Dakka is one of the few forums where I can read it and be like "Oh, geez... not this again, I should prob..." and I keep scrolling to see at least three other folks chiming in with a well poised response to something that is asinine; be it a rules question, tactics discussion, or who actually died on what planet during which war by what faction (and possibly Mk of the blade/bullet used).
For as much hate Dakka gets, it's probably one of the better community forums out there.
The thing is, though, Games Workshop is not making it's games any better. I choose not to forget that this used to be $35:
Spoiler:
Or that you used to get 20 of the modern guardsmen models in a box versus 10.
TheKbob wrote: My post was made in response of the "Tsilber" folks out there. It's not a targeted attack, but every time someone rolls through a thread of legitimate beef with Games Workshop and their games, the hand waving of "I have no problems, lulz for you!" gets quite trite.
If I have to read another "Hate the Player, Not the Game!" blog (or BoLS) article, I may have to take a pair of hobby knives to the eyes. These arguments only further breed dissent in a player base already torn apart. ]
Sorry man, it wasn't my intention to come across as such ("i have no problems , lulz for you"). The topic was about GW's future. Some people think its terrible and going down in flames and some think it will be just fine. People voice their bad experiences, so people then voice their positive experiences in response, after all this is a discussion forum. Sometimes people take offense and get angry for no reason. Honestly Its the Horus heresy, age old, Kyril Sindermann argument. "I am right, so therefore you must be wrong" Or vice versa. Either way apologies for any offense.
And honestly, you don't HAVE to read all the "hate the player, not the game" articles. You chose to. So chose not to read em, because your eyes are valuable.
And honestly, you don't HAVE to read all the "hate the player, not the game" articles. You chose to. So chose not to read em, because your eyes are valuable.
Doesn't mean they're less wrong or any less worse for the community.
Articles, blog posts, and topics on forums that blame the players are bad for the community and should be put in their place. Telling players that their way of playing is wrong is the worst thing we can do as gamers.
TheKbob wrote: My post was made in response of the "Tsilber" folks out there. It's not a targeted attack, but every time someone rolls through a thread of legitimate beef with Games Workshop and their games, the hand waving of "I have no problems, lulz for you!" gets quite trite.
If I have to read another "Hate the Player, Not the Game!" blog (or BoLS) article, I may have to take a pair of hobby knives to the eyes. These arguments only further breed dissent in a player base already torn apart. ]
Sorry man, it wasn't my intention to come across as such ("i have no problems , lulz for you"). The topic was about GW's future. Some people think its terrible and going down in flames and some think it will be just fine. People voice their bad experiences, so people then voice their positive experiences in response, after all this is a discussion forum. Sometimes people take offense and get angry for no reason. Honestly Its the Horus heresy, age old, Kyril Sindermann argument. "I am right, so therefore you must be wrong" Or vice versa. Either way apologies for any offense.
And honestly, you don't HAVE to read all the "hate the player, not the game" articles. You chose to. So chose not to read em, because your eyes are valuable.
Not exactly, while, over the course of twenty pages, the discussion has gone around the houses a bit, this particular thread isn't concerned with experiences, other than those that pertain very directly to the explicit facts of GW and their financial performance and the interpretation of those facts.
While there's every chance that you're right in your assertion that GW will be ok long term, there's very little evidence to support the idea that they're ok right now, and very little evidence to suggest that what they're doing to try and fix it is working sufficiently well to change that.
They're ok in the sense that they probably have time to fix things, and perhaps one or two chances to screw up, but currently "everything will be ok" is not a supportable argument.
And honestly, you don't HAVE to read all the "hate the player, not the game" articles. You chose to. So chose not to read em, because your eyes are valuable.
Doesn't mean they're less wrong or any less worse for the community.
Articles, blog posts, and topics on forums that blame the players are bad for the community and should be put in their place. Telling players that their way of playing is wrong is the worst thing we can do as gamers.
? what? All I was suggesting is don't read articles that make you want to poke your eyes out, eyes are valuable. I was making a joke to his wording... No one said he was wrong or worse about anything, nor did I tell a player their way of playing is wrong... Did you get your reference "quote" correct?
? what? All I was suggesting is don't read articles that make you want to poke your eyes out, eyes are valuable. I was making a joke to his wording... No one said he was wrong or worse about anything, nor did I tell a player their way of playing is wrong... Did you get your reference "quote" correct?
No, I get that, but his strong dislike of posts like that is justified, and potentially worth the cost of his eyes if they were never to be seen again.
TheKbob wrote: My post was made in response of the "Tsilber" folks out there. It's not a targeted attack, but every time someone rolls through a thread of legitimate beef with Games Workshop and their games, the hand waving of "I have no problems, lulz for you!" gets quite trite.
If I have to read another "Hate the Player, Not the Game!" blog (or BoLS) article, I may have to take a pair of hobby knives to the eyes. These arguments only further breed dissent in a player base already torn apart. ]
Sorry man, it wasn't my intention to come across as such ("i have no problems , lulz for you"). The topic was about GW's future. Some people think its terrible and going down in flames and some think it will be just fine. People voice their bad experiences, so people then voice their positive experiences in response, after all this is a discussion forum. Sometimes people take offense and get angry for no reason. Honestly Its the Horus heresy, age old, Kyril Sindermann argument. "I am right, so therefore you must be wrong" Or vice versa. Either way apologies for any offense.
And honestly, you don't HAVE to read all the "hate the player, not the game" articles. You chose to. So chose not to read em, because your eyes are valuable.
Not exactly, while, over the course of twenty pages, the discussion has gone around the houses a bit, this particular thread isn't concerned with experiences, other than those that pertain very directly to the explicit facts of GW and their financial performance and the interpretation of those facts.
While there's every chance that you're right in your assertion that GW will be ok long term, there's very little evidence to support the idea that they're ok right now, and very little evidence to suggest that what they're doing to try and fix it is working sufficiently well to change that.
They're ok in the sense that they probably have time to fix things, and perhaps one or two chances to screw up, but currently "everything will be ok" is not a supportable argument.
After are last falling out on another thread, I can say now I appreciate what your saying and you make some good points AZ. But their is evidence that they will be fine and are moving in the right direction. Revamp the websites, new kits coming out. The amount of codex and books they put out in the last 24 months. Some can say "well all they wanted to do was make money". And some people think they were actually making attempts to update all the rules for all the models they put out. While some think the models are over priced. Some might find the building, modeling, painting and then play value in the $50 for 10 dark elf witches. I see the arguments on both sides. But I do not think GW is at the point of some major companies, such as GMAC or FORD who thought they could never fail because of how big they are. I do not think GW is going to fail because they know they are still not big enough to never fail.
I don't think that it is as rosy as all that - in the case of 7th ed. WH40K... for the first time no one in my local gaming group sprung for the new edition.
And only three bothered with 6th - vs. seven for 5th... and everyone had gone in for 3rd. (I do not remember the numbers for 4th ed.... I think that it might have been six, which means that 5th was more popular than 4th, but I am not certain.)
This time... nothing.
The Auld Grump
*EDIT* The fact that 3rd edition had the full rulebook and the black mini-codex might have been a contributing factor - it actually brought back a lot of folks that had abandoned WH40K in the latter days of the silliness that was 2nd edition. And because of the binding problems... a fair number of folks ended up with two copies of the 3rd edition rules.
TheAuldGrump wrote: I don't think that it is as rosy as all that - in the case of 7th ed. WH40K... for the first time no one in my local gaming group sprung for the new edition.
And only three bothered with 6th - vs. seven for 5th... and everyone had gone in for 3rd. (I do not remember the numbers for 4th ed.... I think that it might have been six, which means that 5th was more popular than 4th, but I am not certain.)
This time... nothing.
The Auld Grump
Where is the group located? Im not sure if I can mention the store I play at by name. But here in Connecticut I know 2 stores in the same town that are competitors. sold about 150 copies of 7th between the both of them. Both stores carry and have a presence of players for warmachine, malifeux, FOW in addition to GW. And both stores have a gaming area of about 10-15 tables. But your comment shows a reality towards the debate of GW not doing so hot, my local area would show evidence its doing just fine. I guess some areas groups are fed up, and plenty of other things out there to get your gaming fix from.
Tsilber wrote: After are last falling out on another thread, I can say now I appreciate what your saying and you make some good points AZ. But their is evidence that they will be fine and are moving in the right direction. Revamp the websites, new kits coming out. The amount of codex and books they put out in the last 24 months. Some can say "well all they wanted to do was make money". And some people think they were actually making attempts to update all the rules for all the models they put out. While some think the models are over priced. Some might find the building, modeling, painting and then play value in the $50 for 10 dark elf witches. I see the arguments on both sides. But I do not think GW is at the point of some major companies, such as GMAC or FORD who thought they could never fail because of how big they are. I do not think GW is going to fail because they know they are still not big enough to never fail.
Sort of. On the surface it did seem like it was an effort to update everything, but then the manner of which they actually released everything was so random and roughshod.
You had codices, limited edition codices, supplements and mini codices getting hardback releases. You had formations getting digital only releases. Then you had codices getting digital releases only. Then you had oddballs like Militarum Tempestus that was released with the new IG codex which included only 4 units to make an entire army, and those units were new kits releasing right then. You had books and formations that were average, you had books and formations that were ridiculously powerful. You had a terrible codex release with a formation that emphasised new kits that had competitive players scrambling for ways to counter just the formation (Tyranids and Skyblight swarm).
Put simply, it was a massiely increased output of rules that was completely random in both quality and accessibility. To new players and veterans who are still enamoured with GW it might have indeed been like Christmas. To veterans who have become jaded about the product is just looked desperate - trying to release as much as possible as cheaply as possible (only releasing physical copies later of things that sold well as digital, for example) to get people to buy as much as possible.
When you then look at that behaviour at the time it came - during/after a particularly bad financial period (as per the last financial report), and alongside a new edition that came two years early, you can see why people are thinking it wasn't done out of love for the game by the company making it.
TheKbob wrote: Dakka is one of the few forums where I can read it and be like "Oh, geez... not this again, I should prob..." and I keep scrolling to see at least three other folks chiming in with a well poised response to something that is asinine; be it a rules question, tactics discussion, or who actually died on what planet during which war by what faction (and possibly Mk of the blade/bullet used).
For as much hate Dakka gets, it's probably one of the better community forums out there.
The thing is, though, Games Workshop is not making it's games any better. I choose not to forget that this used to be $35:
Spoiler:
Or that you used to get 20 of the modern guardsmen models in a box versus 10.
Do you know why some of hate comes from "certain people"?
I came to this site 4 years ago and found out what a wonderful place where people can find a plethora of sound information and advice. I also came at a time of some serious tension. Though new, many of us offered our services to this site just in case any kind of legal issues (or other matters) should occur. In my case I knew as an old timer in the hobby (god going on close to 45 years) you simply do not type of place on the other sites. This site is worth fighting for. This site is one of the few sites that kept true to the independence of thinking and expressing our viewpoints within reason.
You do not see that in many of the other sites. Which is why this is the largest site of its kind. And that is why "haters" hate this site.
They can not control the growth of this site.
They can not control the increase, it least in my eyes, the quality of professionals that come to Dakka to express and share their information on how certain things work... in business and in this hobby.
The reason why certain people hates us is because we keep on searching about the truth about things that other people/business wants to hide.
And it pisses them off greatly...
So I'll continue to support Dakka so that we have the freedom of expression without the fear of reprisal from those who believe that...
-Loki- wrote: Sort of. On the surface it did seem like it was an effort to update everything, but then the manner of which they actually released everything was so random and roughshod.
"Throwing fistfulls of brown matter at the wall to see what sticks" in other words. Regardless of the long term consequences of throwing brown matter on your customers.
Kilkrazy wrote: This is DakkaDakka. We encourage a healthy free exchange of ideas.
TheAuldGrump wrote: I don't think that it is as rosy as all that - in the case of 7th ed. WH40K... for the first time no one in my local gaming group sprung for the new edition.
And only three bothered with 6th - vs. seven for 5th... and everyone had gone in for 3rd. (I do not remember the numbers for 4th ed.... I think that it might have been six, which means that 5th was more popular than 4th, but I am not certain.)
This time... nothing.
The Auld Grump
Where is the group located? Im not sure if I can mention the store I play at by name. But here in Connecticut I know 2 stores in the same town that are competitors. sold about 150 copies of 7th between the both of them. Both stores carry and have a presence of players for warmachine, malifeux, FOW in addition to GW. And both stores have a gaming area of about 10-15 tables. But your comment shows a reality towards the debate of GW not doing so hot, my local area would show evidence its doing just fine. I guess some areas groups are fed up, and plenty of other things out there to get your gaming fix from.
Portland, Maine. There is a store pretty much dedicated to GW games - but most of the folks that I play with mostly shop in Gardner, at a much less GW centric store.
But I am not talking about a store group - I am talking about twelveeighteen folks that take the time, several days each week, to play something on a ping pong table turned into a battlefield - lately that something has most often been Kings of War, with a few games of Deadzone, Infinity, and Flames of War filling in the gaps. (Malifaux keeps being talked about... I have my miniatures for it... but it has not yet happened.)
I typically make it to one night a week.
There is a pick up group that alternates between Necromunda and Mordheim.
WARMAHordes is played on a night that I can't make, but I think that it has about five or six players. But it gets its own night - which is more than can be said for Kings of War or the other games. (Main reason - the owner of said table really, really likes WARMACHINE, and also owns a Hordes army... His house, his table.)
Dreadball gets played a lot as well - but I skip that night, I am not a big fan of either Dreadball or Blood Bowl.
Using that same group of players... 4e D&D is pretty much dead, Pathfinder is running strong, and the WH40Kroleplaying games are doing just fine! (It is actually easier to get a game of any of those RPGs going than a simple game of WH40K....)
The Auld Grump
*EDIT* Demographics of the group - Total of eighteen players, ten over the age of 35, four between 25 and 35, four of ages 17 or younger. (Second and third generation gamers in that younger sub group. )
I am the oldest, at over fifty. Two of the youngsters were my students.
Also... the group is currently eighteen people, not twelve - I really should have remembered this - number eighteen is my girlfriend. I was the one that introduced her to the group. (She needed to beat, I mean meet, new people. )
TheKbob wrote: My post was made in response of the "Tsilber" folks out there. It's not a targeted attack, but every time someone rolls through a thread of legitimate beef with Games Workshop and their games, the hand waving of "I have no problems, lulz for you!" gets quite trite.
If I have to read another "Hate the Player, Not the Game!" blog (or BoLS) article, I may have to take a pair of hobby knives to the eyes. These arguments only further breed dissent in a player base already torn apart. ]
Sorry man, it wasn't my intention to come across as such ("i have no problems , lulz for you"). The topic was about GW's future. Some people think its terrible and going down in flames and some think it will be just fine. People voice their bad experiences, so people then voice their positive experiences in response, after all this is a discussion forum. Sometimes people take offense and get angry for no reason. Honestly Its the Horus heresy, age old, Kyril Sindermann argument. "I am right, so therefore you must be wrong" Or vice versa. Either way apologies for any offense.
And honestly, you don't HAVE to read all the "hate the player, not the game" articles. You chose to. So chose not to read em, because your eyes are valuable.
Not exactly, while, over the course of twenty pages, the discussion has gone around the houses a bit, this particular thread isn't concerned with experiences, other than those that pertain very directly to the explicit facts of GW and their financial performance and the interpretation of those facts.
While there's every chance that you're right in your assertion that GW will be ok long term, there's very little evidence to support the idea that they're ok right now, and very little evidence to suggest that what they're doing to try and fix it is working sufficiently well to change that.
They're ok in the sense that they probably have time to fix things, and perhaps one or two chances to screw up, but currently "everything will be ok" is not a supportable argument.
After are last falling out on another thread, I can say now I appreciate what your saying and you make some good points AZ. But their is evidence that they will be fine and are moving in the right direction. Revamp the websites, new kits coming out. The amount of codex and books they put out in the last 24 months. Some can say "well all they wanted to do was make money". And some people think they were actually making attempts to update all the rules for all the models they put out. While some think the models are over priced. Some might find the building, modeling, painting and then play value in the $50 for 10 dark elf witches. I see the arguments on both sides. But I do not think GW is at the point of some major companies, such as GMAC or FORD who thought they could never fail because of how big they are. I do not think GW is going to fail because they know they are still not big enough to never fail.
If you're hitherto unaware, spend some time researching the decline and final days of TSR.
The parallels are both astonishingly similar and really disturbing.
Value is subjective, and I guarantee you, however people find value in $50 for 10 Witch Elves, quantifiably more will find value in $40 for 10 Witch Elves.
The last interim report, management statement and dividend declaration all point to this being the worst year that GW has had in a long time, despite the accelerated release schedule. This suggests that either a) the increased release rate has had a directly proportional reduction in quality, and that has been noticed by more than a few people on some pokey site on this here new fangled Internet thingy, who have subsequently gone and spent their money elsewhere or b) the ever growing barrier to entry has finally got to the point where GW has effectively cut off new blood at any significant level, and is left with a net customer base that is shrinking, year on year, who can only spend so much cash, and that spending is now simply diffused over a wider range of products or c) a bit of both.
Factor in the consistent anecdotal evidence that Kirby is very much in charge and runs things the way he wants, which can be seen evidenced in the apparently very human way GW acts for a gestalt entity made up of dozens of personalities, who, in theory at least, have their own thoughts and options, especially in terms of it's arrogance and hubris, and a rapid implosion of GW is, while I don't think likely, still a very real possibility.
After are last falling out on another thread, I can say now I appreciate what your saying and you make some good points AZ. But their is evidence that they will be fine and are moving in the right direction. Revamp the websites, new kits coming out. The amount of codex and books they put out in the last 24 months. Some can say "well all they wanted to do was make money". And some people think they were actually making attempts to update all the rules for all the models they put out. While some think the models are over priced. Some might find the building, modeling, painting and then play value in the $50 for 10 dark elf witches. I see the arguments on both sides. But I do not think GW is at the point of some major companies, such as GMAC or FORD who thought they could never fail because of how big they are. I do not think GW is going to fail because they know they are still not big enough to never fail.
Now I'm a science type, not the business type. I plan to change that a bit with further studies in my future career path, but for now, money numbers are a bit of tom-foolery to me that I leave to the other business types on this forum.
But the general idea I get is simply this:
Movement doesn't equate to progress. My cat may the little red daemon light of doom for hours on end, but be no closer to actually achieving her goal of capture.
I am not saying Games Workshop is sunk, but I am saying they are hurting. In my travels I have seen one gaming group sunk, another flounder between stores and waffle pretty hard with 6E, and now I live in an area where the largest 40k crowds gather at one store particular because they run heavily comped events. No comp usually means little to no events. And they, from my limited scope, growing in their skirmish games scene quickly. Since the December to Remember event, I was pretty diehard GW even though I owned armies in other games. Leading up to December, I was getting pretty irritated with the game after a major GT I had done fairly well in. Not that I was upset about games or results, but it felt like playing 40k got in the way of my fun when I could have join equally as cool of dudes, and good buds I had met in that city, that all moved to Warmahordes or Infinity.
Since the great purge of '14 has happened, we've seen releases come hot and heavy, but they all have the same tone. Couple of dual kits, couple of characters/headquarters, and maybe one new thing. If it doesn't fit into that, delete from the book. And the books all have become painfully vanilla in their fluff. It would be easy to make "chapter tactics" for both Imperial Guard and Tyranids to represent the various factions and hive fleets in both armies, but they didn't. They poop out a "codex" for one right before the main book comes out and then pull it back to web only and then "out of print". The other gets massive boosts in performance through $15 updates post release. There's no set pattern on these releases except for vanilla book and "try something different" each time to generate sales. That doesn't breed confidence, to me.
Lastly, the rules releases have been crap. We still have a codex that automatically loses (I like to let no one forget this) and bad FAQs for our newest edition. Which still hasn't sold out of it's "limited edition" stock of which has markedly reduced in value from the previous special editions (Apoc was cheaper and came with a hard carrying case with foam vesus cardboard shell and coins). The store page for this product still says, and I quote:
Games Workshop wrote:"Act fast and pre-order yours today to avoid disappointment. "
Now, to conclude, I ask who's disappointment are they avoiding? Yours or theirs?
I played 6th edition and did not have very much fun doing it....just didn't enjoy the game anymore to be honest. Needing a new game I then switched to X-Wing miniatures and haven't looked back to 40k since it came out. Now with 7th, I took a look at the new rules set to see if it would rekindle the 40k itch....it didn't. Looks like I'm done with 40k almost entirely except for the RPGsFFG has put out.
Yonan wrote: "Throwing fistfulls of brown matter at the wall to see what sticks" in other words. Regardless of the long term consequences of throwing brown matter on your customers.
Sounds remarkably similar to GW's current method of finding development teams for their electronic games...
TheAuldGrump wrote: ... and the WH40Kroleplaying games are doing just fine! (It is actually easier to get a game of any of those RPGs going than a simple game of WH40K....)
This sounds like a wonderful place to live. Which magical wardrobe must I walk through to enter this land?
Yonan wrote: "Throwing fistfulls of brown matter at the wall to see what sticks" in other words. Regardless of the long term consequences of throwing brown matter on your customers.
Sounds remarkably similar to GW's current method of finding development teams for their electronic games...
How I long for another DoW game rather than the trash that's come out since. Space Marine was decent though flawed.
Yonan wrote: "Throwing fistfulls of brown matter at the wall to see what sticks" in other words. Regardless of the long term consequences of throwing brown matter on your customers.
Sounds remarkably similar to GW's current method of finding development teams for their electronic games...
TheAuldGrump wrote: ... and the WH40Kroleplaying games are doing just fine! (It is actually easier to get a game of any of those RPGs going than a simple game of WH40K....)
This sounds like a wonderful place to live. Which magical wardrobe must I walk through to enter this land?
*SNERK!*
Honestly - I think it is because there are a bunch of folks that need their 40K fix, but don't like the current edition(s) of 40K....
40K may not be as original or as unique as GW may want us to think, but it is a fun setting (in a grimdark sort of way).
Hell, I ran a two year long campaign using the old World of Darkness rules. (It is stupidly easy to convert - pretty much a 1:1 correlation between the two systems. BS = Firearms, WS=Melee/Brawl, Str=Str, Toughness=Stamina....)
I just wish that GW would, well... stop being GW....
The Auld Grump
*EDIT* The old Storyteller system was my default system for quite some time.
I have to agree that the 40KRPGs have been done really well, props to FFG for that. I haven't played yet (maybe my battlesystems terrain will change that when it arrives) but as an experienced RPG vet, the rules read well. Also have watched it streamed on twitch and it comes off well.
