actually be the case. It's entirely possible that GW's current business direction actually is resulting in the best result that would have been possible in the current market, and that doing all of the things that their customers are asking for would have actually made things worse. Obviously, we have no way to know for sure, other than to look at the apparent growth of other companies that are doing those things...

Well, that is reasonable.

However, I would argue that with new entrants to the market, established companies must struggle just to maintain marketshare, much less grow (the larger your marketshare, the harder it is to grow). The miniature wargames market was flat in 2014 (at least, we're told so), and GW was also flat. Since GW has no plans to launch its own TCG, I think it's pointless to compare its profitability or growth to YuGiOh or Magic the Gathering.

To me, the strongest valid criticism of Games Workshop comes not in its success or failure measured in dollars, but in its willingness to sacrifice players for profits. In other words, Games Workshop is happy to please the few who spend a lot of money, creating an ecosystem that is less attractive to the many, who spend an order of magnitude less money. That lines GW's pockets, at the expense of shrinking its playerbase and perhaps reducing their relevancy.

I am not certain if this action is because GW is philosophically like-minded with their best customers, or if it's purely profit-driven. I suspect it's a combination of the two.

Azreal13 wrote:Companies are not organic life forms. There is no sell by date or natural lifespan. A company goes out of business when it ceases to make money, but there's no law that says this must happen.

Unless we find a way to leave this planet, eventually, this star system and everything in it will turn to cosmic dust. But that's irrelevant, because long before that, the organic life forms running and owning GW will be extinct, and long before that, Games Workshop will shutter its doors anyways. Unless robots or zombies decide that 40k is cool.

 Talys wrote:
However, I would argue that with new entrants to the market, established companies must struggle just to maintain marketshare, much less grow (the larger your marketshare, the harder it is to grow).

GW was an established company in the late '90s, when they were practically the only game in town when it came to fantasy and scifi miniature gaming. And they grew like nobody's business.

People's resistance to shifting games worked in GW's favour for a long time, and other companies had to work like hell against the GW inertia just to get any sort of foothold. In that environment, I very much doubt that GW had to work 'harder' than all of those startups in order to continue to grow.


I don't think that GW's growth fell because other companies started taking market share. From where I'm sitting, it looked far more like other companies were allowed to grab market share when GW started assuming that they knew what their customers wanted without actually bothering to talk to those customers... because that was when those customers started looking around and wondering if there was maybe something better out there to replace the mess that their current favourite had become.

GW grew the hobby in general intentionally or not in the late 90s and very early 00s.
Games Days, GTs, Golden Demon....just the coverage of those events were hugely formative for anyone already into, or on the fringe of getting in to gaming. Golden Demon alone set the stage for painters and sculptors that are relevant across the industry today.
I think the LOTR bubble hid the importance of all of that event support and it's online coverage on communities like this for the growth of the game. That swell of interest and inspiration was palpable.
Other companies were able to ride that wave of interest. Which isn't to undermine their value, but it's hard to see Warmachine taking off without tournament gaming becoming established with the GT and indie circuit. It's hard to see Rackham having the succes it squandered without GD coverage, the superstar painters it produced and the interest that created in showcase quality miniature painting that followed. Etc. Etc.

They worked to establish themselves, and in doing so established the market for gaming that allowed small companies to establish themselves, often by focusing on elements of the market that GW never addressed fully, or chose to drop.

I don't find 40k to be a mess, it's probably as enjoyable to me at the moment as it was 25 years ago, but that's me. At some point GW stopped leading the market and decided to focus on things that they could see direct, immediate returns on. While I enjoy 40k right now as I said I think that in general is a detriment to the market.

Interesting thread.

Some thoughts on GW as a company:

1. Why do they have stores? They always say they are a miniatures business more than a game business. Well, they certainly aren't a retail business. I think the most effective way to get new customers to try your product is by having your product in other stores that draw in people for other similar products. How many of us started this hobby because we went into a store for Magic cards or D&D stuff and saw 40k and fell in love? Who goes out of their way to go into a store you've never heard of that sells a single product you've never heard of? And I personally hate the awkward discussion and subtle pressure of a salesman trying to tell you about their product. I think for many introverts (most gamers), this is a turn-off. It's a much better experience to walk into a hobby shop filled with games where 40k is one of many.

2. Why do they refuse to interact with their customers? This seems to be the opposite direction all other companies are going and different from the old days when you felt like you knew the designers from White Dwarf interviews. As a comparison, look at the Magic website. They post new content every day. They explain their design decisions. They post articles on tactics. They encourage discussion and feedback. People get involved. A lot of us have so much passion for this hobby and would love more insight into the inner workings. I loved how in the old White Dwarf magazine when a new codex or game came out, they would interview the designers and authors who would explain the design choices. Love it or hate it, at least you understood somewhat of the reason for a rule. They even explained how variations performed during play testing so you knew they actually tried it out and liked the result!

3. Most people want 40k to be a somewhat balanced and tactical game because it is fun trying to outwit your opponent and win, and that's a big reason people play most board games and wargames. Very few games are played regularly just because the game pieces look pretty. Most people don't play tournaments, but even casual players want a fair fight where in-game decisions and maneuvers matter more than the army you choose. Winning or losing because of obviously overpowered units isn't fun for either player. So keep the game balanced, issue errata if needed, and explain your design decisions so we understand why you think a given rule or codex is balanced. Admit design mistakes like Magic has done. Invite tournament winners to play test and try to break their upcoming rules.