Edit: Fantasy Flight Games make both the 40kRPG and X-wing right? They make good rules all 'round it seems.
TheKbob wrote: Dakka is one of the few forums where I can read it and be like "Oh, geez... not this again, I should prob..." and I keep scrolling to see at least three other folks chiming in with a well poised response to something that is asinine; be it a rules question, tactics discussion, or who actually died on what planet during which war by what faction (and possibly Mk of the blade/bullet used).
For as much hate Dakka gets, it's probably one of the better community forums out there.
The thing is, though, Games Workshop is not making it's games any better. I choose not to forget that this used to be $35:
Spoiler:
Or that you used to get 20 of the modern guardsmen models in a box versus 10.
I remember buying citadel RT eldar guardians blister with 12 guardians for 18 Dutch Guilders not Euros in the early 1990's, damn that inflation!
Yonan wrote: Edit: Fantasy Flight Games make both the 40kRPG and X-wing right? They make good rules all 'round it seems.
And the new Star Wars RPG; which although I haven't played yet seems to have received good feedback.
Time for GW to become a "miniatures company" like they claim and outsource all rules creation to FFG. Can't be worse, will likely be a whole lot better.
Yonan wrote: Time for GW to become a "miniatures company" like they claim and outsource all rules creation to FFG. Can't be worse, will likely be a whole lot better.
Would it really save them at this point? So the game gets a little better, but the models are still way too expensive...probably more expensive than even now, since they can't make an easy buck selling expensive mandatory rulebooks, limited editions, supplements, etc.
People wouldn't mind the models being more expensive as much if the rules were good though. At least then it'd have more than ubiquity (due to the number of people who have 10+ year old armies) going for it.
The danger now for GW is that the price of models is pushing users to avoid the official kits and the rapidly increasing price of the rules is pushing people not to use them, let alone dissatisfaction with various kinds of issues.
Cost barrier to entry has been mentioned above. There is also a significant cost barrier for veteran players simply to continue.
So, what is the list of what needs to change to "turn GW around" since there are quite a few.
1. Fix the rules.
2. Model pricing.
3. Regional pricing.
4. Improve licensing to multiple industries.
5. Refocus on customer satisfaction again.
6. Failcast
7. Lawsuits and kneejerk reactions such as "Astra Militarum" need to go away
Just off the top of my head... they have a lot of problems, some with much more impact than others though of course - rules and pricing basically.
Yonan wrote: So, what is the list of what needs to change to "turn GW around" since there are quite a few.
1. Fix the rules.
2. Model pricing.
3. Regional pricing.
4. Improve licensing to multiple industries.
5. Refocus on customer satisfaction again.
6. Failcast
7. Lawsuits and kneejerk reactions such as "Astra Militarum" need to go away
Just off the top of my head... they have a lot of problems, some with much more impact than others though of course - rules and pricing basically.
The worst part is that I highly doubt that any of those things listed are considered problems by GW management. In fact half of them might be considered benefits.
The danger now for GW is that the price of models is pushing users to avoid the official kits and the rapidly increasing price of the rules is pushing people not to use them, let alone dissatisfaction with various kinds of issues.
Cost barrier to entry has been mentioned above. There is also a significant cost barrier for veteran players simply to continue.
My local group is full of 40k vets, and I'm the noob. I just can't afford to build an army to the scale that they have, so I buy what I want to paint. I really cannot see new players coming to GW anytime soon. The Specialist Games seemed to be geared precisely towards new players.
Also! The new rulebook even says that you should already know some things about 40k going into it. AND THERE ARE TYPOS!
That's perhaps more important than pricing and rules ; p
jonolikespie wrote: The worst part is that I highly doubt that any of those things listed are considered problems by GW management. In fact half of them might be considered benefits.
After are last falling out on another thread, I can say now I appreciate what your saying and you make some good points AZ. But their is evidence that they will be fine and are moving in the right direction. Revamp the websites, new kits coming out. The amount of codex and books they put out in the last 24 months. Some can say "well all they wanted to do was make money". And some people think they were actually making attempts to update all the rules for all the models they put out. While some think the models are over priced. Some might find the building, modeling, painting and then play value in the $50 for 10 dark elf witches. I see the arguments on both sides. But I do not think GW is at the point of some major companies, such as GMAC or FORD who thought they could never fail because of how big they are. I do not think GW is going to fail because they know they are still not big enough to never fail.
Now I'm a science type, not the business type. I plan to change that a bit with further studies in my future career path, but for now, money numbers are a bit of tom-foolery to me that I leave to the other business types on this forum.
But the general idea I get is simply this:
Movement doesn't equate to progress. My cat may the little red daemon light of doom for hours on end, but be no closer to actually achieving her goal of capture.
I am not saying Games Workshop is sunk, but I am saying they are hurting. In my travels I have seen one gaming group sunk, another flounder between stores and waffle pretty hard with 6E, and now I live in an area where the largest 40k crowds gather at one store particular because they run heavily comped events. No comp usually means little to no events. And they, from my limited scope, growing in their skirmish games scene quickly. Since the December to Remember event, I was pretty diehard GW even though I owned armies in other games. Leading up to December, I was getting pretty irritated with the game after a major GT I had done fairly well in. Not that I was upset about games or results, but it felt like playing 40k got in the way of my fun when I could have join equally as cool of dudes, and good buds I had met in that city, that all moved to Warmahordes or Infinity.
Since the great purge of '14 has happened, we've seen releases come hot and heavy, but they all have the same tone. Couple of dual kits, couple of characters/headquarters, and maybe one new thing. If it doesn't fit into that, delete from the book. And the books all have become painfully vanilla in their fluff. It would be easy to make "chapter tactics" for both Imperial Guard and Tyranids to represent the various factions and hive fleets in both armies, but they didn't. They poop out a "codex" for one right before the main book comes out and then pull it back to web only and then "out of print". The other gets massive boosts in performance through $15 updates post release. There's no set pattern on these releases except for vanilla book and "try something different" each time to generate sales. That doesn't breed confidence, to me.
Lastly, the rules releases have been crap. We still have a codex that automatically loses (I like to let no one forget this) and bad FAQs for our newest edition. Which still hasn't sold out of it's "limited edition" stock of which has markedly reduced in value from the previous special editions (Apoc was cheaper and came with a hard carrying case with foam vesus cardboard shell and coins). The store page for this product still says, and I quote:
Games Workshop wrote:"Act fast and pre-order yours today to avoid disappointment. "
Now, to conclude, I ask who's disappointment are they avoiding? Yours or theirs?
I guess the facts of the matter are they had a bad a few bad quarters, and people are rightfully upset with how they went about doing things. But the thing about rules being bad, FAQ stinking, dual kits being unfair. cost being overpriced, Codex then data slate, then codex again being considered releases of brown matter thrown at the wall to see what sticks.... These are all opinions of certain people in the game. It is not the general consensus or at least not the majority, well not in the area I am in and not on the different forums I read or blogs I follow.
I made a point earlier about a duel witch dark elf Kit being $50. How I found the worth not only in the 10 models, but the building, posing, bitz options, and modeling/painting. Then the play value of them being on the board. Azriel had mentioned i would of felt even better if the models were $40. While this is legitimately for sure, But If they were $40 there would still be people saying the price was to high? Why not $30 or $20? Because the company that sells the models say $50.. So it is $50, less whatever discounts you may find. You know have a few decisions.
A) Find enjoyment and the worth in $50
B) do not buy it because it is over priced in your opinion, wasting no more time and energy with or about it.
C) be frustrated with it and voice your complaint via letter to GW, forums, or word of mouth to a friend. There is no "WRONG" or "RIGHT" decision....
I understand their are gripes and legitimate people who are frustrated and view things happening as bad. I see some people feel betrayed and wish GW was still that small company that everyone in the world did not know about.
I understand and think it is sad that GW has taken steps in a direction that has caused people to want to walk away from this game.
I understand some people think the rules were rushed and are terrible, or whatever. See my signature... It is not made with callous intent btw.
But there is also a lot of non relevance being thrown in. And regardless of the how the rules were written, regardless of the cost of models, the release of books and release of codexs. No matter what GW did, there will still be a group of people who were upset, or mad, or finding reasons to hate on GW. You simply can not please everyone, and this is not new for GW. It's only more common since the inter-webs have come out.
I do feel for those that legitimately think GW has done a terrible job with their handling of things, I don't want to see anyone ever throw up their hands and walk away from something they love, but it's their rightful opinions and options to do so.
In closing, opinions have been stated an debated. Facts have been posted that does not look promising for GW over the last few quarters dollar and cents wise. But only the future holds what will come of it all, for now the world keep spinning.
On a side note is GW a true public trading company? Like anyone can buy stock? I am not up to date on my stock market know-how.
Tsilber, price elasticity is a real thing and if, as a company, you're reducing exposure to your product because management actually believes that they're the "Porsche" of miniatures....well, you get what we're currently seeing. A reduced market presence is never a good thing but management seems convinced that selling 2000 model kits at $60 per kit is better than 8000 at $40 per kit. Margin is certainly high enough to accommodate this but it would take the company stepping away from the status quo of their current pricing, corporate governance and marketing structures.
Yep, anyone can own GW stock. I did until January when my auto-sell feature kicked in and sold my holdings. Kinda funny that I used my dividends to partially support my plastic addiction. :-)
I guess the facts of the matter are they had a bad a few bad quarters, and people are rightfully upset with how they went about doing things. But the thing about rules being bad, FAQ stinking, dual kits being unfair. cost being overpriced, Codex then data slate, then codex again being considered releases of brown matter thrown at the wall to see what sticks.... These are all opinions of certain people in the game. It is not the general consensus or at least not the majority, well not in the area I am in and not on the different forums I read or blogs I follow.
Are you actually going to say that copy and paste books with little-to-no-value that only add a page's worth of rules for $50 released two weeks before the main event and then moved to digital only aren't a case for market confusion? That the practice isn't a cash grab? How about the codex that auto-loses? How about the FAQs being nothing but copy and paste rush jobs and losing a great deal of FAQs in the process? There's nothing subject or opinion based in these because they are simple measures of judgement. Unless, you mean to tell me, the Grey Knights are supposed to have vindicators and whirlwinds along with the Blood Angels losing their fast vehicles. All for an $85 edition update they've been in the works for at least 12 months and only a year into their last major edition update. The business being crap is showing it's general consensus regardless of any "rainbows and unicorns" blog posts. The business practices are actively killing communities and have been for the last two years since 6E hit. Whether or not it's affected you is another story, but it's certainly affecting them.
The rest of your post misses a lot of points and also strongly suggests you haven't read a majority of this thread as you'd have a few more answers already and have a great amount of clarity. GW is publicly traded, hence we know a lot of their details. And all the economically minded folks that post here, with a great amount of data than your standard schlub like myself would have, are saying it's not looking to hot. Not sinking ship, but not "rainbows and unicorns" either.
TheKbob wrote: The thing is, though, Games Workshop is not making it's games any better. I choose not to forget that this used to be $35:
Spoiler:
You used to be able to get a squad of 5 metal troopers (exarch separate) for $7 when I first started.
Well, but more to what I believe TheKbob is getting at, you could get that 10-man squad of Dire Avengers not that long ago. They were available until what, the release of the more recent Eldar codex in 2013? Unfortunately, GW saw the Dire Avengers as specialists and thought therefore that their price should be higher.
It's the same crap that went on with the Dark Elf Witch Elves- they themselves are a Core unit, but their dual-kit is the Sisters of Slaughter, whom are a Rare unit and therefore now worth $60. Meanwhile the Core Dreadspears with their variant kits are only $35, even though they come with more than the Witch Elves...
EDIT: and I think that's worth clarifying since I kept seeing it- the Wych Elves are $60, not $50.
I guess the facts of the matter are they had a bad a few bad quarters, and people are rightfully upset with how they went about doing things. But the thing about rules being bad, FAQ stinking, dual kits being unfair. cost being overpriced, Codex then data slate, then codex again being considered releases of brown matter thrown at the wall to see what sticks.... These are all opinions of certain people in the game. It is not the general consensus or at least not the majority, well not in the area I am in and not on the different forums I read or blogs I follow.
Are you actually going to say that copy and paste books with little-to-no-value that only add a page's worth of rules for $50 released two weeks before the main event and then moved to digital only aren't a case for market confusion? That the practice isn't a cash grab? How about the codex that auto-loses? How about the FAQs being nothing but copy and paste rush jobs and losing a great deal of FAQs in the process? There's nothing subject or opinion based in these because they are simple measures of judgement. Unless, you mean to tell me, the Grey Knights are supposed to have vindicators and whirlwinds along with the Blood Angels losing their fast vehicles. All for an $85 edition update they've been in the works for at least 12 months and only a year into their last major edition update. The business being crap is showing it's general consensus regardless of any "rainbows and unicorns" blog posts. The business practices are actively killing communities and have been for the last two years since 6E hit. Whether or not it's affected you is another story, but it's certainly affecting them.
The rest of your post misses a lot of points and also strongly suggests you haven't read a majority of this thread as you'd have a few more answers already and have a great amount of clarity. GW is publicly traded, hence we know a lot of their details. And all the economically minded folks that post here, with a great amount of data than your standard schlub like myself would have, are saying it's not looking to hot. Not sinking ship, but not "rainbows and unicorns" either.
I assume you are speaking of one book, when you refer to a copy and paste books for $50 released 2 weeks before the main event. And sure, what were they thinking. That was kinda silly and greedy. So I agree with you on that one about cash grab and what not, pretty said ploy by GW.
As for the $85 7th edition. I found it worth it. The rules and FAQ's were condensed into one book, a decent amount of rules changes, a better binding...Plus the fluff book and the Gallery book. Is the fluff redundant for you and I? Sure, but not for the new player getting into the game. And I enjoyed reading it again.
As for codex's that auto lose, I have to cease agreeing with you. You spoke earlier about reading one more post about X you would gouge your eyes out, lol. I find the same frustration when I see the post about "Auto-lose" codexs.
What codex's auto lose? I do not think any codex is auto-lose, just certain types of players and certain list (and this is opinion not fact). First off, some people play for the fluff and love of the game, so play a codex/list that may lose but still love playing it. Second, what "Auto-lose" codex have you actually played and done the diligence of trying out for yourself?
There was an interesting story about an orks player claiming it was an auto lose army codex and could not win. A Person then posted a list with max loota squads times 3, in battle wagons, with mega armor boss's in two of them to give 2 units slow and purposeful. The guy went on to talk about how he does great in tournies, instead of the original poster trying out the list, taking any of his advice, or thanking him. He went on a tirade on how it would not matter, called the player of the 3 loota squads a liar, and then went on to say he should not have to buy all those lootas... My point is before even trying to give it a chance, using other models as counts as, trying some practice games. He read the post and immediately decided the guy was a liar, and simply found reasons to continue to be mad...
Another example: late last year and early this year there were a lot on forums talking about daemons. How you could not win without Fateweaver, you could not win unless you used a flying circus list, or the grimoire and 3 heralds with screamers. Any list not utilizing these combinations was "auto-lose". So a list was posted, asking how it would do at NOVA. The list did not have fateweaver or the grimoire, did not have screamers and only 2 FMC. Basically it was way outside what the internet declared deamons needed to win... They poster was told the list was bad, would not do well in NOVA or any GT, it only had 2 troops, one being non scoring swarms. The list needed fateweaver... All this was said despite the fact the list/player won Templecon's Onslaught GT the week before.... So the claims of auto-lose codex/list is more opinion than anything else, unless you have played the codex yourself you really should not be using what a few on the internet say. Don't believe everything you read
As for the company being publicly traded, I did read through majority of this thread and was then verifying things I could, sadly my only resource was the internet which is more of a guide of coarse. But I thought I had read somewhere that GW was publicly traded, but was restricted to certain people or only allowed certain people to buy in. Either way it matters little what I thought as its been verified how it works.
In the end we all may think we know whats best or not best for GW, we can declare whats fair profit margin and whats over priced all we like. We all may think we know the inner workings of cost of materials, shipping, and marketing, but a majority of us do not. We simply do not have the luxury of deciding what GW should be allowed to sell its products for. This is no different with computers, cellphone, cars, ETC. Which all have astronomical profit margins, and sometimes at the expense of children in sweat shops....
I do see the legitimacy in peoples arguments against GW, I have even switched some of my points of views through this discussion and was made aware of some things I was clueless about. Facts are one thing, and it was only opinions I was debating. But I will refrain from posting further, as it seems to have no effect regardless what I have to say from a positive side, it seems more like people just want to discuss why GW is not rainbows and unicorns.... People are upset, have a right to be, and I am not GW's shield or spokesperson. I simply think they will be fine and bounce back, and only the future will tell.
I apologize for any offense, as well as any post or remarks there were out of place on this particular discussion. *burns a GW model* ,but not one of the Dark elf witch elves, them are expensive.
They have no exception to reserves arriving from turn 2, and all LotD units must be reserved. Therefore, without allies, a LotD army loses end of turn one.
It'd be a good idea to familiarise yourself with some of the wider arguments before going into bat against them.
They have no exception to reserves arriving from turn 2, and all LotD units must be reserved. Therefore, without allies, a LotD army loses end of turn one.
It'd be a good idea to familiarise yourself with some of the wider arguments before going into bat against them.
To be fair though, while that's usually trotted out as an example of bad rules (and it is), it's also something that no sane person would enforce. So yes, it's indicative of the fact GW glosses over rules, but I think that goes hand in hand with the idea that they expect you to talk to your opponent before a game, so maybe they figured they didn't have to explicitly state that a LotD army needed an exception, because only a total douchebag is going to agree to play a LotD player and then say "Ha, you lose automatically because RULES! Feth you!" at the end of turn one, just because.
That doesn't excuse the fact GW can't write good rules, but it's the type of rule where basically anyone will assume it's a mistake that it was omitted, and anyone who doesn't you probably don't want to play anyways.
They have no exception to reserves arriving from turn 2, and all LotD units must be reserved. Therefore, without allies, a LotD army loses end of turn one.
It'd be a good idea to familiarise yourself with some of the wider arguments before going into bat against them.
Oh cmon.... that book was not what he was referring to. Either way, you are technically correct. LoD auto lose, thats one codex/supplement. He mentioned codex's and referred to the older ones. You know this....
And honestly, its clear to me LOD was more of a supplement to be used with allies or an arranged agreement prior to the game with your opponent of making exceptions. It seems like a far stretch on your part to prove me wrong on my statement of "I do not think any codex is "auto-lose"
So I am wrong about this, and now allow me to amend my statement. Ahem; other than LoD i do not think any other codex is auto-lose.
They have no exception to reserves arriving from turn 2, and all LotD units must be reserved. Therefore, without allies, a LotD army loses end of turn one.
It'd be a good idea to familiarise yourself with some of the wider arguments before going into bat against them.
To be fair though, while that's usually trotted out as an example of bad rules (and it is), it's also something that no sane person would enforce. So yes, it's indicative of the fact GW glosses over rules, but I think that goes hand in hand with the idea that they expect you to talk to your opponent before a game, so maybe they figured they didn't have to explicitly state that a LotD army needed an exception, because only a total douchebag is going to agree to play a LotD player and then say "Ha, you lose automatically because RULES! Feth you!" at the end of turn one, just because.
That doesn't excuse the fact GW can't write good rules, but it's the type of rule where basically anyone will assume it's a mistake that it was omitted, and anyone who doesn't you probably don't want to play anyways.
Absolutely, but then, one could make the same argument about every rule or rule interaction, there comes a point where people's personal definition of what is "reasonable" will begin to diverge, and then you get conflict.
Realistically, the only way to write a decent set of rules is assume every player is a douchebag.
They have no exception to reserves arriving from turn 2, and all LotD units must be reserved. Therefore, without allies, a LotD army loses end of turn one.
It'd be a good idea to familiarise yourself with some of the wider arguments before going into bat against them.
Oh cmon.... that book was not what he was referring to. Either way, you are technically correct. LoD auto lose, thats one codex/supplement. He mentioned codex's and referred to the older ones. You know this....
And honestly, its clear to me LOD was more of a supplement to be used with allies or an arranged agreement prior to the game with your opponent of making exceptions. It seems like a far stretch on your part to prove me wrong on my statement of "I do not think any codex is "auto-lose"
So I am wrong about this, and now allow me to amend my statement. Ahem; other than LoD i do not think any other codex is auto-lose.
Okay back to the topic at hand.
Actually, I assumed that was the book he was referring to.
And here we have a microcosm of why the rules are bad, two people forming completely different opinions based off the same information, both of which are reasonable.
Good thing that the situation is so easily resolved, all we need is the author of the original information to clarify their intent and we can keep moving forward, otherwise we could be here for months arguing in circles.
Tsilber wrote: Oh cmon.... that book was not what he was referring to. Either way, you are technically correct. LoD auto lose, thats one codex/supplement. He mentioned codex's and referred to the older ones. You know this....
They have no exception to reserves arriving from turn 2, and all LotD units must be reserved. Therefore, without allies, a LotD army loses end of turn one.
It'd be a good idea to familiarise yourself with some of the wider arguments before going into bat against them.
So, you're completely ignoring the "Aid From Beyond" special rule, which reads: 'All units from the Legion of the Damned detachment arrive from Reserve at the start of the Legion of the Damned player’s Turn 1. These units must enter play via Deep Strike as normal.'
Given this is only some missions, but they're not always auto-lose.
Yes, I did mean Legion of the Damned as its a perfect example of everything wrong with GW. It has still not been updated to this date on how to fix the issue
My Inquisition and Sisters iCodex books aren't FAQd either, from my understanding. So hurray?
You're being awfully selective in "good things GW has done" the without looking at the big picture. The market has changed and there are better games out there with high quality models, better rules, and lower barrier of entry. Couple this with poor business tactics of GW and you're cooking a recipe for downfall. I've seen more people feeling burned over 7E, or at least "well, I gotta buy it, I guess" instead of excitement. And needing house rulings and FAQs for the core book at $85 is terrible, whether someone likes it or not. A third of the price to entry is a mandatory catalog to boot.
They have no exception to reserves arriving from turn 2, and all LotD units must be reserved. Therefore, without allies, a LotD army loses end of turn one.
It'd be a good idea to familiarise yourself with some of the wider arguments before going into bat against them.
So, you're completely ignoring the "Aid From Beyond" special rule, which reads: 'All units from the Legion of the Damned detachment arrive from Reserve at the start of the Legion of the Damned player’s Turn 1. These units must enter play via Deep Strike as normal.'