4. One other thing they can learn from Magic (I'm no Magic fanboy. I haven't played in years, but from what I understand they are a pretty successful business. And I really respect them.): have both intro and advanced levels. Have simpler and cheaper ways to play to get people in (Magic has, or used to have, simplified Core sets and they also do sealed deck and draft formats where it only takes a small investment to play competitively against people who have massive collections, which greatly reduces the barrier to entry for a new player). Points values should ensure all games of 40k are fair and their box sets allow people to start with a more limited amount of rules they need to understand, but I still think more can be done to make entry easier.

5. Resume selling bits.

I think they have a lot more potential to grow with a few changes that really don't cost a lot.

 Talys wrote:

 agnosto wrote:
Price barriers actually exist. AoS, whether you like the game or not, represents a corporate admittance that there exists a barrier to entry in the game. In AoS, they've completely removed the $80-$100 price tag from entry allowing potential newcomers the ability to focus on what GW has always said they want to be the best at, the models. So in essence, there's a reduced barrier for entry into the fantasy version of their game. If successful with AoS, I fully expect this to happen to 40K; and if we're all honest, they've already tested the waters with formations and data-slates.

Back to the main topic.

I think where GW fails, and was admitted to in the CEO's statement, is in drawing in new blood. What they are hard-headed about is realizing why that is. Everyone knows the old adage, you have to spend money to make money and GW would rather pay dividends (thank you) than invest in growth opportunities. Scaling back stores, draconian trade practices, expensive rebrandings, lawsuits, etc. None of these will lead to long-term stability and growth. Cost cutting is great and they've really done a good job of cutting some things that were weighing them down BUT there's always the danger of cutting too much, too close to the bone and hitting an artery; the result is hemorrhaging market share and sales. They've applied a tourniquet but it took them pulling out every tool that they have in their bag to do; now it's just a matter of time to see if they've able to stave off infection or they'll wind up having to amputate (close the retail arm).

I'd link the two.

I think GW isn't very good at recruiting new players because new players in 2015 are less inclined to build 100-200 model armies than 1988 players. Back then, I knew an awful lot of people who really wanted to build their giant battle force (fantasy or scifi); now a lot of those potential customers want something with a smaller time investment, if nothing else. 40k becomes a hobby for those who are really dedicated to miniatures, not for those who want to goof around with a $70 game. There are just a lot more things that give instant gratification these days (video games being at the top), that have improved by leaps and bounds. People generally also have less disposable income, work longer hours, and are a little less patient, I find.

Funny, sounds exactly like the diatribes I was treated to by a family-friend's son when they used to look after me, after I got into Warhammer as a wean; kids your age are into all this newfangled videogame malarkey, you don't have the patience or attention span for Warhammer, they even have to run those multiplayer participation games at GW on Sundays now because you lot all need instant gratification and have to play with the models right away, [Yorkshire]hobbyists were so much more committed & serious & deep when I were a lad and we had to walk uphill both ways in a hailstorm carrying half-ton weights to get to t'local GW[/Yorkshire], blah blah blah.

If anything, the people I see most often stating their desire for fast, easy, small-scale, low-investment rulesets are the adult crowd who've grown up as wargamers but don't have the same amount of free time they used to thanks to family & work commitments, and I've seen no evidence the teen-to-twenties demo are any less interested in collecting big impressive armies now than they were when I started - a lot of them have just been priced out of being able to do so for GW systems.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

The thing is, though, pay freezes are what companies do when they have, or expect to have, money problems. So, then, why is GW freezing salaries? A pay freeze for all employees should be setting off an alarm bell...assuming any of the big investors have someone more important than the office's student intern reading GW's annual reports, anyway.

Bingo. You don't freeze employee pay unless you anticipate cash-flow issues in the near future.

Here's a trend for you;

Revenue:
2013 - 134,597,000
2014 - 123,501,000
2015 - 119,132,000

- Falling revenues, uh oh, but how was cash-flow?

Cash flow from operation activities (gross):
2013 - 31,908,000
2014 - 24,997,000
2015 - 25,579,000

- This is good, if it can be maintained but then they go ahead and pay a large amount in dividends.

Dividends:
2013 - 18,381,000
2014 - 5,077,000
2015 - 16,601,000

- wait, what? You come off of a bad year by dumping money on investors instead of playing it safer and reinvesting back into the company?

So, you wind up with closing net cash (post dividends):
2013 - 13,931,000
2014 - 17,550,000
2015 - 12,561,000

- Let's empty the safety-net and reserves to pay big dividends, shall we? Here's the sad thing, this is after a large difference in effect that exchange rates had on their cash (i.e. higher in 2014 than 2015, 329,000 vs. 166,000). Good companies pay dividends, don't get me wrong here, but they seldom do so to a level that negatively influences their ability to do business and should never exceed their EPS, that's a big no-no.

So, how healthy are they? Let's look at the trend in current ratio:
2013 - 1.43
2014 - 2.16
2015 - 2.00

- The way this works, for anyone who doesn't know, is a rough and dirty calculation of current assets divided by current liabilities to arrive at a ratio that indicates general financial health. Low numbers are bad and indicate that a business might fold with the right amount of pressure. Anything over a 1 is decent. So GW still looks healthy to a casual investor.

If someone were to ask me, I'd give GW stock a weak buy or at least a hold and wait for the next couple of years to see what's going to happen long-term. It's a good short to medium investment but I feel antsy about owning it long-term (which is probably why I've divested myself of it twice already). It doesn't help that the Chairman's a loon.