Given this is only some missions, but they're not always auto-lose.
Nope, I'm realising that it is a special rule that is only applicable to the Apoc formation in the book, and not for use in general games.
EDIT
My bad, it isn't the Apoc formation, it is one specific scenario in the book, so not even available to wider games.
All they'd need to say is that a CA detachment from the LotD codex benefits from this rule and it's fixed.
They have no exception to reserves arriving from turn 2, and all LotD units must be reserved. Therefore, without allies, a LotD army loses end of turn one.
It'd be a good idea to familiarise yourself with some of the wider arguments before going into bat against them.
So, you're completely ignoring the "Aid From Beyond" special rule, which reads: 'All units from the Legion of the Damned detachment arrive from Reserve at the start of the Legion of the Damned player’s Turn 1. These units must enter play via Deep Strike as normal.'
Heh, allow me to amend my amended statement. Ahem; I do not think any codex is auto-lose.
They have no exception to reserves arriving from turn 2, and all LotD units must be reserved. Therefore, without allies, a LotD army loses end of turn one.
It'd be a good idea to familiarise yourself with some of the wider arguments before going into bat against them.
So, you're completely ignoring the "Aid From Beyond" special rule, which reads: 'All units from the Legion of the Damned detachment arrive from Reserve at the start of the Legion of the Damned player’s Turn 1. These units must enter play via Deep Strike as normal.'
Given this is only some missions, but they're not always auto-lose.
Nope, I'm realising that it is a special rule that is only applicable to the Apoc formation in the book, and not for use in general games.
The unit entry in the LoD book has the special rule also it would seem, not just the unit entry in the apoc formation entries.
This may come as surprise.... But holy ****, that is super expensive for one model and pretty greedy on GW part. It will be hard to find the $37 in building, painting, and playing with it...
They have no exception to reserves arriving from turn 2, and all LotD units must be reserved. Therefore, without allies, a LotD army loses end of turn one.
It'd be a good idea to familiarise yourself with some of the wider arguments before going into bat against them.
So, you're completely ignoring the "Aid From Beyond" special rule, which reads: 'All units from the Legion of the Damned detachment arrive from Reserve at the start of the Legion of the Damned player’s Turn 1. These units must enter play via Deep Strike as normal.'
Given this is only some missions, but they're not always auto-lose.
Nope, I'm realising that it is a special rule that is only applicable to the Apoc formation in the book, and not for use in general games.
Unless my digital copy is wrong, it's a mission rule on the first echoes mission, not a special rule for the apoc formation. There's no need for it on the apoc formation, since in apoc, strategic reserves works differently than normal game reserves. Any unit using the deep strike rule can arrive at the start of any turn you choose, including the first.
azreal13 wrote: TSLiber, you're confusing "aid unlooked for" and "aid from beyond."
Heh, see my mind is all over and the more I stay on this thread the more I do not want to play anymore and hate GW. Damn you all! $37 single infantry model, confusing rule sets that look the same. Assumptions of agreements prior to games to get around poorly written auto lose codexs... Im outta here.. lol
I think everyone misses the point: even if LotD does not auto-lose in one mission, it still auto-loses to everything else. The point is that a kind of codex like that is actually worth paying for. Reasonable people would say no.
heartserenade wrote: I think everyone misses the point: even if LotD does not auto-lose in one mission, it still auto-loses to everything else. The point is that a kind of codex like that is actually worth paying for. Reasonable people would say no.
Well unless you realize running it alone is auto lose, so you buy it for either the fluff, collectors stand point, or the intention of running it with allies. I mean no one would feel sorry for someone who bought this book, bought all the models and showed up to a game or tournament with the intention of screaming "see GW is bad, I bought this book to prove a point, its a codex that can't win"....
I have purchased GW products this year, but it's all the OOP metal models and a few used kits off eBay to make the Space Marine chapter I wanted to (a combo of Iron Hand + Blood Angels called the Obsidian Spectres). Do I expect ever to play it? No.
The thing with one's opinion is that it's great to have, but it doesn't change reality or fact. Games Workshop is struggling and doing everything a struggling company would do at this point. Since the December to Remember event in 2013, the quality and value proposition for new GW products has gone completely off the rails. The new Ork fat thing is $5~ cheaper than the twice as big Stompa. There is literally no sense to that at all. More so when you see how crazy the plastic kits from Japan are getting these days at an extremely reasonable price.
It's essentially this. Games Workshop is all but lying to their customers. They say they are a models company interested in collecting miniatures, but charge the highest price for rules on the market. You have $50 cash grab books that feature 1-4 units and they call that a codex. You have one codex that cannot legally be ran by itself because it AUTOMATICALLY LOSES. You have boxes being cut in half by the amount of units and the price going up. You have models moved from a a superior metal to resin and the price going up, let alone the resin being some of the worst in the industry. You have $15 rules additions to weak, middling codices that suddenly make them "playable" released only a few weeks later (while deleting large swaths of models from the books that just so happen to correlate strongly to a certain courtcase).
Oh, and court cases... you have a fairly good size company trying to sue book authors and small, third party houses and getting smashed in the face on both cases for intellectual property. You are defending a company that tried to claim copyright on the term "Halberd". There's no depths to that stupidity.
So yes, you can like Games Workshop and have this image in your mind that they can do no wrong and doing great. But your perception is not reality. And like many other issues in today's society, an opinion on a matter doesn't change fact.
And for the record, I love the Warhammer 40k universe and would love for it to be nothing more than awesome. A well priced game with tight rules, a vast community, and are only arguments are "my models are cooler than your models!" type. I'd love to be able to roll up to any table, plop down my army and never worry about "is it too strong or too weak;" will I perceived as TFG or pull back to much and then get tabled by what I perceive as TFG. Where there is no such thing as "chasing the meta" and no one goes years without a new model or rules updates. Where an edition update doesn't complete change large swaths of the game, but actually be a tweak, simplification, and clarification of the rules. Where game changes and new models are openly tested by the community and feedback is given on official forums so that we all know when we purchase the new rules exactly what we are getting and there's never a "bad choice" unit in a codex, just different styles and varieties. Where a "gunline" isn't looked at with disdain and an "assault" based army isn't met with an eye roll and a chuckle. Where the concept of a deathstar is just another army strategy and not a back breaking scenario of I pick my models up while you run the game.
I don't think everyone with a concerned or outright negative opinion of the current state of Warhammer 40k and Games Workshop is wanting to twist the knife or just being "haters." We are all heavily invested gamers who still care about this part of our hobby and want it to be fun and a worthwhile expenditure of our time and money. The fact that the negative concerns are growing, and not the bile spewing hatred of a new book release, but the actual apathetic approach to new product is the status quo. Releases are luke warm these days and tepid in sales, with even the poster children of their product line registering less of an uptick as normally seen.
And lastly, placing all the blame on the players is the most ludicrous and asinine thing I have ever seen. It's a completely shallow and selfish means of saying "it's not a problem for me, just get better friends!" or something along those lines. It's garbage that goes hand in hand with "Forge the Narrative" as a concept. And it does nothing but breed fissures and dissent within the community further making it a negative space.
Well said. Little to criticize.
I do have some tolerance of "Forge the Narrative" since I am assuming they suggest we treat it like an RPG.
Other than "cool models" still have trouble getting my kids into 40k.
The small introductory games is a great idea brought up, something inexpensive and a fun quick game, wonder if Space Hulk is still floating around...
heartserenade wrote: I think everyone misses the point: even if LotD does not auto-lose in one mission, it still auto-loses to everything else. The point is that a kind of codex like that is actually worth paying for. Reasonable people would say no.
Well unless you realize running it alone is auto lose, so you buy it for either the fluff, collectors stand point, or the intention of running it with allies. I mean no one would feel sorry for someone who bought this book, bought all the models and showed up to a game or tournament with the intention of screaming "see GW is bad, I bought this book to prove a point, its a codex that can't win"....
Would you buy a paint pot that is advertised that it can be used on its own, but in reality it doesn't do gak unless you mix it with other paints? And it's priced the same as other paints who can actually do things on their own? If you were a company, would selling a clearly defective product like this a good business decision?
Instead of blaming the customers, isn't it the company's responsibility to make a non-defective product in the first place? Do you think it's unreasonable to ask for a non-defective product for the price point they're asking?
Lastly, do you think they should charge that much for a codex that almost always auto-loses while other codices will do fine on their own?
heartserenade wrote: I think everyone misses the point: even if LotD does not auto-lose in one mission, it still auto-loses to everything else. The point is that a kind of codex like that is actually worth paying for. Reasonable people would say no.
Well unless you realize running it alone is auto lose, so you buy it for either the fluff, collectors stand point, or the intention of running it with allies. I mean no one would feel sorry for someone who bought this book, bought all the models and showed up to a game or tournament with the intention of screaming "see GW is bad, I bought this book to prove a point, its a codex that can't win"....
Would you buy a paint pot that is advertised that it can be used on its own, but in reality it doesn't do gak unless you mix it with other paints? And it's priced the same as other paints who can actually do things on their own? If you were a company, would selling a clearly defective product like this a good business decision?
Instead of blaming the customers isn't it the company's responsibility to make a non-defective product in the first place?
I understand your point of view. but comparing a GW codex to a paint pot is really stretching to convince me to your side. That's like saying, im not buying peanut butter and jelly and then bread just to make a PB&J sandwhich. They should put Pb, jelly and bread crumbs all in the same jar and include a plastic spoon lol.
Honestly, I do see the flaw in GW printing that book ( a flaw, not a source for the downward spiral argument). But the rule of things not being on the board at the end of the turn causing an auto lose were in 6th as well. Written prior to LOD.
So either they meant for it to be used in conjunction with allies, or wrote a confusing rule on Aid unlooked for/aid from beyond. Either way you know the rules of the game, you buy the codex knowing this for collection value, running it with allies, the fluff, or with the intent to utilize the Aid rule. If you do not like the rule, don't buy it. but in the end it was not some big catastrophic decision GW made as people seem to be using it to further their argument against GW. This is not a good source of fuel for the fire per say... This particular codex usefulness or collection value is all opinion based.
heartserenade wrote: I think everyone misses the point: even if LotD does not auto-lose in one mission, it still auto-loses to everything else. The point is that a kind of codex like that is actually worth paying for. Reasonable people would say no.
Well unless you realize running it alone is auto lose, so you buy it for either the fluff, collectors stand point, or the intention of running it with allies. I mean no one would feel sorry for someone who bought this book, bought all the models and showed up to a game or tournament with the intention of screaming "see GW is bad, I bought this book to prove a point, its a codex that can't win"....
Would you buy a paint pot that is advertised that it can be used on its own, but in reality it doesn't do gak unless you mix it with other paints? And it's priced the same as other paints who can actually do things on their own? If you were a company, would selling a clearly defective product like this a good business decision?
Instead of blaming the customers isn't it the company's responsibility to make a non-defective product in the first place?
I understand your point of view. but comparing a GW codex to a paint pot is really stretching to convince me to your side. That's like saying, im not buying peanut butter and jelly and then bread just to make a PB&J sandwhich. They should put Pb, jelly and bread crumbs all in the same jar and include a plastic spoon lol.
Honestly, I do see the flaw in GW printing that book. But the rule of things not being on the board at the end of the turn cause an auto lose were in 6th as well. Written prior to LOD. So either they meant for it to be used in conjunction with allies, or poorly wrote a confusing rule on Aid unlocked for/aid from beyond. Either way you know the rules of the game, you buy the codex knowing this for collection value, running it with allies, the fluff, or with the intent to utilize the Aid rule. If you do not like the rule, don't buy it. but in the end it was not some big catastrophic decision GW made as people seem to be using it to further their argument against GW. This is not a good source of fuel for the fire per say... This particular codex usefulness or collection value is all opinion based.
I think Tsilber and Heartserenade are having a fine discussion on what many companies like Apple or Automotive have always done: Make your primary product the only means to sell more product.
Thinking of Apple-Store or designing parts non-standard so you can only buy from them.
They had this for a while; giving direction that for competitions or photos to appear in White Dwarf conversions had to be majority GW product and no visible competitor parts.
They do not host anything relevant here so add-on pieces are not a worry to buy from other companies.
My fear is that the local stores may enforce the "buy from here, play here" and when GW thinks they can yank out from independent retailers and find out how bad that is the hard way.
Exposure in local stores and clubs is what keeps them going, GW stores really are not that appealing to play in, so hopefully GW can make the right decision in the next year.
After releasing the new BRB they have few traditional revenue generating streams available (the latest ork releases and strange pricing has me genuinely concerned).
By any chance did they explicitly say that the LotD codex should be used allies or other codices, otherwise you will almost always lose? Do other codices have the same problem?
This particular codex usefulness or collection value is all opinion based.
No it isn't.
Can you use other codices on their own? Yes.
Can you use the LotD on its own? Yes, but it will almost always auto-lose.
Is a codex less useful if you can't use it on its own? Yes.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: What is this "Auto Lose" Codex that everyone is referring to and why is it considered as such? Chaos Daemons?
Legion of the Damned, because they always start in Reserve, but the BRB states if you have *everything* in Reserve at the end of Turn 1, you auto-lose. LotD doesn't enter play until Turn 2, ergo without playing a specific mission, taking them as allies or a gentleman's agreement with your opponent, a LotD player automatically loses any game they play after the first turn, during which they don't do anything because everything is in reserve.
heartserenade wrote: By any chance did they explicitly say that the LotD codex should be used allies or other codices, otherwise you will almost always lose? Do other codices have the same problem?
This particular codex usefulness or collection value is all opinion based.
No it isn't.
Can you use other codices on their own? Yes.
Can you use the LotD on its own? Yes, but it will almost always auto-lose.
Is a codex less useful if you can't use it on its own? Yes.
There's no opinion there, only facts.
No, the usefulness and collection value's are opinions. I even said I understand your points of view and opinion on the matter... but i guess that is not good enough. I must agree with you that the book is useless or I must be wrong...
Fact, a thing that is indisputable. Opinion, a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.
Can the codex be used in conjunction with other armies and played from with an allies standpoint? YES. Can the book be used in an apoc game or certain formation as a stand alone, Yes. Can you use the book with non-douchbag friends and have a fun game, YES these are all examples and opinions of just how useful the book is. Does the book have fluff and collection value? As a collector I say yes...
So again the usefullness and collection value of this book, is opinion based from judgement. And you are entitled to yours, as I should be entitled to mine. I truly can't believe we are disputing over what a fact and opinion is. Something you find to be useless could be the ultimate treasure to another person...
agnosto wrote: Legion of the damned. They only enter via deep strike which would occur on turn 2 which means you're tabled on turn 1...auto-lose.
Ha ha! Someone should turn up at Throne of Skulls with a pure Legion of the Damned,list, then deliberately make a scene if the judges rule that they automatically lose. Embarrass the feth out of GW.
Does this affect other armies? A pure Drop Pod Space Marine list?
Are you not allowed to withhold an entire army in reserve to arrive on turn 2+ anymore? That used to be a valid tactic...
agnosto wrote: Legion of the damned. They only enter via deep strike which would occur on turn 2 which means you're tabled on turn 1...auto-lose.
Ha ha! Someone should turn up at Throne of Skulls with a pure Legion of the Damned,list, then deliberately make a scene if the judges rule that they automatically lose. Embarrass the feth out of GW.
Does this affect other armies? A pure Drop Pod Space Marine list?
Are you not allowed to withhold an entire army in reserve to arrive on turn 2+ anymore? That used to be a valid tactic...
the rule states if you have no units on the board at the end of any of your turns you lose. Drop pods, 50% come in first turn. but yeah if you do reserve your entire army. And have no way of getting them on the board turn 1 (Like a Deathwing assault) You lose, as at the end of turn one you have no units on the board. Same thing is said you have reserves that fail to come on by turn 2 per say. So at the beginning of turn 3 your opponent kills/destroy all units on the board, if your reserves fail to come in from reserves on your turn 3, you auto lose for having no units on the board.
heartserenade wrote: I never said it was useless. Where did I say that? I said it was less useful.
Another fact: is a screwdriver with interchangeable heads more useful than a screwdriver with only one head? Yes.
Again, facts. That is not opinion. The LotD book is less useful than the others. That's a fact.
okay then you say its less useful, my dispute remains unchanged.
Being a mechanic in the past, your screwdriver analogy is also an opinion. Interchangeable heads strip and dont have the same torque, a certain fillips head or hex head gets lost easier do to size. And then the interchangeable with multiple heads becomes less useful then having an original set of regular screwdrivers in the first place.
But either way we are getting off topic. Lets just agree to disagree on the relevance of usefulness of the LOTD compared to other codex's.
I like how you "edit" your post by removing it entirely and replacing it with a new one.
Let's say my screwdriver analogy is flawed since I know nothing about screwdrivers (and you seem to conveniently know something about them after 8 edits or so). Then go back to the paint analogy that you dismissed: objectively speaking would you think it's entirely reasonable to charge the same for a product that needs to be used with other products in order to be useful, while other products on the same line can be used on their own just fine?
It's not an opinion and that was the point.. If we just chalk everything up to opinion then we have no basis on what is a justifiable price tag for a product. Because if a product is considerably less useful than your other similar products but you charge the same amount for it, is that reasonable?
As for the relevance of the LotD, yes it's not the only problem with GW's rules. Everything else is also a problem. And that's the problem.
I like how you "edit" your post by removing it entirely and replacing it with a new one.
Let's say my screwdriver analogy is flawed since I know nothing about screwdrivers (and you seem to conveniently know something about them after 8 edits or so). Then go back to the paint analogy that you dismissed: objectively speaking would you think it's entirely reasonable to charge the same for a product that needs to be used with other products in order to be useful, while other products on the same line can be used on their own just fine?
It's not an opinion and that was the point.. If we just chalk everything up to opinion then we have no basis on what is a justifiable price tag for a product. Because if a product is considerably less useful than your other similar products but you charge the same amount for it, is that reasonable?
As for the relevance of the LotD, yes it's not the only problem with GW's rules. Everything else is also a problem. And that's the problem.
I did not remove a post entirely, I posted inccorectly, and then I corrected some wording and phrasing to try to better get my point across. I am a terrible typer, FACT. Sorry for my edits if they upset you... I am no longer sure what we are disputing, and its clear now no matter how I say or nicely put it, the more I disagree with you the more off topic we are getting about this post. Apologies, for 'conveniently' knowing about screwdrivers. I was not trying to call you out or embarrass you in any way, only disputing facts from opinions.
Back to the topic, most of the downfall or what is said to conclude a hypothesis that GW is moving more negative then positive (customer satisfaction, pricing, profits, quarterly reports) Seems to be true indeed.
But just like the screwdriver analogy, I think in some cases people need to find a better argument or battle to wage in order to further their grievances or better get their opinions across . The LotD book argument is really grasping for straws (my opinion). There are plenty that were happy to see the book come out from a collectors standpoint, as well as play value, whether twieking the aid unlooked for rule or agreement among friends. i plan to run em as allies for the share fun of running them as a Lotd Army. Do I plan to win, no, I plan to have fun and bring a cool list in my opinion.
I'm surprised this is still rolling on, but anyone postulating that LotD has value as a collector's item realises it is digital only right?
Now, that doesn't preclude it from having some value to a collector, granted, but I'd say that pretty much eviscerates it. In my opinion.
So we have a product that features, essentially, one unit from a Codex, with some extra shinies and bits and pieces that represent a limited amount of value to, I'd suggest, most gamers. For almost half the price of one codex. So, in essence, one unit for the cost of half a codex. That doesn't work properly, or have any value as a physical item, because it doesn't exist.
This is a perfect summary of what GW has been doing (selling less product, for more money, at lower quality, while trying to reduce overhead) and probably represents the stuff they really need to stop doing in order to start growing again.
But given the fact that this dex auto loses if not played with allies it would be an 'allied codex' in everything but name. A way for legion of the dammed to aid their imperial allies without having to take other space marine allies. So now there is no need for it at all unless someone actually wants a sergeant as their warlord.
I see what you mean. Yes, you're right. Same applies to the Inquisition Codex, the Knight Codex and, really, the Latinus Stormstrooperus books as well.
Unbound invalidates the concept of a codex except as a collection of imperial stories concerning a particular faction.
If the codex is regarded as a list of units, it could be organised one page per unit type and released as separate pages: one page "codexette" for Tau Crisis Suit, one page "codexette" for Tyranid Tervigon, one for Ork Boyz.
To make an Unbound army, you simply grab the individual pages to match whatever theme you want to put on table, and there is your army codex.
As relates to the topic, this concept allows GW to put out "codexes" as collections of unit fact sheets or you might say datasheets, plus pages of fluff and pics. These could be physically organised as ringbinder pages.
In itself this is actually quite a good idea. If done right it removes the problem of having to look up rules in eight separate pages of two different books to make the unit work, as for example with the 5th edition Tervigon, and it allows players to carry only the stuff they need.
The downside is that it undoubtedly would be used as a reason to increase prices again.
Plus you'd need to buy your Official™ Citadel™ Ring™ Binder™. And there's probably be a Limited™ Edition™ Citadel™ Official™ Ring™ Binder™ with a special dust jacket.
Most people that "bash GW" here that I've seen credit them in some areas so it's not mindless bashing. I compliment GW on their recent plastic quality (if not always the designs), their shade and base paint quality (if not price or pots), and so on. We really do love 40k... just not GW ; p
I don't think that there is a vendetta, for me GW is that long lost creepy uncle who once you've hung out with them for a long while and gotten to know them well keeps trying to give you the bad touch. I like Necomunda and had good times in 1st and second edition. I stayed up on rules from 3rd to 4th but the company kept reaching out to grab my naughty place, and now I just cannot look at them the same way. I play other games.
I find GW is like a crazy ex-girlfriend: you still find her hot and attractive and you shared good moments in the past together and every now and then you still check her out on Facebook but every time you do that there's the grim reminder that she's still bat-gak insane.
heartserenade wrote: I find GW is like a crazy ex-girlfriend: you still find her hot and attractive and you shared good moments in the past together and every now and then you still check her out on Facebook but every time you do that there's the grim reminder that she's still bat-gak insane.
That might just be the best analogy for this I have ever seen.
I think most people who actually care about the games GW sell, would like GW plc to care about those games a similar amount.
The level of apathy, and ignorance, not to mention arrogance that the senior management at GW plc has simply poisoned the most inspiring game settings we know.
How can our favorite game setting survive when GW plc is just using it as a 'low brow hard sell' mechanism to generate short term cash?
How can driving long term players away by focusing on 'teen appeal' toys and cool sounding rules work as a business plan.