 Yodhrin wrote:
Funny, sounds exactly like the diatribes I was treated to by a family-friend's son when they used to look after me, after I got into Warhammer as a wean; kids your age are into all this newfangled videogame malarkey, you don't have the patience or attention span for Warhammer, they even have to run those multiplayer participation games at GW on Sundays now because you lot all need instant gratification and have to play with the models right away, [Yorkshire]hobbyists were so much more committed & serious & deep when I were a lad and we had to walk uphill both ways in a hailstorm carrying half-ton weights to get to t'local GW[/Yorkshire], blah blah blah.

If anything, the people I see most often stating their desire for fast, easy, small-scale, low-investment rulesets are the adult crowd who've grown up as wargamers but don't have the same amount of free time they used to thanks to family & work commitments, and I've seen no evidence the teen-to-twenties demo are any less interested in collecting big impressive armies now than they were when I started - a lot of them have just been priced out of being able to do so for GW systems.

I don't think I ever attributed this to age or generation. I certainly didn't mean to imply it.

It's a factor of cultural changes and availability of rapid gratification entertainment unavailable 30 years ago. The quality of graphics for videogames and computing power has skyrocketed, such that we are limited by the imagination rater than by technology. Video games are also ultra cheap.

The standard of an awesome army in 2015 is also higher, IMO. But that's another thing wholly.

I don't know about other people, but as a forty-something, I have a ton more time than I did as a 20-something.

 Talys wrote:

RoninXiC wrote:
And I could go out and find on in my garbage bin FOR FREE!!!!
Is that really the argument?
New players WILL not go for ebay but the most standard approach is to buy the big rulebook.

Dude... They are on the shelves of many independents. Stores will give people $10-$15 for them, and sell it for twice that, and many players just give them away.

I've given away (free) 7 copies of mini softcover rules, all to random people who wanted to start 40k.

I agree with a lot of your posts Talys, but no, this is not a common way to acquire rules. GW rules are incredibly expensive if acquired by way of a retailer. There's no defending that.

 The Riddle of Steel wrote:
Interesting thread.

Some thoughts on GW as a company:

1. Why do they have stores? They always say they are a miniatures business more than a game business. Well, they certainly aren't a retail business. I think the most effective way to get new customers to try your product is by having your product in other stores that draw in people for other similar products. How many of us started this hobby because we went into a store for Magic cards or D&D stuff and saw 40k and fell in love? Who goes out of their way to go into a store you've never heard of that sells a single product you've never heard of? And I personally hate the awkward discussion and subtle pressure of a salesman trying to tell you about their product. I think for many introverts (most gamers), this is a turn-off. It's a much better experience to walk into a hobby shop filled with games where 40k is one of many.

2. Why do they refuse to interact with their customers? This seems to be the opposite direction all other companies are going and different from the old days when you felt like you knew the designers from White Dwarf interviews. As a comparison, look at the Magic website. They post new content every day. They explain their design decisions. They post articles on tactics. They encourage discussion and feedback. People get involved. A lot of us have so much passion for this hobby and would love more insight into the inner workings. I loved how in the old White Dwarf magazine when a new codex or game came out, they would interview the designers and authors who would explain the design choices. Love it or hate it, at least you understood somewhat of the reason for a rule. They even explained how variations performed during play testing so you knew they actually tried it out and liked the result!

3. Most people want 40k to be a somewhat balanced and tactical game because it is fun trying to outwit your opponent and win, and that's a big reason people play most board games and wargames. Very few games are played regularly just because the game pieces look pretty. Most people don't play tournaments, but even casual players want a fair fight where in-game decisions and maneuvers matter more than the army you choose. Winning or losing because of obviously overpowered units isn't fun for either player. So keep the game balanced, issue errata if needed, and explain your design decisions so we understand why you think a given rule or codex is balanced. Admit design mistakes like Magic has done. Invite tournament winners to play test and try to break their upcoming rules.

4. One other thing they can learn from Magic (I'm no Magic fanboy. I haven't played in years, but from what I understand they are a pretty successful business. And I really respect them.): have both intro and advanced levels. Have simpler and cheaper ways to play to get people in (Magic has, or used to have, simplified Core sets and they also do sealed deck and draft formats where it only takes a small investment to play competitively against people who have massive collections, which greatly reduces the barrier to entry for a new player). Points values should ensure all games of 40k are fair and their box sets allow people to start with a more limited amount of rules they need to understand, but I still think more can be done to make entry easier.

5. Resume selling bits.

I think they have a lot more potential to grow with a few changes that really don't cost a lot.

I wish I could give this more than one exalt. You completely nailed it.

 Thokt wrote:

I agree with a lot of your posts Talys, but no, this is not a common way to acquire rules. GW rules are incredibly expensive if acquired by way of a retailer. There's no defending that.

I'm certainly not defending the price of the BRB box set. I'm just suggesting that there are alternatives; at least Dark Vengeance if nothing else. The book and templates are things you need anyways, and the models are nice (or you can sell them). Or, if you're a part of a game club, or were introduced by a friend, or if your local store resells them, the small mini book is a much better value.

In a way, I think of the hardcover set as a deluxe collector set. I know it's not, and it would be much better of the book simply came with the $100 faction starter sets.

bitethythumb wrote:
Why would anyone say that, I am just pointing out that the report clearly show GW is alive and kicking and there is little to no sign of any death as several users have pointed out in other post about the inevitable death of GW...

Reinholdt over on Warseer gives GW about 5 years before their revenue declines to the extent that they can no longer mask it by cost cutting measures. When that happens its interesting times at GW towers.