When the products are priced toward the older player collector with above average disposable income?
GW plc is run by and for Mr T Kirby.
When viewed from this perspective all the actions of GW plc make much more sense.
As Mr Kirby retires in the next couple of years with a £200k p.a. pension and about £3m profit from dividend payouts already.
I dont expect much to change from the 'increase prices to make up falling sales volume' gak of the last 9 years.
heartserenade wrote: I find GW is like a crazy ex-girlfriend: you still find her hot and attractive and you shared good moments in the past together and every now and then you still check her out on Facebook but every time you do that there's the grim reminder that she's still bat-gak insane.
But with just a little bit of therapy she could be less crazy enough to be exciting without being scary possessive... you keep hoping for that day.
heartserenade wrote: I find GW is like a crazy ex-girlfriend: you still find her hot and attractive and you shared good moments in the past together and every now and then you still check her out on Facebook but every time you do that there's the grim reminder that she's still bat-gak insane.
But with just a little bit of therapy she could be less crazy enough to be exciting without being scary possessive... you keep hoping for that day.
It will never happen. She's only interested in attracting new "followers" and separating them from their hard earned dollars. She hasn't quite caught on that attitude counts for a lot and that sex appeal only carries you so far... especially when your tastes are increasingly expensive! (Cuz she's worth it! )
This may come as surprise.... But holy ****, that is super expensive for one model and pretty greedy on GW part. It will be hard to find the $37 in building, painting, and playing with it...
HOLY FREAKING GREEDY UPDATE BATMAN... Now they are posting this self same model for $44... I may have to graph this sucker on price fluctuation.
They probably have a formula that automatically jacks up the price based on sales within a given time frame.
No, no, no, best not to think things like than, forgetit, I said nothing....
WarOne wrote: Pretty soon GW employees will be unable to afford their own products.
They'll have to switch to cardboard cutouts in order to build the armies they want.
Coming soon to a GW store near you: GW FineCard.
$9.99 each for the finest cardboard standees.
This is Great News! With the new Citadel FineCard Standees, you can test tactics, formations, and deployment without lugging around those bulky figure cases! Citadel FineCard Standees only available with proof of purchase of the corresponding Citadel model kit. Standees only to be used as stand ins for models in possession of the player. Standees only approved for use in Standee-only games. Standees are not approved for use in official Games Workshop events and retail locations.
WarOne wrote: Pretty soon GW employees will be unable to afford their own products.
They'll have to switch to cardboard cutouts in order to build the armies they want.
Coming soon to a GW store near you: GW FineCard.
$9.99 each for the finest cardboard standees.
This is Great News! With the new Citadel FineCard Standees, you can test tactics, formations, and deployment without lugging around those bulky figure cases! Citadel FineCard Standees only available with proof of purchase of the corresponding Citadel model kit. Standees only to be used as stand ins for models in possession of the player. Standees only approved for use in Standee-only games. Standees are not approved for use in official Games Workshop events and retail locations.
And To Mark the Launch of this monumental occasion we are offering all readers of our magazine an exclusive free limited edition Finecard Cutout, only available while stocks last
*You will also require a copy of the BRB, and the Finecard Expansion Rules (a near identical copy of the main rulebook with modified line of sight rules) accompanied by you're army book.
I suppose it gives them something to do with Rain forest they must have invested in based on the rate of Books and Magazines they're churning out =S
There's lots I'd like to try and understand behind some of there recent decisions, other than some Old Man who's recently picked up from an 11 year old that Bad now means Good and taking it to the extremes in the work place or, consulting a magic eight ball on decisions I can't think of a logical explanation.
Do I want to see them fail, No, but I honestly don't see them growing further no matter how much Injection Molded Plastic or Paper they throw at us.
Less is More would be a good way to go for them, strip it back to Stat Cards for units and models and allow the average Joe to be able to pick up a box of cool looking models and use them game. Stores don't have the capacity for the size of games they're proposing, and people (in general) don't have the kind of cash
So I'll just try to enjoy it whilst it lasts I guess, I doubt anyone's to wake up and think, "Er, did we just fine all of our dedicated following with with a £50 book that's been copied and pasted for the best part, and reward them by saying all that crappy infantry they had to buy last month to play the game is actually that crap it's no longer necessary? So how are we gonna sell it? =S
Crap looks bad and Mr. Beeble is throwing in the towel somewhere between hard stop and pretty bad. Given the previous financial trends from previous years, GW is still probably down massive amounts of sales, with some locations that he's in the know with talking about a 50% drop. Given all the terrible scampering for the end of this fiscal year to include the rush job that is 7E (regardless if you like it or not...), brace yourself for some bad news. He's asking folks to discuss purely profit loss, such as breaking even isn't even a part of the picture.
Some indications from GW stores all over Europe who told me that sales are at about 50% of last year point in this direction. From the few independent retailers I know I hear similar stories, including GW's attempt to move sales into this year by offering discounts in the next fiscal year,
Well that just sounds awful. This report will be a very interesting read.
Some indications from GW stores all over Europe who told me that sales are at about 50% of last year point in this direction. From the few independent retailers I know I hear similar stories, including GW's attempt to move sales into this year by offering discounts in the next fiscal year,
Well that just sounds awful. This report will be a very interesting read.
It will be, but more about their spin versus actual outcome. I think GW can turn it around, though. Maybe a realization that "this ain't workin', boss" comes through. They could easily fix the rules, open up a community to help do it, and increase value of product by putting models back into packages without raising the price. Bring back 10 man Dire Avengers, 20 man guard, 10 man Sternguard, etc. Make a box for a unit the whole freakin' unit! Then kick out some better starter bundles that feature much bigger discounts to lower the barrier to entry and you're back on the road to sitting pretty.
Spoiler:
Also, put Space Hulk back out... I don't know why that game isn't a permanent stock...
"Day one DLC" for the Ork Codex in White Dwarf with the exclusive rules for looted wagons really should piss a lot of people off. We joked that GW was heading that way and lo and behold, it happened. I hope no one rewards them for it ; /
He also talked about GW with 2 other folks at 40 minutes in on this video:
The man who ran the Creature Caster Kickstarter calls them out harsh by stating their pricing scheme on miniatures is, and I quote, "Highway Robbery." And this is backed with his view as as miniatures creator.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I dunno. I still think that the Cash-Grab Edition of 40K will bring them above the line.
They are above the line.
Games Workshop in 2012/2013 - A ~24% drop in net profits.
General Motors in 2012/2013 - A ~88% drop in net profits
--- The Line ---
Starbucks in 2012/2013 - A company actually making losses (below the line).
Twitter in 2012/2013 - A company actually making losses.
They could have been below the line in May, then the 7th ed release brought them above it in June. Another way to say it would be "keep them above the line" whereas without it, they may have been below the line. Damn you English language ; p
Yonan wrote: They could have been below the line in May, then the 7th ed release brought them above it in June. Another way to say it would be "keep them above the line" whereas without it, they may have been below the line. Damn you English language ; p
I doubt it. GW still made 7.7 Million Operating Profit in the "scandalously bad" 6 months that lead to the stock-drop.
That means that in this "really, really, really bad" half-year, they still made over a Million GBP a month in profit (!). Maybe they get back to ~2 Million GBP profit a month they did in their heydays. Maybe not. And possibly there will be some fluctuations.
But I've seen no evidence whatsoever that GW ever wrote red numbers since they went public.
More Apples to Oranges to Bottle Rockets to Split Infinitives comparisons (that is to say, companies and markets that do not share a stage) again from you Zwei. I'm sorry. I'll be less mean to your precious GW in the future... ah who am I kidding. No I won't.
What I was saying, if you paid any fething attention, is that Cash Grab Edition 40K will make it so the significantly bad results from the last report won't be as bad this time around. I think it reverse their fortunes. I'm saying they will do well, and have a positive full-year report.
More Apples to Oranges to Bottle Rockets to Split Infinitives comparisons (that is to say, companies and markets that do not share a stage) again from you Zwei. I'm sorry. I'll be less mean to your precious GW in the future... ah who am I kidding. No I won't.
What I was saying, if you paid any fething attention, is that Cash Grab Edition 40K will make it so the significantly bad results from the last report won't be as bad this time around. I think it reverse their fortunes. I'm saying they will do well, and have a positive full-year report.
I don't deny that. But that is not what you were saying. That might have been what you wanted to say.
What you really did say was...
I dunno. I still think that the Cash-Grab Edition of 40Kwill bring them above the line.
But "below the line"/"above the line" has a specific definition, no matter what company you talk about it (actually it has two, one for accounting and one for advertising, but I think we're talking accounting here).
It describes a loss in the current account period.
There was no loss in GW's most recent financial statement, just a drop in profits (e.g. smaller profits, but still profits).
I am not sure why you think accusing me of GW-fanboyism will make your misapplication of even the most basic of vocabulary more acceptable?
Again, to use a non-GW example, as you seem incapable of using cool thoughts in anything related to GW.
But they are NOT (!) below the line. They are still above the line. Just the margin by which they are above the line is only 22% of what it used to be.
Yonan wrote: They could have been below the line in May, then the 7th ed release brought them above it in June. Another way to say it would be "keep them above the line" whereas without it, they may have been below the line. Damn you English language ; p
I doubt it. GW still made 7.7 Million Operating Profit in the "scandalously bad" 6 months that lead to the stock-drop.
That means that in this "really, really, really bad" half-year, they still made over a Million GBP a month in profit (!). Maybe they get back to ~2 Million GBP profit a month they did in their heydays. Maybe not. And possibly there will be some fluctuations.
But I've seen no evidence whatsoever that GW ever wrote red numbers since they went public.
jamesk1973 wrote: 30% down. I wonder how deep their cash reserve is.
Cash reserves are reported in financials. After paying out their dividend, their cash reserve is rather low for a company facing these tidal shifts; especially a thirty year old company which should have substantially more cash reserves than they do now. Honestly, I don't think management ever thought they would be facing what they are now.
They really do encompass a misguided sense of worth in the industry today - which I believe comes from too many years without truly serious competition, which they now have in spades. When you think on this point, their absurdity with their pricing makes more sense. They think they can set any price because of the mindset "where else are people going to go". Instead of thinking "if our prices are too high, we will drive current players to new game systems and be unable to attract new players with the high cost of entry." But they just don't see it this way.
Yonan wrote: They could have been below the line in May, then the 7th ed release brought them above it in June. Another way to say it would be "keep them above the line" whereas without it, they may have been below the line. Damn you English language ; p
I doubt it. GW still made 7.7 Million Operating Profit in the "scandalously bad" 6 months that lead to the stock-drop.
That means that in this "really, really, really bad" half-year, they still made over a Million GBP a month in profit (!). Maybe they get back to ~2 Million GBP profit a month they did in their heydays. Maybe not. And possibly there will be some fluctuations.
But I've seen no evidence whatsoever that GW ever wrote red numbers since they went public.
that Cash Grab Edition 40K will make it so the significantly bad results from the last report won't be as bad this time around. I think it reverse their fortunes. I'm saying they will do well, and have a positive full-year report.
But will it really?
Sure, a new edition is always a "big thing", but it only "forces" players to buy a new 85$ book and from what anecdotal evidence I have access to, both FLGS's and actual players didn't exactly rush out to buy the new book in the first place.
And lets not forget that the first semester of the month included the re-release of the Space Marine line and THAT didn't save them from those disastrous results...
that Cash Grab Edition 40K will make it so the significantly bad results from the last report won't be as bad this time around. I think it reverse their fortunes. I'm saying they will do well, and have a positive full-year report.
But will it really?
Sure, a new edition is always a "big thing", but it only "forces" players to buy a new 85$ book and from what anecdotal evidence I have access to, both FLGS's and actual players didn't exactly rush out to buy the new book in the first place.
And lets not forget that the first semester of the month included the re-release of the Space Marine line and THAT didn't save them from those disastrous results...
True. But the "drop" was also relative against the 6 months the year before, which did include the release of 40K 6th Edition.
Half-Year report 2012/2013 - Profits down from 11m to 7.7m from a "new-edition"-half-year to a "no-new-edition"-half-year
It doesn't explain all of it, but about 1.5m in profits over 6 months of the swing seems to be due to a new edition alone (whether or not they can replicate that with 7th, no "Dark Vengeance", being another question).
I assume that GW should have been able to sell 100,000 copies of 7th edition in the first two weekends. This lets them book sales revenue of £6,000,000 before the end of their financial year. That amounts to over 4% of their annual turnover which has to make the bottom line look a lot better than without 7th edition.
When the core game rules change it forces people to upgrade or drop out. A new codex only affects the players of that army, even if SMs are the most popular, and new models don't invalidate your older ones.
Yonan wrote: They could have been below the line in May, then the 7th ed release brought them above it in June. Another way to say it would be "keep them above the line" whereas without it, they may have been below the line. Damn you English language ; p
I doubt it. GW still made 7.7 Million Operating Profit in the "scandalously bad" 6 months that lead to the stock-drop.
That means that in this "really, really, really bad" half-year, they still made over a Million GBP a month in profit (!). Maybe they get back to ~2 Million GBP profit a month they did in their heydays. Maybe not. And possibly there will be some fluctuations.
But I've seen no evidence whatsoever that GW ever wrote red numbers since they went public.
Yes, they are still turning a profit. But if profit was the only true measure of a business, they wouldn't require all the other financials to be reported.
Like it or not, you need money coming in to turn a profit. What matters is how this profit is being made as well. GW is managing to turn a profit because they are still squeezing costs from the organization in the face of falling sales and have managed to be able to hike prices on a declining base to make up for the lost customers. However, they have now reached the point where the cost cuts left are all needed items that drove them to the revenue heights they had before. In addition, their product line is precariously small for a company of such size. Finally, their prices have now reached the breaking point with a vast majority of their customer base. Now, the cost cuts are all going to effect their ability to make revenue - and that is the key metric to keep one's eye on.
So, they have managed to turn a profit because of the above. But once the options of the above run out, profit quickly (very quickly) catches up with the path of falling sales. Thus why so many of these outright end in collapse.
When the core game rules change it forces people to upgrade or drop out.
Yes, it does. Unfortunately, by many indicators, it appears more players have opted for the latter than the former this time around. When more opt for dropping out, this becomes a lot less for "upgrading" at a later point. Couple this with the insanity of the price point now, which are keeping many new players from coming into the HHHobby, and you are not replacing the customer base attrition fast enough.
Yonan wrote: They could have been below the line in May, then the 7th ed release brought them above it in June. Another way to say it would be "keep them above the line" whereas without it, they may have been below the line. Damn you English language ; p
I doubt it. GW still made 7.7 Million Operating Profit in the "scandalously bad" 6 months that lead to the stock-drop.
That means that in this "really, really, really bad" half-year, they still made over a Million GBP a month in profit (!). Maybe they get back to ~2 Million GBP profit a month they did in their heydays. Maybe not. And possibly there will be some fluctuations.
But I've seen no evidence whatsoever that GW ever wrote red numbers since they went public.
Yes, they are still turning a profit. But if profit was the only true measure of a business, they wouldn't require all the other financials to be reported.
Like it or not, you need money coming in to turn a profit. What matters is how this profit is being made as well. GW is managing to turn a profit because they are still squeezing costs from the organization in the face of falling sales and have managed to be able to hike prices on a declining base to make up for the lost customers. However, they have now reached the point where the cost cuts left are all needed items that drove them to the revenue heights they had before. In addition, their product line is precariously small for a company of such size. Finally, their prices have now reached the breaking point with a vast majority of their customer base. Now, the cost cuts are all going to effect their ability to make revenue - and that is the key metric to keep one's eye on.
So, they have managed to turn a profit because of the above. But once the options of the above run out, profit quickly (very quickly) catches up with the path of falling sales. Thus why so many of these outright end in collapse.
I don't necessarily disagree.
But they are not "below the line".
It seems futile to even attempt to go into more in-depth analysis, of the kind you suggest, if people like H.B.M.C. and others cannot even get such basic terminology right.
I assume that GW should have been able to sell 100,000 copies of 7th edition in the first two weekends.
How are you arriving at that number? Is it pure speculation or do you have some basis for it?
100k copies seems like a huge number to me (does anyone still have the leaked financial documents from the CHS trial and can check how many rulebooks they sell in a year in the US?).
Also you are assuming a 60 GBP selling price on each rulebook sold and that would only be true for those sold through their retail chain and their webstore. Any rulebook sold through a third party retailer will net GW a much smaller revenue value.
Zweischneid wrote: But "below the line"/"above the line" has a specific definition, no matter what company you talk about it (actually it has two, one for accounting and one for advertising, but I think we're talking accounting here).
It describes a loss in the current account period.
You're right, it does have a specific accounting definition. That isn't it.
In accounting terms, "above or below the line" describes the part of the financial statements that an accounting entry will impact on. Whether it's positive or negative, and the totality of that effect isn't anything to do with it.
In the 2006/7 financial reports you'll find it was a loss-making year.
I assume that GW should have been able to sell 100,000 copies of 7th edition in the first two weekends. This lets them book sales revenue of £6,000,000 before the end of their financial year. That amounts to over 4% of their annual turnover which has to make the bottom line look a lot better than without 7th edition.
When the core game rules change it forces people to upgrade or drop out. A new codex only affects the players of that army, even if SMs are the most popular, and new models don't invalidate your older ones.
It's still only £50 for the rules, thankfully. So £5m at RRP. Then GW would only get £30 for any of those sold from independents, but I don't know the ratio of direct:indirect sales.
It'll certainly go some way to shore up a bad set of results, but I don't think it's going to be enough to provide stability or growth, even if they did sell 100,000 copies. I'd estimate it at under half of that since most players will wait for the box set / mini book.
Kilkrazy wrote: I assume that GW should have been able to sell 100,000 copies of 7th edition in the first two weekends. This lets them book sales revenue of £6,000,000 before the end of their financial year. That amounts to over 4% of their annual turnover which has to make the bottom line look a lot better than without 7th edition.
Of course it's all smoke & mirrors and, true to GW style, beyond short-sighted as it deals only in the short term (ie. 40K Cash Grab Edition was released specifically to make the very next end-of-year report look good, and not to further enhance/grow the game). I remember that the year after Space Hulk came out there was chatter around the idea that they had to do something big for September, otherwise it would look strange that they had a spike one September and lower numbers the next. The focus was all on ensuring that the numbers on the next report looked good to avoid anyone raising questions of performance.
So, smoke and mirrors. A shell game.
Now, let's all start putting "words" into "quotes" so we can "dismiss" out of "hand" and try to "pretend" that the last "report" wasn't as "bad" as "everyone" said it was.
Now, let's all start putting "words" into "quotes" so we can "dismiss" out of "hand" and try to "pretend" that the last "report" wasn't as "bad" as "everyone" said it was.
That kick in sales though for next year's same time period will be interesting to see as I do not envision a major change with an 8th edition.
For some reason I thought the rules were £60, however I notice the Special Edition rules have dropped to £200, perhaps the main rules have been dropped in price recently?
My figure of 100,000 is educated guesswork based on some modestly informed ideas on the size of the market and the sales pattern for this kind of product.
Now, let's all start putting "words" into "quotes" so we can "dismiss" out of "hand" and try to "pretend" that the last "report" wasn't as "bad" as "everyone" said it was.
You didn't say the last report was bad, at least not in those words. If you had, I wouldn't have disputed that.
Again, your exact quote was...
H.B.M.C. wrote: I dunno. I still think that the Cash-Grab Edition of 40K will bring them above the line.
And that is factually wrong. Nothing can bring "them above the line" if they aren't under it to start with.
People can only respond to what you actually posted, not to what you believed you were posting but failed.
The distinction is important because the world is just a sliver more complex than "good" and "bad" (I know, tough stuff, but try to work with the concept).
A) Games Workshop's most recent results were bad, as in profits shrunk.
B) Games Workshop's most recent results were not bad, as in the made losses.
While both A) and B) could be grouped under the broader heading of "bad", only A) is factually true and B) is not.
Just because both qualify as "bad", doesn't mean B) is correct, as you've claimed.
Kilkrazy wrote: For some reason I thought the rules were £60, however I notice the Special Edition rules have dropped to £200, perhaps the main rules have been dropped in price recently?
My figure of 100,000 is educated guesswork based on some modestly informed ideas on the size of the market and the sales pattern for this kind of product.
I think those are the starting prices. GW have never (as far as I can recall) reduced any prices except in re-packs (10 to 5 troop boxes, metal to plastic)
Wait, you're still telling someone they're factually wrong about something you're factually wrong about?
All right. Than help me out...
1. Accounting: used to characterize income earned and expenses incurred during the normal course of a business that affect the profit (bottom line), but not the capital, of the company.
Question 1: Is it a factually correct statement that Games Workshop PLC - as an entire company - is currently "below the line" and in need - as H.B.M.C. states - of being taken "above the line" by a high-margin product such as, presumably, 40K 7th Edition? (assuming the above accounting definition of "below/above the line").
Question 2: Identical to question 1, but assuming "below/above the line" as used by H.B.M.C. was some sort of casual short-hand-reference for "bottom line", or a similar concept?
Wait, you're still telling someone they're factually wrong about something you're factually wrong about?
All right. Than help me out...
1. Accounting: used to characterize income earned and expenses incurred during the normal course of a business that affect the profit (bottom line), but not the capital, of the company.
Question 1: Is it a factually correct statement that Games Workshop PLC - as an entire company - is currently "below the line" and in need - as H.B.M.C. states - of being taken "above the line" by a high-margin product such as, presumably, 40K 7th Edition? (assuming the above accounting definition of "below/above the line").
This isn't a question, the definition of above the line does not work and has no meaning in this context.
Now, instead of trying to use me in a proxy war with HBMC, admit that the definition you gave was also completely wrong, then I'll consider engaging with the rest of the tangent, and I'll explain the definition better as well.
Exactly, "the bottom line" is referring to a completely different "line" than above/below the line, which has already been adequately defined ITT.
So essentially, two pages have been wasted by a non-financial person trying to incorrectly correct another non-financial person who accidentally used an accounting term in a non accounting sense.
Now, instead of trying to use me in a proxy war with HBMC, admit that the definition you gave was also completely wrong, then I'll consider engaging with the rest of the tangent, and I'll explain the definition better as well.
When the core game rules change it forces people to upgrade or drop out.
Yes, it does. Unfortunately, by many indicators, it appears more players have opted for the latter than the former this time around. When more opt for dropping out, this becomes a lot less for "upgrading" at a later point. Couple this with the insanity of the price point now, which are keeping many new players from coming into the HHHobby, and you are not replacing the customer base attrition fast enough.
Not entirely true, most of us *coughs* oldies who started back in 90's at the age of 10+ or at least my little gathering of friends have lists we like to run dating back to first ed apocalypse in excess of 5k, our armies have outgrown the 3 4'x4' tables our stores have to offer, and the only way to get a large scale game in the form of teaming up with a 500-1k point limit per player limit. I wouldn't claim to have OCD but 5k of multi-coloured marines vs everything else just looks a bit sad and doesn't correlate to anything I've read.
However we're all questionably grown up now and have houses, with spare rooms, attics, garages and/or garden sheds so we occupy this space with our 6x8 Tables.
We only need 7th edition to enter tournaments or to play in store, stores open part time, we work full time.
At homes we can play any edition we please making 7th edition an optional extra. Without the addition of someone trying to push us other things because their job (sadly) depends on it. We can pick our copies up from the charity shop when some poor parent Invested the £250 for there child to start gaming to quit after 4 weeks because they couldn't win.
It doesn't drive us away from the hobby as we've invested allot of time (2/3s + of our lives) money and effort into the Game and Hobby, it just drives us away from entering stores and tournaments increasing that drop in store sales.
Our Young ones are of the "who would win in a fight" kind of mentality, mainly because they are young, so unless we explain it to them the alternative is give them 3 fairly substantial books and say go figure it out. As youngster today with smartphones, consoles and more than 4 channels of TV would that would instantly kill any thought taking up our tradition of hobbying. So it's not a question of replacing the customer base fast enough, it's now replacing it at all from that perspective.
What I find slightly amusing is the fact they've had 6 attempts (just at the 40kBRB) and 25+ years at essentially Inventing the game for them still manage to get it wrong, I must check up on my chess rules, hmm, no update necessary
azreal13 wrote: Exactly, "the bottom line" is referring to a completely different "line" than above/below the line, which has already been adequately defined ITT.
I thought it was perfectly obvious what I meant - this report will be a good one for GW - but it appears that one cannot be perfectly obvious to the perfectly obtuse.
I think the financial and business folks all telling the same story of a strong outcome for sadness this fiscal year holds more weight than the non-fiscal-folks saying "Nu-Uh! And it's still profits!"
You've got gents here, gents on warseer, and gents like Mr. Beeble singing the same song. So we can either shoot the moon and say it's a conspiracy and they don't know what they're talking about (or it's all one clever, clever troll) or go with Occam's Razor: We know the companies been hurting, have been erratic, and have been doing a lot of really stupid things. These aren't signs of a healthy organization. They reported a profit at their 6 month, but the stock still tanked greatly so something tells me that isn't the only important metric.
TheKbob wrote: I think the financial and business folks all telling the same story of a strong outcome for sadness this fiscal year holds more weight than the non-fiscal-folks saying "Nu-Uh! And it's still profits!"
You've got gents here, gents on warseer, and gents like Mr. Beeble singing the same song. So we can either shoot the moon and say it's a conspiracy and they don't know what they're talking about (or it's all one clever, clever troll) or go with Occam's Razor: We know the companies been hurting, have been erratic, and have been doing a lot of really stupid things. These aren't signs of a healthy organization. They reported a profit at their 6 month, but the stock still tanked greatly so something tells me that isn't the only important metric.
Again, the key is in the detail. The world isn't a simple black-and-white, good or bad, dichotomy.
Just because some people point out that the ultra-bleak predictions by some people aren't accurate, doesn't mean they don't acknowledge that there are problems.
Just because there are problems with GW's business model, doesn't mean that there are no other possible reasons for GW's troubles (including - as shocking as it may sound - those listed by Mr. Kirby in the financial report), which many doomsayers like to ignore for they spoil their simplistic causality of what they would like to see as (exclusively) causing GW's (serious, but not fatally so) problems.
Herzlos wrote: I think the report is going to be universally bad, but not as terrible as it'd have been without 7th Ed.
This, in a nutshell.
I can't imagine the one man store model has helped either. I felt the urge to expand my paint collection, and had an appointment almost next door to my local GW, so decided to call in and pick up some restocks and a few new colours.
"This store is closed due to unforeseen circumstances open again Thursday"
This was Tuesday, the store is already closed Sun/Mon because the manager (who's a decent bloke and the only reason I even consider buying paint there) lives miles away and relies on a train to get there, and there are no trains in a Sunday. So we're talking about a store that is already closed for what must be one of the stronger trading days every week, closed for what must be 4 days straight.
I don't blame the staff, real life happens sometimes, and illness or other high priority commitments sometimes have to take precedence, but this can't be an isolated incident, and how much, over the whole company, is this costing them, in conjunction with all the other factors that must be eating into their bottom line?
So I went home and ordered £20 worth of Vallejo online, as if I've got to wait anyway, why not order a better value brand in a container I prefer using?
TheKbob wrote: I think the financial and business folks all telling the same story of a strong outcome for sadness this fiscal year holds more weight than the non-fiscal-folks saying "Nu-Uh! And it's still profits!"
You've got gents here, gents on warseer, and gents like Mr. Beeble singing the same song. So we can either shoot the moon and say it's a conspiracy and they don't know what they're talking about (or it's all one clever, clever troll) or go with Occam's Razor: We know the companies been hurting, have been erratic, and have been doing a lot of really stupid things. These aren't signs of a healthy organization. They reported a profit at their 6 month, but the stock still tanked greatly so something tells me that isn't the only important metric.
Again, the key is in the detail. The world isn't a simple black-and-white, good or bad, dichotomy.
Just because some people point out that the ultra-bleak predictions by some people aren't accurate, doesn't mean they don't acknowledge that there are problems.
Just because there are problems with GW's business model, doesn't mean that there are no other possible reasons for GW's troubles (including - as shocking as it may sound - those listed by Mr. Kirby in the financial report), which many doomsayers like to ignore for they spoil their simplistic causality of what they would like to see as (exclusively) causing GW's (serious, but not fatally so) problems.
Really Zwei?
Ok, you can bang your "balance is bad" drum, because, ultimately, that's a subjective discussion and you're entitled to think whatever you like, but this is a discussion based in hard fact, and on a topic you've very recently, and very clearly, demonstrated you don't have a sound grasp of, so posts like this really are fingers in the ears, la-la-la-ing.
The only reason Kirby listed in the last report for the downturn in the last report was the change to the one man model, and while that is a blatantly bad idea to anyone with a brain, they're still forging ahead with it, and given the smorgasbord of perfectly reasonable excuses he could have put forward to explain the downturn, many of which would have been both understandable and unprovable, that this was the only one offered speaks, to my mind, of a dramatic lack of insight.
I want to see if I understand, please correct me if I'm wrong.
Last year they spent cutting everything they could and raising prices in order squeeze out as much profit as they could. They also began pumping out sourecbooks and dataslates as fast as possible that were low quality and high price.
Next year, they'll have nothing left to cut and no "new edition" to increase their sales. So even if they look good at this end of the year report, they'll be hurting far more next year.
MWHistorian wrote: I want to see if I understand, please correct me if I'm wrong.
Last year they spent cutting everything they could and raising prices in order squeeze out as much profit as they could. They also began pumping out sourecbooks and dataslates as fast as possible that were low quality and high price.
Next year, they'll have nothing left to cut and no "new edition" to increase their sales. So even if they look good at this end of the year report, they'll be hurting far more next year.
Fantasy 9th is rumoured for September. 2015 though? That is a bleak looking year, but we wont see that till 2016. Which if GW keeps with what its doing is when 40K 8th is coming out.
Herzlos wrote: I think the report is going to be universally bad, but not as terrible as it'd have been without 7th Ed.
Indeed, the question then becomes; what about next year? Unless GW plan to release 8th ed next year they have nothing to shore up their sales, WHFB 9th isn't going to do it as its a dying game by all accounts, LOtR and the Hobbit are essentially dead games and there are no other options left.
GW may even be forced to do something radically sensible and re-release some of its specialist (aka good) games or Warhammer Quest.
MWHistorian wrote: I want to see if I understand, please correct me if I'm wrong.
Last year they spent cutting everything they could and raising prices in order squeeze out as much profit as they could. They also began pumping out sourecbooks and dataslates as fast as possible that were low quality and high price.
Next year, they'll have nothing left to cut and no "new edition" to increase their sales. So even if they look good at this end of the year report, they'll be hurting far more next year.
Dataslates only started appearing in greater numbers in December 2013 with the digital advent calendar. The last financial report we had only runs up until November 30th 2013.
Dataslates, among with 7th Edition, were clearly one of the attempts to revitalize their business. Whether that strategy worked or not is yet to be seen.
Herzlos wrote: I think the report is going to be universally bad, but not as terrible as it'd have been without 7th Ed.
Indeed, the question then becomes; what about next year? Unless GW plan to release 8th ed next year they have nothing to shore up their sales, WHFB 9th isn't going to do it as its a dying game by all accounts, LOtR and the Hobbit are essentially dead games and there are no other options left.
GW may even be forced to do something radically sensible and re-release some of its specialist (aka good) games or Warhammer Quest.
I'd suggest WHFB 9th could be enough to turn things around.
The trouble is, it would have to redefine the genre in terms of rules quality and playability in order to do so, and somehow solve the issue of a much wider variety of cheaper third party rank and file models than 40K, and I just don't think GW have it in their locker to do so, unfortunately.
When the core game rules change it forces people to upgrade or drop out.
Yes, it does. Unfortunately, by many indicators, it appears more players have opted for the latter than the former this time around. When more opt for dropping out, this becomes a lot less for "upgrading" at a later point. Couple this with the insanity of the price point now, which are keeping many new players from coming into the HHHobby, and you are not replacing the customer base attrition fast enough.
Not entirely true, most of us *coughs* oldies who started back in 90's at the age of 10+ or at least my little gathering of friends have lists we like to run dating back to first ed apocalypse in excess of 5k, our armies have outgrown the 3 4'x4' tables our stores have to offer, and the only way to get a large scale game in the form of teaming up with a 500-1k point limit per player limit. I wouldn't claim to have OCD but 5k of multi-coloured marines vs everything else just looks a bit sad and doesn't correlate to anything I've read.
However we're all questionably grown up now and have houses, with spare rooms, attics, garages and/or garden sheds so we occupy this space with our 6x8 Tables.
We only need 7th edition to enter tournaments or to play in store, stores open part time, we work full time.
At homes we can play any edition we please making 7th edition an optional extra. Without the addition of someone trying to push us other things because their job (sadly) depends on it. We can pick our copies up from the charity shop when some poor parent Invested the £250 for there child to start gaming to quit after 4 weeks because they couldn't win.
It doesn't drive us away from the hobby as we've invested allot of time (2/3s + of our lives) money and effort into the Game and Hobby, it just drives us away from entering stores and tournaments increasing that drop in store sales.
Our Young ones are of the "who would win in a fight" kind of mentality, mainly because they are young, so unless we explain it to them the alternative is give them 3 fairly substantial books and say go figure it out. As youngster today with smartphones, consoles and more than 4 channels of TV would that would instantly kill any thought taking up our tradition of hobbying. So it's not a question of replacing the customer base fast enough, it's now replacing it at all from that perspective.
What I find slightly amusing is the fact they've had 6 attempts (just at the 40kBRB) and 25+ years at essentially Inventing the game for them still manage to get it wrong, I must check up on my chess rules, hmm, no update necessary
I think this is definitely one where YMMV. In my neck of the woods, of the 24+ "old timers" (I will be 49 very soon!) we had playing in the area, all but three of us have divested out of GW completely, compliments of ebay. However, of the three remaining, one currently has his army on ebay, and I am down to two armies (Space Marine and Eldar), having sold a TON of 20+ years of GW stuff in the last two months and I am very close to putting the last two armies up for lack of anyone playing. The young ones in the area (those being in their late teens to early 30s) haven't even started on the GW bandwagon. Bolt Action and Infinity have taken off here in the last year very, very quickly (according to the store owner, Infinity just started barreling off his shelves in the last two months alone to the point he can't stock it fast enough) and have replaced all 40k play at my rather large FLGS. There is also quick a bit of Warmahordes and a smattering of Malifuax, Hell Dorado and X-Wing thrown in.
As I mentioned earlier, it used to be that GW releasing a new edition meant everyone got it. In my area (a rather sizable city in the northern mid-west of the US), not a single copy of 7th edition was wanted, or sold, and therefore the store owners decided not to even get a single copy. I've read similar stories at many other stores and recently even heard from a friend of mine who has run a GW store in the US for 10 years that his sales have dropped like a rock (down 70%) since the beginning of the year.
I think there are some pockets of the opposite happening. But at one time, there were no pockets. GW releasing a new edition used to be guaranteed high volume sales. Now, not so much.
I think this is definitely one where YMMV. In my neck of the woods, of the 24+ "old timers" (I will be 49 very soon!) we had playing in the area, all but three of us have divested out of GW completely, compliments of ebay. However, of the three remaining, one currently has his army on ebay, and I am down to two armies (Space Marine and Eldar), having sold a TON of 20+ years of GW stuff in the last two months and I am very close to putting the last two armies up for lack of anyone playing.
I first started collecting 40k seriously with the 2nd ed boxed set,1993 according to wikipedia, and during the course of 2nd edition I had armies for every single army and 3-4 different Marine armies, some of them pretty large. I stopped playing 40k during 3rd ed and since then I have been steadily reducing the 40k models I own. All I have left is a Deathguard army which will probably never see a table again, a metal Catachan army that I am slowly repainting but will again probably never see a table and a big box full of the remnants of a dozen armies destined for ebay. I have neither the space nor the inclination to keep effectively useless, and badly painted, armies around the house.
Zweischneid wrote: Just because there are problems with GW's business model, doesn't mean that there are no other possible reasons for GW's troubles (including - as shocking as it may sound - those listed by Mr. Kirby in the financial report), which many doomsayers like to ignore for they spoil their simplistic causality of what they would like to see as (exclusively) causing GW's (serious, but not fatally so) problems.
Then there are those of us who have been around the business block long enough to know when we are reading corporate double-speak, which is everything Kirby has been writing, to know when things are worse than they are becuase we have read it so, so many times before.
Here, let me give one example of why GW's current business model is very bad based on their last financials. As they have become absolutely addicted to maximizing their profit on each and every miniature sale, it means a small drop in revenues makes a LARGE drop in profits. Thus why last period, with an 11% decline in revenue you saw a 30% decline in profits.
Also, as pointed out in the very recent Part 14, if GW percentage of dividend to profit is still historically accurate, it would mean a much as a 60% decline in profits. If that is the case, it would mean a second period decline of about 20% in revenues. If that is the case, I will stick with my assertion that GW isn't declining - they are collapsing. And then, we will all see just how fast companies can go to bottom, even after 30 years in business. Just look at TSR as an example of how fast it can happen.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Palindrome wrote: GW may even be forced to do something radically sensible and re-release some of its specialist (aka good) games or Warhammer Quest.
They may, but at this point, I think it is too late.
Release Epic - oh, their all still playing Dropzone Commander.
Release Mordheim - oh, their all still playing Malifaux, Hell Dorado or Godslayer
Release Necromunda - what the heck is this Infinity game I keep hearing about?
Release Space Hulk - dang that PP and their Level 7 game
Release Man O' War - how can anyone still want to play that game that outsold 40k by 7 to 1 in some areas
Release Warhammer Quest - nah, we'll all just stick with our Descent collection
Release Battlefleet Gothic - why would anyone want to play in the Star Wars universe when ours is so much bigger?
In other words, the opening they gave the market has been so filled with solid competition (not to mention GW would probably charge $250 for their new Specialist Games) that now have the leg up on GW.
I think this is definitely one where YMMV. In my neck of the woods, of the 24+ "old timers" (I will be 49 very soon!) we had playing in the area, all but three of us have divested out of GW completely, compliments of ebay. However, of the three remaining, one currently has his army on ebay, and I am down to two armies (Space Marine and Eldar), having sold a TON of 20+ years of GW stuff in the last two months and I am very close to putting the last two armies up for lack of anyone playing.
I first started collecting 40k seriously with the 2nd ed boxed set,1993 according to wikipedia, and during the course of 2nd edition I had armies for every single army and 3-4 different Marine armies, some of them pretty large. I stopped playing 40k during 3rd ed and since then I have been steadily reducing the 40k models I own. All I have left is a Deathguard army which will probably never see a table again, a metal Catachan army that I am slowly repainting but will again probably never see a table and a big box full of the remnants of a dozen armies destined for ebay. I have neither the space nor the inclination to keep effectively useless, and badly painted, armies around the house.
Which is a shame, because, somewhere, in amongst all the customer-exploitation, poor executions of actually decent concepts, poor rules writing and totally inexcusable lack of rules maintenance and adjustment, there is still a game that can be a lot of fun, it is just conditional on a group of players with like minded attitudes being lucky enough to be in close proximity to one another.
My fervent hope is that GW can survive a good kicking, learn some humility and get back in track, my greatest concern is that it's already too late.
Then there are those of us who have been around the business block long enough to know when we are reading corporate double-speak, which is everything Kirby has been writing, to know when things are worse than they are becuase we have read it so, so many times before.
Then there are those of us who have been around the business block long enough to know that customers almost always give too much weight to their personal grievances as causal factors to the performance of a company.
Indeed, the tendency to favour your own personal bias in interpreting a correlation of two events is probably the most common error in both business and academia.
Then there are those of us who have been around the business block long enough to know when we are reading corporate double-speak, which is everything Kirby has been writing, to know when things are worse than they are becuase we have read it so, so many times before.
Then there are those of us who have been around the business block long enough to know that customers almost always give too much weight to their personal grievances as causal factors to the performance of a company.
Indeed, the tendency to favour your own personal bias in interpreting a correlation of two events is probably the most common error in both business and academia.
Then there are those of us who have been around the business block long enough to know when we are reading corporate double-speak, which is everything Kirby has been writing, to know when things are worse than they are becuase we have read it so, so many times before.
Then there are those of us who have been around the business block long enough to know that customers almost always give too much weight to their personal grievances as causal factors to the performance of a company.
Tell that to TSR. If customers don't like a product, they don't buy it. If customers don't buy a product, the company making that product collapses.
Then there are those of us who have been around the business block long enough to know when we are reading corporate double-speak, which is everything Kirby has been writing, to know when things are worse than they are becuase we have read it so, so many times before.
Then there are those of us who have been around the business block long enough to know that customers almost always give too much weight to their personal grievances as causal factors to the performance of a company.
Indeed, the tendency to favour your own personal bias in interpreting a correlation of two events is probably the most common error in both business and academia.
Um, yeah. I reference financials and business performance. Which are identifiable facts. Personally, I could care less if GW lives or dies. I don't own stock in them so no skin off my back. The gaming community in my local area is still strong - just no longer with GW - so my gaming fix is still taken care of. There is no bias in sighting numbers - when looking at all of them. They exist, they are real, and a company just turning a profit does not mean they are still healthy.
However, declining double digits in revenue in a market growing by double digits, with competition that is all growing, is enough evidence that things are not looking bright in the near future.
Tell that to TSR. If customers don't like a product, they don't buy it. If customers don't buy a product, the company making that product collapses.
Lots of interesting lessions there....
1994 saw the release of the Planescape campaign setting.[9]
By 1995, TSR had fallen behind both Games Workshop and Wizards of the Coast in sales volume.[20] Seeing the profits being generated by Wizards of the Coast with their collectible card game Magic: The Gathering, TSR attempted to enter this market in 1995 in a novel way with Dragon Dice. Similar to collectible card games, each player started with a random assortment of basic dice, and could improve their assortment by purchasing booster packs of more powerful dice. In addition to this initiative, TSR also decided to publish twelve hardcover novels in 1996, despite a previous history of publishing only one or two hardcover novels each year.[20]
Sales of Dragon Dice through the games trade started strongly, so TSR quickly produced several expansion packs. In addition, TSR tried to aggressively market Dragon Dice in mass-market book stores through Random House. However, the game did not catch on through the book trade, and sales of the expansion sets through traditional games stores were poor. In addition, the twelve hardcover novels did not sell as well as expected.
Despite total sales of $40 million, TSR ended 1996 with few cash reserves. When Random House returned an unexpectedly high percentage the year's inventory of unsold novels and sets of Dragon Dice for a fee of several million dollars, TSR found itself in a cash crunch. With no cash, TSR was unable to pay their printing and shipping bills, and the logistics company that handled TSR's pre-press, printing, warehousing and shipping refused to do any more work.
- Planescape has a strong fan-following, even until today (~ Blood Bowl?), but never was a viable product.
- Attempts to "copy" other companies model, like Dragon Dice, proved to be a short-term success, but a long-term disaster (would the same happen if GW "copied" the success of Privateer? Corvus Belli?).
- Returned inventory through 3rd party distributors (book trade) proved problematic in anticipating cash needs (is GW decreasing the reliance on 3rd party FLGS and 3rd party book-trade in favour of BL-direct a good response to this?)
Perhaps the most telling comment in the whole discussion is this one from Dizzy Angel Demon (at the 2:09:14 mark):
"I know a lot of people in the hobby and gaming and they have given up on GW already. They've moved on and found other avenues. Then you got your hardcore fans that are really trying their best to stick with them, but they're going to sink with the ship."
When you have a 3 hour discussion on the problems with GW, it is very apparent that things are blantantly obvious to almost everyone at this point that GW is in serious trouble.
Kilkrazy wrote: If you look at the numbers, GW were as profitable if not more so in 2012-2013 than at any time in the past 10 years.
It has been achieved by efficiency savings and increasing prices.
That is why the Dec 2013 report was a shock, because it may indicate that GW have cut too far or increased prices too much.
Yes, it may indicate that
However not: It must indicate that.
Crucial difference.
And the "market grows by double digit" stuff has been misquoted for ages. The "Tabletop games" market grew strongly, led by MtG, a strong demand for board games and surprise hits like the My Little Pony CCG.
Miniature games (as sub-market I suppose) have been shrinking (despite X-Wing even). Of course, GW's drop alone might account for much of that, but I don't think it is a coincidence that ... say ... Privateer is branching into Board Games (e.g. Level 7 stuff), etc....
The miniature games market might not be as hot as people think it is.
Miniature games (as sub-market I suppose) have been shrinking (despite X-Wing even). Of course, GW's drop alone might account for much of that, but I don't think it is a coincidence that ... say ... Privateer is branching into Board Games (e.g. Level 7 stuff), etc....
The miniature games market might not be as hot as people think it is.
Evidence?
All the indicators I see (anecdotal and otherwise) contradict that statement.
Kilkrazy wrote: If you look at the numbers, GW were as profitable if not more so in 2012-2013 than at any time in the past 10 years.