Reinholdt does this kind of thing for a living and the is as close to an authority as the toy soldier forum community can get on this subject IMO at least.

 insaniak wrote:

 Talys wrote:
However, I would argue that with new entrants to the market, established companies must struggle just to maintain marketshare, much less grow (the larger your marketshare, the harder it is to grow).

GW was an established company in the late '90s, when they were practically the only game in town when it came to fantasy and scifi miniature gaming. And they grew like nobody's business.

People's resistance to shifting games worked in GW's favour for a long time, and other companies had to work like hell against the GW inertia just to get any sort of foothold. In that environment, I very much doubt that GW had to work 'harder' than all of those startups in order to continue to grow.

And that's before considering the high barrier to entry competitors face through it being a relatively high up-front capex business.

 Talys wrote:
Paying out dividends is the responsible action for a company that doesn't have anything better to do with its cash, though. Hoarding cash is not good for share prices, and doesn't benefit shareholders (nor does paying your employees better, or lowering your prices, unless that ultimately leads to more profits that could generate even more dividends). Keep in mind too that GAW is not a growth stock, so the best way to provide shareholder revenue is in the form of dividends.

It's perfectly normal for a healthy company to pay out dividends if they have nothing better to do with the cash.

It's properly insane for a company to pay out more in dividends than they make (Dividend Vs Earnings Per Share). That is completely unsustainable.

It's also pretty insane for a company to announce a salary freeze and still give out huge dividends.

Herzlos wrote:

It's properly insane for a company to pay out more in dividends than they make (Dividend Vs Earnings Per Share). That is completely unsustainable.

They don't really do that. Some of the declared dividends were actually from previous years' profit, just declared during this FY.

Herzlos wrote:

It's also pretty insane for a company to announce a salary freeze and still give out huge dividends.

True - normal thing to do nowadays would be to force a salary reduction, so you have MORE money to pay out in dividends, stock options and other executive cash incentives.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Talys wrote:

I think GW isn't very good at recruiting new players because new players in 2015 are less inclined to build 100-200 model armies than 1988 players. Back then, I knew an awful lot of people who really wanted to build their giant battle force (fantasy or scifi); now a lot of those potential customers want something with a smaller time investment, if nothing else. 40k becomes a hobby for those who are really dedicated to miniatures, not for those who want to goof around with a $70 game. There are just a lot more things that give instant gratification these days (video games being at the top), that have improved by leaps and bounds. People generally also have less disposable income, work longer hours, and are a little less patient, I find.

Funny, sounds exactly like the diatribes I was treated to by a family-friend's son when they used to look after me, after I got into Warhammer as a wean; kids your age are into all this newfangled videogame malarkey, you don't have the patience or attention span for Warhammer, they even have to run those multiplayer participation games at GW on Sundays now because you lot all need instant gratification and have to play with the models right away, [Yorkshire]hobbyists were so much more committed & serious & deep when I were a lad and we had to walk uphill both ways in a hailstorm carrying half-ton weights to get to t'local GW[/Yorkshire], blah blah blah.

If anything, the people I see most often stating their desire for fast, easy, small-scale, low-investment rulesets are the adult crowd who've grown up as wargamers but don't have the same amount of free time they used to thanks to family & work commitments, and I've seen no evidence the teen-to-twenties demo are any less interested in collecting big impressive armies now than they were when I started - a lot of them have just been priced out of being able to do so for GW systems.

I don't think Talys is completely off the mark however: the fact is that the teenagers/young adults do not have any more free time nowadays than they did quarter of a century ago, and with so many other gaming options available (video games, MMORPGs, trading card games) it is just inevitable that other hobbies lose market share. Also, whole concept of "making your own toys" is somewhat alien to many modern kids. We can of course blame GW from driving the kids out of the hobby with their pricing (with some justification), but how, then, we are to explain massive decline of model kit building hobby amongst the youngsters, during an era when the model kits are both better and cheaper than ever before? And just look at tabletop RPG's...nowadays when I go to local con it's mostly same guys who gamed 20 years ago already. In some cases, playing very same games (or even campaigns, as it's in case of me....). I'm not saying that there are no kids at all picking these hobbies, of course there are, but there is no denying that age demographics have changed. Also, to some extent it is a self-reinforcing spiral: some younger people are uncomfortable starting a hobby where majority of the people are generation older. It's a social hobby and if you just don't connect "dude, Amaranthe is like greatest band ever! Elize is so hot!" "-Ummm...is that some MTV band? I listen to Rush" it slightly gimps the experience. Now that is a caricature, but you get the idea (hopefully).

I do believe most communities have a "shelf life". At some point they just begin to get less new members, they become "ossified" and lack of dynamics causes older participants to lose interest too. Since wargames are very much community games, their shelf life is limited. Maybe WHFB has simply ran its course.

Backfire wrote:

Herzlos wrote:

It's properly insane for a company to pay out more in dividends than they make (Dividend Vs Earnings Per Share). That is completely unsustainable.

They don't really do that. Some of the declared dividends were actually from previous years' profit, just declared during this FY.

Herzlos wrote:

It's also pretty insane for a company to announce a salary freeze and still give out huge dividends.

True - normal thing to do nowadays would be to force a salary reduction, so you have MORE money to pay out in dividends, stock options and other executive cash incentives.

It depends, some expenses are non-cash expenses like depreciation and amortization. Look at the cash flow statement for a better picture of the company's health. That shows you what they spent their operating cash on throughout the year.

Dividends are nothing more than a payment to the owners for their investment in the company. From the financials, it sounds like the reduction was made across the board and would be back paid if things got better.

GW is not a growth stock. Their share price does not grow and dividends are expected to be paid. With those dividends, you can either buy more shares or invest elsewhere.