It has been achieved by efficiency savings and increasing prices.
That is why the Dec 2013 report was a shock, because it may indicate that GW have cut too far or increased prices too much.
Yes, it may indicate that
However not: It must indicate that.
Crucial difference.
And the "market grows by double digit" stuff has been misquoted for ages. The "Tabletop games" market grew strongly, led by MtG, a strong demand for board games and surprise hits like the My Little Pony CCG.
Miniature games (as sub-market I suppose) have been shrinking (despite X-Wing even). Of course, GW's drop alone might account for much of that, but I don't think it is a coincidence that ... say ... Privateer is branching into Board Games (e.g. Level 7 stuff), etc....
The miniature games market might not be as hot as people think it is.
Citation needed on other tabletop games shrinking.
The secular changes in gaming that are fueling tabletop game play were intact through 2013, with strong sales in both new products and classics driving the growth. Sales were up 15% in 2012 (see "Fourth Consecutive Growth Year"), with strong momentum through 2013 [...], with bellwether Magic: The Gathering leading the way (see "'Magic' Up 30% in Q3").
[...]
The growth rate for Magic compares favorably to Hasbro’s peer brands in a couple of ways: 30% greatly exceeded the 6% overall growth in Hasbro’s game category, and the 19% overall growth in what Hasbro calls its "franchise brands," key company-owned brands including Magic, My Little Pony, Nerf, Transformers, and Play-Doh.
That is the stuff that keeps referred to when people say "GW is in a growing market", though it's clearly not the direct GW-competition that seem to be driving the trend.
1994 saw the release of the Planescape campaign setting.[9]
By 1995, TSR had fallen behind both Games Workshop and Wizards of the Coast in sales volume.[20] Seeing the profits being generated by Wizards of the Coast with their collectible card game Magic: The Gathering, TSR attempted to enter this market in 1995 in a novel way with Dragon Dice. Similar to collectible card games, each player started with a random assortment of basic dice, and could improve their assortment by purchasing booster packs of more powerful dice. In addition to this initiative, TSR also decided to publish twelve hardcover novels in 1996, despite a previous history of publishing only one or two hardcover novels each year.[20]
the twelve hardcover novels did not sell as well as expected.
Despite total sales of $40 million, TSR ended 1996 with few cash reserves. When Random House returned an unexpectedly high percentage the year's inventory of unsold novels and sets of Dragon Dice for a fee of several million dollars, TSR found itself in a cash crunch. With no cash, TSR was unable to pay their printing and shipping bills, and the logistics company that handled TSR's pre-press, printing, warehousing and shipping refused to do any more work.
Wouldn't be trying that with codex's would they. Cus that'll work better than novels. Won't it???
Wouldn't be trying that with codex's would they. Cus that'll work better than novels. Won't it???
Of course. Could be a factor. Could GW's sped up 2013 release schedule be to blame? Did "GW-collectors" stop buying "ever Codex"? Should GW go back to the old "2 Codex a year" speed?
Maybe GW slowing it down again with Orks is a sign of them putting the breaks on?
It is very clear that hobby boardgames have been growing strongly for some years. You don't need market figures to see that, it is obvious from the loads more games that are in shops, the expansion of events like "London On Board" and the number of newspaper articles on the topic.
IDK about miniature wargames except from a personal, anecdotal viewpoint.
Kilkrazy wrote: If you look at the numbers, GW were as profitable if not more so in 2012-2013 than at any time in the past 10 years.
It has been achieved by efficiency savings and increasing prices.
That is why the Dec 2013 report was a shock, because it may indicate that GW have cut too far or increased prices too much.
Yes, it may indicate that
However not: It must indicate that.
Crucial difference.
And the "market grows by double digit" stuff has been misquoted for ages. The "Tabletop games" market grew strongly, led by MtG, a strong demand for board games and surprise hits like the My Little Pony CCG.
Miniature games (as sub-market I suppose) have been shrinking (despite X-Wing even). Of course, GW's drop alone might account for much of that, but I don't think it is a coincidence that ... say ... Privateer is branching into Board Games (e.g. Level 7 stuff), etc....
The miniature games market might not be as hot as people think it is.
PP has been putting out board games for a few years now. They have a whole series of Bodger games. Grind. and just recently added the Level 7 stuff as well as the Warmachine/Hordes CCG. They even have a really good RPG out there.
And let us not forget the incredibly successful kickstarter to get the video game off the drawing board and into reality (heck it was the featured game running at the NVidia booth at E3).
The secular changes in gaming that are fueling tabletop game play were intact through 2013, with strong sales in both new products and classics driving the growth. Sales were up 15% in 2012 (see "Fourth Consecutive Growth Year"), with strong momentum through 2013 [...], with bellwether Magic: The Gathering leading the way (see "'Magic' Up 30% in Q3").
[...]
The growth rate for Magic compares favorably to Hasbro’s peer brands in a couple of ways: 30% greatly exceeded the 6% overall growth in Hasbro’s game category, and the 19% overall growth in what Hasbro calls its "franchise brands," key company-owned brands including Magic, My Little Pony, Nerf, Transformers, and Play-Doh.
That is the stuff that keeps referred to when people say "GW is in a growing market", though it's clearly not the direct GW-competition that seem to be driving the trend.
So nothing about Wargaming there at all?
It's just not growing as fast as M:TG?
If Wargaming is shrinking, can you explain the explosion of Wargames companies and products on the market?
Edit: What evidence do you have that PP has expanded into board games because the wargames are struggling, rather than diversifying like most mature companies do?
Wouldn't be trying that with codex's would they. Cus that'll work better than novels. Won't it???
Of course. Could be a factor. Could GW's sped up 2013 release schedule be to blame? Did "GW-collectors" stop buying "every Codex"? Should GW go back to the old "2 Codex a year" speed?
Maybe GW slowing it down again with Orks is a sign of them putting the breaks on?
PP has been putting out board games for a few years now. They have a whole series of Bodger games. Grind. and just recently added the Level 7 stuff as well as the Warmachine/Hordes CCG. They even have a really good RPG out there.
And let us not forget the incredibly successful kickstarter to get the video game off the drawing board and into reality (heck it was the featured game running at the NVidia booth at E3).
And that is probably the smart thing to do (though I doubt that in nearly 15 years of company history, PP never had a half-year with declining sales).
GW's "all-eggs-in-one-basket" is clearly a major problem, precisely because its company finances are so dictated by the cycles of a single product-line.
So in a bizarre way, GW's problem might not be a lack of 40K-popularity, it might be too much 40k-popularity, which has sapped creativity from everything else (and in a smaller mirror, the Space Marine popularity, which swallowed first GW and, even more voraciously, swallowed FW more recently).
PP has been putting out board games for a few years now. They have a whole series of Bodger games. Grind. and just recently added the Level 7 stuff as well as the Warmachine/Hordes CCG. They even have a really good RPG out there.
And let us not forget the incredibly successful kickstarter to get the video game off the drawing board and into reality (heck it was the featured game running at the NVidia booth at E3).
And that is probably the smart thing to do (though I doubt that in nearly 15 years of company history, PP never had a half-year with declining sales).
GW's "all-eggs-in-one-basket" is clearly a major problem, precisely because its company finances are so dictated by the cycles of a single product-line.
So in a bizarre way, GW's problem might not be a lack of 40K-popularity, it might be too much 40k-popularity, which has sapped creativity from everything else (and in a smaller mirror, the Space Marine popularity, which swallowed first GW and, even more voraciously, swallowed FW more recently).
I think lack of diversity is most definitely an issue. It was almost like they ran WHFB into the ground, and then took silliness from it and slapped it onto 40K. Its like they let Michael Bey take over their blockbuster franchise after destroying another movie.
I'm sure PP has had bad quarters. I think they are still young and agile enough to make quick changes. Look at the transition from Mark1 to Mark2. It was needed and they had an open beta. Now they are on their forums all the time. they interact with gamer at conventions, broadcast finals games on twitch. Add to this that they support the fans with things like podcasts (so much so that PP staff have been on quite a few of the fancasts). and you see a pattern that is pretty distinctly the antithesis of how GW operates.
As to my thoughts on GW. I think they have reached the end of their life cycle just likes all business do. You start as a startup, achieve rapid growth. become stationary, and then the decline. Its all in how long it takes.
Then there are those of us who have been around the business block long enough to know when we are reading corporate double-speak, which is everything Kirby has been writing, to know when things are worse than they are becuase we have read it so, so many times before.
Then there are those of us who have been around the business block long enough to know that customers almost always give too much weight to their personal grievances as causal factors to the performance of a company.
Indeed, the tendency to favour your own personal bias in interpreting a correlation of two events is probably the most common error in both business and academia.
Many of us, myself, Wayshuba and Derek included, have seen fit to disclose our relevant experiences WRT what is informing our opinions and assessments.
Perhaps you'd be so kind as to provide similar information as to "being around the business block?"
Or is this going to be the same as when I asked you to outline one of the wonderful games you play where everything is fabulous, the narrative forging is epic and balance irrelevant? Ie a bunch of sidestepping and non answers.
Then there are those of us who have been around the business block long enough to know when we are reading corporate double-speak, which is everything Kirby has been writing, to know when things are worse than they are becuase we have read it so, so many times before.
Then there are those of us who have been around the business block long enough to know that customers almost always give too much weight to their personal grievances as causal factors to the performance of a company.
Indeed, the tendency to favour your own personal bias in interpreting a correlation of two events is probably the most common error in both business and academia.
Many of us, myself, Wayshuba and Derek included, have seen fit to disclose our relevant experiences WRT what is informing our opinions and assessments.
Perhaps you'd be so kind as to provide similar information as to "being around the business block?"
Or is this going to be the same as when I asked you to outline one of the wonderful games you play where everything is fabulous, the narrative forging is epic and balance irrelevant? Ie a bunch of sidestepping and non answers.
That's not as bad as asking him for a solid, definite answer on how making the penitent engine less useless makes the game less fun.
Many of us, myself, Wayshuba and Derek included, have seen fit to disclose our relevant experiences WRT what is informing our opinions and assessments.
Really? Must have missed those posts where you disclose your business credentials.
I'll save you the time. I worked for YouGov for a while. I know how people misguide themselves consistently on how they think the world works. Never discard a possible cause (such as those given by Mr. Kirby), especially if it goes against your personal beliefs/experience/assumptions.
I'll save you the time. I worked for YouGov for a while. I know how people misguide themselves consistently on how they think the world works. Never discard a possible cause (such as those given by Mr. Kirby), especially if it goes against your personal beliefs/experience/assumptions.
He makes some very good points about the limitations of the data we do have. Saying that the gaming industry has double in the past 5 years needs to be taken with a huge grain of salt considering how few companies actually report numbers publicly. GW and Hasbro are about it.
I'll save you the time. I worked for YouGov for a while. I know how people misguide themselves consistently on how they think the world works. Never discard a possible cause (such as those given by Mr. Kirby), especially if it goes against your personal beliefs/experience/assumptions.
So, no actual experience of managing or running a business then?
So never actually been around the "business block?"
Not denying you your right to an opinion, but don't try and assert that you're any sort of authority of businesses or how to run them.
To save you time, I studied Business in college, worked as a senior manager in a multimillion pound turnover retail sales business (third largest in it's sector at one point) and was company director of my own company for a few years before latterly being forced to give up work due to chronic ill health two years ago.
So, not to turn this into a pissing contest, which was never my intent, but to paraphrase Martin O'Neil "the difference between fans and managers is fans have opinions, managers must make decisions"
I may be a fan now, but I've been a manager.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
dereksatkinson wrote: Azrael.. This is clearly the same Zweischneid from pins of war.
He makes some very good points about the limitations of the data we do have. Saying that the gaming industry has double in the past 5 years needs to be taken with a huge grain of salt considering how few companies actually report numbers publicly. GW and Hasbro are about it.
Except we have Wayshuba posting in this thread, whose access to information is nowhere near as limited because of his profession, and he has been clear and unambiguous on what is happening as far as he is able.
Doubled in 5 years is an average of ~20% per year, which is absolutely in line with everything we do know, or that is rumoured.
So, no actual experience of managing or running a business then?
So never actually been around the "business block?"
Not denying you your right to an opinion, but don't try and assert that you're any sort of authority of businesses or how to run them.
I am not an authority on running a business.
But I am an authority on saying that assuming X, not Y causes Z, only because X would fit your worldview and Y was forwarded by a person you don't trust, is fraught with danger.
It is not dissimilar to how ... say ... a person identifying himself as a "businessmen" would be more inclined to believe a fact if told by another businessmen, but more likely reject the very same fact if told by... say... a politician or social worker, even if the fact is identical.
azreal13 wrote: So, no actual experience of managing or running a business then?
So never actually been around the "business block?"
....
I may be a fan now, but I've been a manager.
Working as a "manager" doesn't mean you know what you are doing. Neither does running a business.
Neither does being a trader, as you've repeatedly demonstrated.
What it does do is demonstrate I've got first hand, real world experience of the topic at hand, that I have a working knowledge of how businesses operate in a day to day basis.
Besides, I make no claims to competence, merely to relevant knowledge and experience. I'm content in my level of ability, I feel no obligation to argue the toss with you.
Nice to seem my assertion that just because you've got certificates doesn't make you any good from months ago has stayed with you though.
azreal13 wrote: Except we have Wayshuba posting in this thread, whose access to information is nowhere near as limited because of his profession, and he has been clear and unambiguous on what is happening as far as he is able.
Doubled in 5 years is an average of ~20% per year, which is absolutely in line with everything we do know, or that is rumoured.
Numbers which can't be projected across the entire industry.
So, no actual experience of managing or running a business then?
So never actually been around the "business block?"
Not denying you your right to an opinion, but don't try and assert that you're any sort of authority of businesses or how to run them.
I am not an authority on running a business.
But I am an authority on saying that assuming X, not Y causes Z, only because X would fit your worldview and Y was forwarded by a person you don't trust, is fraught with danger.
It is not dissimilar to how ... say ... a person identifying himself as a "businessmen" would be more inclined to believe a fact if told by another businessmen, but more likely reject the very same fact if told by... say... a politician or social worker, even if the fact is identical.
It's how humans work.
No, it's how some humans work.
Personally, I have always borne in mind something my grandfather said to me (genuinely)
"even the stupidest, most ignorant person knows something you don't."
Frankly, Zwei, it's the only reason you're not on ignore.
That's what every human thinks. That's the problem, if you make that the basis of what you think caused Z.
Really?
You think every person is completely happy with their ability in every aspect of their life, never strives to improve and lacks the self awareness necessary to identify things they're not good at and consequently make allowances?
You think every person is completely happy with their ability in every aspect of their life, never strives to improve and lacks the self awareness necessary to identify things they're not good at and consequently make allowances?
Sheesh.
Every person filters what they perceive in the world through the lens of their experience. Sure, many, even most people will try to improve.
Still, if confronted with reality, people will "accept" or "reject" facts based on pre-conceptions and biases, not least those they believe themselves to be experts in.
I am pretty sure Mr. Tom Kirby is as convinced of his business-smarts and of his "I know how business works" as you are. Both of you make the same mistake of thinking your expertise/experience is a viable criteria for eliminating (or accepting) a given cause X as the basis of an observed event/trend/development Y, without rigorously testing (and often not even seriously considering) alternative causes and/or counterfactuals.
I've seen lots of evidence suggesting that GW is doing "not good" but no evidence to suggest that they're doing good. Maintaining seems to be the best scenario that I've understood from this thread.
Once again, I'm no expert and I'm trying to understand this.
MWHistorian wrote: I've seen lots of evidence suggesting that GW is doing "not good" but no evidence to suggest that they're doing good. Maintaining seems to be the best scenario that I've understood from this thread.
Once again, I'm no expert and I'm trying to understand this.
No doubt there.
The question isn't if GW is doing "good" or "bad".
The question is why GW is doing "bad" and what they need to change to get back on track.
- Are they part of a decline in the market, or bucking the trend in a growing market?
- How much of the blame is in the prices? If at all?
- How much of the blame are in the game-rules? If at all?
- How much of the blame is in their restructuring of their retail chain? If at all?
- How much of the blame is in their odd social-media/marketing strategy? If at all?
- How much of the blame is in stronger/more numerous competition? If at all?
- How much of the blame is in the demographic shifts among their customers? If at all?
- How much of the blame is in changing aesthetic tastes and pop-culture trends? If at all?
- How much of the blame is in the "natural" product cycle of their "big" product? If at all?
- How much of the blame is in the "secrecy" + "surprise reveal" strategy? If at all?
- How much of the blame is in the faster release-schedule? If at all?
- Etc....
- Etc...
- Etc...
Which factors are working against GW? Which of the above factors possible work for GW, just not enough to stop the slide?
Most accounts in this thread have displayed a very reductionist, "single-cause" (or at best dual-cause") theory of why GW is doing bad, heavily biased by any given posters personal pet-peeve against GW as a customer.
A smart business man/analyst would never discard any possible reason out of hand (and always assume that there are even more possible, yet unknown reasons), rather than jumping to a simplistic conclusion that only serves to pamper his ego as "empowered consumer" "who knew all along what went wrong".
Nobody regularly contributing is blaming a single cause hypothesis, the only person doing that appears to be Mr T Kirby.
Possibly.
But if you'd be serious about getting behind what is going on, you wouldn't just discard Kirby's reasons out of hand "just because they come from Kirby" either.
Kirby's view of events might not even be very likely, but it is possible, and I've seen no evidence that would with disprove his take on things or evidence that would prove the "GW fails because prices" or "GW fails because the game sucks"-theories that are popular here (which, again, might be possible, even likely, but certainly not proven).
Nobody regularly contributing is blaming a single cause hypothesis, the only person doing that appears to be Mr T Kirby.
Possibly.
But if you'd be serious about getting behind what is going on, you wouldn't just discard Kirby's reasons out of hand "just because they come from Kirby" either.
Kirby's view of events might not even be very likely, but it is possible, and I've seen no evidence that would with disprove his take on things or evidence that would prove the "GW fails because prices" or "GW fails because the game sucks"-theories that are popular here (which, again, might be possible, even likely, but certainly not proven).
What's your point? That nobody can talk about this subject? There seems to be a lot of evidence around and I think we'd be foolish to dismiss it.
Nobody regularly contributing is blaming a single cause hypothesis, the only person doing that appears to be Mr T Kirby.
Possibly.
But if you'd be serious about getting behind what is going on, you wouldn't just discard Kirby's reasons out of hand "just because they come from Kirby" either.
Kirby's view of events might not even be very likely, but it is possible, and I've seen no evidence that would with disprove his take on things or evidence that would prove the "GW fails because prices" or "GW fails because the game sucks"-theories that are popular here (which, again, might be possible, even likely, but certainly not proven).
I'm not, I never have.
I've always, consistently, cast doubt on the idea that "disruption to opening due to the changeover to the one man model" has been the sole cause of the massive drop. I've also cast doubt on the thinking process that led to this being cited as the sole reason, when there are many other perfectly relevant reasons that were a lot more plausible.
I've never dismissed it, I've just doubted it being the sole cause.
I'm just gonna leave this here. I feel like a few people might need to learn it.
from Wikipedia
Occam's razor (also written as Ockham's razor and in Latin lex parsimoniae) is a principle of parsimony, economy, or succinctness used in problem-solving devised by William of Ockham (c. 1287–1347). It states that among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected. Other, more complicated solutions may ultimately prove correct, but—in the absence of certainty—the fewer assumptions that are made, the better.
The application of the principle often shifts the burden of proof in a discussion.[a] The razor states that one should proceed to simpler theories until simplicity can be traded for greater explanatory power. The simplest available theory need not be most accurate. Philosophers also point out that the exact meaning of simplest may be nuanced.[b]
Solomonoff's theory of inductive inference is a mathematically formalized Occam's Razor:[2][3][4][5][6][7] shorter computable theories have more weight when calculating the probability of the next observation, using all computable theories which perfectly describe previous observations.
In science, Occam's Razor is used as a heuristic (discovery tool) to guide scientists in the development of theoretical models rather than as an arbiter between published models.[8][9] In the scientific method, Occam's Razor is not considered an irrefutable principle of logic or a scientific result; the preference for simplicity in the scientific method is based on the falsifiability criterion. For each accepted explanation of a phenomenon, there is always an infinite number of possible and more complex alternatives, because one can always burden failing explanations with ad hoc hypothesis to prevent them from being falsified; therefore, simpler theories are preferable to more complex ones because they are better testable and falsifiable.[1][10][11]
Wouldn't be trying that with codex's would they. Cus that'll work better than novels. Won't it???
Of course. Could be a factor. Could GW's sped up 2013 release schedule be to blame? Did "GW-collectors" stop buying "ever Codex"? Should GW go back to the old "2 Codex a year" speed?
Maybe GW slowing it down again with Orks is a sign of them putting the breaks on?
I'd say codex pricing is a big part of being reluctant to buy more products for myself, combined with rate of the new releases lacking codexes for weeks. The drawn out releases at a model a week aren't creating any excitement for me either, and I see it as giving them something to write about in WD weekly to generate sales of that alongside the printed version of the website. Probably hoping that gullible people exist to pick up a copy of an old Codex in the run up to the new one leaving them slightly less to burn at the end. Can't say I blame them for trying but you've got to be resonably smart to play the Game.
7e can be thought of as a "Cash Grab" though I'd personally say it was more along the lines of Bullying towards there physical customers - "Buy or Goodbye"
They really should put Expiry Dates on things, I have a can of soup in the cupboard with a longer shelf life than 6e had =S
MWHistorian wrote: There seems to be a lot of evidence around and I think we'd be foolish to dismiss it.
Exactly.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
darefsky wrote: I'm just gonna leave this here. I feel like a few people might need to learn it.
from Wikipedia
Occam's razor (also written as Ockham's razor and in Latin lex parsimoniae) is a principle of parsimony, economy, or succinctness used in problem-solving devised by William of Ockham (c. 1287–1347). It states that among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected. Other, more complicated solutions may ultimately prove correct, but—in the absence of certainty—the fewer assumptions that are made, the better.
And?
Again, to use the unpopular Kirby example/hypothesis: Less sales because less store opening hours.
As succinct as it gets.
Again, not saying that I think Kirby is 100% spot-on, or that other factors don't play a role (possibly a more important one), but it'd be hard to beat Kirby on parsimony.
Zweischneid.. Jesus wept man, you are a force of nature! Have you got someone behind you giving you a shoulder massage while you type, a few empty cans of Monster Energy rolling around on the table to keep you going through this.. ?
Anyway, the truth will out very soon, one way or another the world (and the industry) will keep spinning. GW decided they didn't want me as a customer when they stopped rest of world sales and I was living in a country with no stockists. That then prompted me to get into other games.
I haven't bought any of their stuff recently because it doesn't appeal. Perhaps a poor financial performance will start the process of turning them into a more conscientious company, releasing a greater variety of games that are more financially viable? One can certainly hope.
MWHistorian wrote: I've seen lots of evidence suggesting that GW is doing "not good" but no evidence to suggest that they're doing good. Maintaining seems to be the best scenario that I've understood from this thread.
Once again, I'm no expert and I'm trying to understand this.
No doubt there.
The question isn't if GW is doing "good" or "bad".
The question is why GW is doing "bad" and what they need to change to get back on track.
- Are they part of a decline in the market, or bucking the trend in a growing market?
- How much of the blame is in the prices? If at all?
- How much of the blame are in the game-rules? If at all?
- How much of the blame is in their restructuring of their retail chain? If at all?
- How much of the blame is in their odd social-media/marketing strategy? If at all?
All these are lowering customer satisfaction
- How much of the blame is in stronger/more numerous competition? If at all?
These are more a result of GW actions. Their inability to provide a quality product, that the customer wants to buy.
I,E, Badly written rules. poor choice of materials. (fine cast)
- How much of the blame is in the demographic shifts among their customers? If at all?
- How much of the blame is in changing aesthetic tastes and pop-culture trends? If at all?
- How much of the blame is in the "natural" product cycle of their "big" product? If at all?
These are out of GW,s control and can only be responded too, by bringing out new product.
- How much of the blame is in the faster release-schedule? If at all?
Neutral effect, the customer can only purchase product, at a rate commensurate with his/her income
A smart business man/analyst would never discard any possible reason out of hand (and always assume that there are even more possible, yet unknown reasons), rather than jumping to a simplistic conclusion that only serves to pamper his ego as "empowered consumer" "who knew all along what went wrong".
What is the real questions of GW's future hanging in the balance as nicely pointed out at "Masterminis" are:
1) Has GW's pricing reached it's market "saturation point"; what the market will bear? = No further source of revenue increase?
2) How shall increased sales (further purchases of present customer base and new customers) be generated? = What is the plan? (i.e. an actual deal on the big Tyranid box was out there). BRB button was pushed just before year end financials, do it again next year? Made terms of sale for independent stores difficult so GW product is not sold/displayed/played as much in local shops: how to get the brand out there?
3) #2 asks the question "Who are GW customers?" Masterminis make the statement that the old/character/collector models went to "finecast" and stopped being an item for "collectors", go to "game day events" and average age is mid-20's so what about the "targeted" 14 year olds? (said they are target for the GW stores only)?, We were trained from the "good old days" before Kirby where on-line retail was king and we got %40-50 discounts and had been "trained" to be cheap and that was also the main cause of poor GW revenue back in the day when profits were in the red. The old GW fans had been trained bad habits by bad market decisions in GW so we keep asking for something that cannot be part of a sustainable market: GW REALLY needs to sell their product direct as much as possible, failing that, hammer out good terms with local brick and mortar shops where people play.
4) The small introductory "Specialist" games (Space Hulk, anything that is complete game in a box) were the great introductory "samples" that generated revenue and got people into the larger hobby, some thought on expanding the IP licensing for more revenue (akin to a drug dealer "free" samples).
As had been pointed out, in the bubble of GW management the "snow is black" until the financials get grim enough.
A side comment on those wall of text rants by Beeble has me worried "GW management thinks tabletop wargaming is dead." I think they very well might.
I just hope a few of them get a good look at successful kickstarters to prove different.
I find the argument of "profit" or "above the line" is irrelevant without some thought on growth, many similar miniature hobby companies are seeing unprecedented growth: It is a shame GW is missing the boat.
As the incumbent, growth is harder for GW, so one could understand if they weren't keeping pace with some of the younger, smaller, companies.
Going backwards in an expanding market is a different kettle of fish though, and much more concerning.
Then, when you factor all the things many people cite (such as SG) that GW could capitalise on, but simply don't, and look at the barrier to entry issue which SG could hypotethically solve, and the inaction surrounding this area, and you have to wonder if GW could, potentially, still outpace the competition, incumbent or no, if direction were altered.
Nobody regularly contributing is blaming a single cause hypothesis, the only person doing that appears to be Mr T Kirby.
Possibly.
But if you'd be serious about getting behind what is going on, you wouldn't just discard Kirby's reasons out of hand "just because they come from Kirby" either.
Kirby's view of events might not even be very likely, but it is possible, and I've seen no evidence that would with disprove his take on things or evidence that would prove the "GW fails because prices" or "GW fails because the game sucks"-theories that are popular here (which, again, might be possible, even likely, but certainly not proven).
Here is some proof:
I make a very high salary and no price in the GW portfolio bothers me from a financial standpoint. I have stopped buying anything GW because the price to value ratio has become complete garbage versus everything else on the market. So I no longer buy from them because they have failed with their pricing.
I didn't buy 7th edition because the rules suck, in my opinion. In fact, I have sold more than $7,000 worth of my 20+ year GW collection on ebay the last two months and have two 40k armies left that I am seriously debating to sell as well. So I didn't get the rules (though I did just pick up three Infinity rulebooks ) because their game, compared to others on the market, sucks.
So, there is your proof. And by their financial peformance, I have a feeling there are a lot of other people like me.
Going backwards in an expanding market is a different kettle of fish though, and much more concerning.
Needs citation that the miniature games market is expanding.
Hehehe... wait a min, you are serious?
Ahem, hard to give a nice definitive citation when leaders like Fantasy Flight and Privateer Press are privately owned: they do not need to publish their sales figures.
This is what has made these discussions so difficult with "upstarts" compared with GW.
I suppose we can look at graphs of membership on discussion boards such as this over time...
I will humbly state that I at least in my area all the miniature gaming convention attendance have increased every year (i.e. Hotlead).
I would base my "opinion" on the multitude of tabletop successful kickstarters as well, but it is a relatively new thing.
MWHistorian wrote: There seems to be a lot of evidence around and I think we'd be foolish to dismiss it.
Exactly.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
darefsky wrote: I'm just gonna leave this here. I feel like a few people might need to learn it.
from Wikipedia
Occam's razor (also written as Ockham's razor and in Latin lex parsimoniae) is a principle of parsimony, economy, or succinctness used in problem-solving devised by William of Ockham (c. 1287–1347). It states that among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected. Other, more complicated solutions may ultimately prove correct, but—in the absence of certainty—the fewer assumptions that are made, the better.
And?
Again, to use the unpopular Kirby example/hypothesis: Less sales because less store opening hours.
As succinct as it gets.
Again, not saying that I think Kirby is 100% spot-on, or that other factors don't play a role (possibly a more important one), but it'd be hard to beat Kirby on parsimony.
I was going more towards the "Anger your customers and you won't have any customers" theory, but that's just me.
MWHistorian wrote: There seems to be a lot of evidence around and I think we'd be foolish to dismiss it.
Exactly.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
darefsky wrote: I'm just gonna leave this here. I feel like a few people might need to learn it.
from Wikipedia
Occam's razor (also written as Ockham's razor and in Latin lex parsimoniae) is a principle of parsimony, economy, or succinctness used in problem-solving devised by William of Ockham (c. 1287–1347). It states that among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected. Other, more complicated solutions may ultimately prove correct, but—in the absence of certainty—the fewer assumptions that are made, the better.
And?
Again, to use the unpopular Kirby example/hypothesis: Less sales because less store opening hours.
As succinct as it gets.
Again, not saying that I think Kirby is 100% spot-on, or that other factors don't play a role (possibly a more important one), but it'd be hard to beat Kirby on parsimony.
I was going more towards the "Anger your customers and you won't have any customers" theory, but that's just me.
For me it was the "we don't care about rules but charge a higher price" and "Pay to win mindset" edition of 40k that sent me away. And once I started trying other games I found that I enjoyed their rules better. So, I'd summerize it as "Disconnect with the customers, price hikes, bad business practices and competition."
I was going more towards the "Anger your customers and you won't have any customers" theory, but that's just me.
Than Walmart wouldn't exist. But it's the biggest company in the world (and one with the lowest customer satisfaction of any company).
It's a plausible theory, but I've seen no hard evidence as to why GW should be the exception to the fact that customer satisfaction and financial success in most cases do not correlate.
Also, ironically, GW's customer satisfaction seems to be higher for the one sub-brand - Forge World - that charges even more for books, charges even more for miniatures, and places an even greater focus on Space Marines. Should make sense for GW as a whole to chase that trend, no?
Ahem, hard to give a nice definitive citation when leaders like Fantasy Flight and Privateer Press are privately owned: they do not need to publish their sales figures.
This is what has made these discussions so difficult with "upstarts" compared with GW.
Well, than I wouldn't just assume that it's growing.
Even Kickstarters aren't what they were in their heyday 2 years ago.
And GW is still a bigger company than Kickstarter. Not just tabletop gaming Kickstarter. Not just games Kickstarter. All of Kickstarter.
Even Kickstarters aren't what they were in their heyday 2 years ago.
And GW is still a bigger company than Kickstarter. Not just tabletop gaming Kickstarter. Not just games Kickstarter. All of Kickstarter.
According to KS' own statistics, their fund raising for the category of table top games has risen significantly, year over year, ever since the company came into existence. Overall, the funds raised by KS since their inception in 2009 is greater than GW's gross revenue for the last 10-15 years. KS passed the $1 Billion mark a while ago, and GW makes less than $100 Million per year in gross revenue. The funding for table top gaming in 2013 was greater than GW's entire gross revenue for 2013.
Though, there's no way to know how much of an impact that has on GW's sales. I'm just pointing out that KS is apparently handling more money than you realize.
I was going more towards the "Anger your customers and you won't have any customers" theory, but that's just me.
Than Walmart wouldn't exist. But it's the biggest company in the world (and one with the lowest customer satisfaction of any company).
It's a plausible theory, but I've seen no hard evidence as to why GW should be the exception to the fact that customer satisfaction and financial success in most cases do not correlate.
Also, ironically, GW's customer satisfaction seems to be higher for the one sub-brand - Forge World - that charges even more for books, charges even more for miniatures, and places an even greater focus on Space Marines. Should make sense for GW as a whole to chase that trend, no?
Ahem, hard to give a nice definitive citation when leaders like Fantasy Flight and Privateer Press are privately owned: they do not need to publish their sales figures.
This is what has made these discussions so difficult with "upstarts" compared with GW.
Well, than I wouldn't just assume that it's growing.
Even Kickstarters aren't what they were in their heyday 2 years ago.
And GW is still a bigger company than Kickstarter. Not just tabletop gaming Kickstarter. Not just games Kickstarter. All of Kickstarter.
You don't get to point at one thing as proof and disregard or hide the rest of the data behind the curtain. People claim to be dissatisfied with Walmart and yet the shop there. I would call that BS. People vote with their wallets. People may not like long lines, rude employee's and dirty stores, but the pricing makes it worth it for them. So are they really dissatisfied?
Personally I won't walk into a Walmart. I get all PTSD like and have actually shoved someone out of my way in an isle (admittedly one of the reasons I have banished myself from the place).
Now I do not have any sort of beef with GW. I stopped playing 40k right after 6th Ed hit. I sold all my stuff and now I play other games. I still like to look over the fence and see if they have made any changes that might entice me back, but so far..... not even a bit.
Heck my best friend. The one that got me into table top gaming. Has played GW games for 20+ years and even he has finally moved on because he can't stand it anymore and he was as white knight as they come.
I was going more towards the "Anger your customers and you won't have any customers" theory, but that's just me.
Than Walmart wouldn't exist. But it's the biggest company in the world (and one with the lowest customer satisfaction of any company).
It's a plausible theory, but I've seen no hard evidence as to why GW should be the exception to the fact that customer satisfaction and financial success in most cases do not correlate.
Also, ironically, GW's customer satisfaction seems to be higher for the one sub-brand - Forge World - that charges even more for books, charges even more for miniatures, and places an even greater focus on Space Marines. Should make sense for GW as a whole to chase that trend, no?
Just to focus on this one point particularly, Walmart exists because it provides goods typically at much lower costs. They have a bad reputation because of their treatment of employees, the damage a Walmart store does to a local community, and the sometimes underhanded dealings they have with other countries, but people shop their because they are searching for the absolute cheapest way to get things, for whatever their personal reasons may be.
Well, than I wouldn't just assume that it's growing.
Even Kickstarters aren't what they were in their heyday 2 years ago.
And GW is still a bigger company than Kickstarter. Not just tabletop gaming Kickstarter. Not just games Kickstarter. All of Kickstarter.
As pointed out by me (which you ignored) and another who bothered to look into it: More money is changing hands there than you give credit and FAR more credit to the HUGENESS that is GW.
I will call a citation back atchya.
To just proclaim the various sources as invalid or insufficient and "Kickstarters aren't what they were in their heyday 2 years ago." facts?, citation? opinion?
This all makes a great point on the future of GW how?
Feeling kind, will save you the trouble since you are too busy to check facts here ya go:
Kickstarter: $480 million was pledged last year while GW Revenue was 134 million pounds (~$227 Am). Care to change your stance?
Imperial Knights and 7th Edition will prop up the sales entry.
Imperial Knights were the biggest thing since sliced bread in this general area (NW Houston).
The plastic stormtrooper kit was a big seller.
7th has been so-so. As far as I can see even the sales of that have not been as big as IK was.
They should still show a loss in sales even if it only a small one.
That said, there is not much fat or meat for that matter, left to cut off of the bone. Also, how many times can they capture lightning in a bottle, a' la the Imperial Knights?
There are very few codices left to update.
Once their bag of tricks is empty what will be left?
The fluff has been prison raped in the pursuit of profit so even the IP is diluted from its former, crazy, and exciting glory.
Right...because cherry picking three crap projects out of all the hundreds of thousands if not millions of projects totally disproves his point.
Wasn't cherry picking at all.. Most of the stuff on kickstarter is unrelated to gaming.
Which still has naught to do with the claim that Kickstarter (not "gaming on Kickstarter", you will note) is smaller than GW. People might be dismissive of you because you're a bold and edgy radical who's speaking uncomfortable truths.....or it might be because you do stuff like this irritating goalpost-moving, indicating you have little interest in arguing in good faith rather than proving your e-superiority by any means necessary.
GW Our business model wrote:Our continual investment in product quality, using our defendable intellectual property, provides us with a considerable barrier to entry for potential competitors: it is our Fortress Wall.
The last couple of years shows that fortress wall is almost non-existent. Chapterhouse has smashed down a large part of that wall by itself.
GW Our business model wrote:While our 400 or so Hobby centres which show customers how to collect, paint and play with our miniatures and games provide another barrier to entry: our Fortress Moat.
One man stores limiting the ability to show customers how to take part in the hobby means their moat is useless. And the advent of that passing fad, the internet, means people don't need meat space to help them get into the hobby anymore.
GW Our business ness model wrote:We have been building our Fortress Wall and Moat for many years and the competitive advantage they provide gives us confidence in our ability to grow profitably in the future.
GW are still relying on this fortress and moat model and it's too outdated. If this is all they've got to keep their competitive advantage then they are going to have to adapt or ...
GW Our business model wrote:Our continual investment in product quality, using our defendable intellectual property, provides us with a considerable barrier to entry for potential competitors: it is our Fortress Wall.
The last couple of years shows that fortress wall is almost non-existent. Chapterhouse has smashed down a large part of that wall by itself.
Not only that, but I find the "continual investment in product quality" laughable. Just compare the Gorkanaut and Imperial Knight to other models like Gundam kits and the Dreamforge Leviathan. Aesthetics aside, GW can't engineer a big model worth a damn these days.
GW Our business model wrote:Our continual investment in product quality, using our defendable intellectual property, provides us with a considerable barrier to entry for potential competitors: it is our Fortress Wall.
The last couple of years shows that fortress wall is almost non-existent. Chapterhouse has smashed down a large part of that wall by itself.
Not only that, but I find the "continual investment in product quality" laughable. Just compare the Gorkanaut and Imperial Knight to other models like Gundam kits and the Dreamforge Leviathan. Aesthetics aside, GW can't engineer a big model worth a damn these days.
My guess would be because they are engineering to maximize sprue usage vs making amazing models and then figuring out how to get them into the fewest molds possible.
GW Our business model wrote:Our continual investment in product quality, using our defendable intellectual property, provides us with a considerable barrier to entry for potential competitors: it is our Fortress Wall.
The last couple of years shows that fortress wall is almost non-existent. Chapterhouse has smashed down a large part of that wall by itself.
Not only that, but I find the "continual investment in product quality" laughable. Just compare the Gorkanaut and Imperial Knight to other models like Gundam kits and the Dreamforge Leviathan. Aesthetics aside, GW can't engineer a big model worth a damn these days.
My guess would be because they are engineering to maximize sprue usage vs making amazing models and then figuring out how to get them into the fewest molds possible.
Oh, I completely agree. The Imperial Knight's lack of articulation, limited weapon options, and inability to swap the weapon options it did have were proof of that.
Like I said, the guy who just ran the extremely successful Creature Caster Kickstarter called out GW by saying their models are highway robbery in terms of cost and the amount of plastic you get. I imagine anyone without a complete glass eye stare at the kits and bits would agree with this. And it doesn't matter if other companies are the in the same boat, it's still crap.
The Freeblades Kickstarter was successful, meaning I'm getting my second faction for that game later this year and can start providing demo games.
I'm waffling on the idea of selling my 40k armies. On the one hand, I could buy a new bike, a firestorm armada fleet, a DZC fleet, and a save a bunch more from models I probably won't use. On the other hand, I still feel attached to the idea of my Eldar and my SM/BA army I want. Also, my Grey Knights are too unique to sell (very limited customer set for those!). I think my Sisters might be on the chopping block, in all reality. I love the army, but I don't enjoy playing them much and I don't feel like painting them since they are boring, static poses.
I'm disliking the game and the company enough to not want to go to tournaments or buy the new rules, but not mad enough to sell off my lots. Hrmm...
The main reason I sold off most of my stuff was to reduce clutter. Once I got started, it was actually kind of fun.
Not to mention I made enough to buy a PS4, new stereo speakers, beer making mats, the Warmachine starter kit and rulebook, a 42" TV for the PS4, cigars, and about 3 months of truck payments. That helped. And I *still* have about 2500 points of World Eaters and 2000 points of guard in case I ever do want to play again. (Plus I enjoy painting Catachans from time to time)
Nothing wrong with keeping your foot in the door to come back if the game stops sucking.
GW Our business model wrote:Our continual investment in product quality, using our defendable intellectual property, provides us with a considerable barrier to entry for potential competitors: it is our Fortress Wall.
The last couple of years shows that fortress wall is almost non-existent. Chapterhouse has smashed down a large part of that wall by itself.
Not only that, but I find the "continual investment in product quality" laughable. Just compare the Gorkanaut and Imperial Knight to other models like Gundam kits and the Dreamforge Leviathan. Aesthetics aside, GW can't engineer a big model worth a damn these days.
My guess would be because they are engineering to maximize sprue usage vs making amazing models and then figuring out how to get them into the fewest molds possible.
Oh, I completely agree. The Imperial Knight's lack of articulation, limited weapon options, and inability to swap the weapon options it did have were proof of that.
And also the prize, i imported the Leviathan and Mortis via a store into Japan and it was still cheaper than the Imperial Knight, I would buy the imperial knight if it was half the price it is now.
slowthar wrote: The main reason I sold off most of my stuff was to reduce clutter. Once I got started, it was actually kind of fun.
Not to mention I made enough to buy a PS4, new stereo speakers, beer making mats, the Warmachine starter kit and rulebook, a 42" TV for the PS4, cigars, and about 3 months of truck payments. That helped. And I *still* have about 2500 points of World Eaters and 2000 points of guard in case I ever do want to play again. (Plus I enjoy painting Catachans from time to time)
Nothing wrong with keeping your foot in the door to come back if the game stops sucking.
I did sell about $600+ stuff at a store that does consignment and filled out armies for other games to completion. Other then that, it's now selling complete kits/armies and I just got done not two months ago prepping a SM/BA list that the new edition may or may not have crapped on. And I have a custom theme I want to do for my Eldar, to boot. So I kinda wanna keep them to paint. Same with my Bretonnia.
Basically, I have all the Infinity I need to compete. Almost all the Cryx I need (not to mention my complete Circle army), so that leaves Malifaux with some plastics I want to get. Other then that, not many mini purchases in the future for me even though I'd like some devastators for 40k to kitbash into Legion of the Damned... someday...
I'm in same boat as darefsky. I left 40k but I still feel the need to poke my nose over the fence. I love 40k. It was the Hobby for me since 97. Since my first Space Wolves codex I have thought about tabletop gaming everyday of my life.
I went to Iraq and Afghanistan as a US infantry Marine. I have a lot of bills and a Girlfriend and dog to pay for. In short, I'm a grown ass man. Yet playing with toy soldiers has been, and will be my favorite thing to do for the rest of my life.
I can no longer afford GW models. Yet I still spend my money on plastic toys and still spend the majority of my time thinking about them. Turns out, there is a wargaming world that exists outside of GW.
In conclusion (and hopefully on topic), 40k is dead where I live. There used to be a Vibrant community of people who were so involved in the game that they would travel to tournaments. Upwards of 20 people, which is pretty good for a small southern town. 40k was the ONLY game.
No more.
I must also add that not a single one of them post on Dakka. Where I live, the game has died a natural death without the aid of Dakka toxicity.
Sorry guys. Had to spill my guts about the topic. :(
Happy that I've moved on, but still sad that the thing I love is dying.
Happy that I've moved on, but still sad that the thing I love is dying.
Saw that happen in another small town in the South when I was there. Sorry to hear about that, but thanks for doing what you do, sir.
I've always wanted to go to a west coast event and I now have the chance to easily attend the BAO. But, I'm kinda not wanting to learn 7th even though I have an army ready to go. I'm thinking I might pop by and meet the crew, see if that gets me jazz-ercised about it, but I'm really just thinking wait for the next big skirmish events and prepare for a local steamroller event. They made a prize for the top 3, but anyone who attends is in a raffle for a Gargantuan/Colossal of their choice.
I think Games Workshop could turn it around. It'd be painful and it'd be another year, but it could be done. Things I think that would help:
Spoiler:
1) Shut down all one man stores. Change all trade agreements to empower the FLSG that sells product. Offer store incentives to bring people back into the shop to purchase like the online store does now, but more.