I'm recalling an anecdote on why they stopped selling bits...

I guess all the bits were just in bins, organized by the same type, so they had like a bajillion bins of arms, lasguns, heads, etc. These were all in racks and shelves in a large storeroom or something.

One of the racks got knocked over, and all the bits spilled and intermingled on the floor.

The story goes that they estimated that sorting all the bits would take a very long time, and cost several thousand dollars, so they just scrapped the bits program.

It's probably not true, but I think it's pretty funny.

The thing is, though, on that same report they announced their plans to open more stores, thus hiring more employees. Sounds absolutely daft to tell prospective new hires "we'll hire you, but you're not going to get any raises, despite the fact that we have more cash than we know what to do with." Especially since GW's in the business of selling things and absolutely depends on its employees to make those sales.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ziggurattt wrote:
I'm recalling an anecdote on why they stopped selling bits...

I guess all the bits were just in bins, organized by the same type, so they had like a bajillion bins of arms, lasguns, heads, etc. These were all in racks and shelves in a large storeroom or something.

One of the racks got knocked over, and all the bits spilled and intermingled on the floor.

The story goes that they estimated that sorting all the bits would take a very long time, and cost several thousand dollars, so they just scrapped the bits program.

It's probably not true, but I think it's pretty funny.

No need to sort them. They're metal, so they can just chuck them back into the pot and recast as needed.

My answers in red (admittedly some are just purely for comedy value)

 The Riddle of Steel wrote:
Interesting thread.

Some thoughts on GW as a company:

1. Why do they have stores? They always say they are a miniatures business more than a game business. Well, they certainly aren't a retail business. I think the most effective way to get new customers to try your product is by having your product in other stores that draw in people for other similar products. How many of us started this hobby because we went into a store for Magic cards or D&D stuff and saw 40k and fell in love? Who goes out of their way to go into a store you've never heard of that sells a single product you've never heard of? And I personally hate the awkward discussion and subtle pressure of a salesman trying to tell you about their product. I think for many introverts (most gamers), this is a turn-off. It's a much better experience to walk into a hobby shop filled with games where 40k is one of many. This is a fair point actually.

2. Why do they refuse to interact with their customers? This seems to be the opposite direction all other companies are going and different from the old days when you felt like you knew the designers from White Dwarf interviews. As a comparison, look at the Magic website. They post new content every day. They explain their design decisions. They post articles on tactics. They encourage discussion and feedback. People get involved. A lot of us have so much passion for this hobby and would love more insight into the inner workings. I loved how in the old White Dwarf magazine when a new codex or game came out, they would interview the designers and authors who would explain the design choices. Love it or hate it, at least you understood somewhat of the reason for a rule. They even explained how variations performed during play testing so you knew they actually tried it out and liked the result! Because there's nothing wrong with their products. Obviously

3. Most people want 40k to be a somewhat balanced and tactical game because it is fun trying to outwit your opponent and win, and that's a big reason people play most board games and wargames. Very few games are played regularly just because the game pieces look pretty. Most people don't play tournaments, but even casual players want a fair fight where in-game decisions and maneuvers matter more than the army you choose. Winning or losing because of obviously overpowered units isn't fun for either player. So keep the game balanced, issue errata if needed, and explain your design decisions so we understand why you think a given rule or codex is balanced. Admit design mistakes like Magic has done. Invite tournament winners to play test and try to break their upcoming rules. They do tweak things..usually not the things that need it lol

4. One other thing they can learn from Magic (I'm no Magic fanboy. I haven't played in years, but from what I understand they are a pretty successful business. And I really respect them.): have both intro and advanced levels. Have simpler and cheaper ways to play to get people in (Magic has, or used to have, simplified Core sets and they also do sealed deck and draft formats where it only takes a small investment to play competitively against people who have massive collections, which greatly reduces the barrier to entry for a new player). Points values should ensure all games of 40k are fair and their box sets allow people to start with a more limited amount of rules they need to understand, but I still think more can be done to make entry easier. To be fair to GW Age of Sigmar while expensive, has covered the rules bit (sort of)

5. Resume selling bits. Pff don't be silly! There's no market for that!

I think they have a lot more potential to grow with a few changes that really don't cost a lot.

There is no need to stand on ceremony here. Why all the politically correct backtracking. Is anyone here running for public office? Afraid that someone you post here might be used against you?

There's nothing wrong with acknowledging the FACT that there are generational differences. The things my father did for enjoyment are largely different than what I do, my children will enjoy different things as well. There a million reasons why, from the advancement and availability of technology, to politics, to religion, to location and so and so forth but they don't really matter on their own, only in their ability to illustrate that no two generations will be the same, and that it's not an opinion or bias, it's an observable fact with more contributing factors than you can easily address.

That being said - there is no doubt in my mind that 40k as a hobby is less interesting to the 18-35 demographic of today than it did for the 18-35 demographic in 1990 or in 2000 ... just a fact.

At those times, videogames were a less compelling alternative to more physically engaging hobbies and fell further outside the social norm (it was a little weird to identify as a 'gamer' in 1990... today that's like internet's equivalent of street cred).

I got into 40k because of its appeal at the time - the lore was more consistent, had far fewer cooks in the kitchen in terms of writers (speaking strictly of the codices here since I have not once enjoyed a 40k themed novel). And let's be honest, the lore is really the main if not the only attraction to the hobby as a whole. The rest is just plastic minis. If you were strictly into the painting or modeling aspect, there are certainly other options... quality options that can meet that need. What makes 40k unique is it's setting.