2) Keep your best store owners as traveling game guys. Let them hit up the biggest stores in their area or cities and be the "TO". Let them get feedback, let them make sure the store is being honest in sales, let them run events. Eventually, as these guys lapse out, you make outriders come back (press gangers, henchmen, etc.).
3) Open the floodgates and prepare for the tidal wave of hate: Bring back a community. Pay some community managers to fight the lions. It won't be pretty. In fact, it will be a crap show, but you can stave it off with one thing:
4) Admit the rules are crap and offer to fix them through open beta. Every book comes out for free with just cut down black and white rules. If you really believe your books are worth the $50 price tag for pretty pictures and fluff, then put up or shut up. Let the community pour in feedback. Collect tournament results from those store guys to see what's winning and what isn't.
5) Keep Games Day dead... but create a traveling circuit/team that visits the big events already held by independent TOs. We all know those events cost a metric butt load of money, so let them front it, and you bring in prize support and the name. I'm sure NOVA, BAO, LVO, Feast, Adepticon, Dualcon, WargamesCon, etc. would all be excited to have that presence back if they turn it around.
6) Don't want to decrease the price on stuff? Increase the value. Put more sprues in the box. Bring back 10 man dire avengers, 20 man guardsmen, etc. Make a unit box a FULL FREAKIN' UNIT. 10 man sternguard for $50 suddenly becomes awesome versus knowing you need to spend $100. You get to keep your silly high prices, but you dramatically cut the barrier to entry. While you're at it, make better starter sets for each faction and the game all around. We know they aren't balanced and many feature busted and bad units. They are barely deals, even. Drop your hobby supplies as they are overpriced. Make your paint pots bigger at the same price (dropper bottles would be baller). And those brushes? No, thanks.
7) Stop charging for things that should be a part of other product. Painting guides are all beginner level and not worth the money, put them back into books or provide that as incentive to buy digital.
8) Create a digital army builder app and a one time purchase, say $100, to own all the rules forever. You're going to find that a lot more people will want to try new things if there isn't a $50 price barrier, they can scheme more about allies knowing all the rules, there's less confusion if I can easily reference everything, and you'd be on parity with pretty much every other game these days. Plus, it's way easier to create and maintain a piece of software then those books if you're doing it right.
Crazy ideas, I know, but it's basically common sense to me.
Happy that I've moved on, but still sad that the thing I love is dying.
Saw that happen in another small town in the South when I was there. Sorry to hear about that, but thanks for doing what you do, sir
I just think that the worst part is in more rural areas (and Charleston isn't that rural) Big companies like Hobbytown are the only places that can support 40k stuff. FLGS cant compete with the internet and GW itself, so Hobbytown are the only people who can stock 40k, yet they make most of their profit on Not GW Products. 40k Players become an inconvenience and rightfully so.
edit: so naturally ....shelves stocked with 40k get stocked with something else.
Crap looks bad and Mr. Beeble is throwing in the towel somewhere between hard stop and pretty bad. Given the previous financial trends from previous years, GW is still probably down massive amounts of sales, with some locations that he's in the know with talking about a 50% drop. Given all the terrible scampering for the end of this fiscal year to include the rush job that is 7E (regardless if you like it or not...), brace yourself for some bad news. He's asking folks to discuss purely profit loss, such as breaking even isn't even a part of the picture.
GW wanted and still want to follow a selective distribution model, similar to that followed by Luxury brands in fashion and cosmetics etc. However they I am sure didn't figure for the entire marketplace shifting as it has done under their feet as they do it so they get hurt twice as hard in the process.
They claimed they could grow to £300m a year publicly a few years ago, they seem to have lost the appetite or capability to attain proper growth.
Kilkrazy wrote: Everyone selling your armies and stuff -- someone is buying them who presumably will carry on playing.
Carry on playing is the right term. People who buy whole armies used are, in the vast majority, people that were already playing the game.
So the net effect, in the majority of the times, is that for every person that "sells out", there isn't a new person "buying in" and the game will still be one gamer short than there was previously.
I too am shocked at the cost of GWs kits now. I have saved a buttload of money by buying and rehabing MK1 kits on Ebay to expand my DAs. 20 and 30 year old minis just upgraded and I yet have not had to put money on the counter for a NIBGW kit in years. I miss the days of three Rhinos in a box for $35.00. Oh 3rd edition values, where did you go?
Value is now in micro transactions and one click bundle deals that save you 5 dollars for three less clicks worth of effort.
Seriously, the only values left are used models and army boxes that shave a considerable amount off (but use caution about the quality of the units within).
This also seems to be the defining theme of all threads of this nature, the thing that comes up time and time again isn't price, or rules, or bullying legal practice or any of the other things that GW (rightly) get lambasted for.
The one thing that recurs over and over is the word value. People would be more tolerant of wooly rules if they didn't cost so much, people wouldn't care if a miniature was badly designed so it was hard to magnetise or repose, or just flat out dumb looking, if it didn't represent a substantial investment.
GW, right now, represent poor value to many people, and that, above everything else, is what needs to be addressed, either by increasing the quality of what they're offering, or the sale price they offer it at.
Kilkrazy wrote: Everyone selling your armies and stuff -- someone is buying them who presumably will carry on playing.
Carry on playing is the right term. People who buy whole armies used are, in the vast majority, people that were already playing the game.
So the net effect, in the majority of the times, is that for every person that "sells out", there isn't a new person "buying in" and the game will still be one gamer short than there was previously.
I agree, and GW try constantly to recruit new players to offset the drop-out rate. However there is a kind of perception that because "I" have dropped out of 40K, so will everyone else. I wanted to point out that a certain number of veterans are still keen.
We don't know if GW's recruitment rate exceeds the drop-out rate. We also don't know how the reduction in the network of veteran players might reduce the new recruitment rate.
GW Our business model wrote:Our continual investment in product quality, using our defendable intellectual property, provides us with a considerable barrier to entry for potential competitors: it is our Fortress Wall.
The last couple of years shows that fortress wall is almost non-existent. Chapterhouse has smashed down a large part of that wall by itself.
Not only that, but I find the "continual investment in product quality" laughable. Just compare the Gorkanaut and Imperial Knight to other models like Gundam kits and the Dreamforge Leviathan. Aesthetics aside, GW can't engineer a big model worth a damn these days.
Honestly, Gundam or Mech style models from Japanese manufacturers were better in the 1980's than any of the large models GW is putting out today.
"Shooting yourself in the foot on several occasions
GW only started caring when they realized that their bottom line didn't really increase by supplying internet dealers with their product. Yes, volume went up, but margin went way down. The direct channel suffered. The GW Hobby Centers suffered (tumbleweed syndrom). The independent retailer suffered (crickets chirping) and were up in arms.
Instead of working on the obvious, which was the above described focus on the best (Direct Sales), second best (Hobby Centers) and 'third best' (Indep. Retailers) sales channels, they morphed in a cannibalizing, fourth sales-channel-monster in the form of low-margin-mass-volume Internet traders that consistently gnawed on the existing sales channels.
Well played, GW. NOT.
And yes, this is your fault - and no, this has nothing to do with hindsight. I could have told you. Others tried to tell you. For Frak's sake, you can just google videos of disgruntled retailers on Youtube - they TOLD you.
Again, you turned the community into deal-thirsty bargain hunters. And in my nerdy dreams, I was the Alpha Male of the pack. It was a good dream while it lasted."
We are still seeing the fallout of the cheap prices today even if it is product for resale that people got for very little, competing with new from GW.
From your link, something there struck me:
"Have computer games, and especially these new online role-playing games, finally bitten Games Workshop? [No.]" Sales dropped in 2004, the year WoW launched. I don't think it much of a stretch that WoWs meteoric rise - and video gaming in general cannibalized sci-fi and fantasy tabletop wargamers as they share a demographic. Video games are a much cheaper and more accessible alternative with much greater competition in products.
Yonan wrote: From your link, something there struck me:
"Have computer games, and especially these new online role-playing games, finally bitten Games Workshop? [No.]" Sales dropped in 2004, the year WoW launched. I don't think it much of a stretch that WoWs meteoric rise - and video gaming in general cannibalized sci-fi and fantasy tabletop wargamers as they share a demographic. Video games are a much cheaper and more accessible alternative with much greater competition in products.
I may be, probably am, atypical, but I loathe MMORPGs.
It might have something with witnessing a friend and former flatmate pretty much retreat from reality and spend his entire non-working life logged on, but they didn't really appeal beforehand.
IMO they're the antithesis of TTWG, as they completely lack the real life social engagement that gaming demands. I'm sure, if one were to create a Venn diagram of nerdly activity, there'd be massive overlaps, but not this guy.
azreal13 wrote: IMO they're the antithesis of TTWG, as they completely lack the real life social engagement that gaming demands. I'm sure, if one were to create a Venn diagram of nerdly activity, there'd be massive overlaps, but not this guy.
I can understand not liking them definitely, and they've certainly triggered addiction in some people like your friend. MMOs definitely do not lack social engagement however - coordinating a difficult endeavour with dozens of other people through voice chat, maintaining social bonds to keep the guild together, people who haven't engaged in it severely underestimate the social experience of MMOs. Even just doing a dungeon with a few random people you'll never see again is a great social opportunity. I met most of my friends in MMOs as far back as Ultima Online (high school). I still have them, but most of the friends from high school fell to the wayside as they do for so many people.
TBS and RTS I think have more of an impact on tabletop wargaming due to their much more similar nature but more accessible medium, but I definitely think that MMOs - with their addictive nature as you mentioned - take and keep people who otherwise may have been tabletop gamers too. Especially the teen demographic and F2P MMOs or games like LoL which has an immense playerbase too.
I *may* have been playing the WoW version of pokemon the last few days, leveling battle pets all across Azeroth ; p
Yonan wrote: From your link, something there struck me:
"Have computer games, and especially these new online role-playing games, finally bitten Games Workshop? [No.]" Sales dropped in 2004, the year WoW launched. I don't think it much of a stretch that WoWs meteoric rise - and video gaming in general cannibalized sci-fi and fantasy tabletop wargamers as they share a demographic. Video games are a much cheaper and more accessible alternative with much greater competition in products.
I would agree there is some competition of disposable income but not to a significant extent.
From my own experience I find video games compete for my time the most (<edit> which I think still fits in with your point).
I find the rate where I get models complete and game with them (and possibly buy more) has slowed greatly due to the multitude of distractions out there.
Dakka, Facebook, latest video game, latest sports playoffs; it is a wonder the little men get done at all.
Makes me feel like my commitment to the hobby is shockingly lax as of late but I have to have another go at "Space Run" one more time...
I found when it came to gaming competitions or just arranging a meet with my friends "forced" me to "get'er dun".
Yonan wrote: From your link, something there struck me:
"Have computer games, and especially these new online role-playing games, finally bitten Games Workshop? [No.]" Sales dropped in 2004, the year WoW launched. I don't think it much of a stretch that WoWs meteoric rise - and video gaming in general cannibalized sci-fi and fantasy tabletop wargamers as they share a demographic. Video games are a much cheaper and more accessible alternative with much greater competition in products.
I would agree there is some competition of disposable income but not to a significant extent.
From my own experience I find video games compete for my time the most (<edit> which I think still fits in with your point).
That's exactly it. If you're spending your leisure time on video games you're not spending it on tabletop games, so there's then no point of spending money on tabletop products. Or at least, if you're playing less tabletop games, you're likely spending similarly less on it.
IMHO.. I think most of the complaints i've seen about GW have been priced in. They are the same complaints that we've seen for 20+ years and regardless of what a certain bitter socially awkward GW hating online community believes, people will still continue to buy games workshop products going forward. Individuals spending all their day posting thousands of negative comments about a game they supposedly never play isn't going to change that.
I am very glad that GW has chosen not to engage the irrational anymore and focused on keeping the business profitable. It's the best thing for the business and for the longevity of the game. Just like how it's been for 20+ years.
dereksatkinson wrote: IMHO.. I think most of the complaints i've seen about GW have been priced in. They are the same complaints that we've seen for 20+ years and regardless of what a certain bitter socially awkward GW hating online community believes, people will still continue to buy games workshop products going forward. Individuals spending all their day posting thousands of negative comments about a game they supposedly never play isn't going to change that.
I am very glad that GW has chosen not to engage the irrational anymore and focused on keeping the business profitable. It's the best thing for the business and for the longevity of the game. Just like how it's been for 20+ years.
Glad to see you finally shed whatever pretence of objectivity and neutrality that you were trying to project with your previous posts and take up the white mantle to join your brothers!
PhantomViper wrote: Glad to see you finally shed whatever pretence of objectivity and neutrality that you were trying to project with your previous posts and take up the white mantle to join your brothers!
I salute you, Sir Knight!
I am perfectly objective in my financial analysis of the company.
I do not view people who have a negative opinion as irrational. People who have posted thousands of negative comments on games they supposedly no longer play and have sold all their models for I view as acting irrational. If I don't like a game, I move on to something more constructive with my time. I don't sit there and spend 3+ years complaining about it. That isn't an exaggeration either.
If I like Microsoft gaming consoles, I don't constantly bash sony on a daily basis over an extended period while wishing for their failure. I might have an opinion, but I don't make thousands of posts trying to convince people. It speaks volumes about someone's emotional maturity when they take joy and hope for someone's failure.
Derek, dude, just let it go. Your posts in the old GW Financial thread I felt had some decent merit, even if your tone was at times what I perceived as dismissive.
But all you're doing lately is just talking about a considerable segment of Dakka as some negative, hate-spewing segment and then getting frustrated when your posts, which again largely constitute labeling this group as haters, are modded (i.e. that image-only posts about "group-think" did nothing to contribute to the conversation).
Do I think all complaints that people make are valid? No, but then they aren't making these complaints against other people in the forum, they're complaining about a company. GW doesn't need special protection, they're a company just like any other one and their primary motive is to ensure sales...I would have to assume customer satisfaction is a big part of that and there seems to be a growing population of people who are unsatisfied.
Yonan wrote: From your link, something there struck me: "Have computer games, and especially these new online role-playing games, finally bitten Games Workshop? [No.]" Sales dropped in 2004, the year WoW launched. I don't think it much of a stretch that WoWs meteoric rise - and video gaming in general cannibalized sci-fi and fantasy tabletop wargamers as they share a demographic. Video games are a much cheaper and more accessible alternative with much greater competition in products.
I would agree there is some competition of disposable income but not to a significant extent. From my own experience I find video games compete for my time the most (<edit> which I think still fits in with your point).
Ah men. This is exactly my experience. Before I had kids, I played video games and did wargaming. Once I had kids, something had to give, and it was video gaming. I just don't play video games much anymore, because when I have time I use it for table top games. As a result, I don't really spend money on video games anymore. GOG, which is awesome, sometimes gets a few bucks for a nostalgic laugh...like the painful realization that I am still utterly incapable of piloting a ship in Descent!
One of the reasons I hate MMOs because I would get lost on raids...there's totally no connection between the two...
Yes, god forbid people disagree with a company that simply raises prices and considers itself a luxury when it's really not. I am entitled to state that I would buy GW products again if:
A) The rules were well-written, concise, streamlined and balanced to allow for both casual and competitive play and allow *ALL* armies to be on equal footing in most cases, so I'm not screwed just because I want to play a World Eaters army and Berserkers are complete gak..
B) The prices were more reasonable, at the very least if the startup cost for a new army wasn't hundreds of dollars. Buying one Tactical Squad @ $40 isn't that bad (I just bought a box of 13 Winter Guard Infantry for my Khador army for $50). Needing to buy several more boxes that are $40 or more (including a $30 Captain that is for one, single-pose model!) just so I can start playing is where it becomes ridiculous. Obviously it would be unrealistic for them to have a $50 starter box like Warmachine, but is it that unreasonable to ask them to have a beginning army for like $150? Not counting the stupidity of the rules being nearly $100 itself (and more when you factor in a Codex), I would be okay with spending $150 to get a small force to start playing the game. It's not so much the overall cost (barring outright crooked deals like "Da Gunmob" giving 25 models for almost $400) as it is the cost just to be able to play the fething game.
You can point to the fact people have been complaining about prices for 20+ years; it doesn't invalidate that argument it just shows that GW has never given a flying feth about what its customers think or want, but has always tried to dictate from the ivory tower to the peons below.
Over the past six months the GBP has been trading higher against the USD than any value in the previous two years. Thus any sales in the USA are worth less as GW reports its results in the UK. The pound has been up against the Euro too.
I am not sure how much of a percentage of their entire trade is done overseas.
Do I think all complaints that people make are valid? No, but then they aren't making these complaints against other people in the forum, they're complaining about a company. GW doesn't need special protection, they're a company just like any other one and their primary motive is to ensure sales...I would have to assume customer satisfaction is a big part of that and there seems to be a growing population of people who are unsatisfied.
Who is saying they need special protection? I am pointing out that you guys are beating a dead horse and since you don't like hearing that, you call on the mods to protect and censor my comments.
Do you not see how making thousands of negative posts about GW isn't a complete waste of time and energy? If you are unsatisfied, then move on to another product and be happy. That's how a normal person would act. Constantly bashing a company that you choose not to do business with isn't rational.
Well then, according to the Derek Atkinson Dictionary of English, I myself am not irrational. I haven't sold my armies for 40K and LOTR. I don't hate the games, I hate the way GW is run - I.e. Kirby and his cronies.
I've abandoned plans for 2nd and 3rd 40K armies due to prices, (whilst simultaneously salivating over 3rd party minis like Victoria Miniatures). I'm bulk buying 2nd hand LOTR minis off eBay to convert. I'm converting 3rd party minis to make entire armies (plastic Gripping Beast Anglo Saxons as Rohirrim). I still haven't got round to picking up 6th ed 40K, never mind the early rip off 7th ed.
GW is driving me away through its inept policies. I'm not abandoning the games altogether, I'm simply looking for ways to make my hobby affordable, depriving GW of sales in the process.
Do I think all complaints that people make are valid? No, but then they aren't making these complaints against other people in the forum, they're complaining about a company. GW doesn't need special protection, they're a company just like any other one and their primary motive is to ensure sales...I would have to assume customer satisfaction is a big part of that and there seems to be a growing population of people who are unsatisfied.
Who is saying they need special protection? I am pointing out that you guys are beating a dead horse and since you don't like hearing that, you call on the mods to protect and censor my comments.
.
Then don't be so fething rude and dismissive of other people's opinions.
The most name calling and abuse I've seen in this thread has come from you.
Do I think all complaints that people make are valid? No, but then they aren't making these complaints against other people in the forum, they're complaining about a company. GW doesn't need special protection, they're a company just like any other one and their primary motive is to ensure sales...I would have to assume customer satisfaction is a big part of that and there seems to be a growing population of people who are unsatisfied.
Who is saying they need special protection? I am pointing out that you guys are beating a dead horse and since you don't like hearing that, you call on the mods to protect and censor my comments.
Do you not see how making thousands of negative posts about GW isn't a complete waste of time and energy? If you are unsatisfied, then move on to another product and be happy. That's how a normal person would act. Constantly bashing a company that you choose not to do business with isn't rational.
I think it's just as much a "waste of time and energy" for you to sit here and keep calling everyone out over it. If people are pissed over what GW is doing let them vent. If you think they are incorrect about things then provide reasons and evidence. If it is good information then people who are trying to be objective will take it into account and those who are not concerned about being objective won't. And that's their choice, don't start calling them out, it just creates unnecessary argument. Who cares if people want to vent on this? Who exactly is it hurting that you feel the need to keep telling people to stop?
In my opinion, there is some considerable level of frustration going on in the 40k population. While there might be a number of prominent Dakkanauts in this thread, I see a number of one-time posts that follow the same sentiment. There are just a number of posters who enjoy posting in the biggest topics of Dakka, and this is one of them. And while I don't necessarily think these growing complaints means the death-knell of GW or 40k, I do think it is something GW needs to address.
Accolade wrote: I think it's just as much a "waste of time and energy" for you to sit here and keep calling everyone out over it. If people are pissed over what GW is doing let them vent. If you think they are incorrect about things then provide reasons and evidence. If it is good information then people who are trying to be objective will take it into account and those who are not concerned about being objective won't. And that's their choice, don't start calling them out, it just creates unnecessary argument.
I don't believe it is a waste of time is a single person takes the time to self reflect on what they have done and focus their time on something more important to them. If they hate anything irrationally to the point where they are posting thousands of times on a message board, then maybe they need a little push towards doing something more constructive with their time. Maybe working?
That way people who actually enjoy the hobby don't have to be bombarded with negativity all the time.
Accolade wrote: Who cares if people want to vent on this? Who exactly is it hurting that you feel the need to keep telling people to stop?
It spills into every single thread on this forum and the whining makes it so people new to the hobby get turned off. The negativity is not good for the hobby.
Accolade wrote: In my opinion, there is some considerable level of frustration going on in the 40k population. While there might be a number of prominent Dakkanauts in this thread, I see a number of one-time posts that follow the same sentiment. There are just a number of posters who enjoy posting in the biggest topics of Dakka, and this is one of them. While I don't necessarily think this means the death-knell of GW or 40k, I think it is a growing concern GW does need to address.
The reason why it's one of the hottest topics on dakka is because the same people keep posting the same crap over and over again.
Maybe you should look through the thread then. Several posters have come here.. posted their opinions.. got shouted down and left. Then when i look at other threads these same posters contribute to, the same pattern exists. IE.. the heldrake thread.
Accolade wrote: Who cares if people want to vent on this? Who exactly is it hurting that you feel the need to keep telling people to stop?
It spills into every single thread on this forum and the whining makes it so people new to the hobby get turned off. The negativity is not good for the hobby.
Maybe without new people GW will realize that THEY are what's ruining the hobby?
It spills into every single thread on this forum and the whining makes it so people new to the hobby get turned off. The negativity is not good for the hobby.
Funny thing that that you mention... Its almost as if, say, customer satisfaction is an important part of any major corporation sales strategy and that when that customer satisfaction drops, then the company's business ends up suffering because of it... Some might even say that its even more important to that company's bottom line than say, .... the crash of the banking system in Cyprus...
Accolade wrote: Who cares if people want to vent on this? Who exactly is it hurting that you feel the need to keep telling people to stop?
It spills into every single thread on this forum and the whining makes it so people new to the hobby get turned off. The negativity is not good for the hobby.
Maybe without new people GW will realize that THEY are what's ruining the hobby?
So a jerk online shouts down a 13 year old who comes to an online forum and it's GW's fault?
)
I was the one that introduced her to the group. (She needed to beat, I mean meet, new people. 
)
)