Fast forward a few years - most of the story has been either radically overhauled or completely re-written. There are several new (totally superfluous) factions that don't need to exist and some of the factions that we knew and loved are now effectively gone. The writing style has shifted from 'give them enough to get their imagination going and let them create a fantasy' to 'over-explain everything to such a degree that it constrains the fantasy, or ruins altogether because it clashes with other, existing material'.

And while that burns - it really doesn't hurt me as badly as it hurts GW. I - like many if not most other long-term fans, have an appreciation for the hobby as a whole, and as my appreciation wanes, so does my willingness to purchase their products. They are, quite literally, losing their most loyal, most lucrative customers. This is of far greater significance than price or release schedule. I've said before that their financials aren't going to recover just because they slash prices - that's a silly thing for people to even be suggesting. they need to repair their relationship with their loyal customers. That's how you generate positive WoM advertising and increase both customer retention and induction. This is how you bridge that generational gap; you have the current generation induct future generations by word of mouth. If I have fun playing, and people can see that I have fun playing... they will want to play as well. But I walk into my FLGS and spend the whole time complaining with my chums about how much GW hates me and just wants my money... who is going to jump on board with that?

I know that I drew a parallel with Apple as a company model in a previous post, but that was more cautionary in nature. I would never recommend that any company attempt to recreate that model. Apple is an anomaly in the business world - every choice they make is a awful and they should, by all reason be bankrupt and relegated to a footnote in some obscure history textbook - but they somehow succeed despite their failures (mostly because Microsoft has repeatedly bailed them out of Chapter 11 to avoid anti-trust but that's another story). Apple sells garbage that they have convinced people is more valuable than diamonds. GW actually produces quality miniatures that would by flying of the shelves if they had better rules and actually catered to their customers needs. There are, apart from the fact that they are both publicly traded companies, no similarities between Apple and GW - my previous example with strictly as an example of what NOT to do.

As one of my old lecturers put it,
using your imagination is becoming a thing of the past.
I really think it is where entertainment, technology and generations glued to a screen are concerned.
Its not the only brain function to suffer either,
why think when your phone can tell you the answer ?

ziggurattt wrote:
I'm recalling an anecdote on why they stopped selling bits...

I guess all the bits were just in bins, organized by the same type, so they had like a bajillion bins of arms, lasguns, heads, etc. These were all in racks and shelves in a large storeroom or something.

One of the racks got knocked over, and all the bits spilled and intermingled on the floor.

The story goes that they estimated that sorting all the bits would take a very long time, and cost several thousand dollars, so they just scrapped the bits program.

It's probably not true, but I think it's pretty funny.

It's not true. If this had happened they'd have taken on some interns or work experience kids to do it. Free labour is readily available!

 Rayvon wrote:
As one of my old lecturers put it,
using your imagination is becoming a thing of the past.
I really think it is where entertainment, technology and generations glued to a screen are concerned.
Its not the only brain function to suffer either,
why think when your phone can tell you the answer ?

I'm pretty sure people have been saying this sort of stuff since forever. There has always been dunces who don't think critically, creatively or deeply just like there have always been people who do and for the foreseeable future there will still be both sides of the coin and lots of grey in between.

I think people way overstate that sort of stuff. Sure, things change over the years but I think peoples' capacity to think (or in some peoples' cases, not to think) is relatively constant.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 En Excelsis wrote:
At those times, videogames were a less compelling alternative to more physically engaging hobbies and fell further outside the social norm (it was a little weird to identify as a 'gamer' in 1990... today that's like internet's equivalent of street cred).

We can get in to philosophical debates about how the desires of the population have varied over the years.... but I actually think you're wrong on this point. I think gaming has only become mildly more socially acceptable among adults than it used to be and no more acceptable among kids (though maybe more accepted by parents).

In no way did I ever feel ashamed talking about being a video gamer, growing up in the late 80's through the 90's. But now as an adult I tend to avoid talking about video games, even people at work I know are gamers don't talk about it, instead favouring discussion on the more socially acceptable forms of recreation.

I don't actually think much has changed in that regard in terms of market appeals since the mid 90's. GW probably has more to be concerned about with competition from other wargames these days than it does or ever did have to worry about things like video games.

 daddyorchips wrote:

ziggurattt wrote:
I'm recalling an anecdote on why they stopped selling bits...

I guess all the bits were just in bins, organized by the same type, so they had like a bajillion bins of arms, lasguns, heads, etc. These were all in racks and shelves in a large storeroom or something.

One of the racks got knocked over, and all the bits spilled and intermingled on the floor.

The story goes that they estimated that sorting all the bits would take a very long time, and cost several thousand dollars, so they just scrapped the bits program.

It's probably not true, but I think it's pretty funny.

It's not true. If this had happened they'd have taken on some interns or work experience kids to do it. Free labour is readily available!

Yup, not true. There was a big shelf collapse at GW, and what they did was sell grab bags of metal bitz for dollars per ounce. Turned out to be a really great deal. I still have lots of those bitz, and/or half model in my bitz boxes.

GW stopped their bitz service because they didn't think it was making them enough money, or that it was more of a cost than it should have been. Have you eve seen the old bitz catalog? Makes the phone book look like the new white dwarf. Consider, every model GW had ever made, and new ones in the back of each month's white dwarf, broken up into bitz - head, arm (R/L), legs, torsos, weapons, pouches, torches, everything cast up, catalogued, and for sale. Its a HUGE inventory to maintain. Granted, it was great as a converter and modeler back in the day, but it was unsustainable. Then, when they switched to plastics, it makes bitz harder for them, I would assume.

I still miss their bitz service... And when they used to hold their Games Days, you could buy bitz by the ounce. It was amazing.

 Cruentus wrote:

 daddyorchips wrote:

ziggurattt wrote:
I'm recalling an anecdote on why they stopped selling bits...

I guess all the bits were just in bins, organized by the same type, so they had like a bajillion bins of arms, lasguns, heads, etc. These were all in racks and shelves in a large storeroom or something.

One of the racks got knocked over, and all the bits spilled and intermingled on the floor.

The story goes that they estimated that sorting all the bits would take a very long time, and cost several thousand dollars, so they just scrapped the bits program.

It's probably not true, but I think it's pretty funny.

It's not true. If this had happened they'd have taken on some interns or work experience kids to do it. Free labour is readily available!

Yup, not true. There was a big shelf collapse at GW, and what they did was sell grab bags of metal bitz for dollars per ounce. Turned out to be a really great deal. I still have lots of those bitz, and/or half model in my bitz boxes.

GW stopped their bitz service because they didn't think it was making them enough money, or that it was more of a cost than it should have been. Have you eve seen the old bitz catalog? Makes the phone book look like the new white dwarf. Consider, every model GW had ever made, and new ones in the back of each month's white dwarf, broken up into bitz - head, arm (R/L), legs, torsos, weapons, pouches, torches, everything cast up, catalogued, and for sale. Its a HUGE inventory to maintain. Granted, it was great as a converter and modeler back in the day, but it was unsustainable. Then, when they switched to plastics, it makes bitz harder for them, I would assume.

I still miss their bitz service... And when they used to hold their Games Days, you could buy bitz by the ounce. It was amazing.

PP lets you order bits, but I suppose they have less models to worry about.

 agnosto wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

The thing is, though, pay freezes are what companies do when they have, or expect to have, money problems. So, then, why is GW freezing salaries? A pay freeze for all employees should be setting off an alarm bell...assuming any of the big investors have someone more important than the office's student intern reading GW's annual reports, anyway.

Bingo. You don't freeze employee pay unless you anticipate cash-flow issues in the near future.

Here's a trend for you;

Revenue:
2013 - 134,597,000
2014 - 123,501,000
2015 - 119,132,000

- Falling revenues, uh oh, but how was cash-flow?

Cash flow from operation activities (gross):
2013 - 31,908,000
2014 - 24,997,000
2015 - 25,579,000

- This is good, if it can be maintained but then they go ahead and pay a large amount in dividends.

Dividends:
2013 - 18,381,000
2014 - 5,077,000
2015 - 16,601,000

- wait, what? You come off of a bad year by dumping money on investors instead of playing it safer and reinvesting back into the company?

So, you wind up with closing net cash (post dividends):
2013 - 13,931,000
2014 - 17,550,000
2015 - 12,561,000

- Let's empty the safety-net and reserves to pay big dividends, shall we? Here's the sad thing, this is after a large difference in effect that exchange rates had on their cash (i.e. higher in 2014 than 2015, 329,000 vs. 166,000). Good companies pay dividends, don't get me wrong here, but they seldom do so to a level that negatively influences their ability to do business and should never exceed their EPS, that's a big no-no.

So, how healthy are they? Let's look at the trend in current ratio:
2013 - 1.43
2014 - 2.16
2015 - 2.00

- The way this works, for anyone who doesn't know, is a rough and dirty calculation of current assets divided by current liabilities to arrive at a ratio that indicates general financial health. Low numbers are bad and indicate that a business might fold with the right amount of pressure. Anything over a 1 is decent. So GW still looks healthy to a casual investor.

If someone were to ask me, I'd give GW stock a weak buy or at least a hold and wait for the next couple of years to see what's going to happen long-term. It's a good short to medium investment but I feel antsy about owning it long-term (which is probably why I've divested myself of it twice already). It doesn't help that the Chairman's a loon.

Thank you for the excellent and intelligent post!

The only thing I didn't follow was EPS - could you define what that is or tell me where in your post it is?

Earnings Per Share = profit / total number of shares

 daddyorchips wrote:

ziggurattt wrote:
I'm recalling an anecdote on why they stopped selling bits...

I guess all the bits were just in bins, organized by the same type, so they had like a bajillion bins of arms, lasguns, heads, etc. These were all in racks and shelves in a large storeroom or something.

One of the racks got knocked over, and all the bits spilled and intermingled on the floor.

The story goes that they estimated that sorting all the bits would take a very long time, and cost several thousand dollars, so they just scrapped the bits program.

It's probably not true, but I think it's pretty funny.

It's not true. If this had happened they'd have taken on some interns or work experience kids to do it. Free labour is readily available!

It is sort of true. It happened in the US at their Baltimore facility (IIRC). The rack did go over, bits intermingled. So Games Workshop had a special offer. Rather than sort the stuff, they scooped the bits into bags and sold those bags of mystery bits-- I think it was half a pound or quarter pound weight. Several friends of mine bought those mystery bags. This was around 1999-2002. They did not stop selling bits because of it however.

Why isn't this locked? There's a huge thread in the discussions section now.

(and dakkadakka seems to have its fair share of "economics majors" )

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Cruentus wrote:

 daddyorchips wrote:

ziggurattt wrote:
I'm recalling an anecdote on why they stopped selling bits...

I guess all the bits were just in bins, organized by the same type, so they had like a bajillion bins of arms, lasguns, heads, etc. These were all in racks and shelves in a large storeroom or something.

One of the racks got knocked over, and all the bits spilled and intermingled on the floor.

The story goes that they estimated that sorting all the bits would take a very long time, and cost several thousand dollars, so they just scrapped the bits program.

It's probably not true, but I think it's pretty funny.

It's not true. If this had happened they'd have taken on some interns or work experience kids to do it. Free labour is readily available!

Yup, not true. There was a big shelf collapse at GW, and what they did was sell grab bags of metal bitz for dollars per ounce. Turned out to be a really great deal. I still have lots of those bitz, and/or half model in my bitz boxes.

GW stopped their bitz service because they didn't think it was making them enough money, or that it was more of a cost than it should have been. Have you eve seen the old bitz catalog? Makes the phone book look like the new white dwarf. Consider, every model GW had ever made, and new ones in the back of each month's white dwarf, broken up into bitz - head, arm (R/L), legs, torsos, weapons, pouches, torches, everything cast up, catalogued, and for sale. Its a HUGE inventory to maintain. Granted, it was great as a converter and modeler back in the day, but it was unsustainable. Then, when they switched to plastics, it makes bitz harder for them, I would assume.

I still miss their bitz service... And when they used to hold their Games Days, you could buy bitz by the ounce. It was amazing.

PP lets you order bits, but I suppose they have less models to worry about.

I wish they didn't restrict it to just the metal ones though. It frustrates me to no end that Goreshade3's Only resin part is his cool cloak bit that I want several extra of, but can't order because they don't sell the resin bits.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

The thing is, though, pay freezes are what companies do when they have, or expect to have, money problems. So, then, why is GW freezing salaries? A pay freeze for all employees should be setting off an alarm bell...assuming any of the big investors have someone more important than the office's student intern reading GW's annual reports, anyway.

Find a company that isn't freezing salaries... It's the current thing to do, freeze pay, cut training, then complain that you can't get qualified staff and have high turnover and blaim the government, educators and "kids today".

Anyway, in the face of a strong pound for a company that does allot of exports, seems reasonable good. The last 6 months seem to be much stronger than the first. With stable adjusted revenue and solid profits it is not yet good, but it is looking up.

I don't know if it will keep going, but I think GW's changes might be working. Despite what some people think, they do seem to be listening to people, with WHFB getting the full re-write (for better or worse) many wanted, the Ad-Mech and Knights were things people were asking for for a long time and an attempt was made to sort out White Dwarf. Yes, some things may not have worked (White Dwarf), but I think GW are listening and do seem to be making changes.

Now, if they can stick with an edition for a while... I just hope they take some notes from AOS over to 40k. Not the points, but simplified rules, available free. If so I would buy allot more. At the moment I don't know when I will next play a game, but if I knew that I could buy whatever I wanted and grab the current rules that would make me buy stuff rather than waiting to see if I still want it next time I get a game, or if the rules have changed by then.

Most places with freezes have lifted them again (though there's usually caps in place).

I suspect a large surge of sales in the last half will have been people panic buying WHFB before it goes OOP. Though Ad-Mech seems to have been pretty popular too.

I'm also not sure who/what GW is listening to; they do seem to be trying new things, but not actually fixing anything that people are asking about. Maybe it's just a really bad case of the grapevine distorting the message?

Most people are fairly static in employment so not increasing renumeration is often the norm. They simply don't put their hand up.

Outside of the SE of England things are pretty flat, particularly in manufacturing so outside opportunities will not necessarily exist, even less so in toy manufacture.

Plus It's Nottingham, they're lucky to have jobs.

Yeah, no pay rise seems reasonable. Announcing it to the world seems vary daft.

 notprop wrote:

Yeah, no pay rise seems reasonable. Announcing it to the world seems vary daft.

GW was probably thinking "look how much money we'll save by not paying our employees!"

 Selym wrote:

 notprop wrote:

Yeah, no pay rise seems reasonable. Announcing it to the world seems vary daft.

GW was probably thinking "look how much money we'll save by not paying our employees!"

Perhaps this is their long-term goal with the "we hire for attitude" philosophy?

Next they'll only be hiring interns...

AllSeeingSkink wrote:


I think people way overstate that sort of stuff. Sure, things change over the years but I think peoples' capacity to think (or in some peoples' cases, not to think) is relatively constant.

Agree that the capacity to think is constant, but the desire or need to think more than making basic decisions, Im not so sure.

 Rayvon wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:


I think people way overstate that sort of stuff. Sure, things change over the years but I think peoples' capacity to think (or in some peoples' cases, not to think) is relatively constant.

Agree that the capacity to think is constant, but the desire or need to think more than making basic decisions, Im not so sure.

Given the sharp rise in production of creative goods you see in the "common man" through Kickstarter et al., that is people whose job is often not in a creative industry but are starting a new career as such, that is a little difficult to believe. People said the same thing about TV. I suspect that most folks highly over estimate the amount of creative and deep thinking that anyone ever does, especially in the past.
You see that at play in measures of political knowledge. People complain that folks don't understand government or politics etc., that previous knowledge and engagement was much higher. Then you see actual survey data spreading from the early-mid 20th century to the later part, and pretty much no one knew anything ever (citation in link). Arguably things are more complicated now and so the gap between what people know and what they would need to know to be "fully informed" is ever increasing, but it hasn't been a rosy picture since people slept one hut over from their representatives.

And I would not be too suspicious of the number of economists that are on the forum and in this thread. Turns out a job that requires a taste for model building and design, system analysis and a lot of numbers lends itself nicely to a hobby that rewards similar behaviors

So... I think this has meandered on for long enough to put it to bed. There's an ongoing 'GW Financials' thread in Dakka Discussions if anyone is inclined to continue the discussion there.